.
The Ports of Massachusetts Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum Number 2
Maritime Port System Infrastructure And Existing Operations
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
Table of Contents
Maritime Port System Infrastructure and Existing Operations ............................................................................................. 1
2.0
2.0.1
2.0.2
2.1
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.2
2.2.1
2.2.2
2.3
2.3.1
2.3.2
2.4
2.4.1
2.4.2
2.5
2.5.1
2.5.2
Introduction...................................................................................................................................................................... 1
Organization of this Memorandum ......................................................................................................................... 1
Designated Port Areas and Harbor Planning.......................................................................................................... 2
Boston ............................................................................................................................................................................. 3
Overview of the Port ............................................................................................................................................... 3
Review of Port Activities ......................................................................................................................................... 7
Fall River ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3
Overview of the Port ............................................................................................................................................... 3
Review of Port Activities ......................................................................................................................................... 7
Gloucester ....................................................................................................................................................................... 9
Overview of the Port ............................................................................................................................................... 9
Review of Port Activities ....................................................................................................................................... 12
New Bedford.................................................................................................................................................................. 17
Overview of the Port ............................................................................................................................................. 17
Review of Port Activities ....................................................................................................................................... 21
Salem ............................................................................................................................................................................ 25
Overview of the Port ............................................................................................................................................. 25
Review of Port Activities ....................................................................................................................................... 29
List of Figures
Figure 1: Boston Study Area ........................................................................................................................................................ 3
Figure 2: Port of Boston Marine Facilities..................................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 3: Landed Values by Species, Boston, 2012..................................................................................................................... 2
Figure 4: Total commercial fishery landings (millions of pounds), Boston .................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 5: Fall River Study Area .................................................................................................................................................... 4
Figure 6: Braga Bridge/Route 79 Improvement Project and Central Portion of Study Area ......................................................... 5
Figure 7: Landed Values by Species (millions of pounds), Fall River, 2012 ................................................................................. 8
Figure 8: Gloucester Study Area .................................................................................................................................................. 9
Figure 9: Marine Paint Factory ..................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 10: Landed Values by Species, Gloucester, 2012............................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 11: Total Commercial fishery landings (millions of pounds), Gloucester ........................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 12: New Bedford Study Area ........................................................................................................................................... 18
Figure 13: New Bedford State Pier ............................................................................................................................................. 19
Figure 14: Landed Values by Species, ....................................................................................................................................... 25
Figure 15: Total commercial fishery landings (millions of pounds), New Bedford ........................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 16: Salem Study Area ..................................................................................................................................................... 26
Figure 17: Salem Harbor Plan Overview Map ............................................................................................................................ 28
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
i
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
List of Tables
Table 1: Port of Boston: Container Throughput (source) .............................................................................................................. 7
Table 2: Cargo Throughput, Port of Boston, 2011 (Top Five Bulk Commodities)......................................................................... 7
Table 3: Ferry Operations in Boston............................................................................................................................................. 9
Table 4: Excursion Boat Operators in Boston Harbor................................................................................................................... 9
Table 5: Employees, Wages, and Sales for Boston Passenger Transport, 2012 ....................................................................... 10
Table 6: Total spending by Whale Watch and Excursion Passengers for Boston Harbor, 2012 ................................................ 10
Table 7: Boston Harbor Marinas .................................................................................................................................................. 1
Table 8: PIERS data, Boston Seafood Imports and Exports, 2012 .............................................................................................. 3
Table 9: Cargo Throughput, Port of Fall River, 2011 (Top Five Bulk Commodities)..................................................................... 7
Table 10: Cargo Throughput, Gloucester Harbor, 2011 ............................................................................................................. 12
Table 11: Gloucester Harbor: Charter and Recreational Vessels ............................................................................................... 13
Table 12: Cargo Throughput, Port of New Bedford, 2011 (Top Five Bulk Commodities) ........................................................... 21
Table 13: Employees, wages and sales for water transportation in New Bedford, 2012 ............................................................ 22
Table 14: Port of Salem: Single commodity throughput for 2011 ............................................................................................... 29
Table 15: Excursion Vessels in Salem Harbor ........................................................................................................................... 29
Appendix A - Inventory References
Appendix B - Detailed Marine Infrastructure
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
ii
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
Maritime Port System Infrastructure and Existing Operations
2.0 Introduction
2.0.1 Organization of this Memorandum
The purpose of this technical memorandum is to provide a comprehensive overview of existing conditions in the
five ports that make up the Massachusetts Ports Compact. The document consists of five main chapters,
addressing each port in alphabetical order:
2.1
Boston
2.2
Fall River
2.3
Gloucester
2.4
New Bedford
2.5
Salem.
Each of these port chapters is organized to address existing conditions at three ascending levels of detail. First is
a section entitled Overview of the Port, which presents the “big picture”:
• the Study Area, in the form of a simple map and a narrative description of how it was determined;
• Location and Access, describing the port in relation to its waterway, roadway, and rail infrastructure;
• Organization and Management, addressing the roles of local government, the Commonwealth, and any
special port governance entity (Massport and the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission); the
management of State Piers in those ports that have them; and other institutional characteristics essential to
understanding how the port works; and,
• Issues and Opportunities, a narrative outlining the unique challenges of the port in question and providing a
framework for the more detailed material to follow. These narratives reflect review of approved Municipal
Harbor Plans and other key planning and policy documents, as well as meetings held with the key leaders of
each port in the course of this study.
Second is a section entitled Review of Port Activities, which presents in narrative and tabular form the extent of
activity in each of three port business categories:
• Cargo Transport, including all forms of bulk cargo, containers in the case of Boston, and special cargoes like
offshore wind turbine components;
• Passenger Transport, including (to the degree relevant in each port) ocean cruises, excursion cruises
(including whale watches, charter fishing, and sightseeing cruises); ferries; and recreational boating; and,
• Commercial fishing and seafood processing, covering the fishing fleet, processing establishments, and
dealers.
1
Finally, Appendix B provides a detailed Inventory of Marine Infrastructure, in map and tabular form, for each
port. This includes channels and anchorages; bridges that cross study area waterways; and shoreline structures
(piers, wharves, bulkheads). This inventory was based on US Army Corps of Engineers condition surveys and
1
Various topics in each port’s Overview and Review of Port Activities are addressed in greater detail, and from a more forward-looking
perspective, in Technical Memorandum 4 (Analysis of the Massachusetts Port System).
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
1
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
drawings for each port; nautical charts published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; and a
variety of previously published documents, online property records, or other online information.
2.0.2 Designated Port Areas and Harbor Planning
In defining the study area for each port, the point of departure was the Designated Port Area(s) established by the
Commonwealth’s Office of Coastal Zone Management (CZM) in that harbor. A Designated Port Area (DPA) is a
section of harbor—typically including waterways, piers and other structures in the tidelands, and supportive
backlands—in which maritime industry is, or reasonably could be, the principal economic activity. The uses in
question include commercial fishing, shipping, and other vessel-related marine commercial activities, and
manufacturing, processing, or production activities that require marine transportation or need large volumes of
seawater for withdrawal or discharge.
State policy seeks to preserve and enhance the capacity of DPAs to accommodate water-dependent industrial
use and prevent significant impairment by non-industrial or nonwater-dependent types of development. This is
done by defining the uses that can be licensed within a DPA under Chapter 91, the Commonwealth’s regulatory
code for land and watersheet use in filled and flowed tidelands. The DPA Regulations (310 CMR 25.00) operate
in tandem with the Chapter 91 Waterways Regulations (310 CMR 9.00), and provide that:
• In DPA flowed tidelands, only water-dependent-industrial uses are allowed.
• On DPA filled tidelands, other uses are allowed only if they are “supportive DPA uses” (industrial or
commercial activities providing direct economic or operational support to water-dependent industry; housing,
hotels, recreational marinas, entertainment, and general office buildings are not eligible); “temporary uses”
limited to a ten-year term; or part of a “marine industrial park” (a master plan in which two-thirds of the filled
tidelands are dedicated to water-dependent industry).
While the DPA Program is largely regulatory in nature, a harbor’s DPA boundaries also indicate, from a planning
and development perspective, where the Commonwealth believes that working port activities have the best
chance of being preserved, modernized, expanded, or attracted.
The study areas for this analysis were not strictly confined to the DPAs, however. In each harbor, other areas
were added for purposes, either because they are immediately adjacent to the DPA and affect its operation, or
because they are integral to the strategic development of one or more port activities. The added areas were
suggested by the city in question, the study team, or both.
The Commonwealth, through CZM, invites coastal communities to develop Municipal Harbor Plans (MHPs),
through which those Chapter 91 provisions that are zoning-like in nature may be custom-tailored to local
conditions. An MHP typically covers an entire harbor, including both DPA and non-DPA areas; the DPA portion
may also be included in a DPA Master Plan, which becomes an integral part of the MHP. Gloucester, New
Bedford, and Salem have MHPs in place that incorporate DPA Master Plans. In Boston, non-DPA segments of
the harbor are covered by a series of Municipal Harbor Plans, while the DPA is covered by Massport’s statutory
port planning powers and by the state-approved Master Plan for the City’s Boston Marine Industrial Park.
The cities of Fall River, Gloucester, New Bedford, and Salem receive annual funding support from the
Massachusetts Seaport Advisory Council for a Harbor Coordinator, the individual designated by the Mayor to lead
on-going harbor planning and implementation activities. This support is intended to enhance the cities’ planning
capacity. The annual for the last several years has been $50,000 per city.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
2
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
2.1 Boston
2.1.1 Overview of the Port
2.1.1.1
The Study Area
The study area for the Port of Boston includes four DPAs, which share the harbor’s 40-foot main shipping
channel: the South Boston DPA, East Boston DPA, Mystic River DPA, and Chelsea Creek DPA. In each of the
four, the study identified between 15 and 25 properties with shoreline structures. In addition to the four DPAs, the
study area includes the two downtown ferry terminals (at Long Wharf and Rowes Wharf), which are important
hubs of passenger transport activity. The Port’s marine infrastructure is presented in detail in Appendix B, the
Inventory.
Figure 1:
Boston Study Area
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
3
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
2.1.1.2
Technical Memorandum #2
Location and Access
The Port of Boston lies at the confluence of the region’s highway, rail, and air systems. Interstate Highways 90
and 93, which intersect near South Station, are connected to the port directly via the I-90 Extension (the Ted
Williams Tunnel) and its South Boston and East Boston interchanges. As shown in Figure 3, the container
terminal and other high-truck volume port facilities in South Boston are also connected to I-90 and I-93 by a semidedicated truck route known as the Massport Haul Road, and by a limited-access, commercial-only highway
known as the South Boston Bypass Road.
The Ted Williams Tunnel, built by the state in partnership with the Massachusetts Port Authority (Massport),
connects the container, cruise, seafood, and industrial facilities in South Boston directly to Logan International
Airport, a key advantage for the port.
The South Boston port facilities, and the facilities along the Mystic River in Charlestown, have direct but inactive
rail connections to the CSX and Guilford freight networks, respectively. In South Boston, the spur known as Track
61, which was recently acquired by MassDOT from CSX, connects to the Boston Marine Industrial Park (BMIP)
and Massport Marine Terminal (MMT). Massport and the Boston Redevelopment Authority/Economic
Development and Industrial Commission plan to reactivate Track 61 and extend it to more BMIP/MMT locations;
this project would support planned new general cargo and seafood processing development and remove or
prevent up to 24,000 annual truck trips. In Charlestown, Massport owns the inactive Mystic Wharf Branch
Railroad, which it is preserving for future freight use. Additional detail about the rail connections is provided in
Technical Memorandum 4.
CSX service does not reach Conley Terminal, and no such service is contemplated, because the rail network
inside Boston cannot accommodate double-stacked container trains. Rail-bound containers exit the port by truck
and are conveyed to intermodal yards located inland. The principal CSX intermodal yard serving the port is being
moved from Allston (Beacon Park) to Worcester, as part of CSX’s larger transactions with the Commonwealth and
Harvard University. CSX and MassDOT are creating second-generation double-stack clearance from Worcester
westward into the national double-stack network.
2.1.1.3
Organization and Management
Boston’s waterfront is home to the oldest continually active port in the Western Hemisphere. As shown in Figure
2, the Port of Boston is not a single institution or jurisdiction, but a combination of public and private facilities
under diverse ownership. The principal public terminals of the working port are owned and operated by Massport:
the Conley Container Terminal, Cruiseport Boston, Massport Marine Terminal, International Cargo Port, and
Boston Fish Pier, all in South Boston; and the Boston Autoport and Mystic Piers in Charlestown. Beyond
operating its own facilities, Massport acts as the non-federal sponsor of harbor dredging projects and as a broad
institutional advocate for port issues, along with the Boston Shipping Association and the Coast Guard.
