DOCSLIB.ORG

Seward Freight Traffic Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Seward Freight Traffic Study Seward Marine Terminal Expansion Planning Freight Traffic Study May 2017 This page left intentionally blank. Seward Marine Terminal Expansion Planning FREIGHT TRAFFIC STUDY Prepared for: Prepared by: With support by: Cover Photos courtesy of Judy Patrick Photography. This page left intentionally blank. Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I Executive Summary ..............................................................................................................................................................................I Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................................I Background and Issues ...................................................................................................................................................................... II Approach ............................................................................................................................................................................................... II Improvement Options .......................................................................................................................................................................III Freight Dock ........................................................................................................................................................................................III Seward Loading Facility ...................................................................................................................................................................IV Permit Area Inside Freight Dock Fence .......................................................................................................................................IV Permit Area Outside Freight Dock Fence ....................................................................................................................................V New Laydown Area .............................................................................................................................................................................V Freight Building ...................................................................................................................................................................................V Railyard ..................................................................................................................................................................................................V Real Estate Enhancements with a Freight Focus .......................................................................................................................V Next Steps ............................................................................................................................................................................................VI 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Seward Marine Terminal Expansion Planning Project Structure ............................................................................. 1 1.2 Project Vision ........................................................................................................................................................................ 2 1.3 Background Information .................................................................................................................................................... 2 1.3.1 Project Funding ........................................................................................................................................................... 2 1.3.2 Alaska Railroad Corporation .................................................................................................................................. 3 1.3.3 Seward Marine Terminal .......................................................................................................................................... 3 1.4 Study Objectives ..................................................................................................................................................................4 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS 5 2.1 Alaska Railroad Network .................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.1.1 Freight Services ..........................................................................................................................................................5 2.1.2 Seward Freight Facilities .........................................................................................................................................6 2.1.3 Freight Dock ................................................................................................................................................................ 7 2.1.4 Seward Loading Facility ........................................................................................................................................... 7 2.1.5 Permit Area Inside Freight Dock Fence ...............................................................................................................9 2.1.6 Permit Area Outside Freight Dock Fence .........................................................................................................10 2.1.7 New Laydown Area ...................................................................................................................................................12 2.1.8 Freight Building .........................................................................................................................................................13 2.1.9 Railyard ....................................................................................................................................................................... 14 Freight Traffic Study 3. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT 15 3.1 Visioning Process ...........................................................................................................................................................15 3.2 Stakeholder Outreach ................................................................................................................................................15 3.2.1 Internal and External Stakeholder Meetings ...........................................................................................13 3.2.2 Anchorage Transportation Fair ..................................................................................................................16 3.2.3 Additional Stakeholder Outreach Efforts ................................................................................................16 3.3 Key Issues .......................................................................................................................................................................17 3.4 Ongoing Community Engagement .........................................................................................................................21 3.4.1 Internal Stakeholder Workshops .................................................................................................................21 3.4.2 External Stakeholder Follow-Up