Port roads to cost over $25M

| 11/12/2011

cruise term_0.JPG(CNS): If government does eventually go ahead with the proposed plans to develop cruise berthing facilities in George Town, it could cost the public purse millions to address the road system that will be needed. At a public meeting last week Burns Conolly said that the NRA has revealed that at least $25 million will need to be spent on modifying the capital’s roads to accommodate the new port and the thousands of passengers that will be coming off the ships directly into George Town. It is understood that China Harbour Engineering Company will not cover the cost of the roads in the current plan, which means the money will need to come from the public purse.

Taking the role as the lead spokesperson for the Red Bay or South Sound port option, Conolly stated that he and the sea-captains had met with both the Department of the Environment and the National Roads Authority in order to discuss their alternative proposal.

He said that they had been told that a considerable amount of work would be needed on the downtown road system in order for George Town to be able to cope with the change that the berthing of mega ships would bring to the capital.

Pushing the alternative location, Conolly said that one of the major advantages with the Red Bay location was that the facility would tap straight into an already gazetted and existing road network and would help to alleviate rather than worsen local traffic problems at the location with the intended bridge. Conolly stated that the plan would be to deliver people to George Town in shuttle buses in a manageable fashion.

He said that a significant amount of work would be needed in George Town to accommodate what could be as many as 24,000 passengers arriving in a given day. During the negotiations with DECCO, the first developer which the current government had begun talks with over the propose project, of which Conolly said he was a part, it was suggested that a one way system would need to be created in the capital to deal with the new facility.

Listing what he stated were the many different problems with developing in the capital, he pointed in particular to the disruption that would be caused during the development as well as after. He added that once the project was underway, the Royal Watler would need to be closed from the start of the project which meant buses and taxis would be returning to the old north and south terminals to collect the passengers from the ships that will continue to tender during construction.

The Royal Watler terminal would under the current plans be demolished to make way for the proposed new two storey retail facility at the point where the passengers disembark.

Meanwhile, speculation continues around the cruise berthing project after the premier extended the existing MOU that he had signed last June. A few weeks ago he extended the MOU to March.

The premier has said that he will get the port project underway, despite the financial framework agreement he has signed with the UK.

McKeeva Bush told the Legislative Assembly recently that the agreement merely requires government to complete an independent business analysis of the project to satisfy the conditions of the agreement. He announced that KPMG was undertaking the business analysis but it is not clear if the review includes examining the alternative port locations in Red Bay.

CNS contacted KPMG to ask if it was part of the remit and despite the fact that this project involves crown land and public assets the auditing firm stated:  “Due to client confidentiality, we are unable to comment publicly on this matter or discuss the scope of this engagement with any third party.”

Government has not yet revealed any of the details of the proposed plans that China Harbour Engineering Company has proposed but a delegation from the Chamber of Commerce took an all-expenses paid trip to Jamaica recently for a presentation by the firm. During the presentation it was revealed that the firm was willing to discuss the traffic management issues relating to the project but it was clear it is not currently part of the plan.

See Chamber of Commerce report on trip to Jamaica.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: Local News

Comments (72)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Brian Tomlinson, MD, NRA says:

    The NRA did not make the statement to anyone that  "at least $25 million will need to be spent on modifying the capital's roads … coming off the ships directly into George Town".

    We have not evaluated the traffic impacts due to any of the proposed port development projects as none of them have advanced far enough yet to be evaluated.

    • anonymous says:

      I heard that figure also was used in an insider civil service meeting interestingly with nra in attendance. I guess we will have to wait and see who is right.

  2. Chillywil says:

    Perhaps looking ahead 10 years or more when demand justifies, multple cuise docking locations make make sense. Two or more docking locations would provide seasonal alternatives as well as distributing commerce and traffic across the island. 

    • Anonymous says:

      1 docking facility is enough for this tiny island.  This is not some large island or even a country, where one could probably see the need for that.  Nuff said.   

