Providence Journal business section editor John Kostrzewa, has an interesting article calling on state officials and business leaders to promote the Quonset/Davisville port for short sea shipping:

Develop and promote Quonset. The business park is a success and already is home to 160 businesses and 8,200 workers. But to separate it from other industrial parks in the Northeast and put it on the map on the East Coast, it needs to expand by exploiting its access to the ocean. There was a missed opportunity years ago for a deep-water cargo container port to connect Rhode Island with world trade. But there is still a chance for a smaller port in the Davisville area for so-called short-sea shipping that will attract some of the excess capacity from Boston and New York.

Last week, Massport said the Port of Boston handled 10 percent more cargo container shipments last year than 2006, straining the port’s capacity. There’s already a highway and railroad network at Quonset to handle the cargo once it arrives by sea. And more companies would want to locate there for quick importing and exporting of goods and equipment.

The General Assembly plans hearings to study the possibilities. Good. They should anticipate the opposition from South County residents who want to protect their lifestyle. But just like Green, the greater economic good is to develop Rhode Island’s strengths.

If properly protected and promoted, the Port of Providence, with it’s 40ft federal deep water channel and easy highway and rail access, is also perfectly situated to take advantage of short sea shipping opportunities.

Today’s Providence Journal has an article about legislation filed by state Senator Paul E. Moura that would create a commission to study ways to attract more shipping commerce to Rhode Island’s ports:

If approved, the legislative commission would hear testimony from experts in the shipping and fishing industries, and study economic opportunities on all industrial waterfronts, including those in Providence, East Providence and Newport.

The Providence Working Waterfront Alliance is encouraged to see General Assembly leaders focusing on port development and we look forward to working with them to help Rhode Island realize the opportunities created by exploding international shipping volumes.

Today’s Providence Journal has an opinion piece by Working Waterfront Alliance member Julie Gill of the Oil Heat Institute of Rhode Island. Julie’s piece points out the danger to the region’s energy supply if we continue to lose oil storage capacity in the Port of Providence.

Because of the city’s “Providence Tomorrow” plan, we are in danger of losing Sprague Energy, a company that has been a dependable supplier of energy and other products in the state for more than 100 years. We stand to lose more than 20 million gallons of storage capacity — storage we cannot afford to lose. The petroleum industry comprehends the seriousness of this situation.

Why is it that, in Providence, some elected officials want to forge ahead with the “Providence Tomorrow” plan without weighing the consequences? Who will bear responsibility if our storage supply — the lifeblood of our state and indeed of all of southeastern New England — isn’t adequate?

Today’s Providence Journal has an editorial noting a recent Maine Port Authority study which points to the huge economic development opportunities for North Atlantic ports:

Editorial: Maine chance
01:00 AM EST on Tuesday, January 8, 2008

A recent story in the Boston Business Journal was headlined “Rhode Island a tough sell for lux [condo] units.” People who think that Rhode Island can depend on condo developments, restaurants and the like without a wealth-creating underlying economy would do well to read it (boston.bizjournals.com/boston/stories/2007/12/31/story5.html). A thriving economy has as its bases manufacturing (or agriculture, mining and fishing), invention (R&D) and trade. They add wealth to a region, while real-estate development mostly just moves it around.

Also please look at a new study from the Maine Port Authority (www.maineports.com/PortStrategyStudy.html). Consider these executive-summary points:

• “Container port capacity in the North Atlantic will not keep pace with demand, resulting in unacceptably high port utilization, severe port congestion and reduced productivity.”

• “To avoid vessel delays, operate at world-class productivity and remain competitive, by 2015 North Atlantic ports will need to add at least 43 percent additional capacity [to what] is currently planned.”

• “Others have similarly determined the need for a new container port in the North Atlantic. .?.?. If Maine [which has a container port already at Portland] does nothing, this window of opportunity will be closed and Maine’s economy will suffer.” And the report said: “There is a large market-driven opportunity to develop a new container terminal at Searsport .?.?. “

If properly protected from incompatible mixed uses, the Port of Providence will be perfectly situated to take advantage of these shipping opportunities.