Presentations .....................................................................................21 3.4.3 Seward Public Meeting No. 1 .......................................................................................................................21 3.4.4 Agencies and Other Governmental Outreach ......................................................................................21 3.4.5 Additional Outreach ..................................................................................................................................21 4. MARKET ANALYSIS 23 4.1 Port of Seward ....................................................................................................................................................................23 4.1.1 Location and Setting ...............................................................................................................................................23 4.1.2 Infrastructure ............................................................................................................................................................23 4.1.3 Transportation ..........................................................................................................................................................24 4.1.4 Freight Operations ..................................................................................................................................................24 4.1.5 Origin and Destination of Freight .......................................................................................................................24 4.1.6 Freight Businesses ...................................................................................................................................................26 4.1.7 Seasonality of Business Activity ...........................................................................................................................27 4.2 Comparison of Other Southcentral Port Facilities ...................................................................................................27 4.2.1 Port of Whittier .........................................................................................................................................................27
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Kenai Peninsula Borough Comprehensive Plan 2018 Update
    REVIEW DRAFT | DECEMBER 2017 Kenai Peninsula Borough Comprehensive Plan 2018 Update Public Review Draft December 15, 2017 This plan is available to download as a PDF at www.KPBCompPlan.com. Hardcopies are also available at Borough offices: Soldotna Seward Homer George A. Navarre Building Seaview Plaza Homer Annex 144 North Binkley St. 302 Railway Ave, Suite 122 206 E. Pioneer Ave. Phone: 262-4441 Phone: 224-2001 Phone: 235-9837 Toll Free: 1-800-478-4441 Fax: 224-2011 Fax: 235-8990 Fax: 262-1892 The public comment period is open through Saturday, March 31, 2018. Comments should be submitted in writing: Email [email protected] Mail KPB Planning Department ATTN: KPB Comprehensive Plan 144 North Binkley Street, Soldotna, Alaska 99669 Contact the project team Visit www.KPBCompPlan.com Bruce Wall | Borough Planner | Phone (907) 714-2206 | Email [email protected] Shelly Wade | Agnew::Beck Project Manager | Phone: (907) 242-5326 | Email [email protected] REVIEW DRAFT | DECEMBER 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................... i Plan Adoption ............................................................................................................................................... ii Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... 1 Our Values .................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Seward Historic Preservation Plan
    City of Seward City Council Louis Bencardino - Mayor Margaret Anderson Marianna Keil David Crane Jerry King Darrell Deeter Bruce Siemenski Ronald A. Garzini, City Manager Seward Historic Preservation Commissioners Doug Capra Donna Kowalski Virginia Darling Faye Mulholland Jeanne Galvano Dan Seavey Glenn Hart Shannon Skibeness Mike Wiley Project Historian - Anne Castellina Community Development Department Kerry Martin, Director Rachel James - Planning Assistant Contracted assistance by: Margaret Branson Tim Sczawinski Madelyn Walker Funded by: The City of Seward and the Alaska Office of History and Archaeology Recommended by: Seward Historic Preservation Commission Resolution 96-02 Seward Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 96-11 Adopted by: Seward City Council Resolution 96-133 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction......................................................................................................................................1 Purpose of the Plan ..............................................................................................................1 Method .................................................................................................................................2 Goals for Historic Preservation............................................................................................3 Community History and Character ..................................................................................................4 Community Resources...................................................................................................................20
    [Show full text]
  • Port of Anchorage Organization Chart 2012
    2012 Proposed Operating and Capital Budgets PORT OF ANCHORAGE ORGANIZATION CHART 2012 Mayor Dan Sullivan Municipal Manager George Vakalis Port Director William Sheffield Deputy Port Director Stephen Ribuffo Finance Operations & Port Engineer Special Maintenance Projects Stuart Edward Leon Greydanus Todd Cowles Vacant PORT - 1 2012 Proposed Operating and Capital Budgets PORT OF ANCHORAGE UTILITY PROFILE 2012 ORGANIZATION The Port of Anchorage (Port) is organized into the following functional areas: Administration, Finance, Port Operations and Maintenance, Engineering, Marketing, and Public Affairs & Special Projects. The Administrative and Finance responsibility entails day-to-day business functions and real estate management. Operations and Maintenance functions include management of vessel movements and dockside activities, general upkeep and operation of the facilities, infrastructure, equipment and security. Engineering is responsible for the capital improvement program. Marketing is responsible for all media advertising and coordinating public outreach, and Public Affairs and Special Projects is responsible for all intergovernmental and media/press relations and any major events involving public participation. HISTORY The Port of Anchorage commenced operation in September 1961, with a single berth. In its first year of operation, 38,000 tons of cargo crossed the Port’s dock. On average, around four million tons passes over the dock every year. The Port of Anchorage is a major economic engine and one of the strongest links in the Alaska transportation chain. This chain enables residents statewide from Cordova to Barrow to take full advantage of the benefits of inexpensive waterborne commerce through this regional Port. The Port and its stakeholder’s have maintained a notable safety record throughout the four decades the Port has been in operation.
