New cruise-ship dock? Here’s how to have a say

(Port of Seattle image: Yellow-shaded area is where the new cruise terminal would be)

On this day after the end of Seattle’s 2019 cruise-ship season, the port invites your feedback on a proposed new terminal that would be closer to West Seattle than the two it operates now, at Terminal 46, parallel with the south end of the Highway 99 tunnel, as this map shows. Here’s the announcement:

The Port of Seattle is proposing to develop a new cruise terminal at Terminal 46 as part of a flexible marine transportation facility which will continue to support cargo and other marine operations. Analysis of the cruise market and cruise ship deployment supports the need of a fourth berth to meet the demand for Port of Seattle cruise services, which can no longer be met by the three berths at the Port’s two existing terminals.

Scoping is an early and open process for determining the scope of issues that will be addressed in the environmental review document, for soliciting input regarding the Proposed Action and reasonable alternatives, and for identifying concerns regarding the potential environmental effects of the Proposed Action. Comments received during Scoping will be reviewed and taken into consideration during the preparation of the SEPA analysis.

All comments are due no later than 4 PM, November 13, 2019, and may be submitted via:

Terminal 46 Cruise Development website (Click “Participate”) at:

E-mail to:

In writing to: Laura Wolfe, Port of Seattle, Pier 69, 2711 Alaskan Way, Seattle, WA 98121

In writing and/or verbally at the three EIS Public Scoping Meetings/Open Houses: These meetings will provide opportunities to learn more about the project and proposed actions, and to provide input on the environmental review process.

October 30, 2019
5:30-7:30 PM
South Seattle Community College
Georgetown Campus
6737 Corson Avenue South
Building C, Room 122

November 4, 2019
4:00-6:00 PM
Embassy Suites at Pioneer Square
King Street Ballroom
255 South King Street

November 7, 2019
11:30 AM-1:30 PM
The Foundry
4130 1st Avenue S

The new terminal is expected to be ready for the 2023 cruise season. The port also has issued a Request for Proposals to three teams that have qualified to compete for the contract to “co-invest with the port to build and operate the facility.”

25 Replies to "New cruise-ship dock? Here's how to have a say"

  • Michelle October 24, 2019 (9:01 pm)

    Thank you for sharing! The Puget Sound and all of its many inhabitants already suffer too much pollution. Cruise ships are toxic! 

  • Drew October 24, 2019 (9:38 pm)

    How cute that they’re taking comments. This thing is already in the can. The thousands of cruise ship travelers streaming thru Sea-Tac every weekend May-Sept is helping to gridlock our airport. This won’t help. 

  • Rumbles October 24, 2019 (10:01 pm)

    Sweet!  Build it!

  • bolo October 24, 2019 (11:35 pm)

    Remember the “I Spy” game?

    I Spy the Alaskan Way Viaduct in their photo there!

  • anonyme October 25, 2019 (5:52 am)

    NO.  NO.   OH, HELL NO.

  • WSNeighbor October 25, 2019 (7:59 am)

    More jobs and more tourist money for our community sounds good to me!

  • K October 25, 2019 (8:03 am)

    More traffic to an already gridlock area!

  • Chris K October 25, 2019 (8:12 am)

    My family makes huge sacrifices to limit our greenhouse gas emissions (no more plane trips, more expensive electric vehicle, move to more expensive neighborhood to be closer to work, significant reduction of meat in diet).  It all seems a bit pointless at times.

  • ltfd October 25, 2019 (8:28 am)

    The end is coming …

  • Lola October 25, 2019 (8:45 am)

    Those poor dock workers have to have something to do all of the Port Business went down to Tacoma.

  • Frank Cunningham October 25, 2019 (8:57 am)

    We should read/listen before any conclusion. This could be better with electric hook ups so boilers don’t run in dock, sewage hookups for proper disposal, and better traffic than the current ports. We need to steer the project to be the best port built if that is what’s decided. 

  • L in PP October 25, 2019 (9:52 am)

    The negatives outweigh the positives in terms of increased traffic and pollution.  NO, please.