  3. Anonymous says:

    The sad thing is that if not for the counter proposal to build a port in Red Bay, the need to re-design the roads @ $25 million for the Dart or China Harbour project would have remained hidden and then sprung on the people in typical UDP fashion.

     

     

  4. Libertarian says:

    Mr. Conolly, the Red Bay area that you and the developers are proposing, most definitely have residents who will be effected by the changes of traffic, commercial opportunists, and influx of tourists. Also, the local businesses in George Town like Island Companies and Kirks, will be effected if the facility is in Red Bay area, as tourists will have to pay more on bus fares to get into town. These things you have to consider and the residents in close proximity. Like Emerald Sound, you cannot play a blind eye on how such a develop would impact the community. Will therebe a independent survey done to see the number of those who will be happy or contented with the changes; especially, those changes effecting their environment?  Regards   

    • Anonymous says:

      Once again leadership by committee, every project will have those who are against it come what may. That is why you have professional and elected officers to study the alternatives and present a proposal that has the best in the country in mind.

      For God sake Lib make a decision where do you stand? Step out on the limb and make a decision.

      I am for Red Bay. See making a decision with facts isn't all that difficult.

    • Burns Conolly AIA says:

       

      It would be good if you visited "www.caymancruiseport.com" to see what is actually being proposed. The road from the safe harbour flies over the south sound road on its way to the bypass system so it does not contribute to local traffic down SS road.

       

      I think when the local businesses downtown contemplate the loss from the new two story retail and transportation centre on Royal Watler they may find it is more practical and profitable to ensure that the ships arrive in the first place and come to shop with them than the potential loss from them shopping at the Chinese scheme. I think what we are saying is this is not as simple an equation as it might seem.

       

      I actually agree with you that the Red Bay safe harbour as well as the GT finger piers must be reviewed carefully.  But surveys are only accurate if we have an "informed" public.  That is what the Captains have been attempting to do. Without the impacts in both locations then it comes down to who can influence the public the most and that does not necessarily give the correct solution.

       

      Regarding the environment however, it appears that the loss of all snorkeling and diving in the upper reefs of GT vicinity may actually be more significant environmental loss than the environmental loss in Red Bay. We support EIA’s in both locations.

       

      And,… there is no ‘developer’ in Red Bay as you can see from the website. This is a cruise harbour facility island in the middle of the sound merely connecting to the existing or planned road network. We do not care who designs it, builds it nor owns it. It just seems to make more sense than the exposed finger piers in GT which have to close at the smallest northwester.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Not a peep from the Ministers Association. hmmmm.

  6. Anonymous says:

    I find it extremely heart-warming to see the grassroots origin of this proposal.  (Red Bay) This proposal has been around from Capt Theo days and I'm sure he would have been happy to see this finally gaining traction.

     

  7. Anonymous says:

    There has to be maximum budget to which all of these grandiose plans and chatter are constrained.  It seems we would spend $5 to earn $2 and allow those at the levers to squirrel away a dollah for themselves in the process.  
     

  8. Anonymous says:

    All of George Town needs to be re-engineered.  This is a perfect opportunity to do it.

  9. Anonymous says:

    XXXX

    cruise piers must go in Georgetown…..nowhere else…..as to 24,000 people in any day, if we had a decent landing facility it would be handled a lot cleaner than we currently handle 10-15,000….i bet it'd seem like there would be less people and less chaos……and here's the thing, the cruise ships will not all try to land and depart at same time (as they currently do) if we had a dock (and a dock that allows them to keep their onboard gaming and stores open)……the only reason they head off early here is so they can crawl to jamaica or mexico with their onboards open

    we really need people to stop scare mongering, and stop patently pushing not-so-hidden agendas…..just build the thing and lets focus on turning over 2Million day passengers into repeat stay-over guests…..thats the goal…..the goal isnt to let dart or kirk or anyone else save their jewlery empires, they'll all be ok……the goal is to move cayman forward…and we can do that with a landing facility that allows us to showcase cayman properly by having an organized and spacious facility to cart the cattle off to the wonders of SMB/East end/Rum Point/Stingray/etc/etc….and they'll come back next year to stay in the hotels…..this is not rocket science……the problem is we dont have any rocket scientists involved in any aspect of this deal, but we need some.