Maine’s Port Authority recently released a detailed market analysis of the demand for ports and shipping services in the North Atlantic. Among the report’s conclusions:

• CONTAINER PORT CAPACITY IN THE NORTH ATLANTIC WILL NOT KEEP PACE WITH DEMAND, RESULTING IN UNACCEPTABLY HIGH PORT UTLIZATION, SEVERE PORT CONGESTION AND REDUCED PRODUCTIVITY.

• TO AVOID VESSEL DELAYS, OPERATE AT WORLD CLASS PRODUCTIVITY AND REMAIN COMPETITIVE, BY 2015 NORTH ATLANTIC PORTS WILL NEED TO ADD AT LEAST 43% ADDITIONAL CAPACITY THAN IS CURRENTLY PLANNED.

• OTHERS HAVE SIMILARLY DETERMINED THE NEED FOR A NEW CONTAINER PORT IN THE NORTH ATLANTIC, AND ARE PROCEEDING WITH ITS DEVELOPMENT. IF MAINE DOES NOTHING, THIS “WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY” WILL BE CLOSED AND MAINE’S ECONOMY WILL SUFFER.

The Port of Providence is perfectly situated to take advantage of these market trends, but only if our city and state leaders step up to protect and promote our marine industrial resources. If we instead allow condos to close off access to our port, our “window of opportunity” will be closed and Rhode Island’s economy will suffer.

The business section of today’s New York Times has an article about our fight to preserve the vital regional economic resource that is Providence’s working waterfront, from glitzy condos that would shut off the true economic potential of the Port of Providence :

. . . A band of business owners, who feel threatened by the mixed-use vision that Mr. Conley espouses, have come together to fight the developer. Their position is that Providence needs a traditional working waterfront — not more condominiums . . .

They predict it will only be a matter of time before they are driven out of business on Allens Avenue, a situation they believe will have disastrous economic implications for Providence — though city officials don’t seem to agree — and for the entire region .

“Providence is just thinking of Providence,” said David A. Cohen, president of the Promet Marine Services Corporation, a shipyard located on eight acres next to Mr. Conley’s renovated conference center.

Noting that home heating oil shipped into Providence’s deep water port is sent as far away as Worcester and Cape Cod in Massachusetts, Mr. Cohen said the waterfront’s traditional industrial base is more important economically than new commercial and residential uses. “Allens Avenue is important to the whole region,” Mr. Cohen said.

A recent Providence Journal editorial and an opinion piece in the Christian Science Monitor both make the case for alleviating truck congestion on Route 95 by encouraging the growth of short sea shipping, a developing transportation solution where goods are shipped via barges from large ports to smaller regional ports for end distribution.

Coastal shipping has the potential to strengthen the resilience of America’s transportation system – an important national security objective. It can also provide substantial environmental benefits by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The European Union, which moves 40 percent of its internal freight by sea, provides an example of how much America stands to gain.

The US Maritime Administration estimates that a typical barge can handle 456 containers whereas the same amount of cargo requires 228 double-stacked rail cars or 456 tractor-trailers. Studies have shown that coastal shipping could be three times more efficient at transporting cargo than long-haul trucking is. This is particularly true along the I-95 corridor between Massachusetts and Florida, where many smaller ports enjoy excellent yet underutilized access to the sea around clogged highways.

Providence’s working waterfront, with our 40ft federal deep water channel and rail and highway access, is perfectly situated to take advantage of short sea shipping growth opportunities.

Today’s Providence Journal “Stacking the waterfront?” editorial questions the openness of the city’s planning process for the future of our waterfront. While RISD students did an excellent job at a recent waterfronts symposium, the ports they chose to highlight were not apt comparisons to the Port of Providence:

Mayor Cicilline wants to rezone the waterfront between the new Route 195 bridge and the Port of Providence from industrial to mixed use. Some businesses along the Providence River understandably view that possibility with alarm, fearing that condos, restaurants and other businesses paying low wages and that don’t make or ship much stuff will eventually push out grittier (and higher-paying) industrial uses.