  • Scubafrog October 25, 2019 (1:37 pm)

    If it infuses more money into the economy of West SeattleIf It brings MORE jobs, and doesn’t harm existing jobs at Terminal 46 As long as pollution is *closely* monitoredThe cruise industry being another industry that will benefit by light rail, it’s sad that Amazon/Microsoft/Being and Cruise/big billion-dollar corporations won’t inject their money into speeding up light rail.  They have 0% corporate tax rates, and all get corporate welfare.

  • BettytheYeti October 25, 2019 (2:22 pm)

    Puget Pollution you are correct.  Cruise ship are some of the worst polluters.  Wring your hands over local salmon and orca populations and then supporting the cruise ship industry IS oxymoronic.  NO, NO, NO to more cruise ships.  I am pro recycle,  yet the Seattle Utilities last no plastic dictum has me wondering what kind of bubble I live in that neighboring  cities can have gas and oil furnaces; and put plastic in their recycle bins.

  • KM October 25, 2019 (2:40 pm)

    For a Port that won’t require shore power, this seems like (another) slap in the face.

  • Lisa October 25, 2019 (2:45 pm)

    NOOOOOOOO!Ugh. The pollution and toxicity to wildlife and water are not worth it. This is horrible and depressing but, as was mentioned earlier, likely already a done deal.

  • Watcher October 25, 2019 (3:21 pm)

    When the new Sonics arena was proposed for SODO the port, and unions fought it on the basis that this pier was a working container pier. Their arguement was it would impact truck traffic too much. They probably knew all along that this pier would be converted and an arena wouldn’t have an impact. Talk about a “swamp”!!!!!

    • WSB October 25, 2019 (3:27 pm)

      The cruise terminal is proposed for part of 46, while the rest would remain in the cargo business.

  • anonyme October 25, 2019 (4:28 pm)




    /* Style Definitions */
    {mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
    mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
    mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”;

    A handful of jobs and more revenue to unnamed recipients
    does not justify the huge environmental impact.  The next step will be the
    gigantic levy that will predictably be proposed to taxpayers to cover this
    massive construction.  I would like – no, demand- that independent
    analysis is done to show exactly what kind of benefit all individual taxpayers
    (not just interested parties) will glean from this project.  I’m guessing
    that, at best, it will be net-zero once the higher taxes and ongoing
    maintenance costs are figured in.  But any (unlikely) financial gain to
    taxpayers is completely negated due to the environmental negatives, which are
    substantial.  Terminal 5 is bad enough, but this proposal is gag-worthy,
    adding insult to injury.  Seattle’s ‘leadership’ continues to brazenly flag
    its hypocrisy by giving mewling lip-service to environmental awareness on one
    hand, while simultaneously showing a reckless disregard for our ecosystem and
    our people with projects such as this one.

  • MrB October 25, 2019 (4:30 pm)

    Friendly reminder: Our property tax dollars go to subsidize the port. We’re paying corporate welfare so for-profit companies get a break. If the port cannot operate without this tax then it should be redeveloped. We’re being scammed. 

  • Ex-Westwood Resident October 25, 2019 (4:33 pm)

    For those of you that forgot, this is just north of where the cruise ships docked BEFORE pier 90 and 91 were taken over for them.
    It is on the SEATTLE side of Elliott Bay and will have little to no impact on West Seattle, directly.
    So you bought an ALL electric vehicle to combat pollution and green house gases. Do yourself a favor and look up the mining practices used to obtain the materials required for the manufacture of those batteries and the carbon footprint generated by those practices. Not to mention the conditions of the workers and how they are treated.
    Now tell me if it is worth it.

    • Rumbles October 26, 2019 (2:17 pm)

      Good point on the mining practices.  And that electric car will become all that more expensive if they remove the hydroelectric dams off the Columbia River and the power rates go up when they start burning something to generate it.  You can’t have it all, sorry!

      • KM October 29, 2019 (1:02 pm)

        Nobody is talking about removing Hydro on the Columbia river. The discussion is about 3-4 of the lower Snake dams, so rest easy.

  • joebez October 29, 2019 (12:15 pm)

    Send it down to Tacoma port.  Tacoma could use the money

Sorry, comment time is over.