Comments on: Terminal 5’s last cargo-ship call for now, after half a century

By: Jim

Jim — Thu, 07 Aug 2014 00:25:57 +0000

The jobs argument is a very weak one. Automation is in the plan. (It’ll cost far more than a quarter billion dollars when it’s done.) Divide the cost by the new jobs created and it doesn’t jump out as a good investment. It’s not even clear that enough shipping will come here to feed it.

Your first sentence misses the point. There are many ways to mitigate the damages done to the community. (Ideally, the Port would compensate homeowners who were there long before the Port “Eminent Domain’ed” the land for Terminal 5.)

By: dawsonct

dawsonct — Wed, 06 Aug 2014 18:29:02 +0000

If one purchases a propert overlooking an industrial zone (or a farm or whatever) shouldn’t that person expect to be impacted in one way or another by the sights, sounds, and odors of the industrial area they are overlooking? Why complain about the inevitable.
Don’t like the sounds of industry? Take advantage of the next few months of down-time and sell your house to someone who doesn’t care or is too naive to realize what they are getting into, and leave the area. A fairly simple solution.
—-
A quarter-billion dollar upgrade to the terminal will create far more living-wage jobs than do most of the other expenditures we take on as a community. This is an obvious and necessary infrastructural upgrade that we Seattleites need to take on.

By: Paula

Paula — Mon, 04 Aug 2014 15:26:41 +0000

The City and Developers, their partners in stupidity, are building up the density in West Seattle only to allow the Port to turn it into a place no one wants to live. I hope my property taxes go down as quickly as my real estate’s value. Hey West Seattle political representatives! – are you watching and listening? There is time to mitigate effects. PLEASE HELP US!!

By: Mykscott

Mykscott — Sat, 02 Aug 2014 13:34:57 +0000

Have the neighbors of WS considered the impact of their views looking east with the replacement of the smaller cranes (orange) to the much larger super post-panamax (white) cranes? If you don’t own a home directly west of T5 you will still be impacted by the noise from the increased train traffic the Port proposes anyway. The environmental impact of the T5 modernization proposal and your concerns need to be addressed to the Port Commissioner (Bill Bryant) early in the planning process. You can’t stop this development but we shouldn’t make it easy for them to pursue this plan that will be a negative impact to our quality of life.

By: Jim

Jim — Mon, 28 Jul 2014 22:54:50 +0000

Steven – Why? Why do you hope we spend 400 million dollars to expand Port facilities when the existing terminals aren’t anywhere near capacity?

By: Steven

Steven — Mon, 28 Jul 2014 18:41:32 +0000

I really hope that we can get this project completed and get another steamship line to move in! I am afraid it won’t get completed.

By: brandon

brandon — Sat, 26 Jul 2014 03:08:25 +0000

Permits?? PERMITS?? We don’t need no stinking permits!

By: PortSpeak

PortSpeak — Fri, 25 Jul 2014 20:43:46 +0000

Has anyone given much thought into the expansion of Terminal 5 and the effects on WS?

Automation is on the table, which would essentially increase the efficiency of T5 to a point where this ONE facility could handle the current container traffic flow of the ENTIRE Port! The current environmental permits, however, do not allow this type of volume to be transferred through the terminal without extensive reviews…but the expansion has started anyway…

All of this reminds me of the condo developer currently turning California Ave into a s–thole…

By: SteveM

SteveM — Fri, 25 Jul 2014 03:28:04 +0000

Robert: yup, I think they are

By: Thomas M.

Thomas M. — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 22:23:08 +0000

How about a light rail and bus system park and ride? Maybe even run bigger water taxis from there to downtown? It is one heck of a big parking lot.

By: wetone

wetone — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 18:46:01 +0000

Another only in Seattle well thought out plan that follows many other of our projects in this town. 1st problem I see is funding oh wait they have unlimited funding, just raise the taxes once more since we already have one of the highest subsidized ports in the nation. 2nd is it’s location. Could not pick a worse location from the standpoint of egress/ingress. How about all the increased traffic activity’s onto Seattle Sodo area surface streets, W/S fwy, I-5 ? from big rigs, more road closures from increased port trains and don’t forget they want to run a lot more coal trains through this area. Between the trains and increased surface street usage that will be coming from the hwy99 2 lanes (both n/s) toll tunnel once it’s done Sodo area traffic and access in/out of W/S will be flat out terrible. I also see no mention in the Port’s plan for a new railroad bridge being built for crossing the Duwamish river ? as the old one is well very old, who will pay for that ? along with all the environmental studies/clean up cost ? Just one more thing that will impact W/S traffic is any increased marine traffic in that area will most likely cause more lower bridge openings.

By: Jim

Jim — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 17:46:10 +0000

Pigeon pointer – You are spot on! They will be running trains 24/7 to get the cargo off the giant ships and on it’s way. The train noise will be far worse than what you have already experienced over the past years.
And if we wait to mitigate the noise until T-5 is operational again, it’ll be too late.
The Port only does what is clearly written in the permit issued by the City.

By: Pigeon pointer

Pigeon pointer — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 15:36:12 +0000

Mega ships mean more cargo–which means more trains honking at every used and unused intersection at the base of Pigeon Point in the early am. It is going to get even louder if they increase the amount going through that terminal.

By: Robert

Robert — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 15:05:39 +0000

It seems that the port commission is busting their butt to run all of the business out of seattle on to tacoma..first sealand , major loss of business, now once again after 35 years one more big loss. are they trying to turn seattle into the back-water port that tacoma used to be????????

By: WSB

WSB — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 05:30:09 +0000

In reply to Mike.

The PDF linked in our previous story mentions some depth info – scroll through the slide deck:
.
http://www.portseattle.org/About/Commission/Meetings/2014/2014_06_03_rm_3a_supp.pdf