    [Show full text]
  • 90% 80% 75% 50% $14 Billion
    Prepared by McDowell Group for Port of Alaska October 2020 The Logistical and Economic Advantages of Alaska’s Primary Inbound Port Port of Alaska (PoA) serves three Defense missions in Alaska and around critical functions. 1) It is Alaska’s key the world. 3) PoA provides a resilient cargo gateway, benefiting virtually every transportation lifeline that supports segment of Alaska’s economy. 2) PoA is routine movement of consumer goods, critical national defense infrastructure, industrial development and disaster playing an essential role in Department of recovery. Alaska Inbound Freight Profile, 2019 PoA freight, by the numbers . Non-Petroleum Percent of Alaska’s population served by PoA. Total inbound 90% Alaska Freight Percent of total vans and containers Port of Alaska handles 3.1 Million Tons shipped to Southcentral Alaska Total inbound Port of Alaska ports. This containerized freight is 80% eventually distributed to every region 50% 1.55 Million Tons of the state. of all inbound Alaska cargo Percent of all non-petroleum marine cargo shipped into Alaska, exclusive of Southeast Alaska (which is TRUCK 75% primarily served by barges directly < from Puget Sound). 5% Percent of all freight shipped into Alaska by all modes (marine, truck, 50% and air). Value of commercial activity in Alaska $ supported by PoA, as the state’s main 14 billion inbound containerized freight and AIR fuel distribution center. MARITIME <5% 90+% Port modernization will ensure that PoA continues to provide the most efficient, reliable, and timely service possible to distributors and consumers. Relying on other ports would, over the long-term, cost Alaskans billions of dollars in increased freight costs.
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Environmental Issues Identification Technical Memorandum
    PRINCE WILLIAM SOUND/COPPER RIVER AREA TRANSPORTATION PLAN Preliminary Environmental Issues Identification Technical Memorandum prepared for the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities prepared by HDR Alaska, Inc. and Parsons Brinckerhoff in association with Northern Economics The Glosten Associates, Inc. Ogden Beeman & Associates, Inc. March 1998 Table of Contents PURPOSE....................................................................................................................................1 METHODOLOGY .........................................................................................................................2 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AND CONSTRAINTS ......................................................................3 AIR QUALITY .........................................................................................................................3 NOISE ....................................................................................................................................3 WATER QUALITY ..................................................................................................................4 PROTECTED SPECIES.........................................................................................................5 NATURAL HAZARDS.............................................................................................................7 LAND MANAGEMENT ...........................................................................................................8 SOCIAL, CULTURAL,
    [Show full text]
  • ECONOMIC IMPACT of COVID-19 on the CRUISE INDUSTRY in ALASKA, WASHINGTON, and OREGON October 20, 2020 ______
    FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION _______________________________________________ FACT FINDING INVESTIGATION NO. 30 _______________________________________________ COVID-19 IMPACT ON CRUISE INDUSTRY _______________________________________________ INTERIM REPORT: ECONOMIC IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON THE CRUISE INDUSTRY IN ALASKA, WASHINGTON, AND OREGON October 20, 2020 _______________________________________________ 1 Table of Contents I. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................. 3 II. Fact Finding Method ............................................................................................................ 4 III. Observations ........................................................................................................................ 5 A. Cruise Industry in Alaska ................................................................................................. 5 B. Anchorage ...................................................................................................................... 11 C. Seward ............................................................................................................................ 13 D. Whittier........................................................................................................................... 14 E. Juneau ............................................................................................................................. 15 F. Ketchikan .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • It's All in the Numbers!