At a recent meeting held at Save the Bay’s Fields Point headquarters, nine architecture students from the Rhode Island School of Design described waterfronts from Vancouver to Charleston, S.C., to Buenos Aires, Stockholm, Hamburg and beyond, each compared with the industrial part of Providence’s waterfront. The students, who did not select the cities, were urged not to take sides in the zoning debate. They did not, and presented their findings with commendable objectivity.

However, every last one of the waterfronts featured a mixture of uses.

“I think they presented it in a fair way,” says Joel Cohen, part owner of Promet shipyard on Allens Avenue. He added, “I personally don’t think they made apt comparisons.” He quibbled with the selection of waterfronts.

City officials must try harder, as they ask neighborhoods to help put the finishing touches on the Providence Comprehensive Plan, and seek state approval of the plan, to generate public trust in the process. If the deck was stacked at Fields Point, that does not help.

Mayor David Cicilline’s “New uses for Providence’s waterfront will benefit all” commentary in the December 12, 2007 Providence Journal Metro Section continues to demonstrate an unfortunate bias against existing working waterfront businesses and a myopic vision of economic development via condos which ignores the incredible growth opportunities provided by the Port of Providence’s 40ft federal deep water channel. The following is a detailed response to the Mayor’s comments.

Cicilline comments:

Our fortunes in Providence have always depended on our relationship with the water. The better we have aligned our economy with the natural advantages provided by our waterfront, the more prosperous our city has been.

In a pre-industrial economy, it gave us fishing and a global mercantile trade. In an industrial economy, it gave us the means to export our mass-produced goods. Now, in our post-industrial information economy, we are defining a new relationship.

Working Waterfront response:
The Mayor is quite right that the use of Providence’s waterfront has always defined the city. Our historic working waterfront made Providence one of the wealthiest cities in the nation at the turn of the 19th century, and today it continues to provide hundreds of millions of dollars in total economic impact for the city, state, and region.

While we may now be a “post-industrial information economy,” that economy needs water-based shipping resources more than ever. According to Transportation Institute projections, by 2020 U.S. foreign trade in goods, the vast majority of which is shipped by water, may grow to four times today’s value and almost double the current tonnage. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers similarly points to estimates that over the next 20 years there will be a 65 percent increase in ship transported cargo and that containerized trade is the fastest growing segment of the economy, doubling every 10 years. These projections point to a steady increase in shipping traffic which in turn will mean more jobs and a stronger economy for cities and states that invest in and protect their marine industrial resources.

With our recently dredged 40ft federal deep water channel (a $65 million investment of state and federal money), the Port of Providence, including all of Providence’s waterfront along Allens Ave. (more below), is perfectly positioned to benefit from this explosion in international shipping. So if Providence truly wants to define a new relationship and align its economy “with the natural benefits provided by our waterfront,” the city must look beyond closing off its valuable industrial waterfront with glitzy condos, hotels, and marinas.

Cicilline comments:

For many years, the array of businesses on Allens Avenue, north of Thurbers and the Port of Providence, existed while hardly being noticed. Most residents and visitors sped by above on Route 95, barely registering an anonymous, industrial blur separating them from the sea. This landscape was, after all, just like every other stretch of urban waterfront in the Northeast.

Working Waterfront response:
The Mayor refers to working waterfront businesses as an “anonymous, industrial blur.” While the Mayor might prefer to treat us as anonymous, the businesses along Providence’s working waterfront have a long and proud history. Both Sprague Energy and Narragansett Improvement have been successfully operating in their locations for over 100 years. Promet Marine has operated at its Allens Ave. location for more than 30 years. Far from an “anonymous, industrial blur,” these and several other area businesses are responsible for hundreds of direct and thousands of indirect jobs, and provide the energy, raw materials, and repair services essential to our region’s economy.

