Port Canaveral Business Owner: Closing Boat Ramps Not Set In Stone
Letter by Joe Penovich, owner of Grills Seafood and Sunrise Marina:
Dear Commissioners,
I have met with John Walsh and Diane Denig concerning the location of
a new cruise terminal where the Freddie Patrick Park and boat ramps are
currently located. While I am grateful that your staff reached out to
me for input, the feeling I get is that a decision has already been
made to proceed with this cruise terminal. In fact, the Port website
stated that the board had already approved such a facility.
“During the July Commission meeting, the Canaveral Port Authority
Board of Commissioners unanimously approved building a new $75 million
cruise terminal and parking garage to accommodate new 6,000-passenger
megaships just east of the Cove area where the current boat launch
facilities are located.”
This statement has since been modified on your website, when I
pointed out to staff that this location had not been put to a vote.
This is a significant decision to be made. The insistence that it has
to be made immediately does not seem prudent, and the misinformation
given to our local citizens and fishing community is prompting my letter
to you. Whether this was an overzealous position of staff, or just a
simple mistake, is unknown. Had this “misprint” not been pointed out,
the boating community and our local dining and Cove patrons, would have
operated under the assumption that this location was set in stone, that
they had no further say in the matter, other than secondary ramp
locations. Correct me if I am wrong, but a final decision concerning
this drastic change to Port Canaveral,
rests with its governing body of commissioners elected by the local
population. It does not rest with staff, a consulting firm, or any other
outside interests?
Commissioners were given a presentation at the July meeting that
stated why the Freddie Patrick Park was the most viable location for a
new cruise terminal. I feel some very important issues were either, not
thought of, ignored, or glossed over.
1. North Cargo Berths 5 or 6 could accommodate these enormous ships
far better than any other site currently considered. The Port talks
constantly about best use of land and waterfront. A consulting firm is
using this argument to propose eliminating the central boat ramps. It
is admitted however, that the Freddie Patrick site cannot accommodate
the largest cruise vessels on the horizon. The average cargo ships that
call on Port Canaveral are tiny in comparison. Why place them where a
mega cruise ship will actually fit? Why is this, the “favored plan”
over North cargo piers 5 and 6. This plan removes an existing, fully
functioning, South Cargo 5 dock, and crams an oversized passenger ship
where it really does not really fit or belong. It destroys an already
built, much used park and launch facility that the public has grown
comfortable with for over 40 years in the process. This plan has not
even addressed the real costs, permitting, and time frame of relocating
this park and launch facilities. All this when the North Berths are
already dredged and built, and have plenty of vacant land just waiting
to have a terminal constructed! Why waste this large berth potential,
when it is so easy to accommodate smaller cargo vessels at existing
smaller docks. This is not the best use of Port resources, nor does it
maximize future revenue potential. Your pilots also agree that docking
challenges with these mega ships, are much better met on the North side
berths, adjacent to the west turning basin. Time and channel congestion
are greatly increased when docking ships of this size at the center of
the Port.
2. The Port is nearing completion of its welcome center and in the
process of finalizing plans for an amphitheater in the same vicinity
(amphitheater size yet to be determined). These facilities that are not
even opened yet, but are touted to bring thousands of new visitors to
Port Canaveral. Accurate numbers will not be determined until opening.
Now, before real traffic flows can be established, the Port is going to
approve locating a 6000 passenger cruise ship adjacent to this project,
on an already crowded George King Blvd? Traffic is occasionally backed
up to 528 now. What about all the special events the Port hopes to
attract to the cove in the future with these new facilities. Is this
traffic situation something our local patrons to the cove and residents
of Cape Canaveral will be grateful for? How does local DOT feel about
this?
3. Having spent millions on the new welcome center viewing tower,
would it not be a much more aesthetically pleasing to be looking at a
beautiful new mega cruise ship, instead of a rusty cargo vessel on the
North side? Would this not be a selling point to any potential cruise
line customer for this berth. In addition, what confusion will be
created by not locating this new mega ship on the North side, where the
majority of your cruise ships are berthed now, where millions of the
cruising public has already embarked from in the past. Day sailing
ships on the south side, and extended trips on the North, are an
established norm. Why confuse your cruising patrons and frustrate your
local residents? Look at any existing cruise port in this country…why
are the cruise ships and passenger terminals grouped together in a
specific area of the individual ports. I would argue that it just makes
logistical sense for passenger traffic flow, security issues and
stevedoring requirements.