    It’s all in the numbers! Alaska’s Port . Alaska’s Future Port of Anchorage ALASKA’S PORT. ALASKA’S FUTURE. of0% Municipal Property Taxes used to run Port! Municipal Enterprise Fund The Assets 220 Acres The Basics 3 Cargo Terminals 24 Employees 1 Dry Barge Berth 9 Commissioners 2 Petroleum Terminals $ 10M Operating Revenue 1 Small Craft Floating Dock 3 Regional Pipelines - ANC, JBER, Nikiski 2 Rail Spur connecting to Alaska Railroad 2,400 Note: 2011 Dockage Totals Cost of “parking” at the dock. Container Ships: DOCKAGE: Tariff based on vessel length. Carry containerized freight. Common POA container ships 208 Tugs/Barges = TOTE or Horizon Lines 206 Container Ships Break Bulk Ships: Carry uncontainerized cargo. 17 Bulk Tankers 450 Common cargo at POA average number of = cement or drill pipe 8 Break Bulk vessel calls per year WHARFAGE: TARIFF: Cost of bringing cargo to/from the vessel A list of prices for services or taxes. Tariff to/from the dock. Tariff based on weight. set by Commission approved by Assembly. 50,000 2.3 Million 118,000 240,000 Note: 2011 Wharfage Totals Cars/Truck/Vans Tons of break bulk per year Tons of liquid cargo per year 20ft equivalent units bulk per year (containers) per year 2000 Anchorage Port Road, Anchorage Alaska, 99501 Tel: 907.343.6200 Fax: 907.277.5636 www.PortofAlaska.com Port of Anchorage Alaska’s Port . Alaska’s Future ALASKA’S PORT. ALASKA’S FUTURE. 52 Years of Uninterrupted Service! Serving Alaskans since 1961 90% of the consumer goods for 85% of Alaska come through the Port of Anchorage If you eat it, drive it, or wear it, it probably came through the Port of Anchorage first! Receives goods directly from Seattle/Tacoma by barge Mean Low *Businesses Size in *Municipal Low Water Located in Acres Population Facility Information (MLLW) Municipality 220 -35 ft 299,281 17,536 Gantry Petroleum Available Rail Spur Cranes Lines Acres 3 2 Miles 9 8 *Source: www.AnchorageProspector.com *Source: Alaska’s Port.
    [Show full text]
  • 1964 Great Alaska Earthquake—A Photographic Tour of Anchorage, Alaska
    1964 Great Alaska Earthquake—A Photographic Tour of Anchorage, Alaska Open-File Report 2014–1086 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover: Comparison photographs taken from the same location on 4th Avenue looking east through the intersection with C Street, Anchorage, Alaska. (Top photograph taken by U.S. Army, 1964; bottom photograph taken by Robert G. McGimsey, 2013) 1964 Great Alaska Earthquake—A Photographic Tour of Anchorage, Alaska By Evan E. Thoms, Peter J. Haeussler, Rebecca D. Anderson, and Robert G. McGimsey Open-File Report 2014–1086 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior SALLY JEWELL, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2014 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Suggested citation: Thoms, E.E., Haeussler, P.J., Anderson, R.D., and McGimsey, R.G., 2014, 1964 Great Alaska Earthquake—A photographic tour of Anchorage, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2014-1086, 48 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20141086. ISSN 2331-1258 (online) Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Alaska University Transportation Center UAA Institute of Social and Economic Duckering Building Room 245 Research P.O
    Analysis of Alaska Transportation Sectors to Assess Energy Use and Impacts of Price Shocks and Climate Change Legislation Alaska University Transportation Center Alaska University Transportation Institute UAA of Economic Research Social and Photo Authors: Ginny Fay, Tobias Schwörer, Mouhcine Guettabi, Jeffrey Armagost Date: April 2013 Prepared By: Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska Anchorage Alaska University Transportation Center UAA Institute of Social and Economic Duckering Building Room 245 Research P.O. Box 755900 3211 Providence Dr. Fairbanks, AK 99775-5900 Anchorage, AK 99508 INE/AUTC13.03 Form approved OMB No. REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestion for reducing this burden to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-1833), Washington, DC 20503 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (LEAVE 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED BLANK) April 2013 Final Report (8/1/2009-4/31/2013) 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS Analysis of Alaska Transportation Sectors to Assess Energy Use and Impacts of Price Shocks and Climate Change Legislation 309002 DTRT06-G-0011 6. AUTHOR(S) Ginny Fay, Tobias Schwörer, Mouhcine Guettabi, Jeffrey Armagost 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Goal 3. Preserve and Improve Quality of Life in the Kenai Peninsula