    • Anonymous says:

      Calling the cruise ship visitors, "cart the cattle of to…" is highly offensive and don't think that they cannot feel those attitudes from ignorant people such as yourself.

      Rethink your attitude toward cruise ship visitors that pay to be here, Einstein. No one likes to be disrespected smart guy,

      • Anonymous says:

        wow, someone got out of bed the wrong side….you ever been on a cruise? i've been on 8….and trust me, you feel like cattle on many occasions….its not offensive, we pay to do it…no different than q'ing hours at an airport or in line for a Disney ride….we're all cattle dude….dont read things wrong, but apologies if i wasnt clear

        all cool….moo!

  10. so anonymous says:

    Take all the intelligence in CIG and you would still need twice as much more to pull this off.  Add to this the fact that Caymanians can never get together to decide on anything and it should be clear that the Cayman islands is not up to this big a job.  And of course they will not be happy with what they have.  So what you have is a lot of  contention and nothing gets done right and anything that gets done is done poorly and cost twice as much.  Caymankind. Someday maybe Cayman can put pride aside and let proffessionals do the hard stuff.

  11. Burns Conolly AIA says:

    I would like to just clarify my statement last Tuesday night. The Captains did indeed meet with the NRA about the road system in the area however they did not tell us directly that the new roads were going to cost $25M. I believe they were in the position of most departments we met that they would wait and see what the final proposal is to accurately access the impact and solutions.

     

    I recieved that cost information from a third party that had spoken with NRA members. It is also in the region of our estimate for modifications needed to get that many tour buses into and out of town given the level of road works required. If you actually add in the purchase of any significant lands in the area this figure may be light.

     

    Hope that clarifies the situation.

  12. Anonymous says:

    Roads for what?

    All I can say is Cayman make up your mind and do it soon or you will have nothing. This Island is in need of tourists badly, without them the place will fold.

    Build the dock in George Town, Close the streets to vehicles and get on with it.

    DO NOT turn the new terminal into a shopping mall, let the tourists spread their buying.

    Tenants can't pay their rents at Royal Watler? I wonder how the rest of the shops are supposed to survive.

    Royal Watler is a disgrase and an embarrasment.

    What the tourists need is a sidewalk that some moron is not parked on, or some hawker selling their smuggled junk.

  13. Anonymous says:

    My energy supply was nearly exhausted opposing  the East End Quarry, and I certainly have no more to waste on "The Sea Captains" plan, which also, incidentally, involves dredging 150 million dollars worth of fill from South Sound and blasting a 600 foot gap in the reef.  It also involves destroying the Downtown retail industry by building 130,000 feet of retail space onshore in a prime residential area, thus reducing the likelyhood of passengers bothering to shop in Georgetown. The word "bonkers" springs to mind.  I hope the hospital has a good supply of white coats, as they're gonna be needed soon……

     

     

     

     

     

    • Burns Conolly AIA says:

      No retail is proposed in Red Bay. It is George Town that gets the large retail facility and transportaion centre on the Royal Watler terminal dock. That will certainly kill the rest of retail in town. No lab coats needed to figure that out.

      At least Red Bay Facility ensures the ships arrive here every day. That is much better for the retailers, the taxis and tour operators than at the contiued whim of the northwesters.

      • Anonymous says:

        Yes then if we put the site in Red Bay tourist must right away take a taxi to get to town to walk around. If it is in George Town already they get off an walk. And this place is too expensive as it is.