4. Glossed over at the July presentation, was the security buffer
issue with these ships. A 300 foot rule exists now. This is an
impossible distance to maintain at the center of the Port, 100 feet from
a restaurant and marina, at one of the narrowest places in the Port
channel. Staff seemed to indicate this requirement would just go
away…Will it? Should it? What happens if there is, God forbid, another
significant terrorist event in this country. How will adjustments be
made to this docking situation, and the mix of private vessels in its
proximity. The West basin is closed to pleasure boats when occupied by
cruise ships now. This does not hinder boat traffic and provides
security to the berthed cruise ships and its passengers. Is it not
foolish to be complacent about security issues in this world we live in.
Security issues for a high profile mega cruise ship? Cargo ships do
not need this level of security. Again, the North Cargo Berths 5 and 6
offer secure dockage, separated from private boats, that does not exist
at a Port channel wall location.
5. Relocating the existing boat ramps at Freddie Patrick Park
completely changes the dynamic of the boating community and its
interaction with the Cove area. So many of our local residents use
these centrally located ramps for a day of fishing, then meet up with
non-fishing family and friends at the ramps to dine in the cove. In
addition to this daily use, offshore fishing tournaments and racing
events are a key component of the Cove dynamic. Millikens, Rustys,
Fishlips and Grills all sponsor and host a fishing tournament or
multiple tournaments throughout the summer. This is a huge part of what
the Port is to this community. Key to these events, public interest in
them, and logistical ease to run them, is the centrally located boat
ramps. It is this local draw that makes this area attractive to tourists
as well. Arguments put forth for the two alternate sites do not really
look at this public impact, nor do they address the real drawback to
these locations. The site West of the 401 bridge would create a
bottleneck of boat traffic sandwiched between the drawbridge and
Canaveral locks, at what is the narrowest part of the Ports channel.
The other location at the East side of the Port, near Jetty Park, is ill
planned for multiple reasons. Swell incursions are at times significant
at this part of the Port. Vessel wakes are always present. This would
create an extremely unsafe and difficult trailering situation regardless
of the configuration. The most critical oversight, is a bottleneck of
boats at the mouth of the Port. Movements of ships and submarines would
be in constant conflict with the hundreds of pleasure boats that
currently access the Atlantic via the Port ramps. This is not wise
planning, it is not highest and best use, and does impact the future
development potential of CT 3,4,5.
As a resident and user of Port Canaveral for my entire life, I share
above concerns with many other residents I have spoken to. As a business
owner and tenant in Port Canaveral since 1994, I have additional
concerns. Grills has become an unbelievable part of this local
community…so much so, I feel it is foolish to even call it mine. In
many ways it does belong to the local public…they certainly have made it
what it is. Locating a mega cruise ship at the Freddie Patrick Park
places the stern of a 20 story ship in the face of our customers. I
have spoken to many of them already…they are in shock. What this will
do to our atmosphere and view is obvious to them. What it will mean to
our overall business revenue is a coin toss. There was a flippant
comment made at the last commission meeting…“this is going bring so much
money to the cove merchants, the Port could now raise rates to these
leaseholders.” This is an interesting mindset. This has not been the
mindset of Grills. We have not operated our restaurant here for over 16
years with the primary focus on how much money we can make. Should this
be the mindset of Port Canaveral? I don’t think so…but ask your
voters. Revenues are important. But I believe any entity that looks
primarily at revenue potential, will ultimately miss the big picture.
As to how great locating a ship here would be for the cove merchants?
Cruise ship passengers have all the free food they can eat. Yes we may
sell them a few beers and some trinkets, but with all the above
mentioned reasons, we may in fact, drive our local population away. This
local population accounts for 80% of our business. They are what makes
Grills successful and the Cove what it is.
I can only ask that you seriously consider the ramifications of this
decision. Port Canaveral is a strategically located, embarkation cruise
port. Local business outside the Port, Cove merchants and local
residents, are benefiting from the cruise traffic that exists here. It
is working and working better than ever. The rare, fragile balance,
between local population interests, and a fully functioning cruise and
cargo facility has been established. It is truly a wonderful place to
visit for locals and tourists. There is plenty of room for well thought
out growth, larger ships, and the subsequent revenue increases this
generates. Nobody denies this is good for the area.
What Port Canaveral is not, and should not try to be, is a Nassau,
Cancun or even Key West. South side infrastructure and local interests
would not handle it well. Trying to make this embarkation facility, a
destination port of call, with the enormous potential of the
aforementioned disruptions to this local community, is not wise
planning. The fragile balance of success, that does exist here, should
not be placed at risk by this Canaveral Port Authority.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely
