Author Topic: JaxPort Dredging Fiasco?  (Read 15659 times)

bl8jaxnative

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 906
Re: JaxPort Dredging Fiasco?
« Reply #45 on: July 01, 2021, 10:30:15 AM »

They certainly implied it if they didn't explicitly say it given that they didn't address the impact of the bridge and power line heights and any shortcomings of equipment on the docks as part of the dredging approval process.  Surely, some one/people at the Port knew these issues would have to be eventually addressed to extract the full value of the dredging going back to the very start of bringing up this project. 



Bridge clearance has always been a known limitation.  Always.  Savannah, Brunswick, et al. have similar issues.   IIRC Savannah's dredging has allowed for ships that are too big to to fit under that US 17 bridge downtown.   Just because you don't have that, does not mean the dredging doesn't provide value.

You do things in iterations.  The dredging allows for bigger ships.   As bigger ships come, you work on putting the next piece in place.

And it's not just the bridge, the port itself, the cranes, the storage space, et al all factor into the size of the ship that's going to come.

TraPac + their customers will experiment with what works + doesn't work.   If the ship made it to the port, then whatever cover story they use, the physical environment allows for it.   The trick is does it make sense given the market.  Are they better off using that ship to ship from China - EU?   Or better using Halifax or Houston instead of Jacksonville.  There's a lot of factors in play.



jaxlongtimer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1298
Re: JaxPort Dredging Fiasco?
« Reply #46 on: July 01, 2021, 11:52:01 AM »
^ I don't have a problem with stepped improvements.  I do have a problem when someone knows the whole game plan but withholds substantial parts of it or the risks to getting a full return on investment until the plan is underway and it can't be reversed or salvaged if the later parts can't be fully accomplished.  It's called full disclosure and government entities doing these types of projects should be held to the same strict standards public companies are required by the SEC to live up to in terms of disclosing business risks, the competitive landscape and operational/financial trends.  No one likes surprises.

The JaxPort approach damages the credibility of the acting party which may ultimately impair their ability to get approval for future requests.  This is part of the parallel with JTA's advocacy for the Skyway/U2C.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2021, 12:37:18 AM by jaxlongtimer »

bl8jaxnative

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 906
Re: JaxPort Dredging Fiasco?
« Reply #47 on: July 23, 2021, 11:10:41 AM »

Just because they didn't have a copy of their master plan FedExed to your doorstep doesn't mean there aren't plans.  Please, that's a pretty preposterous claim.   

Again, you do things in pieces.  Dredging is needed regardless of bridge raising, et al.   Things like Bridge raising just enable that next class, that next size of ship.

First, you get those 6,500 TEU vessels to come on a regular basis on various routes.  Then you work on put things in place for the next phase.