        If you are going to build it in Red Bay then you must put the infrastrcuture including shopping in the plan. A trip to George Town would then become an excursion trip. Otherwise you have put a plan in place to make things even more expensive for tourists.

      • Bueller says:

        Burns, please explain how the South Sound proposal would ensure that ships would 'arrive every day'. For one, the seas on the South side of the Island are regularly rough – yes it's calm inside the reef, but once you bust a big (and deep) hole in it, the waves will wash straight in. Secondly, the ships that were lost due to that Hurricane last month simply did not come to the Western Caribbean – no matter where the port is, we would not have got them.

         

        The downsides to this Red (Bay) Herring are plain for all to see: South Sound would be completely destroyed; cruise passengers would still have to be tendered to GT, defeating the whole purpose of the dock; and we'd end up with the mother of all traffic jams every day there was a ship in port. Please stop wasting everyone's time with this foolishness.

        • anonymous says:

          you dont need Burns to answer that one. The angle of the breakwater keeps the mainly easterly and south easterly waves around this island out of the chanel. The opening is pointing to the SW, a rare direction for waves and I am sure the Captains would have pointed that out when they designed it.  You are correct, in a hurricane they could not use any harbour on the island including downtown. But remember even in a norwester, which is guaranteed each year, you cant use george town. One thing about Red Bay for sure it is better year round than george town. Not sure about the environmental thing however.

        • Burns Conolly AIA says:

          12:06 basically answered this for me.  What is shown is the standard "overlap" of breakwater at entrance to basin to avoid prevailing waves from entering. The Pros & Cons document on "www.caymancruiseport.com" is a fair indication of issues at both locations. Still not sure why folks do not even want to consider Red Bay when GT has so many more negatives.

           

          This idea that we are 'tendering' on land is a good sound bite but way off. Our research has indicated that around 70% or more of the arriving passengers immediately leave GT on a tour. The fact that you see a lot of people downtown is the fact that they are revolving into and out of town as one trip finishes and the other starts.

           

          What the Red Bay proposal does is distribute those passengers and put them directly onto the Bypass corridor to their tours. It removes that traffic out of town allowing a better pedestrian experience there.

           

          The downtown merchants are concerned, and it is a fair concern, that the returning passengers who may buy something today, will not be available as they may go directly to the ships. Two mitigating facts to consider. First the tours could deliver the passengers directly to GT afterwards and the shuttle system deliver them to ships. I have been on tours where this is done. As the tours completion is staggered it is not the same effect as all the passengers walking off the ship simultaneously. Also as the arrival of the ship is guaranteed in Red Bay, unlike at the new GT, Northwester prone piers, the number of passengers actually shopping per year will likely increase. 

           

          Now a question for you Bueller, why are you so “hell-bent” on GT? Why do you not even want to consider this better solution to cruise berthing? What is your real issue?

           

          • Bueller says:

            It's not a question of being hell bent on GT, rather I do not want to see South Sound destroyed (as it undoubtedly would) and I do not want to have to deal with more traffic than already exists.

             

            You make it sound like the by-pass corridors are some wonderful thing that doesn't affect rush hour traffic in and out of GT – the fact is that even if tourists are going on tours in WB or to SMB, they have to pass through GT to get there from SS.

  14. Anonymous says:

    And don’t forget folks; 25 million on paper = 60-70 million real world

    • Anonymous says:

      Bearing in mind that Puppet Mac is also Minister of Finance, $300 million for a Port + $25 million for roads could mean a surplus of $325 million into the Government coffers.  By the time he is through spinning the numbers Cayman could own half of China!!

  15. Anonymous says:

    This is not New York or Miami .  It is a Caribbean island  that tourist want to see.

     

    It can not have 24000 people coming off a cruise ship any day.  That is about half the population of this island.

     

    When is the govenment going to wake up and realise that they are attempting to destroy this island.