Also, Providence’s working waterfront is not “just like every other stretch of urban waterfront in the Northeast.” Due to our 40ft deep water channel and easy access to highway and rail, the Port of Providence is a unique economic resource that many other port cities and states would love to have. Due to these advantages, the Port of Providence is one of the top 50 ports in the United States.

Cicilline comments:

. . . And at a more fundamental level we understand the inherent value of cleaning what was polluted, opening what was closed, and fulfilling a need to reconnect to the water.

Furthermore, we recognize that the vast majority of businesses now have the capacity, through environmental advancements and new attitudes about urban living to co-exist with properties used for a wide variety of purposes. We don’t always need the same kind of closed-market zoning segregation we did in the past. The transformation we want to encourage can happen while still retaining the best of the character and the economic contributions on our waterfront today.

Working Waterfront response:
These comments seem to imply that existing working waterfront businesses are polluted. This is inaccurate. The area is perfectly well suited for its current industrial uses. Indeed, expensive environmental remediation would only be needed if the city were to allow for residential development.

While we believe that certain non-residential mixed uses, such as commercial office buildings, could be compatible with existing industrial businesses, we disagree with the Mayor that “urban living” can co-exist next to industrial facilities. Future condo residents and hotel guests are sure to complain about the noises, lights, vibrations, and odors that are a normal part of many working waterfront businesses operations. Resident complaints will result in political pressure for operating restrictions that would eventually force many working waterfront companies out of business. This very situation is currently playing out in downtown Providence, where condo residents are complaining about the loud noise and food odors at Murphy’s Deli and bar.

For this very reason, Providence needs to preserve areas zoned exclusively for industrial uses.

Cicilline comments:

Experience shows that these uses can co-exist with true waterfront-dependent business and industry. Most recently, the Canadian cities of Toronto and Vancouver have earned particular praise for their successful mixing of residential, recreation, office and industrial uses. But several American cities, such as Portland, Ore., Seattle and Baltimore have done it successfully for several years.

Working Waterfront response:
Nearby waterfronts in Portland, Maine and Boston also provide relevant examples of how cities can protect and encourage, rather than displace their marine industrial resources. In Portland, city residents realized that condo developments were incompatible with their working waterfront and passed a multi-million dollar bond to purchase and preserve port area land for water-dependent uses.

In the 1970s and 80s Boston purchased former military bases located on the outskirts of Boston Harbor in South Boston. Resisting condo and hotel developers, the city chose to invest in and protect its deep water marine resources. That investment is now paying off. In September of this year, the city approved a $130 million Boston Cargo Terminal project that will provide multi-modal ocean, rail, truck, and air transportation for bulk cargo, seafood processing, and warehouse businesses.

The city is also promoting its Boston Marine Industrial Park which has recently received several proposals from developers looking to build international bulk cargo and other large-scale maritime and industrial projects.

Combined, Boston’s marine industrial facilities house 180 businesses which employ 3,000 workers.

We could have the same success here if the city protected and promoted our working waterfront businesses and the 40ft deep water channel in the Port of Providence.

Cicilline comments:

It is important to clearly understand exactly what change is — and is not — being encouraged along our waterfront.

The Comprehensive Plan does not call for new regulations affecting the area that makes up the Port of Providence, a vital hub of economic activity that we aim to help make busier and more valuable. Existing zoning regulations work effectively there and separation makes good sense. It is the area north of the port area, from Thurbers Avenue to the relocated [Route] 195, where we hope to grow our economy by encouraging increased mixed-use development.

Working Waterfront response:
Throughout the Mayor’s commentary, he conflates ProvPort, waterfront property owned and leased by the city, and located south of Thurbers Ave., with the Port of Providence. Unfortunately for the Mayor, the Port of Providence (also referred to as the Providence River and Providence Harbor) encompasses not just the city owned and favored ProvPort, but the entire waterfront along Allens Ave. north to the hurricane barrier as well as much of East Providence’s waterfront. The entire port area is an economically interconnected water-based resource that can not be subdivided for purposes of political expediency. That is why the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers recently dredged the federal deep water channel well past ProvPort for the benefit of water-dependent business all along Allens Ave. and on the East Providence side of the port.