There are many private industrial sites located within the DPAs. In addition, the Boston Redevelopment Authority
(BRA) owns the Boston Marine Industrial Park (BMIP), a 191-acre facility in South Boston, which houses both
maritime and general industrial operations. Massport’s 40-acre Marine Terminal is actually part of the BMIP,
under a lease, which runs through 2070. The BRA also owns Long Wharf and Rowes Wharf, on which the
harbor’s two downtown ferry terminals are located.
A number of marine terminals are owned and operated by private enterprise, particularly those importing natural
gas and petroleum products through the Mystic River in Everett and petroleum products through Chelsea Creek.
As readily seen in Table 2, these are by far the port's largest cargo commodities.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
4
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
2.1.1.4
Technical Memorandum #2
Issues and Opportunities
Activities within the Port of Boston support 34,000 jobs and contribute more than $2 billion to the local, regional,
2
and national economies through direct, indirect, and induced impact. With a diversity of operations across four
main business lines, Massport confronts a number of issues and opportunities. Contemporaneously with this
study, Massport is undertaking an Authority-wide strategic plan, with significant attention to its role in the Port of
Boston.
• Containers. The future of the container business is a top-tier strategic issue, rooted in global and national
shipping trends, on the one hand, and local conditions on the other. Conley Terminal provides weekly
service to Asia, Northern Europe, and the Mediterranean. It is the closest U.S. container port to Europe and
the Suez Canal and enjoys a productive export market and affluent import market within an easy distribution
radius. Conley handled 187,747 TEUs in 2012 and 192,727 in 2011—by far the largest New England
3
container port, but just the 33rd-ranked in North America. The Panama Canal expansion, to be completed in
2015, is expected to accelerate the trend toward a handful of “mega-ports” on the East Coast. Conley’s
ability to maintain a solid competitive position—not as a mega-port but as an economically vital regional
port—will depend on how Massport evaluates and addresses those existing constraints that it might
reasonably influence. Facility size, landside access, and channel depth are addressed in Section 2.1.2.1
below. Among the strategies to consider is whether coastal shipping—in the short-sea, hub-and-spoke, or
so-called “Marine Highway” models—can emerge as a complement to direct calls.
• Automobiles. Boston Autoport is an 80-acre deepwater terminal on the Mystic River; it was converted from
its prior use as Massport’s second container port when the entire container business was consolidated into
Conley in the late 1990s. Leased to Diversified Auto for 40 years, Autoport handled over 40,000 cars in
2012. It can also accommodate occasional or special cargoes, such as wind turbine components. Adjoining
the Autoport and covered by its lease is the Medford Street Terminal—a 14-acre site consisting of the old
Revere Sugar and Somerville Lumber wharves and their backlands, purchased by Massport nearly 30 years
ago to preserve them for maritime use. This combined site enjoys direct rail access.
• Ocean cruise industry. In the 27 years since Black Falcon (now known as Cruiseport Boston) replaced
Commonwealth Pier as Boston’s cruise terminal, Massport’s business has grown from 13 vessels and
11,723 passengers in 1986 to 117 vessels, 380,054 passengers, and a half billion dollar impact on the
4
regional economy in 2012. In 2011, Massport completed the $11 million renovation of a previously
unfinished portion of the Black Falcon structure, tripling its volume of usable space. As the cruise business
grows, however, Massport has identified the potential need for additional terminal space so that two large
cruise ships can embark or disembark simultaneously.
• Local passenger transport. In addition to Massport’s cruise business, Boston harbor is home to the full
typology of passenger transport activities. There are intercity ferries to Provincetown and Salem, and a
system of local transit ferry routes, funded and branded by the MBTA and operated by private contractors. In
2011, 1.3 million passengers used these MBTA ferries. Boston also has a robust excursion sector, including
entertainment and whale watch cruises as well as ferries to the Harbor Islands. These services are centered
on the two downtown ferry terminals, with other key venues at Logan Airport and Commonwealth Pier.
• Seafood. The Boston Fish Pier berths a fleet of 18 groundfish vessels. The vulnerability of the groundfish
fleet to the fish stock crisis and associated regulations, and the long-term physical limitations of the Fish Pier
itself, represent challenges to Massport and the Boston fishery. Massport and the City continue to promote a
2
3
4
https://www.massport.com/port-of-boston/About%20Port%20of%20Boston/AboutPortofBoston.aspx.
http://aapa.files.cms-plus.com/Statistics/NORTH%20AMERICA%20PORT%20CONTAINER%20TRAFFIC%20RANKING%202011.pdf
Massport, Cruiseport Boston 2013 Fact Sheet.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
5
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
modern seafood processing industry as a principal activity on their nearby South Boston properties, with new
cold storage plant development expected in the near future alongside Legal Seafoods and two multi-tenant
facilities. According to Massport, Boston vessels frequently land their catch in Gloucester, while most of the
fish processed in Boston arrives by road, sea, or air from other ports where it is landed.
Figure 2:
Port of Boston Marine Facilities
Source: Massport
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
6
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
2.1.2 Review of Port Activities
2.1.2.1
Cargo Transport
The container throughput at Conley Terminal for 2011 and 2012 is shown in Table 1. Conley today has a land
area of 101 acres. Massport has acquired the adjacent former Coastal Oil property, which when put into service
will add 30 acres of backland space and allow eventual extension of the berth area. To implement this expansion,
Massport has programmed a multi-phase improvement project, which includes a $34 million dedicated freight
corridor along the edge of the Coastal site connecting Conley truck traffic to the Haul Road/Bypass Road system
and keeping most containers off local streets.
Table 1:
Port of Boston: Container Throughput (source)
Containerized Cargo (Conley Terminal)
Category
Aug 12 – Jul 13
Aug 11 – Jul 12
% Change
Containerized Cargo Import TEUs (Fulls)
94,651
94,307
0.4%
Containerized Cargo Export TEUs (Fulls)
64,981
61,614
5.5%
Containerized Cargo Empty TEUs *
30,597
32,663
-6.3%
Containerized Cargo Total TEUs*
190,229
188,584
0.9%
Containerized Import Short Tons
983,329
979,755
0.4%
580,280
550,213
5.5%
1,563,610
1,529,968
2.2%
Containerized Export Short Tons
Total Containerized Short Tons
Source: Massport, Port Statistics
5
The ship channels serving Conley are currently 40 feet deep, and its berths are 45 feet deep. Massport has
received approval from the Army Corps of Engineers to begin design of a Deep Draft Navigation Improvement
Project that would dredge the Main Ship Channel, Conley Turning Basin, and Lower Reserved Channel to 47 feet,
and the harbor’s North Entrance Channel to 51 feet. Implementation is estimated to cost $305 million, of which
6
the non-federal share would be $93 million. The dredging project and Conley expansion are discussed in greater
detail in Technical Memorandum 4.
The dredging project would also deepen Chelsea Creek to 40 feet, benefitting the private liquid bulk terminals on
that waterway. As shown in Table 2, Boston’s dominant bulk commodities are petroleum products and LNG
imported through those two waterways. In 2011, these imports represented 41% of New England’s petroleum
product consumption, and 66% of the distillate oil, 79% of the gasoline, and 100% of the jet fuel consumed in
7
Massachusetts. A crucial infrastructure improvement to enhance the capacity and reliability of Chelsea Creek
was the recent $125 million replacement of the Chelsea Street Bridge, which crosses the Creek, increasing the
8
channel width for tankers from 96 feet to 175 feet.
5
6
7
8
(http://www.massport.com/port-of-boston/About%20Port%20of%20Boston/PortStatistics.aspx)
Massport and New England District, Army Corps of Engineers, Technical Working Group Meeting Minutes, July 9, 2013.
Massport, Port of Boston, 2012.
http://www.mhd.state.ma.us/ProjectInfo/Main.asp?ACTION=ViewProject&PROJECT_NO=604517.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
7
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Table 2:
Technical Memorandum #2
Cargo Throughput, Port of Boston, 2011 (Top Five Bulk Commodities)
Total Throughput (Short tons) *
Gasoline
Distillate
Fuel Oil
Hydrocarbon & Petrol
Gases, Liquefied or Gaseous
Non-Metal.
Min. NEC
Iron / Steel
Scrap
924,332
5,722,681
4,402,416
3,134,237
981,027
Percentage of Domestic Throughput
23%
69%
0%
0%
2%
Percentage of Foreign Throughput
77%
31%
100%
100%
98%
Total Receipts (Short tons)
5,700,594
4,158,399
3,134,182
980,820
25
Domestic Receipt Percentage
23%
71%
0%
0%
0%
Foreign Receipt Percentage
77%
29%
100%
100%
100%
Total Shipments (Short tons)
8,846
209,912
55
207
924,307
Domestic Shipment Percentage
0%
28%
0%
0%
2%
100%
72%
100%
100%
98%
Foreign Shipment Percentage
* Throughput is the total of Receipts (in-coming) and Shipments (out-going).
Source: Army Corps of Engineers Navigation Data Center)
2.1.2.2
9
Passenger Transport
As explained in the introduction, the term “passenger transport” describes a typology of navigational uses ranging
from ocean cruises to intercity and local ferries to recreational excursions to recreational boating. Of the five
Compact ports, Boston is the principal ocean cruise venue and the only harbor with a scheduled, high-frequency
ferry transit system.
Ocean cruises. Cruiseport Boston Cruise handled 322,161 passengers in 2010; 310,238 in 2012; and 380,054 in
2012. 10 Almost 20 cruise lines call on the port each season, and currently four ships homeport in Boston:
Norwegian Cruise Lines’ Norwegian Dawn, Holland America’s Maasdam, Carnival Cruise Lines’ Carnival Glory,
and Royal Caribbean’s Brilliance of the Seas. The principal itineraries are Bermuda and New England/Canada.
According to a 2012 report by the Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA), cruise industry spending
generated nearly 7,500 jobs and $438 million in income for Massachusetts’ workers through direct, indirect, and
induced impact in 2011. Furthermore, the report estimated that cruise industry direct spending in Massachusetts
accounted for more than $452 million, and passengers and crew spent $24.8 million in Boston in 2011.
11
Massachusetts is one of the top ten states for economic impact from the cruise industry.
Ferries. There are multiple public and private operators of passenger ferry services in the Boston Harbor. They
range from year-round peak period commuter service to and from downtown Boston, funded and branded by the
MBTA, to seasonal service oriented to visitors and tourists. The table below lists the various operators, estimated
trips in 2011 (where available), routes, and service schedule.
9
http://www.navigationdatacenter.us/wcsc/webpub11/Part1_Ports_tonsbyTT_Dr_Yr_commCY2011-2007.HTM
10
https://www.massport.com/port-of-boston/About%20Port%20of%20Boston/PortStatistics.aspx
11
Massport, Cruiseport Boston 2013 Fact Sheet. It should be noted that if the more conservative methodology used in this Memorandum to
estimate the economic impacts of the excursion sector (see below) were applied to the cruise sector as well, the direct impact of cruise ship
calls would be between $60-114 million in total expenditures and 600 to 1,114 jobs.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
8
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Table 3:
Technical Memorandum #2
Ferry Operations in Boston
Operator
MBTA
Winthrop Ferry
Trips (2011)
Route
Schedule
634,866
Route F1: Hewitt's Cove to Rowe's Wharf
Year-Round
257,704
Route F2: Fore River Terminal, Long Wharf, Logan Airport
Year-Round
67,508
Route F2H: Pemberton Point, Long Wharf, Logan Airport
Year-Round
343,393
Route F4: Charlestown Navy Yard to Central Wharf
Year-Round
18,370
Quincy to George’s Island
Seasonal
11,165
Winthrop Harbor and Long Wharf
Seasonal
South Boston Waterfront and Provincetown
Seasonal
Long Wharf and Provincetown
Seasonal
Salem and Long Wharf
Seasonal
Long Wharf to Boston Harbor Islands
Seasonal
Baystate Cruise Company
Boston Harbor Cruises
Salem Ferry
70,393
Boston's Best Cruises
Source: Passenger Ferry Transportation in Massachusetts; Massachusetts Department of Transportation, October 2012
12
The MBTA’s year-round commuter routes were used by over 1.3 million passengers in 2011, half of them on F1,
the Hingham- Rowes Wharf route. Despite the high ridership in 2011, overall MBTA ferry ridership has shown a
decline from its high of 1.4 million in 2007. After declining to 1.2 million from 2007 to 2009, ridership has bounced
13
back but not yet attained its pre-recession levels.
Excursion cruises. Whale watching is a popular activity in New England with an estimated 900,000 patrons in
2008. In Boston Harbor there are two principal whale watch operators: Boston Harbor Cruises, which has two
400-passenger high-speed catamarans operating from Long Warf with up to six sailings daily in peak season; and
Boston Best Cruises, with the 350-passenger Viking III operating two sailings per day in peak season. According
to information developed for the 2008 Boston Water Transportation Summit, these whale watch boats carry about
14
160,000 to 220,000 passengers per year. In addition to whale watching there are a number of pleasure
excursion boats offering sightseeing, lunch and dinner cruises, and so forth. Principal operators and the number
of vessels in each fleet are listed in Table 4 below. From the 2008 Water Transportation Summit, these excursion
15
cruises carry a total of about 1,000,000 passengers each year.