    Reread the above article again and see who is going to profit. Certainly not the local stores that now are on the waterfront.  According to this information the building is  going to be destroyed.

    Let us get all the information from the dpartments  that are investigating the roads and

    enviorment before we let Bush decide that he is the king and can do what he wants

     

     

     

    • Anonymous says:

      Here we are talking about the cost of roads for putting the cuise dock in town. The option is to put it in Red Bay where there is currently NO infrastructure in place. So everything has to be built. There are many tourist that come off the crusie ship and just go walking in town and there are many that after they have gone to Stingray City come back to town and spend time walking around. Where are they going to go. On yes to special interest groups that have designs on stores yet to be built.

      At the same time. If you build a cruise port where passengers can walk off the ship without the tender ship you will see many more passengers coming ashore. That means that when the radio station says there will be 5,000 passengers in and around town there really will be very close to that number. In our current situation this would be a disaster unless somehow we were able to make a significant portion of downtown pedestrian only.

  16. Anonymous says:

    As Burns Conolly Group designed the existing 'concrete shadeless jungle concentration camp fencing freeforall'  mess that is Royal Watler I hope he doesnt get the job if Red Bay wins. I could do better with an old envelope and a blunt pencil

    • Burns Conolly AIA says:

      Correction. The Burns Conolly Group did NOT design the Royal Watler terminal. That was a design/build project by Misener and Hurlstone. We merely executed the Project Management on the facility.

       

      I think most folks know the quality of our design work and can see our work on the otherside of the harbour at the Kirk Harbour Centre, at Camana Bay and our other projects.

       

       

       

      • Anonymous says:

        Kirk Harbour and Camana Bay were designed by Architects from the USA…Truth….

        • Burns Conolly AIA says:

          I am glad you were on the design teams and know more than I do…. you guys are sure funny  🙂

           

  17. Mushroom 1 says:

    Oh, please! Like it makes ANY sense too totally throw our cruise business in the dumpster, and forego any hope of a competitive future to save a few bucks on road work. Clearly we’ve got some real economic visionaries working for us. Could this be any more short-sighted. What are we the Beverely Hillbillies… ‘They got them a real nice road by Hurleys, let’s put us a port there. We done gonna build them a cement pond too!’

  18. Peter Milburn says:

    I would like to dis-agree with the costing of a road system for the new cruise dock if indeed it does go into G/Town.On several occasions during high season I have seen many thousands of folks coming ashore and milling about G/Town as it is today.and getting tour buses for their various trips out of town and back.Chaotic yes but doable in most cases.From what I have been told the chances of the mega ships coming here are quite slim with or w/out a dock as I hear that they are not proving to be as popular as thought when these be-hemoths were planned and finally built.In fact I also understand that a second mega ship has been put on hold for the time being(possibly to see if indeed they are feasable in the long run)I have said this many times before and a simple changing of the Harbour drive to one way going north would make things much easier or maybe even close it to vehicular traffic other than tour buses etc.Limiting the numbers of passengers would also simplify things even more as we cannot and I say again CANNOT possible handle more than 15000 passengers per day no matter what people say.Do we care about the product that we sell to these passengers whether they are herded around like cattle?We should do, as we need to balance our stay over visitors with cruise shippers and try to get them to come back as stay over visitors(Who spend way more than the average c/ship passenger.)It seems to me that the costing of so called "New Roads"is very high like many other Govt projects seem to be.Lets hope that a viable plan will be done that will simpify things in G/Town and not be as expensive as I have seen mentioned in the local papers.Personally I would like to see some sort of guarantee from the cruise ships re numbers and then work from there or better yet TELL them what we can sensibly handle on a daily basis and go from there.You can add all the roads you want but when you get that many people on island at the same time we CANNOT handle them as our infrastructure is way to limited and we cant just add attractions like more s/ray cities or more reefs etc.just to please the cruise ships.We after all one small island with limited resources not like the Bahamas with all their many islands scattered around the area.Time will tell.