Cicilline comments:

A careful look at the current uses for this land around and between many existing businesses argues strongly for change. Most reasonable observers would agree that the unused, the half-used and the ill-used need to make way for development that will make better use of the currently unrealized value of much of this land.

Working Waterfront response:
Underutilized waterfront parcels do exist along the Allens Ave. corridor, but this is due in large part to uncertainty over the city’s intentions for the area. Over the past decade, several industrial users have expressed interest in locating here but have been scared away by administrations who have favored condo and hotel proposals to new water-dependent businesses. Take for example Seaboats Inc., a family-run marine transportation business which builds and operates tugboats. The company was planning to locate along Allens Ave. but scrapped its plans due to former Mayor Cianci’s “Three Cities” plan in the late 90s calling for condos, hotels, and marinas along the waterfront. Today, Seaboats Inc. is located in Fall River and has grown to over 100 employees with $4 million in payroll.

This perspective on waterfront development continues, as Mayor Cicilline’s only vision for “valuable” development of this land is parks, retail, offices, entertainment, and residences. This myopic vision fails to account for the potential growth that could occur if the city were to maintain the existing industrial only zoning for the area. Why is the Mayor completely closed to encouraging further industrial uses of this area that would take advantage of the port’s unique advantages like the 40-ft deep water channel and easy access to railways and highways? Given huge projected increases in sea based shipping volumes, attracting more marine industrial uses could well be the “highest and best use” for the entire Port of Providence. In the absence of any real economic analysis studies comparing possible future land uses, as was conducted during the 1990 Comprehensive Plan process, it is shortsighted to simply assume that “Mixed Use/Residential” is the “highest and best use” for the working waterfront.

In summary, the Mayor’s commentary:

• Fails to portray the value of existing working waterfront businesses.

• Glosses over the inevitable conflicts that will arise from locating mixed use developments next to industrial businesses.

• Artificially segregates the geographic and economically interconnected Port of Providence into ProvPort, which he would protect, and the rest of the Allens Ave. waterfront which he would rezone for mixed use development.

• Fails to recognize the incredible potential of the Port of Providence’s 40ft federal deep water channel and easy access to highway and rail to attract new marine industrial uses.

We look forward to discussing all of these points in greater detail at the upcoming Providence Waterfront charrette on February 25th. We hope that through continued engagement with city officials and other stakeholders, that Providence will realize the current value and future potential of our working waterfront.

Located in Fall River, Seaboats Inc. employs more than 100 people who build tugboats and provide tug and barge transportation services. In the video below, Seaboats founder Capt. Don Church explains why in the 1990s he was forced to move his company from Providence to Fall River due to the uncertainty over rezoning Providence’s working waterfront to allow for condos.

October 16, 2007 Narragansett Bay Propeller Club presentation.

Working Waterfront Alliance member Jack Goodison has a letter to the editor in today’s Providence Journal about how Boston has protected and invested in its marine industrial resources:

As city planners work on the details of Providence’s comprehensive plan, they should look to what Boston has done to protect working-waterfront areas.

In the 1970s and ’80s Boston purchased former military bases on the outskirts of Boston Harbor in South Boston. Resisting condo and hotel developers, the city chose to invest in and protect its deep-water marine resources. That investment is now paying off. In September of this year, the city approved a $130 million Boston Cargo Terminal project that will provide multi-modal ocean, rail, truck and air transportation for bulk cargo, seafood-processing and warehouse businesses.

The city is also promoting its Boston Marine Industrial Park, which has recently received several proposals from developers.

Combined, Boston’s marine industrial facilities house 180 businesses that employ 3,000 workers.