Table 4:
Excursion Boat Operators in Boston Harbor
Operator
Location
Fleet Size
Boston Best Cruises
Long Wharf
5
Boston Harbor Cruises
Long Wharf
21
Charles River Cruises
Liberty Wharf
Cambridge Galleria
5
Entertainment Cruises
Rowes Wharf
3
Massachusetts Bay Lines
Rowes Wharf
5
Source: FXM Associates
Table 5 summarizes 2012 employment in Boston in these categories, including number of employees, average
weekly wages, and estimated sales (in thousands of dollars). These data are from existing secondary sources
12
In addition to scheduled ferries, Boston Harbor also supports water taxi services. There are four such operations: Boston Harbor Water
Taxi, City Water Taxi, Rowes Wharf Water Transportation, and Seaport Water Taxi. These services operate as on-call taxis and serve a
variety of points along the Waterfront and Logan Airport. Boston Harbor Water Taxi is the largest, providing service to Logan Airport and 14
other destinations around the harbor.
13
Passenger Ferry Transportation in Massachusetts, Massachusetts Department of Transportation, October 2012.
14
Reported whale watch patronage for 2007 adjusted to 2012, based on a 7% increase in employment in NAICS 4872 scenic and
sightseeing.
15
950,000 passengers reported in 2007, adjusted upward by 7%.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
9
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
and may not be inclusive of all employment. Massachusetts Department of Labor reports account only for full-time
employees who are covered by state unemployment insurance, and may not include part-time or seasonal labor
which is common in the water transportation and sightseeing industries.
Table 5:
Employees, Wages, and Sales for Boston Passenger Transport, 2012
NAICS
Category
Employees
Avg. Weekly
Wages
Annual Sales
(millions)
483
Water Transportation
86
$501
$14.9
487
Scenic and Sightseeing
Transportation, Water
550
$497
$22.2
Totals
636
$498
$37.1
Source: Nielsen Site Reports, MassDOL and FXM Associates
The benefits to the Boston economy of whale watch and excursion cruises are estimated in Table 6. Passenger
volumes for 2012 were derived from the 2007 passenger counts in the survey of operators for the 2008 Boston
Water Transportation Summit. The 2007 numbers were inflated to 2012 using the increase in NAICS 4872 Scenic
and Sightseeing employees from the Massachusetts Department of Labor monthly employment statistics.
Boat fares alone account for annual sales of $38 million to boat operators. The 2008 Boston Water Transportation
Summit estimated that tourists spent an average of $280 per day and residents $150 when engaged in water
recreation activities. Assuming a 50-50 breakdown of tourists and residents, this translates to total spending by
whale watch and excursion passengers of $290 million per year in the local economy when adjusted for inflation.
A preliminary estimate is that about 3,000 jobs are created in the Boston Area economy because of whale watch
16
and excursion boat operations and related visitor spending, not including indirect (multiplier) effects.
Table 6:
Total Spending by Whale Watch and Excursion Passengers for Boston Harbor, 2012
Whale Watch, 2007
Excursion passengers, 2007
Expansion factor for 2012
Whale Watch, 2012
Excursion passengers, 2012
Total
Per person spending,$2007
Inflation (CPI)
Per person spending, $2012
Total spending
Grand total spending
175,000
950,000
1.07
187,250
1,016,500
1,203,750
Visitors (50%) Residents (50%)
601,875
601,875
$280
1.12
$314
$150
1.12
$168
$188,988,750
$290,103,750
$101,115,000
Source: FXM; data from 2008 Boston Water Transportation Summit
Recreational Boating. There are marinas and recreational boat moorings in locations throughout Boston Harbor.
Among the installations with the greatest visibility in the study area are Constitution Marina, a Massport tenant in
Charlestown; Boston Harbor Shipyard, a Massport tenant in East Boston; Boston Yacht Haven, a 100-slip megayacht facility near the Long Wharf ferry terminal; and the Marina at Rowes Wharf, adjoining that ferry terminal.
16
FXM Associates.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
10
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Table 7:
Technical Memorandum #2
Boston Harbor Marinas
Marina
Constitution
Yacht Haven
Marina at Rowes Wharf
Shipyard Quarters
Boston Harbor Shipyard
Boston Waterboat
Spectacle Island
Admiral's Hill
Total
Location
Charlestown
Commercial Wharf
Rowes Wharf
Charlestown
East Boston
Loong Wharf
Boston Harbor Islands
Chelsea
Slips and moorings
290
100
350
30
180
40
transient only
136
1,126
Source: Boston Harbormaster Website
The economic impact of recreational boating is significant. According to a 2006 study of recreational boaters
moored at Constitution Wharf, these boaters spent $4,965 per boat on trips made using their boat and $9,120 per
17
boat on the vessel itself.
2.1.2.3
Commercial Fishing and Seafood Processing
The history of Boston is steeped in its connection to the sea through fisheries. Hundreds of years ago, Boston
was a major port for landing fish, especially groundfish. Fishing activity out of Boston Harbor supported many
shore-side businesses such as ice harvesting, boat building, and boat repair. Today, with the high prices of
waterfront property and the decline in groundfish catches, fishing activity in Boston Harbor exists on a much
smaller scale than historically, and supports far fewer shore-side businesses.
The principal berthing for commercial fishing vessels is at Massport’s Boston Fish Pier, where there are 18
groundfish vessels, and at the Cardinal Medeiros Lobster Cooperative facility on land leased from the MBTA on
the Reserved Channel, with berthing for about 20 vessels. According to National Marine Fisheries Service
Northeast Region Vessel permit database, 143 vessels with a federal vessel permit have Boston as their principal
port. Many of these vessels may not be actively fishing. The majority of the permitted vessels (65 percent) are
classified as small (less than 50 feet in length), while 19 percent (27 vessels) are large, of the class likely to berth
18
at the Fish Pier.
The situation with respect to fish landings is summarized in Figures 3 and 4, which show, respectively, the
domination of the current Boston catch by groundfish and the decline in landings over the last 30 years. Landings
(in pounds) have dropped by almost half since 1981. Nonetheless, the industry saw approximately $18 million
worth of fish landed in Boston in 2012, showing that it is still an important economic force in the City’s maritime
economy. The majority of fish landed (in terms of dollar value) was groundfish ($12,365,568), followed by lobster
($2,241, 350), monkfish ($2,130,767), and skates ($114,827).
17
Edward Mahoney, et al; “The Economic Impacts of Spending by Owners of Boats Kept at Constitution Marina, Boston, Massachusetts,”
Recreation Marine Research Center, Michigan State University; August, 2006.
18
NOAA, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Social Sciences Branch, Boston Vessel Size.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
1
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Figure 3: Landed Values by Species,
Boston, 2012
Technical Memorandum #2
Figure 4: Total Commercial Fishery
Landings (millions of pounds), Boston
Source: NOAA, Northeast Fisheries Science Center,
Source: NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of
Social Sciences Branch.
Science and Technology
In addition to fish harvesting, Boston is home to approximately 13 fish processors located on or near Massport’s
Boston Fish Pier and the Massport Marine Terminal. There are eight processors in the City’s nearby Boston
Marine Industrial Park (BMIP). According to the Employment and Wages Database maintained by the
Massachusetts Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development, this sector employs approximately 270
19
people.
Processing companies on Massport property include: Atlantic Coast Seafood, Inc., Sunny's Seafood, Inc.,
Edelman & Company, Inc., Fraser Fish Ltd., Ideal Seafood, Inc. (Beaus'), Legal Seafoods, John Mantia & Sons,
Inc., New England Marketers, Inc., Sea Jem Imports, Inc., Wildfish, LLC, Seaport Ice, LLC, Portside Seafood.
Seafood companies in the BMIP are Northcoast Seafoods, PJ Lobster, American Seafood (2 sites), Nagle
Seafood, Commercial Lobster, New Boston Seafood, and Stavis Seafood. Channel Fish Processing is on
Chelsea Creek in East Boston.
In the mid- to long term, the Fish Pier will need costly renovations to be code-compliant, and its dimensions would
not support modern operations. Massport and the City of Boston are seeking to create an expanded and
modernized industry on their nearby port lands. Accordingly, Massport has reserved approximately 10 acres of
land within the Massport Marine Terminal as a seafood center, which together with the Boston Seafood Center, a
65,000 square foot modern, multi-tenant seafood processing facility that opened in 2001 in the Boston Marine
Industrial Park, is now the center of the seafood industry in Boston. This area currently houses Legal Seafoods’
75,000 square foot processing facility and headquarters which opened in 2003. Massport also expects
20
construction to begin within a year on another seafood building with 400,000 square feet of cold storage space.
Much of this processing activity uses product imported and exported through the air and sea ports of Boston, as
shown in Table 8:
19
Employment and wage data: ES-202 Employment and Wages Database, Massachusetts Executive Office of Labor and Workforce
Development, 2012. Definition of seafood processing: NAICS defines this industry as comprising establishments “primarily engaged in one or
more of the following: (1) canning seafood (including soup); (2) smoking, salting, and drying seafood; (3) eviscerating fresh fish by removing
heads, fins, scales, bones, and entrails; (4) shucking and packing fresh shellfish; (5) processing marine fats and oils; and (6) freezing seafood.
Establishments known as "floating factory ships" that are engaged in the gathering and processing of seafood into canned seafood products
are included in this industry” (NAICS 2012).
20
Massport, Port of Boston, 2012; Maritime Department Strategic Analysis, 2013.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
2
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Table 8:
Technical Memorandum #2
PIERS Data, Boston Seafood Imports and Exports, 2012
Country
Import TEUs
Export TEUs
Total TEUs
% of Total
6,419
501
6,920
75%
Asia
631
168
800
9%
Europe
465
225
689
7%
Med
323
322
645
7%
Other
175
47
222
2%
Total
8,013
1,263
9,276
China
Source: PIERS (Port Import Export Reporting Service)
The third sector of the seafood market in the port, after fishing vessels and seafood processors, consists of
seafood dealers. In Boston, 118 entities have dealer permits, 36 of which are also permitted as primary buyers,
allowing them to buy directly from fishermen, or, in the case of permitted fishermen, allowing them to act as their
21
own dealers.
2.2 Fall River
2.2.1 Overview of the Port
2.2.1.1
The Study Area
The Fall River study area consists primarily of the Mount Hope Bay DPA, which extends up the Taunton River
estuary to the limits of the Federal Navigation Channel’s turning basin. It includes four deep-water terminal areas
on the Fall River side and two on the Somerset side. The Somerset DPA sites, and the northernmost Fall River
DPA site, were purpose-built terminals for fuel imports.
Two areas in Fall River that adjoin the DPA sites have been added to the study area: the Central Waterfront
extending northward from State Pier through Battleship Cove and Heritage State Park; and the marina area
located south of the State Pier and flanked on either side by DPA sites.
Within the study area, 21 properties with shoreline structures were identified, 19 in Fall River and two in
Somerset. The majority of the structures consist of solid-filled piers and wharves fronted by a fender system
and/or with ancillary mooring and breasting dolphins. Larger facilities with pile-supported structures include the
Weaver’s Cove Energy terminal in Fall River and the Brayton Point Station terminal in Somerset. Appendix B
presents a detailed listing of the facilities in the study area.
21
Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, 2013.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
3
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Figure 5:
2.2.1.2
Technical Memorandum #2
Fall River Study Area
Location and Access
The Port of Fall River is located on the eastern shore of the Taunton River estuary. The port area and the nearby
downtown are accessed by Interstate 195 (I-195), which crosses directly over State Pier on the Braga Bridge and
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
4
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
connects with the local roadway network. I-195 connects with Interstate 95 (I-95) in Providence and with Route 24
east of downtown Fall River. These are the principal north-south limited-access highways traversing the Rhode
Island / Southeastern Massachusetts corridor.
Route 79 diverges from Route 24 in North Fall River and runs along the waterfront as a limited access highway,
connecting to local streets and to the Braga Bridge (I-195) in a complex elevated interchange. MassDOT recently
awarded a $197 million contract to simplify this interchange and remove nine “spaghetti ramps” which will result in
greater visual and public access to the waterfront. 22 Route 138 (Broadway) accesses the port area from the south
and connects to local streets, Route 79, and I-195 in the central port area.
Figure 6:
Braga Bridge/Route 79 Improvement Project and Central Portion of Study Area
Source: MassDOT
The CSX Fall River Line, recently acquired by MassDOT, connects directly to the port at Weaver’s Cove, the
central port area, and the waterfront to the south. This same line will carry the South Coast Rail passenger
service, which will have two stations in the study area.
