Gov. Sean Parnell’s decision to cancel the Alaska Class ferry, after years of planning and public input, came as a shock to many people. The reason, he said, was because the construction estimate had gone over budget. If plans for the East Lynn Canal road had to meet this standard, they would have been scrapped long ago. In 2006, construction of the road was estimated to be about $260 million. The most recent estimate is $520 million.
DOT Commissioner Pat Kemp has stated that two smaller “shuttle ferries” can be built for the $120 million allotted to the Alaska Class ferry project. These ships would be part of the East Lynn Canal road plan, shuttling vehicles from a new terminal at the Katzehin River to Haines and Skagway.
At first I was disappointed by this sudden change from one Taku-sized ship to two smaller ones, but now I have embraced the idea. Two new ships can greatly improve access to Juneau, but they have to be the right ships, and they have to be scheduled in the right way.
At the Jan. 17 meeting of the House and Senate Transportation Committees and DOT officials, Captain John Falvey, general manager of the Marine Highway, made some encouraging statements. He said that DOT is not considering open-decked ferries for the Lynn Canal. This is good, because they absolutely won’t work here. Picture a parking lot full of cars, all frozen together into an immovable mass under several inches of salty ice. Salt spray also quickly corrodes metal and electronics.
The ships Capt. Falvey described would be 280 feet long, quite a bit larger than the LeConte, with ocean-type hulls and enough power to handle winter conditions in Lynn Canal. They would load from both ends and operate as day-boats. Staterooms, crew quarters and a full galley would be eliminated to save money.
I think this two day-boat concept can work, but only if the ships are seaworthy. Whether they sail from Auke Bay or from the Katzehin, these new ships must be designed for the extreme conditions that occur here regularly. An East Lynn Canal road would be closed by avalanches much of the winter, so the ships must be capable of going the entire distance.
Efficient scheduling will also be critical. A plan was put forward by DOT at the meeting to have one ship sail between Juneau and Haines, and the other sail between Haines and Skagway. This would be inefficient. The Juneau-Haines connection carries about three-fourths of the traffic. It doesn’t make sense to devote 50 percent of the ships to 25 percent of the traffic.
DOT wants to limit each ferry’s run to 12 hours a day. Under their plan, this would mean only one Juneau-Haines round trip a day. If the new ships can perform as advertised, I think two loops a day between Juneau, Haines and Skagway are possible. Currently, the day-boat loop takes 14 hours. The proposed roll-on, roll-off design can save time in two ways. There is less time in port, probably half an hour instead of an hour, and less time spent maneuvering the ship to the dock. I think enough time could be saved to do the loop in 12 hours.
On summer mornings, one ship could leave Juneau, northbound, and the other leave Skagway, southbound. Both would complete the loop between the three communities. This would not only double the current vehicle capacity, but it would give travelers much more flexibility. In the fall, when the volume of traffic declines, one ship could be taken out of service.
I’m skeptical that two 280 foot, seaworthy, roll-on, roll-off ferries can be built for $120 million. However, if they are essential links in the plan for the East Lynn Canal road, cost overruns shouldn’t be a problem. Apparently, the road project has no budget ceiling.
If the newly designed ferries are capable of operating safely and efficiently between Juneau, Haines and Skagway, while doubling vehicle capacity, how can the Governor and DOT justify spending half a billion dollars on a road?
• Goldberg is a business owner and Chairman of the Haines Borough Planning Commission.
Comments (32)
Add commentGood points, Rob
Consider: If the road to Katsehin was built, the shuttle run to Haines would be about 5 miles, and the run to Skagway less than 20. Who needs two ferries for that? Unless you wanted to have a spare on the shelf.
So instead of building two ferries, take the money you'd save on the second one and invest in avalanche shed roofs, with the hopes of keeping the road open for more of the winter.
The total cost will still be a billion, everyone knows that. So let's just make the investment before the oil runs out.
BTW, I'm not quite clear what a roll-on/roll-off ferry would look like. Would it resemble the Washington State ferries, but with a door enclosing each end? Is that design compatible with the existing terminals/ramps?
double shuffle
The political double shuffle one again: when cost increase cancel the project unless the project is somewhat special like the road project. The road cost has doubled while the canceled ferry cost increase around 12% according to estimates.
When the road project is completed there will be two small ferries available to make the shorter trips. No doubt one of those two will not be operated as it will not be needed. So where does this second smaller ferry fit into the long term needs of the AMHS? So far not a comment from the administration on that aspect of the long term uses of small day ferries.