    Goal 3. Preserve and improve quality of life in the Kenai Peninsula Borough through increased access to local and regional facilities, activities, programs and services. FOCUS AREA: ENERGY AND UTILITIES HEADLINES Enstar Natural Gas Company has contracted with AIX Energy for gas supplies through 2021. The resurgence of independent oil and gas companies in the Cook Inlet Basin is providing new supplies of gas and long-term contracts. Bradley Lake expansion via the Battle Creek diversion will add about 37,300 megawatt hours per year from the hydroelectric facility. The Alaska Energy authority owns Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project, but contracts with Homer Electric Association (HEA) to operate it. HEA provides electricity to the southern and central portion of the Kenai Peninsula. Ocean Renewable Power Company applied to surrender the preliminary license for a proposed East Foreland tidal energy project in Cook Inlet. FERC granted a preliminary permit in 2011 to conduct a feasibility study for constructing the East Foreland tidal energy project. Tidal energy is viable, but the strength of the conventional energy market in Alaska affects the integration of new technology, making it financially infeasible (Marine Energy 2016). The Borough does not provide utilities but assists in utility provision through its platting authority and by requiring dedication of utility easements on new subdivision plats. Private utility companies, some cities, and the U.S. Public Health Service provide utilities to residents in the borough. Borough subdivision plat review is coordinated with private utilities and cities to ensure easements are adequate to serve future utilities. WHERE HAVE WE BEEN? WHERE ARE WE NOW? WHERE ARE WE HEADED? Energy Homer Electric Association (HEA) provides electricity to the southern and central portion of the Kenai Peninsula, including: Kenai, Soldotna, Nikiski, Homer, Seldovia, Nanwalek and Port Graham.
    [Show full text]
  • The Port Mackenzie Money Pit It’S Time for Answers, Not Investment
    The Port MacKenzie Money Pit It’s time for answers, not investment. The Port MacKenzie Money Pit The Port MacKenzie project is the latest in a long line of extremely expensive projects undertaken by the Mat‐ Su Borough that have turned into complete financial boondoggles. Growth is something all Alaskans believe in. But pouring money into a bottomless pit is not. The Mat‐Su Borough has a long track record of mismanaging projects funded with public dollars. From the $7.8 million ferry with nowhere to dock to the fancy $4.5 million Ferry Terminal that sits empty and the empty $225 million Goose Creek Prison, Can Alaska continue the Point MacKenzie area in the Mat Su Borough is a magnet for to afford the Mat‐Su bad investments and mismanaged projects. Let’s not let another Borough’s poorly money pit swallow Alaska’s public funds. planned projects? The Port MacKenzie project has never received much support from the general public. Investment in Port MacKenzie was first rejected by the voters of the Mat‐Su Borough in 1989 when they voted down a $25 million bond package. Opposition to this project has remained strong over the years, local meetings frequently draw large crowds of vocal opponents who cite the Mat‐Su Borough’s history of mismanagement and the anticipated runaway costs of the project among their primary concerns. After the bond package was rejected by voters the Borough commissioned a study that the described the Port as “a speculative investment whose long‐term development potential is uncertain.” Despite the findings of their own study commissioned by Temple, Baker and Sloan, the Mat‐Su Borough moved forward with the project anyway and used a loan on a Borough‐owned office building to finance construction of the Port.
    [Show full text]
  • Task 5: Freight Issues & Trends White Paper
    Task 5: Freight Issues & Trends White Paper AMATS Freight Mobility Study Prepared for AMATS Prepared by HDR with RSG Anchorage, AK March 21, 2016 Task 5: Freight Issues & Trends White Paper HDR with RSG Contents 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 2 The Regional Economic Market .......................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Population & Households .......................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Major Industries ......................................................................................................................... 4 2.3 Freight-Related Land Use ......................................................................................................... 6 2.4 Foreign Trade Zone ................................................................................................................. 10 2.5 Major Freight Generators ........................................................................................................ 11 2.5.1 Port of Anchorage ...................................................................................................... 11 2.5.2 Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport ............................................................ 12 2.5.3 Alaska Railroad Corporation Anchorage Rail Yard .................................................... 13 2.5.4
    [Show full text]