    • anonymous says:

      Mr. Peter,

      You are correct about the maximum number of people in George Town. Which is why spreading them out which the red bay dock would do is better for everyone. The shops will actually sell more and shoplifting will be less. I can only imagine most will just stay in the new 2 story mall at the dock if they are not touring.

    • Anonymous says:

      Do not forget they are nocking down Royal Watler so just imagine the mess at north and south terminal for the next tree years. If we could not barely handle 15000 imagine 24000.

      We need to study this thing proper.

  19. Caribitz says:

    And just how much would Mr. Conolly's newest pet project cost if the cruise berthing facility were to be put in Red Bay?   $250M???   It has to be done.  It has to be done NOW.  And any person with any smarts would see that it has to be done in George Town.

     

    • Anonymous says:

      It will surely cost less than $300 million that the GT one will cost.

    • Anonymous says:

      Cariblitz you dont make sense.

      If downtown is $300M but Red Bay is only $250M with none of those problems, why would you suggest downtown? Why, even GLF proposal was less than the chinese $300M downtown.

      I agree it needs to be done now but are you saying we should spend more downtown and ignore Red bay…that makes no sense to me.

      • Anonymous says:

        GLF's proposal was $185million. It was also tested and approved by both Royal Caribbean and Carnival ship captains.

  20. Anonymous says:

    XXXX It would be impossible for 24,000 visitors to all be in the capital no matter what road systenm we have and there are cheaper ways just make part of George Town pedestrian . We also have to consider IF the numbers are going to increase to up to daily arrivals of 24,000 visitors when the world is in finacial crisis and people will be cutting back on holidays as unemployment increases plus oil and other costs increase . Just look at what is happening in Europe and all the debt the USA is hiding it is not such a rosy scenario thet we can glible predict "up to 24,000" tourists crowd George Town on a daily basis better we plan for 2,400 , far more realistic

  21. The Nose Wiper says:

    There goes the projected surplus!!

  22. Anonymous says:

    About time the local experts are at least listened to.

  23. Anonymous says:

    A cost of $25.0m for the upgrading of roads in GT if this is at all true is a small price for the country compared to the costs of infrastructure and roads that will be required for Mr. Connolly's Emerald Port in South Sound. Just look at his plans for South Sound that the "Sea Captains" have drawn for their port which Mr. Connolly is representing on their behalf. This Emerald Port road show is becoming the best entertainment we currently have in this country.

    • Anonymous says:

      The road costs are offset by the fill sales and the cheaper construction overall as the piers are noton the edge of the drop-off and exposed to full hurricane wave conditions. 

      We clearly have to realise the port downtown is now costing $325M at least. That is not a small price for two finger piers that you can only use some times and digs up and kills all of the reefs in town.

      I agree this is entertaining as people like you try to ignore the facts about Red Bay! Quite entertaining!

       

  24. Name changed by moderator says:

    Wait, let me guess. All that will be required for the Red Bay location would be the "realignment" of a certain road for which a certain developer would be happy to pay. Doh!

    • Burns Conolly AIA says:

      The Red Bay location does NOT require the realignment of any existing road. The project merely connects to the exisiting NRA proposed network in the area. It connects to the existing Old Prospect Roundabout.

       

      No developer is involved in the project to date although this week it was suggested by Mr. Bo Miller that it could be locally funded and executed. This is an idea that has been around for 40 years and all that is being asked is that the government consider it in lieu of GT based on the fact that its superior technically.

      • Anonymous says:

        Mr. Burns. –

        I know that you have many degrees and professional certificates but have you totally lost your senses?    For just a minute, please put aside the fact that you could have your firm's name on another Cayman development.  And put aside the fact that you might make a healthy amount of money if cruise berthing were to come to Red Bay instead of GT.  