It would seem the Alaska Class ferry would be able to fill the needs of year round service to Haines and Skagway until the road is built. Then a smaller ferry can be built and the larger one put into service elsewhere as the existing older ships like the Tustumina (over 50 years old) are retired.
As it stands now the larger ferry construction will be put off for years. Then it will be built at an even higher cost than it would encounter today. I'll project the increase cost will be greater than the cost of building a smaller ferry at that time. In the interim the larger vessel would serve the year round needs for the weather conditions that will keep smaller vessels in port on many occasions.
Fine - but we will still need big ferries
Matanuska, Malispina, Columbia, Tustumina are disasters waiting to happen - they all need to be replaced in the next 5-10 years....when the cost will be double what it is now! Use Federal money and state reserves...possibly even *gasp* dividend principle money to complete these projects NOW....less oil every day!
Alaska spends half a billion
Alaska spends half a billion dollars on yet another Road To Nowhere.
Haines and Skagway are mainliner communities. The Taku and
the Mat are the smallest ferries in the system that can be reliably counted on to safely and comfortably, and with adequate capacity, serve the Upper Lynn Canal.
What we really need is a clone of the Mat, a clone of the Taku and maybe one more, like the originally planned 350-foot, Alaska class ferry, to keep the AMH system going for the long term.
People have been waiting for years, watching one failed experiment after another--the fast ferry fiasco and the unreliable and unpleasant LeConte winter routine in the Upper Lynn Canal.
We are dubious about trusting another experimental small shuttle ferry plan. We need our mainliners and we need them yesterday.
The plan to limit Haines and Skagway to one mainliner a week in the winter and two in the summer is going to kill these communities economically, as well as put the health and safety of the folks in these communities at grave risk.
How are we, for example, going to safely and reliably transport sports teams to regional tournaments with unreliable shuttle ferries and road closures due to avalanches or blizzards and ferry cancellations due to high winds and high seas? Hotel Katzehein? Search and rescue across the Lynn Canal? How about elders with no vehicle needing to get to an airport or a health care appointment south of Haines or Skagway?
The road, if it ever happens will be years in the making. And if the Governor is really concerned about budget issues, we ought not go there.
Build the Road
But, up the Taku River and let all that tourism traffic and income bypass Haines and come directly to Juneau!
Here's the math on that 'loop'
Let's say the shiny new ferry is capable of the 18 knots Kemp is promising. With favorable winds and tides, it's probably feasible that you can reduce travel times down to about four hours between Haines and Juneau, and about 45 minutes between Haines and Skagway. So you'd need a total of nine and a half hours of travel time total to add to port time. Even if you could get port time down to thirty minutes, that would mean two and a half hours (two half hours in Juneau, two half hours in Haines, one half hour in Skagway). So there you are, right at twelve hours with not a minute to spare. Of course, you better not have fifty knot head winds or fight the tide both directions. Better hope there aren't thirty RVs boarding in Skagway or four reefer vans coming on in Haines.
And then what are we left with? Two ferries that are incapable of filling in for any of the mainline vessels we are in dire need of replacing right now. Money well spent?
I think any boat they get
I think any boat they get should be able to fulfill the role of any route. These day boats wouldn't be able to.
2 new small boats for JNU, HNS, SGY?
Looks like the gov has forgotten about the rest of SE. The communities south of JNU would like a new ak class boat as well.
Hope its all thought out
This state has a real history of failed projects. One can only look around. An icebreaker never used, ferry landings built and never used, bridges to nowhere. All failures due to lack of oversight and just plain "Didn't think of that." I still think these small ferries are too small for Lynn Canal when the water whips up. Hey, any drawings, hull data, other useful things we might be able to look at?
Opinions are like.......
The debate drags on, will it be additional ships for the AMHS or will it be the "road" . Seriously people, maybe the entire issue should be turned over to some ample minded high school students and have them find a solution. As people age they become too set in their ways and bring too many personal agendas to the table. Let's see what the youth of the community thinks.
Good point, Helter
Since we probably won't see a road or mainline replacements until those kids are all grown up, they might as well have the say in the matter.
My thinking has evolved on the road. Obviously oil revenue is going to decline at some point in the near future, regardless of (or because of) any tax giveaway scheme Parnell comes up with. Our only hope is that oil prices continue to skyrocket like they have lately to make up for declining production. But then those high oil prices make ferries that much less viable.