On the Somerset side, the Brayton Point DPA site is accessed from nearby I-195 via its interchange with Route
103 and connecting local streets. The former Montaup power station DPA site is on Riverside Avenue (Route
138), which connects, via the new Routes 6/138 Bridge, to the regional highway system.
2.2.1.3
Organization and Management
There is no single port planning or management entity in Fall River, and there is no joint planning structure
involving the Fall River and Somerset port stakeholders. Waterfront planning, including planning for the future of
the various locations within the study area, is directed by the Fall River Office of Economic Development. Fall
River has to date not submitted a Municipal Harbor Plan.
22
ht http://www.heraldnews.com/news/x1292454818/MassDOT-awards-200M-Route-79-I-195-interchange-and-Braga-Bridge-project-tolowest-bidder#axzz2WlqY9vcR. MassDOT is simultaneously undertaking an $88 million structural repair and repainting of the Braga Bridge.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
5
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
The Commonwealth is a principal landowner in the central portion of the study area, owning both the State Pier
and the Heritage State Park. Both properties are owned and operated by the Commonwealth Department of
Conservation and Recreation (DCR). The state pier is leased from DCR and managed by Fall River Line Pier,
Inc., a non-profit corporation. The Battleship Cove, the major waterfront visitor attraction that is commonly thought
of as part of the Heritage State Park, is owned by a non-profit corporation, the USS Massachusetts Memorial
Committee, which leases the north face of State Pier.
2.2.1.4
Issues and Opportunities
Fall River differs from the other four Compact ports in that it currently generates little day-to-day port activity. The
one major, on-going maritime operation—the import of coal to the Brayton Point Power Station—is a single use
located on the Somerset side of the river. Fall River’s waterfront is a fundamental link to its history and an
important resource for the South Coast economy, but the port is, for the most part, a narrow, linear collection of
sites sandwiched between the Route 79 expressway and the water. Two sets of issues define the study area.
One is the future of the central port area, consisting of the State Pier, its backlands, and the large Borden and
Remington industrial complex (formerly Firestone Rubber) immediately to the south. The State Pier is an eightacre site with a 96,000 square-foot shed. It supports occasional and diversified cargo activity, from exporting food
and household goods to Cape Verde to importing giant wind turbine blades in 2011, as well as a small fishing
fleet. The State Pier has also attracted small cruise ships at various times. The Commonwealth has made
periodic investments in the pier, including a recent $1.7 million upgrade of the South Berth and a planned
expansion to include a floating dock.
However, the State Pier is hemmed in by the visitor attractions immediately to its north (Battleship Cove and
Heritage State Park) and by the sharp rise in topography leading uphill to the nearby downtown. The Route
79/Braga Bridge project, by eliminating several elevated ramps, will create greater visual connectivity, and
potential greater synergy, between the downtown and the visitor attractions. The City envisions a multi-use
terminal at State Pier supporting increased cargo activities on a portion as well as cruise, ferry, excursion
23
activities, and visitor-related commercial uses on the upper level. The City would like to attract all three forms of
commercial water transport—cruises, ferries, and excursions—to State Pier, where a hub of passenger activity
could be created in proximity to Battleship Cove, the future South Coast Rail station, and downtown.
By contrast, the Borden and Remington complex, which manufactures and ships chemicals and imports liquid raw
materials, shares State Pier’s deep water and rail access but has adequate on-site backlands and no competing
24
pressure for visitor-related uses.
The other “big picture” concern is the future of the power generation and fuel-import facilities that constitute three
of the six sites in the Mount Hope Bay DPA. These facilities are separate and distinct from one another, and all
are in transition. While the energy and environmental policy issues surrounding these properties are beyond the
scope of this report, their relationship to the DPA is important:
• Weaver’s Cove is the northernmost of the DPA sites in Fall River. A petroleum tank farm owned by Weaver’s
Cove Energy, a subsidiary of Hess, combines a deepwater terminal with direct access to Route 79 and the
CSX rail line. This was to be the site of a major LNG import terminal, which was cancelled by Hess in 2011 in
23
Ibid., and Southeast Massachusetts MPO Regional Transportation Plan (http://www.srpedd.org/transportation/2012documents/TPLANFINAL/chapter-14.pdf).
24
Interview with Fall River Office of Economic Development and http://www.boremco.com/.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
6
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
25
the face of community and City opposition. There is no current public plan for the site, which requires
hazardous materials remediation.
• Brayton Point in Somerset is one of the largest power stations in New England, with a capacity of 1,500
megawatts generated by three coal-fired units plus one, which can be fired by oil or LNG. Brayton Point,
which imports coal on an on-going basis, has a complex environmental and regulatory history involving both
air emissions and its thermal impact on the river. In March 2013, Dominion Energy sold Brayton Point to
26
Energy Capital Partners. How the station will be fueled in the future, and whether any portion of the 306acre site might become available for other uses (as in the case of Salem Harbor Power Station) are unknown
at this time.
• The former Montaup power station, also in Somerset, was closed in 2010 by its then owner, LRG Energy,
and sold to Asset Recovery Group, Inc. The latter is demolishing the station and remediating the 21-acre site
27
for redevelopment. A program including aquaculture and ocean research has been proposed.
2.2.2 Review of Port Activities
2.2.2.1
Cargo Transport
The Fall River/Somerset DPA handled fewer than ten bulk commodities in calendar year 2011; the top five are
listed in Table 9.
Table 9:
Cargo Throughput, Port of Fall River, 2011 (Top Five Bulk Commodities)
Coal &
Lignite
Distillate
Fuel Oil
Sodium
Hydroxide
Electrical
Machinery
Manufac.
Prod. NEC
1,640,990
79%
127,174
100%
3,555
0%
373
0%
92
0%
Total Receipts (Short tons)
21%
1,640,990
0%
127,174
100%
3,555
100%
373
100%
92
Domestic Receipt Percentage
Foreign Receipt Percentage
79%
21%
100%
0%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
Total Throughput (Short tons)
Percentage of Domestic Throughput
Percentage of Foreign Throughput
Source Army Corps of Engineers Navigation Data Center
2.2.2.2
Passenger Transport
Ocean cruises. There are no ocean cruises calling at Fall River at this time.
Ferries. There are no ferries currently operating in Fall River. The City is undertaking a study evacuating the
feasibility of operating ferry service to Newport and/or Block Island.
Excursion cruises. In 2012, the Harbor Queen, a small cruise ship previously based in Newport, undertook a
28
pilot excursion cruise from Fall River State Pier. This service was not continued and there are no other
excursion vessels currently operating in Fall River. There are no other excursion or whale watch vessels currently
operating in Fall River.
25
26
27
28
http://www.heraldnews.com/news/x1732975518/Hess-LNG-withdraws-Fall-River-proposal#axzz2WlqY9vcRR
https://www.dom.com/about/stations/fossil/brayton-point-power-station.jsp
http://www.heraldnews.com/news/x1402242893/Somerset-Station-redevelopment-plan-features-aquaculture-pond#axzz2WlqY9vcR
http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20120517/PUB03/205170389 and http://harborqueencruise.com/.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
7
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
Recreational Boating. The study area includes the Borden Light Marina, a large facility (250 slips) located south
of the Borden and Remington complex and outside the DPA. The City is currently finishing the remediation of City
Pier, a municipally-owned former industrial pier north of Battleship Cove, where it envisions a marina and hotel.
2.2.2.3
Commercial Fishing and Seafood Processing
Fall River’s commercial fishing fleet is quite small. There are six commercial fishing vessels with berths on the
south and west sides of the State Pier. Four fish for scallops, one for crab, and one for finfish or scallops. The
vessels themselves are large, ranging in size from 70 to 100 feet. None of these vessels offload fish in Fall River
(most offload in New Bedford). The fish landed by Fall River vessels in 2011 were valued at $323,586, with the
majority consisting of fluke, scup, and sea bass.
Fall River is home to three seafood product and
29
preparation companies . Together, the three
companies employ more than 300 people.
These include Blount Seafood, a major, multiproduct value-added company; Raw Seafoods,
specializing in fresh and frozen scallops, fish,
and value-added products; and Atlantic Frosts
Seafoods,
a
vessel-based
shore-side
processing facility with a 150-ton daily
30
capacity.
In Fall River, 39 entities have dealer permits, six
of which are also permitted as primary buyers,
allowing them to buy directly from fishermen, or,
in the case of permitted fishermen, allowing
31
them to act as their own dealer.
Figure 7: Landed Values by Species (millions of
pounds), Fall River, 2012
Source: NOAA, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Social Sciences
Branch.
29
NAICS data tend to under-report number of establishments as any firm with less than five employees does not need to be in
the unemployment insurance system and are not included. Additionally, if there is any way firms might be able to be identified,
that data will not be reported for reasons of confidentiality.
30
31
http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/read/socialsci/pdf/MA/fallriver-ma.pdf
Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
8
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
2.3 Gloucester
2.3.1 Overview of the Port
2.3.1.1
The Study Area
The Gloucester study area consists primarily of the Gloucester Harbor Inner Harbor DPA, with several additions
directly linked to the port economy:
Figure 8:
Gloucester Study Area
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
9
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
• the Annisquam River and Blynman Canal, an inland north-south waterway connection across Cape Ann to
Ipswich Bay serving recreational boating and the Coast Guard;
• the Stacey Boulevard waterfront, which connects the port area to the Blynman Canal and its drawbridge;
• the seaward side of Commercial Street, just outside the DPA, where a waterfront hotel is being developed;
• the historic Paint Factory at the harbor entrance, now the home of the Ocean Alliance, Inc., marine sciences
facility and a focal point of the City’s diversified maritime economic strategy.
As shown in the detailed inventory in Appendix B, the study area is rich in port terminals and other marine
infrastructure. The study identified 47 properties with shoreline structures. Many of these provide berthing and
related services to the fishing fleet or other commercial vessels, or vessel repair. Other properties include the
Gloucester Maritime Heritage Center, the Gloucester Harbormaster, the U.S. Coast Guard, and numerous
commercial businesses.
2.3.1.2
Location and Access
The Port of Gloucester is located in Gloucester Inner Harbor, on the south side of Cape Ann. Like Gloucester as a
whole, it is accessed primarily by Route 128, which crosses the Annisquam River on a high bridge and proceeds
as a two-way surface arterial into the port area. Route 127, a local roadway connecting Gloucester and Rockport
to Manchester-by-the-Sea, is the only other road that crosses the Annisquam River/Blynman Canal waterway.
“Last-mile” truck connections between Route 128 and all DPA locations are via local streets. While the MBTA
Rockport Branch serves Gloucester, there is no rail connection to the port.
2.3.1.3
Organization and Management
The port-related activities of Gloucester’s City government are divided broadly into planning and management
functions. Planning, including landside development related to the port, is led by a Director of Harbor
Development in the Community Development Department. Day-to-day management of the City’s waterways is
managed by the Harbormaster, in partnership with the Coast Guard. The policy framework within which the
Harbormaster works—regulations regarding the City’s waterways, fees for docking and mooring, leases for City32
owned docks—is established by the Gloucester Waterways Board. The City itself is the owner of the strategic
I4-C2 development site, which is discussed in “Issues and Opportunities” below.
One of the most important facilities in the port is the Jodrey State Pier, an eight-acre site at the Head of the
Harbor closest to Route 128. The pier was built by the Commonwealth in 1933, and like other state piers, it is
owned by the Commonwealth through the Department of Conservation and Recreation. In the 1970s,
management of the pier was transferred to the Massachusetts Government Land Bank and thereby to its
successor, MassDevelopment. In 1993, MassDevelopment undertook the state-funded remediation and
modernization of the pier, which today comprises a 54-slip marina for boats up to 100 feet in length, three berths
for ships up to 145 feet in length, a 5,000-square-foot office building, a 50,000-square-foot fish processing facility,
33
and a 40,000-square-foot freezer facility.
2.3.1.4
Issues and Opportunities
Fishing and Seafood. Gloucester is America’s oldest seaport, the birthplace of the US fishing industry, and a
dominant groundfish port. It is home to a substantial fish processing industry and conducts a large wholesale
business, especially in lobsters and other specialty products. As in the other ports, major fish processors have
32
33
http://www.gloucester-ma.gov/DocumentCenter/Home/View/1041
http://www.massdevelopment.com/real-estate-development/development-projects/jodrey-state-pier/
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
10
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
switched to reliance on frozen fish from other regions due to the decline of consistent fresh fish availability from
the Northeast region. Through its outsourcing as well as continuance of the fresh catch, Gloucester retains its
brand as well as its processing and distribution networks in the seafood industry.
Gloucester’s diverse fresh fishery consists primarily of three groupings:
• the groundfishery including cod, pollock, flounder, and hake, which is that is high-value relative to volume (in
2008, 7.2 million pounds of cod returned $13 million);
• the mid-water fishery of herring and mackerel, which is high-volume relative to dollar return (18 million
pounds of mackerel returned $1.8 million);
• the lobster fishery, a high-value catch (2.0 million pounds of lobster returned $8.6 million).