        Now that you have totally discarded those thoughts, can you image what it would be like 5 to 7 days a week to have all of those passengers come off their ship and get in queue for a shuttle bus into George Town.  You say that they will use the existing NRA infrastructure from the Old Prospect roundabout.  Right now on 10 or so days each year when the weather is bad, when Spotts Dock is used, the traffic becomes absolutely a nightmare.  But if increased cruise passenger numbers were to enter into our island by way of Red Bay, that Spotts problem would get worse by a hundredfold.  Everything east of George Town would grind to a halt.

        Red Bay is not viable, quit pushing an idea that is dead in the water and please step back and use some common sense. 

        You are a very educated man and well spoken, but you have lost all ability to reason like a common man. 

        Get real!

         

        • Burns Conolly AIA says:

          Thanks for taking the time to comment.

           

          Just for clarity the Red Bay Cruise facility is 90% marine and coastal engineering which my company does not provide. The proposal sits on an island in Red Bay and only comes ashore to connect to the road system. 

           

          The existing traffic will only get worst as Shetty and CEC get developed due to the pinch point at Grand Harbour. As Bodden Town is the fastest growing district, traffic will continue to increase through that existing choke point making it worst. One of the benefits of the Red Bay facility is that it doubles the road capacity through the Grand Harbour area and thus, all though adding east and west bound traffic during cruise visits, will negate the two pinch points of Grand harbour and the single lane down Lindford Pierson. That is the situation with traffic in that area.

           

          All that the Captains are asking is that before we as a country commit to the largest infrastructural project in our history that the alternate be considered. I think that is a reasonable request and thus I have volunteered to assist them.

           

          I do realise Red Bay is out-of-the-box thinking but I think it is valid to help if my daughter and her future children will have to pay for it over the next 50 years.

          • Bueller says:

            Burns,

            no-one is talking about the traffic at Grand Harbour – the issue is the armada of omnibuses filled with tourists trying to get into George Town at the same time that people are trying to drop kids to school and to get to work. Yes, a few will go to the Eastern Districts, but the vast majority of tourists will be going to GT, Seven Mile Beach or West Bay. That is surely unarguable? If you're bussing tourists in that direction between 8am and 9am in the mornings (and vice versa between 4pm and 5pm), you're going to have the mother of all bottlenecks in and around GT, regardless of how many new by-passes have been Gazetted (where exactly does that by-pass end up, btw? Walkers Road? That'll be wonderful for school traffic!)

             

            In fact Mr. Burns, surely you'll be able to give us the exact figures: how many shipsand how many passengers per day does your South Sound port scheme purport to accommodate? And how do you intend for the tourists to be transported to GT? 30-seater Toyota Coasters? Now explain to us how this new road is going to help again.

             

            (I'd be grateful for a response to my post up the page too)

      • F.A. Cetious says:

        Ok, I believe you.

  25. Anonymous says:

    If… "24,000 people would arrive in GT in a given day"… and most may well choose to WALK into town, this reduces the need to bus them to other places.

    However the same 24,000 who would arrive in Red Bay, would definitely HAVE to be transported into town, also on new roads, requiring a fleet of at least 500 buses clogging up the roads at rush hour. (at say 50 per bus that is…most buses will take 15 to 20 pax.  !!!, you do the math Mr. Connolly )

    Where will they park when they reach GT or at their starting point.

    God save us from so many senseless experts who are intoxicated by their own sense of self importance as they ride their 15 minutes of fame.

    • Burns Conolly AIA says:

      Please see 'www.caymancruisport.com". Your numbers are way off. 

       

      At the moment a huge number of these passengers are actually bused OUT of town to the attractions. As these numbers increase as projected with the larger ships berthed the GT road system will grand to a halt trying to get all those passengers into and out of town.

  26. Anonymous says:

    What a complete load of rubbish.

     

    How is building this port going to increase the amount of people coming through it?

     

    We already have 4 – 6 ships a day during high season .. and back a few years aho it was not uncommon to have around 10 ship in a day. We even had 13 booked at one point but a few didn't show knowing it was going to be a nightmare day.