When oil revenue drops, ferries will become endangered species...the mainliners already are, as we can see from Kemp's scaled-down plans.
It appears that we may have a small window of opportunity to get the road built. The State still has money. Parnell appears to be supportive. And we have a commish who REALLY would like to build it. So build it already, and then devote some resources to the mainliners and other ferries for the region.
Not Happening
A road north of Berners Bay wouldn't just be closed during the winter because of snow slides, rock slides in the summer are common on much of the steep terrain. There is one very large slide area just north of Pt. Sherman that is half a mile wide and extends from the shore to the top of a 4000' foot mountain. It won't be possible to just put a strip of pavement across the many slide areas- they will require either a bridge or a tunnel, giving this project a very high cost and almost no benefit at all.
The Road
According to State workers we bought much of the materials needed to build the road in the 70's and are still storing it; which isn't free.
Also, the West side road is not impossible, it is just that the East side would open up development because it is privately owned; West side owned by Gov. I would rather not take the ferry at all, but at this point I do not want to be locked in.
Lat, that is a good point about if they scaled down the ferries or if they became too costly to operate. Fares only cover about 25% of the cost to run them already. Can you imagine what AK Airlines will do to us if it was their way or the...oh wait no highway.
Build it.
screw the road
mass transit - a narrow gauge railroad
It is Skagway that does not want the road
If I have my facts right Skagway built/created a park or preserve in the route of the road. This act blocks/stops the road short of Skagway without access to Haines. What would happen to the profit margin to the Haines and Skagway businesses if a road was built. If you have shopped in either community, you know what markup they been getting rich off of.... Sounds like Capitalism at its best.
Keep to guitars Bob
Your assertion that you are a 'business owner' is a bit of a stretch, Bob. More appropriately a shill for SEACC/LCC. You greenies in Haines already have a road. Stick with that and we will get our road built and use it.
@angelcrusher
The port time in Juneau cannot be reduced to 1/2 an hour (at least not every time) because it takes longer than that for them to offload, load, and fuel.
Good article.
I'm for the Road, AND for the Alaska-Class boats. Building the Road will free up vessels to increase service to the rest of Southeast. It is not a road to nowhere, but a road that puts travellers within minutes of their destination, as opposed to an 8 hour trip. It will open up numerous opportunities for property, commerce and recreation. Even though the State's investment in Juneau as Alaska's Capital is woeful to say the least, we still should do everything in our power to increase access to Juneau.
road/ferry issues.
The road is a waste of state moneys for many reasons. Some of the few are the fact that even without rockslides or avalanches, DOT does not have the money or the will to keep it plowed in the winter, even with snowfalls of only a foot or two. In 1999 the cost was pegged at just under a billion dollars, so I have a real problem with the "experts" cost estimates in 2013....can you say "fudging"? Lynn canal can have some of the worst sea conditions in the winter, does anyone with any common sense think that 100 mph winds wouldn't affect road traffic traveling right along the edge? The decision to build the ferry or ferries only at ASD in Ketchikan is suspect considering the obsfucation by DOT about the increased cost as an excuse to scuttle the Alaska Class design. ASD is run by Vigor Industries a lower 48 company who also owns Cascade General and Todd Shipyards. Considering that vessels being built today are built using "modular" techniques which could allow Vigor to build sections at one of their other yards, ship to ASD and weld together. And why are we not accepting federal $ to build these ships? A federal 70% match would lower the States outlay considerably, unless the "sole source" build by ASD would put some serious cash in someones pocket?
Increased opportunity???
Well wolfmagic2012 it seems to me you have either never traveled Lynn Canal or failed to look out the window if you did.
The east side of Lynn Canal after Berners Bay is essentially one 40 mile cliff...not much land for property, recreation or any other opportunity other than rock climbing.....
Bahaha
A road to Skagway only shows that planners are more concerned about getting out of state and not to serve Alaskan interests such as the best connection to the Anchorage/interior road system because that is only found in the Haines connection.
A road to Haines shows that they are hoping to get to Skagway but will settle for Haines and maybe have their two shuttle ferry's working to satisfy all concerned here and still have their road by boat shuttling.
If there was to be any sense in this, then the road would go up the west side of Lynn Canal. This is the only sensible route up Lynn Canal without the threats of cliffs, landslides and avalanche that the east side clearly offers. This is when we would all see the sensibles call foul on "2 ferries". Hence, my Bahaha
Peace out.