34
The species most important to Gloucester’s fishing industry, including cod, pollack, flounder, and white hake, are
under stringent catch restrictions imposed by the federal government to restore overfished species. As the state’s
largest primarily non-shellfish port, Gloucester’s fresh fish industry is the most deeply affected by the on-going
crisis of fish stock decline and regulation. In recent years, the Gloucester fleet consistently landed over 100 million
pounds annually, however, from 2009 to 2011, according to NOAA’s latest US port statistics released in
35
September 2012, Gloucester landings declined 63%, from 122 million pounds to 77 million.
As fresh fish becomes a premium product, new marketing techniques are being used to leverage that value.
Several dozen boats and two processors are participating in the innovative Fresh Catch program, a "communitysupported fishery" that distributes fresh fish to multiple pick-up sites in Eastern Massachusetts. With 650
36
customers, it was reported the largest CSF in the country in 2012. There are ongoing discussions around
development of seafood as a part of the Massachusetts Food Policy Council's efforts to expand local food
systems. Gloucester Fishermen's Wives and other partners are developing an approach to marketing local fish to
institutional customers, such as hospitals and schools.
The Maritime Economy: diversifying the working port. In the last several years, the City has taken an initiative
to broaden its harbor development strategy. The long-standing paradigm was a dual emphasis on the fishing
economy and the visitor economy, with some tension between the two
over the long-term use of the harbor’s waterways and land resources.
The new approach recognizes a “third leg of the stool”—a diverse
maritime economy, related to but distinct from fishing and tourism.
A seminal event in the City’s development of this idea was a Maritime
Economy Summit which it convened in 2011, and the publication in
2012 of the resultant report by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council
(MAPC) and the City on Gloucester’s “new maritime port economy”.
Underlying the strategy is an emerging Marine Science and
Technology cluster, an estimated $4.8 billion industry in New England
in which Gloucester has the locational advantages, port infrastructure,
37
and human resource base to participate.
34
35
36
Figure 9: Marine Paint Factory
Gloucester landings for 2008, reported by NOAA.
http://www.gloucestertimes.com/local/x964639688/Fishtown-slides-as-a-top-port/print.
New York Times, October 2012.
37
Metropolitan Area Planning Council and City of Gloucester, The New Maritime Port Economy Gloucester, Massachusetts; 2012; and
.“The Marine Science and Technology Industry in New England” prepared by the University of Massachusetts Donahue Institute Authors
Clyde Barrow, Rebecca Loveland and David Terkla, 2005.
37
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
11
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
Within the physical harbor, the symbol of this approach is the development by Ocean Alliance, Inc., of its
headquarters and marine sciences center at the iconic marine paint factory on the tip of Rocky Neck. This facility,
whose initial phase opened in 2013, will be the home of the Alliance’s state-of-the-art research programs. The
Alliance’s ocean-going research vessel, the Odyssey, is and will remain home-ported in Gloucester. The Alliance
has begun to attract other marine technology businesses and institutions to Gloucester.
A related initiative is the City’s move to acquire the key waterfront parcel known as “I4-C2”, a former urban
renewal property in the heart of the DPA, and solicit development proposals that meet the DPA requirement for
38
50% water-dependent industrial use, with the other 50% for supporting uses in the maritime or visitor economy.
Gloucester’s New Maritime Economy strategy is described in further detail in Technical Memorandum 4.
2.3.2 Review of Port Activities
2.3.2.1
Cargo Transport
Gloucester is not now a significant cargo port. Up until the 1980s, freighters from Europe delivered frozen grocery
product to the port that included fish as well as other foods. The global markets for frozen fish, however, shifted
the sourced frozen fish for Gloucester from Iceland and Greenland to the Pacific Northwest, so that today
Gloucester’s sourced fish product arrives entirely by highway. As recently as 1996, the Massachusetts Freight
Advisory Council noted 74,000 tons of fish and fuel were brought to Gloucester, compared to the fewer than
10,000 tons shown in Table 10. If Europe were to reemerge as a source of frozen fish product, the role of
Gloucester as a fish importer by sea would return as well.
Table 10: Cargo Throughput, Gloucester Harbor, 2011
Distillate Fuel Oil
Lube Oil & Greases
6,947
474
Total Throughput (Short tons)
Source: Army Corps of Engineers Navigation Data Center
As noted above, the multi-purpose terminal at Cruiseport Gloucester can handle diverse cargoes; this “mega39
dock” has a draft of 20 feet and handled the import of wind turbines in 2012. The City hopes to use the megadock as a resource in pursuing a role as a support base for offshore wind development in the Gulf of Maine,
complementing New Bedford’s aspirations in the areas south of Cape Cod.
2.3.2.2
Passenger Transport
Gloucester’s port accommodates a modest ocean cruise business and a highly visible, economically significant
excursion cruise business. Recreational boating is also important, both as a physical presence on the outskirts of
the DPA and as a contributor to the visitor economy.
Ocean cruises. In 2006, one of the few privately operated cruise ship terminals in the nation, Cruiseport
Gloucester, opened at Rowe Square. Cruiseport homeland security clearance to process passengers through
customs into the US. In 2012, the terminal was able to book 22 ships, including the large Holland America ships
such as the Eurodam. In 2013, only smaller shipping lines are scheduled: the American Glory and the Yorktown,
with seven calls. At the time of this Memorandum, Cruiseport is working to return large ships for the 2014
38
39
http://gloucester-ma.gov/DocumentCenter/Home/View/1298
http://cruiseportgloucester.com/MarineTerminal/Port-Parameters.cfm
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
12
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
40
season. Cruise marketing strategies for Gloucester and the other small ports, including the state-sponsored
Historic Ports of Massachusetts initiative, are addressed in Technical Memorandum 4.
Cruiseport operates a function room and restaurant, and its ownership is involved in the development of a 100room waterfront hotel on Commercial Street, just outside the DPA. It is thus a significant asset to the port’s larger
visitor economy, supporting the excursion cruise sector and waterfront tourism in general.
Excursion cruises. Gloucester and Provincetown are at either end of the Stellwagon Bank National Sanctuary,
one of the world’s premier sites for whales. The Gloucester Harbor Economic Development Plan identified waterbased tourism as a key segment of Gloucester’s visitor economy, comprised of recreational boating, charter
fishing, and whale watch excursions that had experienced stable or declining market trends at the state and
41
national levels.
Between the DPA and the Annisquam River, about 25 commercial boats operate for whale watching, scenic
excursions, and charter fishing. Table 11 below lists them, including activity type and location. The five whale
watch vessels listed at the top of the table provided scheduled whale watching tours during the May to October
season; other charter vessels provide whale watch experiences, but these are for small groups (usually up to 6
passengers) and are demand-driven like fishing charters.
The whale watch vessels are 149-passenger boats providing one or two sailings per day in season. Based on the
total number of sailings, vessel capacities and the experience of whale watch vessels in Boston Harbor, a
preliminary estimate is that the vessels carry close to 100,000 whale watch excursion passengers per year
combined. Using a breakdown of 70 percent tourists and 30 percent residents, these passengers generate about
$17 million to $27 million to the Gloucester area economy. This level of spending would support about 170 to 270
42
direct jobs.
Recreational Boating. In 2009, Gloucester registered more than 340 recreational vessels, all of which were
berthed in East Gloucester or anchored at moorings. The Harbor/DPA Master Plan reported that recreational
boating facilities were at or near capacity; the waiting list for a private mooring had almost 600 requests, an
43
increase of more than 100% since the 1999 Harbor Plan. At present, the City website states that the
Harbormaster’s on-line wait list for mooring rental, as of May 8, 2013, had approximately 3,000 names of boat
owners seeking to rent one of 28 municipal moorings.
The 2006 Harbormaster survey of Gloucester Harbor vessel berthing and moorings reported dock space for
approximately 260 commercial vessels and 280 recreational vessels in the Inner Harbor, generally sized between
30 and 60 feet. The Inner harbor had 117 mooring buoys for both commercial (27) and recreational (86) boats;
approximately 20 berths dedicated for commercial vessels receiving port services, and 10 berths used exclusively
by government boats (U.S. Coast Guard, Harbormaster, Massachusetts Environmental Police). The 2006 survey
also estimated that another 50+ berths could be created in four areas (Americold East Gloucester, MassElectric,
the Boating Center, former FBI property).
40
Ships up to 500 feet in length can berth directly at Cruiseport, while larger ships anchor in the outer harbor and tender in their passengers.
Data from City of Gloucester.
41
Gloucester Harbor Economic Development Plan, March 2011
42
FXM Associates. Available data for NAICS code 487, “Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Water”, indicate 92 jobs in 2012; this
category covers only direct jobs in water transport. (Nielsen Site Reports, MassDOL and FXM Associates.)
43
City of Gloucester Harbor Plan and Designated Port Area Master Plan, 2009
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
13
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
Table 11: Gloucester Harbor: Charter and Recreational Vessels
Vessel
Services
Locations
Cape Ann Whale Watch
Whale Watching, Fishing, Scenic
415 Main Street
Captain Bill & Son
Whale Watch, Deep Sea Fishing
24 Harbor Loop
Whale Watch Seven Seas
Whale Watch
7 Seas Wharf
Yankee Whale Watch
Whale Watch, Deep Sea Fishing
75 Essex Street
Yankee Fleet
Whale Watch
121 E. Main Street
Cape Ann’s Marina River Cruise
Scenic
75 Essex Street
Harbor Tours of Cape Ann
Scenic
Harbor Loop (69 Rogers St.)
Cape Ann Divers
Dive Charters
127 Eastern Ave.
Defiance Sail Charters
Celebration and Lodging
Beacon Marine Basin (211 E. Main St.)
Schooner Adelle Charters
Scenic
23 Harbor Loop
Schooner Thomas E. Lannon
Scenic
7 Sea Wharf (Roger Street)
Amanda Marie
Fishing
3-5 Parker Street
Anne Rowe Charters
Fishing
7 Parker Street
Black Pearl Charters
Fishing
Cove Landing (E. Main Street)
Charlie’s Charters
Fishing
Roses Wharf (415 Main St.)
Coastal Fishing Charters
Fishing, Scenic
Roses Wharf (415 Main St.)
Connemara Bay Charters
Fishing, Scenic
220 Magnolia St
Karen Lynn Charters
Fishing
75 Essex St. (Cape Ann’s Marina)
Go Girl Fish Fishing Charters
Fishing
7 Thornhill Way
Kayman Charters
Fishing
J Dock
Lady J Fishing Charters
Fishing
23 North Kilby Rd.
Patriot Wave Charters
Fishing, Tours
1 Rogers Street
Sandy B Fishing Charters
Fishing
Harbor Loop
Striper King Charters
Fishing
1 Beach Street
Tuna Hunter Charters
Fishing
75 Essex Ave. (Cape Ann Marina)
Harbor Tours of Cape Ann
Water Taxi, Water Shuttle
Harbor Loop (69 Rogers St.)
Source: AECOM 2013
The economic impact of recreational boaters is significant. The 2011 Harbor Economic Development Plan
examination of the visitor economy described recreational boaters as an important source of visitation to
Gloucester Harbor, and noted that infrastructure, service, and regulatory limitations discourage harbor access and
deter some recreational boaters. The 2009 Harbor Plan had noted that most of the recreational boating facilities in
East Gloucester operated as legal non-conforming uses within the DPA and Marine Industrial District, which
44
specifically prohibit new recreational marinas. There were relatively few slips available at Inner Harbor marinas
for transient boaters and all were located on the east side of the harbor, opposite the downtown business district.
The 2009 and 2011 plans suggested a number of steps to better accommodate recreational boating demand in
proximity to the downtown, including: create a “gateway” in or near Harbor Cove to facilitate recreational boat
access to downtown services and attractions; investigate the feasibility of using temporary, bottom-anchored
floats or rafts for recreational boat berthing; create additional dinghy tie-ups at Harbor Cove and/or Solomon
Jacobs Landing serving recreational vessels berthed at marinas in East Gloucester; and, investigate the feasibility
of a new public access pier and float at a location just outside the DPA, such as Stage Fort Park, which might also
support a water shuttle to downtown.
44
City of Gloucester Harbor Plan and Designated Port Area Master Plan, 2009
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
14
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
2.3.2.3
Technical Memorandum #2
Commercial Fishing and Seafood Processing
Gloucester is considered a regional hub and full-service port. Key attributes related to this characterization
include:
• ability to serve both vessels home-ported in Gloucester and transient vessels from more distant ports;
• adequate permanent, short-term, and transient dockage;
• ability to unload vessels and sell catch at auction or directly to buyers; and,
• availability of supplies such as ice, fuel, gear, bait, and crew provisions; and haul out and repair facilities.