     

    So my point is .. the roads we have now already deal with as many people as we will be expecting to see through the port if it does get built .. which I say it shouldn't. So who made up this rubbish about needing to build new roads .. what do they have to deal with that we don't deal with already?

  27. Anonymous says:

    So who paid for Foolio's trip.

    Did he declare it!

  28. anonymous says:

    Another reason why we should go with the GLF/Royal proposal which is only $185m vs. the CHEC $300m proposal. Let's just get the piers built by GLF/Royal and we can simultaneously begin to implement the NRA's plan over time. We have managed to handle in excess of 1.8m passengers/year in the past with our current infrastructure. The ships don't all arrive and unload at the same time and their passengers don't all follow the same schedules. We can make do until the NRA is able to completely implement its plan. The important thing is to get the piers built so that we can create jobs and small business opportunities! 

    People using these scare tactics are misleading viewers of these comments, as we will never have 24,000 people running off the ships all at once. Not only because of the above mentioned reasons,  but mainly because there are only two oasis class ships in existence. Realistically, their itineraries would not allow them to ever have more than one in our port at any given time. So even if we had one Oasis and three Freedom class ships at birth that would still only be 18,000 max. Realistically, the mix of ships would include even smaller ships than those in the Freedom class as the itineraries of the Freedom class vessels would make it difficult to have three of them in port together on a regular basis.

  29. Anonymous says:

    This is all getting increasingly silly. Can you imagine 24,000 cruise shippers arriving in one day at either location? That's nearly half the total population of the islands being dumped into under half a square mile over a 3-4 hour period and that isn't going to work wherever you put it.

    And the one thing that's still missing from all this is any committment by the cruise lines to use either proposed facility let alone deliver anything like 24,000 passengers a day.

    This is pie in the sky! But while everyone is arguing about it the real future market, stopover tourism, is slowly slipping away because of lack of investment.

    • anonymous says:

      I do agree that 24,000/day is a stretch. However, berthing will allow us to get more out of whatever the daily figures are.

      GLF's testing of it's design earlier this year was performed using captains from Royal Caribbean and Carnival. Both were very pleased with the design's performance. It is a no-brainer that GLF's negotiations would have led to minimum guaranteed passenger flows/preferential berthing agreements. However, the Premier doesn't want anyone to know that so that he can push CHEC as the only game in town.

      • Anonymous says:

        Unfortunately, the captains don't control the cruise lines' operations – that's done by the accountants and directors.

        To date the cruise lines have shown no solid committment to this project at all and it's very dumb to assume that because some of their staff participated in exercises based on the GLF proposals the companies themselves are going to support the development.

        If this is going ahead, wherever it ends up located, the time is long overdue for the major cruise lines to put down on paper what their plans for Grand Cayman are in the foreseeable future.

        Back in August 2010 it was reported, "CNS has contacted both Royal Caribbean and Carnival to ask them why they are reducing calls to the Cayman Islands and is still awaiting a response.

        Any update on that CNS?

        • Dummy says:

          Dumb??? I'm not the one referring to the captains of vessels valued in the $500million-$1billion range as "some of their staff"!

          The reason the Royal and Carnival ship captains participated in the design testing was exactly for the purpose of determining if the cruise lines would approve the design. Are you suggesting that they should have sent one of their accountants to dock the 1100+ foot long oasis?

      • Anonymous says:

        Good post, at least your use of the word "Captains " refers to those in active duty with experience relevant to TODAY's vessels in the cruise business, not seamen who worked on National Bulk Carriers ships of yesteryear.

  30. Anonymous says:

    Why is any information we receive on current government projects come from secondary sources and not from the government itself? 

    • Dred says:

      Because if the CURRENT government told you, you would see how STUPID they are to begin with. It's Christmas, it's suppose to be a surprise.