Kemp and the gang are low balling the road costs
The FEIS signed by Pat Kemp himself in 2006 included ferry terminal construction at $16 million and new vessel construction at $53 million in the project estimated total of of $273 million.
The 2009 cost estimate, totalling $474 million, removed all but $13 million of the vessel construction costs*.
In sum, the Juneau Access Road project has been estimated at:
Initial: $273,000,000 (with $53 million for vessel construction)
2007: $374,000,000 (with $65,000,000 for vessels)
2009: $474,000,000 (with $13,000,000 for vessels*)
2013: $??????????? **
Furthermore, in 2007, Road "Planner" Rueben Yost, M.S. Zoology, admitted that "DOT does not know how much the road will actually cost because the technical information on the geology is incomplete," i.e. DOT had no idea what it would cost to address the hazards identified by its own consultants (Golder), and has not determined those costs in the 6 years since.
This spontaneous outburst of honesty is the last we've seen from the DOT gang when discussing costs for this project.
* The costs for the "original, less expensive 2006 concept for a Southeast Alaska shuttle ferry" to which Kemp and Yost claim they are returning was allocated to the Juneau Road Project. In 2009, all ferry costs except for a small vessel to be used from the end of the road to Skagway were removed from the project because a decision had been made to move ahead with a plan replacing the Malaspina and Taku with 3 identical 60-vehicle vessels, which would serve other routes as well and therefore could be considered to be independent of the road. Kemp has made it quite clear in public remarks that the intent of his "plan" is to revert back to a ferry design like that originally contemplated for the road project, and has publicly inextricably intertwined the ferries to the road.
** Looks like "project creep" to me
Cost Over-Runs
Any large project in Alaska will cost more than even honest estimates. Just look at the fiasco involved in dredging the Douglas Boat Harbor. The Half-Way To Nowhere road would cost 1 to 2 billion and ten years to complete if it were to begin this year, which isn't happening. Once a road to Skagway became impossible this whole thing devolved into just a make-work scheme. The Pipeline was estimated in 1969 to cost about a billion to complete- it cost seven billion.
We don't "need" the road.
We don't "need" the road.
The M/V Susitna
The Mat-Su Borough sits on a virtually new 200 foot ferry they can not give away. Built with millions of Federal dollars than to Uncle ted Steven, who never faulted on a way to bilk congress out of pork for Alaska, the new vessel needs a home. The AMHS could acquire the vessel for free. One would think in all the assorted needs of the ferry system the M/V Susitna would have some use in the long term planning.
But of course the AMHS brainiacs can not see any use for a 200 foot vessel becasue it not an original idea and will not result it spending millions with the Ketchikan yard. The AMHS will provide you lot of reasons why the Susitna does not fit into the picture. I'm sure the big reason is the politics of big spenders who can not see any alternative that would not require building new ships.
No doubt the Susitna would need some kind of retrofit. However is a retrofit so expense that new would cast less?
What road?
I have a good imagination, but I can't imagine a road past the Kensington. Before he left office, Frank Murkowski suggested just building the road to the Kensington Mine and worrying about the rest of the road later. I think this is probably the current position, even if no one in the governor's office will admit it.
So the the push for the road seems to have devolved into a Republican plan to ruin Berners Bay for local recreational use to provide a free road to Coeur Alaska.
Those of you who are dreaming of paying $15 to drive to the ferry terminal may have to find an alternate universe.
What road?
Conradmuller...I think you hit the nail on the head...just wonder who in DOT or the Gov. office stands to benefit.
me plus is correct
If a shuttle ferry is going to be unavoidable anyway, then make the shuttle off of the existing Juneau road system and run a road up the west side.
The advantage of running the shuttle out of Auke Bay is that it links to other ferries, but the shuttle run would be longer - 20 or 30 miles depending on where the Chilkat terminal was. It might also require a longer road on that end.
If the ferry left out of Echo or Sawmill Cove, the crossing to William Henry Bay would be a little over 10 miles, but there'd have to be a shuttle bus between it and Auke Bay for transfer riders...not a major deal.
A road up the west side would open up all sorts of interesting country for hunting and exploring - much better than the east side. And the shuttle crossing would be in far friendlier waters than up in N. Lynn Canal.
If the choice is to get a road, or watch our ferry system be systematically starved without getting a road, I guess a road it should be. I'm sure these guys could find even more wasteful things to spend the money on.
Where would a road on the
Where would a road on the west side of Lynn canal connect? May as well hook over to Gustavus too since we would be in the neighborhood.