45
According to the dockage summary prepared for the Gloucester Fisheries Commission in 2013: Of the 741
vessels…whose homeport or principal port is Gloucester and that landed fish in Gloucester in 2011, 250
commercial fishing vessels berth at docks or wharves in Gloucester Harbor. Another 29 vessels which berth or
46
moor in other locations in Gloucester or elsewhere land fish in Gloucester.
In 2012, 384 vessels holding at least one federal fishing permit had Gloucester as their principal port. Of these, 86
47
percent were classified as small and 7 percent (28 vessels) as large (over 70 feet). The number of licensed
48
commercial vessels home-ported in Gloucester declined by almost 20 percent between 2003 and 2008. In 2011,
average monthly employment in the fishing industry in Gloucester was 127, down from a peak of over 200 in
49
2003-2004. Annual wages were $7.9 million.
The situation with respect to fish landings is summarized in Figures 10 and 11, which show, respectively, the
domination of the Gloucester catch by groundfish and the decline in landings over the last 30 years. Gloucester
continues to be the primary port for groundfish landings in Massachusetts, landing $25 million in value in 2012.
Most of the waterfront parcels within the DPA continue to be used predominately for marine industrial activities
that directly or indirectly support the commercial fishing industry. With the continuing downturn in the fishing
50
industry, several of these businesses are struggling to survive.
45
46
Mt. Auburn Associates. 2009. Sustaining Gloucester’s Commercial Fishing Industry: Opportunities and Challenges.
City of Gloucester Fisheries Commission, June 20, 2013; survey prepared by Urban Harbors Institute.
47
NOAA, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Social Sciences Branch, Gloucester Vessel Size. A number of vessels, including but not limited
to lobster boats, fish only in state waters and carry state permits only; this explains, in part, the difference between 741 vessels in the Urban
Harbor Institute survey and 384 in the NOAA data base.
48
Mt. Auburn Associates. 2009. Sustaining Gloucester’s Commercial Fishing Industry: Opportunities and Challenges.
49
ES-202 Employment and Wages Database, Massachusetts Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development, 2012. These
employment figures are believed to significantly understate employment in the local fishery. ES-202 statictics are taken from Unemployment
Compensation payments; many fishing vessels do not carry workman’s compensation and thus the employment on those vessels is
unreported.
50
City of Gloucester, Municipal Harbor Plan, 2009.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
15
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
Figure 10: Landed Values by Species,
Gloucester, 2012
Source: NOAA, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Social
Sciences Branch.
Figure 11: Total Commercial Fishery
Landings (millions of pounds), Gloucester
Source: NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of
Science and Technology
Harbor Cove has been the traditional heart of the commercial fishing industry in Gloucester and still provides
essential dock space and shore-based processing and support services for this industry. Businesses along the
east side of Commercial Street most directly support the commercial fishing fleet and utilize the few remaining
historic finger piers, thus retaining some of the traditional character of Gloucester Harbor. The Industrial Port
(Harbor Loop to the State Fish Pier) has become the city’s primary marine industrial area with 98 percent of the
land and pile-supported piers and wharves dedicated to industrial and accessory uses. It has recently
experienced several significant changes, including the opening of the Gloucester Seafood Display Auction,
modernization of Americold’s and Gorton’s waterfront infrastructure, and expansion of facilities on the Jodrey
State Pier.
While Gorton’s and Americold have been traditionally classified as water-dependent and continue to own a large
part of the existing waterfront industrial infrastructure in the harbor’s DPA, these companies are no longer
dependent on fish stocks landed in Gloucester or on local marine transportation to carry their products to market.
51
The fish supplies and products they produce or store now typically arrive and are shipped out by truck.
Seafood processing companies employ about 550 people in Gloucester, with total annual wages of $45.6
52
million. Gorton’s, a frozen fish processor, employs 360 of these workers. Other significant processors include
National Fish & Seafoods, Cape Seafoods, Neptune’s Harvest, New England Marine Resources, and Western
Sea Fishing Co. Gloucester is also currently home to four processors of fresh seafood products: Steve Connolly
Seafood Co., Ocean Crest, Whole Foods Markets, and Cape Ann Seafood.
The third sector of the seafood market in the port, after fishing vessels and seafood processors, consists of
seafood dealers. In Gloucester, 53 entities have dealer permits, 30 of which are also permitted as primary buyers,
allowing them to buy directly from fishermen, or, in the case of permitted fishermen, allowing them to act as their
51
52
Mt. Auburn Associates. 2009. Sustaining Gloucester’s Commercial Fishing Industry: Opportunities and Challenges.
ES-202 Employment and Wages Database, Massachusetts Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development, 2012.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
16
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
own dealers. Six dealers have “wholesale broker” permits, which allow the holders to “act as an agent who
53
negotiates contracts of purchase and sale of seafood.”
Grocery wholesaling, consisting nearly exclusively of seafood, employs 215 people paying wages of $13,800,000.
These wholesalers broker product globally and include A B Seafoods Inc., Boston Fish Market, Cape Ann
Seafood Exchange, the Explorer II Corp, Fish George & the Fillet Sfds, Intershell Seafood Corp, Island Lobster
Ltd, J Turner Seafood, Lewis Mills & Co, Mortillaro Lobster, New England Fresh Sea Products, Channel Fish,
54
Proteus Industries, Inc., The Seafood Network, Inc., and Zeus Packing.
The City of Gloucester is home to two fish auctions: the Cape Ann Seafood Exchange (CASE, formerly the
Gloucester Display Auction) and more recently, BASE Gloucester. The latter, located on Fisherman's Wharf, is
part of "Buyers and Sellers Exchange" (BASE), an electronic auctioning company owned by the Whaling City
Seafood Display Auction
2.4 New Bedford
2.4.1 Overview of the Port
2.4.1.1
The Study Area
The study area for the Port of New Bedford consists primarily of the New Bedford/Fairhaven DPA, which begins at
the hurricane barrier in New Bedford Harbor and extends up the Acushnet River beyond Pope’s Island. As shown
in Figure 12, it encompasses virtually the entire New Bedford waterfront south of the I-195 bridge as well as a
section of the Fairhaven waterfront across the river. In addition to the DPA, the study area includes the following
locations:
• the Hicks-Logan-Sawyer Master Plan Area, a 150-acre waterfront industrial district where the City of New
Bedford is considering implementing an urban renewal plan;
• a strip of land and buildings adjoining the City's key South Terminal facility;
• the Pope's Island Marina and the eastern span of the New Bedford-Fairhaven Route 6 Bridge, a pivotal
location in the center of the harbor.
As listed in the detailed inventory in Appendix B, the study area is rich in port terminals and other marine
infrastructure. Nearly 45 properties with shoreline structures were identified, 10 in Fairhaven and 35 in New
Bedford. Nearly half of the structures have uses related to the fishing industry or the receipt of goods. At least five
provide uses related specifically to the repair of vessels.
2.4.1.2
Location and Access
The Port of New Bedford is located at the mouth of the Acushnet River, protected by the hurricane barrier
completed in 1966 and operated by the Army Corps of Engineers. The port areas on both sides of the river are
reached by I-195 and by Route 6. The latter, which connects the downtown waterfronts of New Bedford and
Fairhaven via a swing bridge spanning the main navigation channel, is currently being rehabilitated by MassDOT
55
at a cost of $19 million.
53
54
55
Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, 2013.
NAICS code 4244 and MA DOL listing of companies under code 4244 in Gloucester.
http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20120302/NEWS/120309981/-1/NEWS.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
17
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Figure 12:
Technical Memorandum #2
New Bedford Study Area
The port facilities on the New Bedford side are accessed by Route 18, also known as JFK Boulevard—a northsouth arterial with a full interchange connection to I-195 and a connection to Route 6. Route 18 was recently
improved by MassDOT and the City in a project designed to enhance its functionality in serving the port and
56
enhancing downtown access to the waterfront.
56
http://www.coastalmags.com/The-South-Coast-Insider/new-bedford-connections/.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
18
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
The CSX rail system reaches the New Bedford waterfront in the form of the New Bedford Line, recently acquired
by MassDOT. Mass Coastal, a Class III short-haul railroad, operates on this line and provides direct service to
North Terminal, the wharf area located north of the Route 6 Bridge. The rail was extended to the berth built by
EPA for transporting packed sediments from its Superfund dewatering facility to a licensed PCB landfill in
Michigan. This rail spur has only been available to the Port on a limited basis, but at the conclusion of the EPA
program, it is expected that the Port will have regular access to the site. Improvements to three rail bridges along
the New Bedford line were funded through a TIGER Grant and are currently under construction. New Bedford’s
proposed South Coast Rail passenger station would be located in the current “Whale’s Tooth” parking lot
alongside North Terminal. Rail service currently extends as far as the base of State Pier, but not further south.
2.4.1.3
Organization and Management
The primary institutional actors in the port are the City of
New Bedford (through its Harbor Development Commission
or HDC), the Town of Fairhaven, and the Commonwealth.
The HDC, created by the Legislature in 1957 and chaired by
the Mayor, is the agency charged with operating all port
facilities owned by the City, including North and South
Terminals, several other wharves, and the Pope Island
Marina, and is the principal institutional advocate for the
port. The New Bedford Harbormaster acts as an agent of
57
the HDC.
Figure 13: New Bedford State Pier
State Pier is a central hub for passenger and cargo operations. Like other state piers, it is owned by the
Commonwealth through the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR). Under agreement with DCR, the
HDC manages certain operations and activities on State Pier, including the island ferry terminal and events such
58
as the Commercial Marine Expo.
In addition to these public operations, the port houses numerous private companies utilizing the waterfront for
waterborne commerce either on leased land from the HDC or on private land. The private shipping company
Maritime Terminal International operates food import, export, and storage functions on State Pier and at three
terminals, which it owns north of the Route 6 Bridge.
The Municipal Harbor Plan for the New Bedford and Fairhaven waterfronts, covering the DPA and other portrelated facilities as well as other, non-maritime activities where applicable, is a joint effort of the City and the
Town. The original plan was approved by the Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs in 2002, and the
59
current update was approved in 2010. The Commonwealth has also played a significant role in funding port
projects, including the current major investment at South Terminal discussed below.
2.4.1.4
Issues and Opportunities
The historic harbor shared by New Bedford and Fairhaven has shaped the cultural identities and economies of
these two municipalities for centuries. Today’s Port of New Bedford, supported by maritime businesses and
facilities in Fairhaven, is a diversified port—best known as a commercial fishing and seafood processing center
57
http://www.portofnewbedford.org/.
58
http://www.portofnewbedford.org/hdc/hdc-operations/state-pier.php. The operating agreement between HDC and DCR expired on June 30,
2012 and as of the time of this Memorandum has not been permanently renewed. Cruise ship berthing, previously managed by HDC, was
managed by DCR in 2013.
59
City of New Bedford and Town of Fairhaven, New Bedford/Fairhaven Municipal Harbor Plan, 2010
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
19
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
but with significant opportunities in other port business lines. The key issues and conditions affecting the port are
summarized in this section, with details provided in the analysis of port activities, which follows.
Fishing. New Bedford remains one of nation’s preeminent fishing ports. In 2011, it ranked #1 in the U.S. by dollar
value ($368.8 million) in commercial fish landings. In contrast to Gloucester, New Bedford has been able to
sustain its position largely because its principal catch is scallops rather than groundfish. New Bedford is an
internationally established center of seafood processing, competitive in both size and technology.
Cargo. New Bedford is interested in developing a diversified and sustainable cargo business. Historically
imported commodities include fresh produce from Northern Africa through trade relations in Morocco. Exports
have included seafood to Europe and Africa; however, dedicated ocean service has not been sustainable. This
trade has fluctuated over recent years. The Port has been engaged in trade discussions with the Port of Tuxpan,
Mexico to determine if a dedicated ocean service between the two could be sustained. The goal is to connect the
consumption market of New England and possibly Canada through the Port of New Bedford with agricultural
products that can be cost-effectively exported from Mexico through Tuxpan. Most of this cargo today moves by
truck across the U.S.-Mexico border and into New England. The Port continues to promote the backhaul
movement for exports (such as apples or frozen fish) from the New England region for the consumption market of
Mexico City. The Port has interfaced consistently with the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) and agencies of
the Commonwealth to promote the National Export Initiative (NEI) under DOC oversight.
The Port of New Bedford has also been a major proponent of the development of the America’s Marine Highway
(AMH). The Port was one of five proponents, which were responsible for the U.S.DOT Maritime Administration’s
designation of the M-95 AMH corridor. The Port continues to support this development and is active with parties
who envision the Port of New Bedford as key port along the corridor to access the New England markets.
Finally, New Bedford has served as load point for bulk materials going to Cuttyhunk, Martha’s Vineyard,
Nantucket, and Block Island due to proximity and the availability of berths and open storage areas.
Offshore Wind. A new technology opportunity of high potential value to both the port and the regional economy is
the support of offshore wind development. New Bedford, with the Commonwealth’s support, has made the
development of this business a strategic priority and has worked for five years to position itself in the market.