We could have the same success in Providence, if only our city planners would recognize the value of the deep-water channel we have right here in Providence Harbor.

The latest issue of 41°N, a magazine published by Rhode Island Sea Grant and the University of Rhode Island Coastal Institute, has an excellent summary of a spring stakeholders workshop about the future development of Providence Harbor:

As you drive along Interstate 95 in Providence, south of the state house, the hotels, and the mall, cast your eye towards Allens Avenue and Providence Harbor. When you look at the smoke stacks, industrial buildings, salt pile, and fuel tanks, are you seeing an eyesore, an unfair burden on the city of Providence, or an economic engine that is vital to the city, state, and region?

William Coffey, interim director of the Maritime Affairs Institute at Roger Williams University School of Law, has an excellent op-ed in today’s Providence Journal about the incredible economic opportunities for U.S. ports being created by increased international sea trade. Ports across the country are taking advantage of these opportunities. With the proper protections and economic development policies, the Port of Providence and Quonset could benefit as well:

For well over a decade, America’s international sea trade has been growing at unprecedented levels. Today, both cargo export and import volumes, whether in containers or via other means, are burgeoning, and all indications point to this trend continuing for the foreseeable future. This has been a particularly welcome development for U.S. Atlantic Coast ports. Much of the increase is coming from China, with “all-water-services” via the Panama and Suez canals increasingly used by ocean carriers and their customers to avoid delay and additional expenses associated with Pacific Coast gateways.

From the ports of Houston and Miami in the south to New York and Halifax in the north, terminal operators and port authorities are working diligently in tandem with their ocean carrier customers to meet these new demands.

The Port of New York and New Jersey and the Port of Savannah, for example, are focused on the container megaport/large-distribution-center model. Baltimore is building its automobile and roll on/roll off lines. Philadelphia and Wilmington lead in handling refrigerated commodities.

Boston and Halifax have been developing strong regional operations based on their compact container facilities. There are large private investments being made in these and other locations, and public/private partnerships are also being used to keep pace with trade.

Today’s Providence Journal has a telling article about downtown condo owners complaining about the noise and odors from a nearby bar.

“We were lured to downtown being told one thing, and we were duped. This is an upscale place, and it should have a certain tonality. Instead, my home is now a source of my stress. You’re lying in bed at night, the headboard’s going boom-boom-boom,” she said.

It’s the downside to the new downtown. The clubs and bars that have long dominated are now coming into conflict with the high-end residences that have sprung up in the last few years. Both feel they have the right to exist, exposing an at-times uneasy relationship between the established businesses and the moneyed newcomers.

The story is a perfect illustration of what will happen if condos are built right next to industrial facilities along Allens Ave. Future condo owners are certain to complain about the loud noises and industrial activity produced by typical working waterfront operations. And with complaints will come political pressure for operating restrictions that would eventually force many working waterfront companies out of business.

Unlike Providence city planners, who only envision luxury condos, hotels, and marinas as the future for our industrial waterfront, the city of Boston has protected its marine industrial resources and is now seeing that investment payoff. In September, Boston officials approved a $130 million Boston Cargo Terminal project:

After years of proposals and approvals for mostly mixes of luxury residences, hotels, and office developments on the harbor’s edge in the city, traditional water-related activities have made a distinct comeback along an 800-foot dock in the Boston Marine Industrial Park.

The new Boston Cargo Terminal, as the facility is to be called, will have multiple tenants including those handling seafood. It will accommodate ocean, truck, rail, and air transportation and – though no tenants have been disclosed – is expected to have seafood processors, cold-storage facilities, and warehouses.

Yesterday, the city approved a $130 million plan by the developer, Marine Terminal Development LLC, for three buildings totaling more than a half-million square feet, and a 4.3-acre bulk cargo facility to import and export concrete materials.

In addition to the cargo terminal project, Boston officials are busy promoting their Marine Industrial Park and are reviewing several proposals for large-scale maritime and industrial projects.