Offshore wind support would begin with the construction of Cape Wind and, if successful, would extend to
construction of other offshore wind projects, such as the recently awarded Deepwater Wind, as well as long-term
operational support. The City has undertaken a multi-faceted strategy, including both port infrastructure and
business development, described in detail in Technical Memorandum 4.
At the core of the strategy, the Harbor Development Commission and the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center
(MCEC) have undertaken the current major port investment at South Terminal. This $100 million project,
managed and primarily funded by the MCEC, broke ground in 2013. It will create the New Bedford Marine
Commerce Terminal, a purpose-built facility to support the construction, assembly, and deployment of wind
turbines. The terminal will handle mobile cranes, high-volume bulk, breakbulk and container shipping, as well as
large project cargoes. 60.
Passenger Transport. New Bedford and Fairhaven support, at varying levels, a broad range of passenger
transport activities. This includes an increased number of cruise ship visits and ferry service to Martha’s Vineyard
and Cuttyhunk. These activities all operate from State Pier. New Bedford/Fairhaven constitutes a major
60
http://www.portofnewbedford.org/shipping/operating-areas-marine-terminals/new-bedford-marine-commerce-terminal.php and
http://www.masscec.com/programs/new-bedford-marine-commerce-terminal. Cape Wind's federal permits list Quonset Point as its
construction staging area. Cape Wind has stated publicly that it will use New Bedford's South Terminal to stage its materials and equipment,
provided the port facility is completed within its 19-month timetable. (New Bedford Standard-Times, June 19, 2013)
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
20
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
recreational boating and boat repair market and is a principal regional destination for yachts. The port’s marine
service and vessel repair industries, based in Fairhaven, are respected throughout the East Coast, attracting
business from both recreational and commercial vessels. The City of New Bedford, the HDC, and the Town of
Fairhaven are working to increase the number of recreational vessels utilizing the port.
Waterfront Access. Because New Bedford’s entire downtown waterfront is located in the DPA, the ability of the
public to access the shoreline and observe the port in action is limited, both by the physical presence of maritime
industrial uses and by the limitations on development other than marine industrial or supporting uses. The City
has expressed a strong interest in developing waterfront opportunities to bring the public to the waterfront for
events as well as increasing public access year-round. Currently, there is virtually no public access in the central
harbor. Due to the large size, proximity to downtown, and underutilization of the State Pier property, the City
believes that with careful planning and space utilization the State Pier can serve as the hub of the public’s access
to the downtown waterfront while balancing the need to maintain the central waterfront’s marine industrial
capacity. The State Pier is also named in the New Bedford Whaling National Park enabling legislation and
management plan with an emphasis on creating interpretive opportunities for park visitors.
2.4.2 Review of Port Activities
2.4.2.1
Cargo Transport
The Port of New Bedford has historically attracted one-way cargo traffic, consisting more of imports than exports.
The table below lists the top five bulk commodities in 2011 traveling to and from New Bedford. As noted above,
the Harbor Development Commission is actively exploring new and diversified markets.
Table 12: Cargo Throughput, Port of New Bedford, 2011 (Top Five Bulk Commodities)
Gasoline
Distillate Fuel Oil
Residual Fuel
Oil
Sand &
Gravel
Fruit & Nuts
NEC
Total Throughput (Short tons)
5,412
54,422
14,543
87,900
25,162
Percentage of Domestic Throughput
100%
100%
100%
100%
0
35,113
7,893
0
100%
100%
Percentage of Foreign Throughput
Total Receipts (Short tons)
100%
Domestic Receipt Percentage
Foreign Receipt Percentage
25,162
100%
Total Shipments (Short tons)
5,412
13,833
6,650
87,900
Domestic Shipment Percentage
100%
100%
100%
100%
0
Foreign Shipment Percentage
Note: Total Throughput = Total Receipts (imports) + Total Shipments (exports)
Source: Army Corps of Engineers Navigation Data Center
The principal cargo-related investment is the creation at South Terminal of the new Marine Commerce Terminal,
which although purpose-built to support offshore wind development will also expand New Bedford’s shipping
capabilities in a range of bulk and special cargoes, including containers loaded by mobile cranes. Due to the
enormous weight of turbine components, the new terminal is engineered to rival the strongest port facilities in the
world, with load capacities of up to 20,000 psf. The load strength of the apron and upland area is being
constructed to accommodate heavy lifts and will be unique in the northeastern U.S. The project, with a total cost
of up to $100 million, has the added benefit of remediating 244,600 cubic yards of contaminated industrial
sediment from decades ago. The project includes:
• Dredging and removal of contaminated sediment in the harbor to create a channel to the facility that will be
constructed to a depth of 30 feet for the passage of deep water vessels;
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
21
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
• The construction of a 1,000-foot long extension to the existing South Terminal bulkhead. The new bulkhead
will be built as a cofferdam style structure capable of supporting large vessel berthing as well as heavy
shore-side cranes for the unloading of cargo and industrial components that are expected to range in size
from large to super-sized.
• Placing of the clean sediment generated from the dredging behind the bulkhead to create additional acres of
productive land available for staging commercial scale offshore wind projects; and,
• Constructing a Confined Aquatic Disposal (CAD) cell offshore for disposal and sequestration of any
contaminated soils in a safe and environmentally responsible manner.
2.4.2.2
61
Passenger Transport
Ocean cruises. The 2010 Municipal Harbor Plan reported that since July 2002, cruise ships have been regularly
making port calls to New Bedford during the summer and early fall months. In 2009, the City signed a contract
with American Cruise Lines for up to 25 visits. This activity was expected to increase as cruise industry continues
to grow, supported by a statewide initiative (Historic Ports of Massachusetts) to attract more cruise ships to
smaller Massachusetts ports. Two small ship cruise lines now make New Bedford a regular stop on tours of
historic New England harbors: American Cruise Lines (Cruise New England Islands) and Blount Small Ship
Adventure (Cruise Islands of New England). The Harbor Development Commission has suggested making
modifications to State Pier, possibly including a new terminal facility better suited to serve the needs of cruise
ships and their passengers.
Ferries. Currently two commercial ferry operations serve New Bedford: Seastreak and Cuttyhunk, both operating
from the State Pier. The 149-passenger Cuttyhunk provides daily service to and from Cuttyhunk Island from midMay to September 30, and two to four times per week the rest of the year. Seastreak provides fast ferry service
under license to the Steamship Authority to Vineyard Haven and Oak Bluffs on Martha’s Vineyard from May to
October. During the summer, the ferry provides five daily round trips with additional service on the weekend.
62
Seastreak Ferry also offers limited trips from New York City to Martha’s Vineyard during the summer. In 2013,
SeaStreak has entered into an agreement with Tremblay’s Bus and Motor Coach Company to offer a combined
63
bus-ferry round trip from Boston to Martha’s Vineyard via New Bedford.
Excursion Cruises. The motor launch Acushnet provides mooring-to-dock service in season for New Bedford
harbor. The Acushnet also offers 70-minute tours in season of New Bedford Harbor. Table 13 shows 57
employees in local water transportation services in New Bedford in 2012 with sales of $5.5 million.
Table 13: Employees, Wages and Sales for Water Transportation in New Bedford, 2012
NAICS
Category
Employees
Average
Weekly
Wages
Annual Sales
(millions)
483
Water Transportation
35
$727
$3.5
487
Scenic and Sightseeing
Transportation, Water
22
$328
$2.0
Totals
57
$528
$5.5
Source: Nielsen Site Reports, MassDOL and FXM Associates
61
62
63
http://www.masscec.com/news/patrick-murray-administration-announces-federal-approval-develop-offshore-wind-deployment.
http://www.steamshipauthority.com/ssa/documents/MeetingSummary_20120313.pdf
http://www.mvtimes.com/2013/05/01/seastreak-fast-ferry-adds-boston-bus-connection-15360/
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
22
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
Recreational boating. New Bedford and Fairhaven recognize the economic benefits of recreational boating, and
their joint 2010 Municipal harbor Plan included expansion of recreational boating slips and moorings, as well as
more boater services and amenities. Suggested additional facilities and services for transient recreational boats
included shuttle services, dinghy docks, improved access for physically disabled boaters, and shore-side support
services such as boat repair, provisions, and visitor amenities. The Plan recommended designating some of the
new slips and moorings for transient boaters to draw more tourists and visitors by sea. It also recognized the need
to ensure that growth of recreational boating activity does not interfere with the traditional working port functions
or limit opportunities to expand other marine industries in the port. New or expanded recreational slips and
64
moorings in both communities are to be located outside the DPA.
The HDC recently invested more than $275,000 to implement Harbor Plan recommendations for recreational
65
boating improvements within the Inner Harbor, including transient moorings, boat launches, and dinghy docks. A
detailed description of recreational moorings in the harbor, and of the plan to maintain and expand this activity,
can be found in the 2010 New Bedford Harbor Recreational Boating Plan. As of the 2010 plan, there were 495
moorings for recreational vessels on the New Bedford side, of which 373 were private moorings and the
66
remainder public moorings administered by the HDC.
Over the past decade, the number of super-sized pleasure boats or mega-yachts has grown in the northwest
Atlantic. These vessels have experienced challenges in finding ports with adequate berthing and services. New
Bedford/Fairhaven is attracting some of this business, through the broad mix of quality marine services in the port
as well as berthing locations in the non-DPA portions of the harbor capable of accommodating large vessels.
The largest and most visible marina is Pope’s Island, a public facility located in New Bedford waters alongside the
Route 6 Bridge in the center of the harbor. This marina, funded by the Commonwealth and operated by HDC, has
67
198 slips and 502 recreational moorings. Six marinas are located in Fairhaven, with a total of 581 slips. These
marinas accommodate various types of sail and powerboats ranging from 23 to 120 feet; the Fairhaven
Harbormaster and marina owners report increasing demand from larger boats (50+ feet) but access is restricted
by limited water depths of less than six feet at low tide in some areas due to harbor silting. The majority of marina
slips are rented on a seasonal basis with 5 to 6 percent of Fairhaven marina slips used by transient boaters. The
majority of marina clientele are repeat customers, primarily from southeastern Massachusetts; there are waiting
lists for slips at several of these marinas for larger vessels.
2.4.2.3
Commercial Fishing and Seafood Processing
The fishing industry is central to New Bedford’s cultural heritage and modern day identity as a maritime center.
Today, New Bedford Harbor is one of nation’s preeminent fishing ports with proximity to prime fishing grounds.
From 2000 to 2011, the port was ranked #1 in the U.S. by dollar value of commercial fish landings, with $368.8
million in 2011. Fish landed in 2011 neared 120 million. New Bedford’s focus on shellfish, particularly scallops, as
opposed to groundfish species, is the basis for this elite ranking. For example, in 2012, the value of scallops
landed in New Bedford was more than 12 times the value of groundfish landed in the port. As a geographically
stable species, shellfish can be studied more closely and regulated more effectively than more migratory fish
species.
64
65
New Bedford Fairhaven Municipal Harbor Plan, 2010
2011: A Year of Achievement, New Bedford Harbor Development Commission, December 12, 2011
66
. New Bedford Harbor Development Commission, Recreational Boating Plan, New Bedford Harbor, May 2010
67
Cozy Cove Marina (90 slips), Seaport Inn Marina (105), Moby Dick Marina (50), Fairhaven Shipyard Companies (South Yard 170, North
Yard 12), Achushnet River Safe Boating Club (150).
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
23
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
The New Bedford fleet is berthed principally at five wharves owned and managed by the Harbor Development
Commission: Fisherman’s Wharf, immediately north of State Pier; and Steamship Wharf, Coal Pocket Pier,
Homer’s Wharf, and Leonard’s Wharf, immediately south of State Pier. There are between 15 and 30 active
draggers and a far large number of active scallop vessels. According to the NMFS data, approximately 313
vessels holding at least one federal fishing permit have New Bedford as their principal port. Seventy percent, or
68
approximately 220, are classified as large at 70 feet or longer. The situation with respect to fish landings is
summarized in Figure 14, which show, respectively, the increase in landings over the last 30 years and the
domination of the current New Bedford catch by scallops.
According to state employment and wage data, there are 169 fishing establishments with approximately 1,000
employees located in New Bedford and approximately 140 in Fairhaven. The number of establishments and
employment peaked in 2010, although wages have continued to increase. Total wages for New Bedford and
69
Fairhaven fishing employees in 2011 were $140 million. While the scallop industry is likely to remain strong and
will sustain the New Bedford fishing industry overall, it remains to be seen how recent severe cuts in groundfish
70
quotas will affect local groundfishermen.
The HDC has identified 39 processors and wholesalers. Data from the Massachusetts Executive Office of Labor
and Workforce Development shows New Bedford being home to 17 seafood product and preparation companies,
including several national processing facilities whose products are shipped globally. This is one of the City’s
71
largest industries, employing (in 2011) 763 people. In 2007, the industry generated $1.1 million in indirect
business taxes, and had a total value added of $44.2 million (in 2007) “Seafood product preparation and
72
packaging” was listed as the fourth highest industry in terms of its contribution to the local economy. Seafood
processing companies in New Bedford include Kyler Seafood, Inc., Sea Watch International, Northcoast Seafood,
MF Foley, Inc., Northern Pelagic Group LLC, A&A Seafood, Inc., Seatrade International CO. Inc., Big G Seafood,
Inc., Tichon Seafood Corp., Zeus Packaging, Inc., Cold Atlantic Seafood, Cap Seafood, the Norpel Group, Pier
Fish Company, Mariner Seafood, American Seafood International, American Seafoods Processing LLC, Eastern
Fisheries, Friendly Fruit, Inc. (Sid Wainer & Son), JC Fisheries, Inc., Mar-Lees Seafood, LLC, North Wind, and
Oceans Fleet Fisheries.
New Bedford’s low labor and land costs and proximity to the local fishing industry make it an attractive place for
seafood processing companies. Yet most of the large processors rely on imported frozen seafood (delivered by
rail or truck) rather than on locally landed catch, particularly in years when local landings are reduced by federal
limitations. This lack of interdependence between the fleet and the processing industry has led some to question
whether seafood processing is the economically best use of waterfront property (or whether processing of fish
73
imported and exported by land is truly a water-dependent use).
The third sector of the seafood market in the port, after fishing vessels and seafood processors, consists of
seafood dealers. In New Bedford, 89 entities have dealer permits. Fifty-one dealers have permits to be “primary
buyers”, which allow them to buy directly from fishermen, or, in the case of permitted fishermen, allow them to act
68
69
70
NOAA, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Social Sciences Branch, New Bedford Vessel Size.
ES-202 Employment and Wages Database, Massachusetts Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development, 2012.
HR& A Advisors, New Bedford Harbor Study: Analysis of Growth Potential for Existing Potential Port Industries, May 2009.
71
ES-202 Employment and Wages Database, Massachusetts Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development, 2012. This number
reflects the documented workforce; a significant number of undocumented workers may also be employed. Also, NAICS data tends to underreport number of establishments as any firm with less than five employees does not need to be in the unemployment insurance system and
are not included. Additionally, if there is any way firms might be able to be identified, that data will not be reported for reasons of confidentiality
72
HR&A Advisors, Inc. undated. New Bedford, Massachusetts: Market & Economic Analysis. Prepared for MassDevelopment and the City of
New Bedford; and HR&A Advisors, Inc. 2009. New Bedford Harbor Study: A Comprehensive Analysis of Growth Potential for Existing and
Potential Port Industries.
73
HR&A Advisors, Inc. undated: Market & Economic Analysis. Prepared for MassDevelopment and the City of New Bedford.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
24
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
as their own dealers. One of the permitted wholesale dealers is the Whaling City Seafood Display Auction,
located on the City’s waterfront. Founded in 1994, the auction is intended to ensure a reliable supply of seafood
for buyers while bringing fair market prices to fishermen.
Figure 14: Landed Values by Species, New
Bedford, 2012
Source: NOAA, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Social
Figure 15: Total Commercial Fishery
Landings (millions of pounds), New Bedford
Sciences Branch
Source: NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Services, Office of
Science and Technology
The Whaling City Seafood Display Auction, serving New Bedford and Southern New England, was established in
1994. The display auction provides an open market allowing fishermen access to fair market prices for their catch
and buyer’s access to more predictable supplies of seafood. Whaling City owns and operates the Buyers and
Sellers Exchange (BASE), the electronic auctioning company.
2.5 Salem
2.5.1 Overview of the Port
2.5.1.1
The Study Area
The Salem study area consists of the Salem DPA, which is the Salem harbor Power Station and its deepwater
channel, plus three other nearby areas:
• the South Commercial Waterfront, where the South River Basin extends the navigable waterfront into the
downtown;
• the North Commercial Waterfront, which adjoins the DPA on its southerly (downtown) side and includes a
large marina; and,
• the South Essex Sewage District treatment plant, which adjoins the DPA on its north side and is identified in
the Salem Harbor Plan as part of the industrial port.
• The study identified 14 properties with shoreline structures, the largest of which is the DPA’s Salem Harbor
Power Station wharf and its 32-foot main ship channel. Approximately five properties provide marina related
services for recreational vessels. Appendix B presents a complete list of Salem’s facilities.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
25
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Figure 16:
2.5.1.2
Technical Memorandum #2
Salem Study Area
Location and Access
The Port of Salem and the other components of the study area are located east of downtown. The downtown
waterfront area is accessible to the major regional highway system (Routes 95, 128, and I-95) only via arterial
roads, particularly Route 114 (via Peabody), Route 107 (via Lynn), and Route 1A (via Beverly).
The connection to the DPA and North Commercial Waterfront is by either of two local streets: Derby, the main
street of the tourist waterfront, or Webb, which runs along Collins Cove. There is no rail connection to any portion
of the study area.
2.5.1.3
Organization and Management
There is no “port agency” in Salem. Planning for future harbor development is led by the Department of Planning
and Community Development, while day-to-day management of the waterways is the responsibility of the
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
26
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
Harbormaster. The City is the owner and operator of the new Salem Wharf, where the Fast Ferry to Boston and
occasional cruise vessels are berthed.
The US Government owns Derby, Hatch’s, and Central Wharves, which are the national historic sites on Derby
Street at the entrance to the South River Basin. Salem has no other public marine terminals. The largest private
facility is the Salem Harbor Power Station wharf.
2.5.1.4
Issues and Opportunities
The “big picture” maritime issues in Salem fall in two categories: the future of the Power Station, including the
potential redevelopment of two-thirds of its land area, and the role of the study area’s non-DPA marine assets in
the future economy of the City.
In August 2012, it was announced that Salem Harbor Power Station will be repowered in a transaction that will
both maintain its role as an electric generator and create a major redevelopment opportunity. Footprint Power
LLC, which is buying the plant from Dominion Energy, plans to run the existing coal- and oil-powered plant for two
years and then demolish and replace it with a state-of-the-art, gas-fired plant 630 megawatt plant. The
74
replacement will leave about two-thirds of the 63-acre site available for new development.
This opportunity is directly adjacent to the major maritime infrastructure project recently completed by the City: the
$18 million Salem Wharf at the foot of Blaney Street, which is home to the Fast Ferry and can accommodate
small coastal cruise vessels. When coupled with the future redevelopment of the Power Station, the combined
site could become a regionally significant waterfront destination, accommodating larger cruise ships and
extending the Derby Street tourist waterfront past the House of the Seven Gables.
This development opportunity will be constrained not only by Footprint Power’s eventual design for the new,
downsized generating facility (and by the adjacent SESD treatment plant), but by the DPA status of the Power
Station site and the constrained condition of Derby and Webb Streets. The infrastructure requirements will
emerge over time, but it is clear that the City, the Commonwealth, and the private sector will have to collaborate in
planning a new port development district and implementing the necessary water- and landside infrastructure over
75
time.
Except for the Power Station and Salem Wharf, the study area’s marine resources and activities lie outside the
DPA. Figure 13 is the overview map of the City’s 2008 Harbor Plan, showing the proximate relationship between
the DPA and the other marine areas along Derby Street. The North Commercial Waterfront consists of Salem
Wharf (just inside the DPA) and the Hawthorn Cove Marina (just outside the DPA); these two uses should prove
synergistic in generating visitor spending and activity.
74
http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2012/08/06/deal-sell-salem-power-plant-closes-new-gas-plant-and-developmentplanned/2QXaYxH8CEQ9pvciaNISuN/story.html
75
Salem DPCD Interview; also: City of Salem, A Site Assessment Study on Potential Land Use Options at the Salem Harbor Power Station
Site, January 2012.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
27
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Figure 17:
Technical Memorandum #2
Salem Harbor Plan Overview Map
Source: Salem Harbor Plan, 2008
The South Commercial Waterfront consists of the South River Basin, including Pickering Wharf on the seaward
side of the Congress Street Bridge and a 750 foot-long granite-faced inlet on the landward (downtown) side of the
Congress Street Bridge. The City has completed a Harborwalk along the west and south sides of the inlet, but its
long-term plans call for the watersheet to become a small boat destination. Among the recommendations are:
• provide additional floats along the both sides of the South River with capacity for at least 50 small boats with
a dinghy dock for local recreational boaters, visiting vessels at nearby moorings, or transient boaters in the
harbor;
• encourage uses to utilize Pickering Wharf near Central Wharf, such as transient boat docks for visiting
recreational boaters or berthing for excursion boats; and,
• add a floating performance barge on South River next to new park.
This program requires that the basin be dredged to 6.0 feet, and South River Entrance Channel, which runs
76
between Derby Wharf and Shetland Mills, dredged to 8.0 feet. The City has identified these dredging
improvements as a priority but no funding has been identified to date.
The North and South Commercial Waterfronts are barely a quarter of a mile apart on Derby Street. The long-term
opportunity is to redevelop the southern third of the Power Station in a way that introduces larger cruise, ferry,
and excursion vessels with their supportive commercial uses, while at the same time creating a destination in the
South Commercial Waterfront. These “bookends” would reinforce one another and strengthen Salem Harbor as a
water-based commercial location.
76
City of Salem, Salem Harbor Plan, 2008.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
28
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
2.5.2 Review of Port Activities
2.5.2.1
Cargo Transport
The Port of Salem’s only cargo throughput in 2011 was the receipt of coal and lignite at the Power Station. The
table lists the source of the receipt.
Table 14: Port of Salem: Single Commodity Throughput for 2011
Coal & Lignite
Total Throughput/Receipts (Short tons)
318,399
Percentage of Domestic Receipt Throughput
6%
Percentage of Foreign Receipt Throughput
94%
Source: Army Corps of Engineers Navigation Data Center
2.5.2.2
Passenger Transport
Ocean cruises. Salem Wharf can accommodate small ocean cruise vessels, but at this time, there is no regularly
scheduled cruise business.
Excursion cruises. Table 15 below lists charter and excursion vessels in Salem Harbor, most of which are based
at Pickering Wharf, the tourist-oriented venue on the South River. There is insufficient information at this time to
estimate the economic impacts of these services on the Salem area economy.
Table 15: Excursion Vessels in Salem Harbor
Vessel
Capt’s Charter Sailing – Dream Again
Mahi Mahi Cruises
Sailboat Independence
Schooner Fame
Services
Locations
Scenic cruises
Pickering Wharf
Specialty cruises
Pickering Wharf
Scenic cruises, overnight charters
Scenic cruises, charters
Pickering Wharf
Harbor tours
Public landing at Congress Street
Tight Lines II
Charter fishing
Pickering Wharf
Talisman
Charter Fishing
Pickering Wharf
Salem Water Taxi
Source: Salem Harbormaster, FXM Associates
Ferries. The Salem Fast Ferry provides passenger-only service from Salem Wharf to Long Wharf in downtown
Boston. The vessel is owned by the City of Salem and operated by Boston Harbor Cruises. The 92-foot long
vessel is able to accommodate 149 passengers. The Salem Ferry provides five round trips on weekdays with
additional runs on Fridays and weekends from Memorial Day to Halloween. The ferry served 70,393 passengers
in 2011 and approximately 45,000 in 2012.
Recreational Boating. In 2007, there were over 1,600 permitted recreational boats in Salem waters, and an
estimated 8,000 recreational boats at moorings or slips in the Salem Sound area of Beverly, Marblehead,
Danvers and Salem during the summer. The City of Salem has approximately 1,400 boat moorings in six mooring
fields, including at Winter Island (260 moorings), east of Derby Wharf (320 moorings), and Palmer Cove/Forest
River (230 moorings).
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
29
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
The study area includes several fixed marinas:
• Hawthorne Cove Marina, with over 100 boat slips and 135 offshore moorings and facilities to haul and launch
boats; this is the large marina located in the North Commercial Waterfront area adjacent to Salem Wharf;
• Pickering Wharf Marina, with slips for power and sailboats up to 55 feet in length, including both recreational
and excursion vessels; this facility also accommodates transient boats up to 120 feet long;
• a marina on the South River opposite Pickering Wharf, along the northern boundary of the Shetland Park
office complex;
• Palmer Cove Yacht Club, on the southern facing of Shetland Park.
2.5.2.3
Commercial Fishing and Seafood Processing
Salem’s commercial fishing industry is small, with only 19 federally permitted vessels listing Salem as their
principal port. The majority of these commercial fishermen are lobstermen. Most lobstermen keep their vessels on
moorings in the harbor during the fishing season, while in the off-season some dock at Pickering Wharf. The City
plans to develop a permanent mooring and storage area for lobster boats in Hawthorne Cove, the embayment
between Salem Wharf and the existing Hawthorne Cove Marina.
There are no seafood processors in Salem. Six entities have dealer permits. Three dealers have permits to be
“primary buyers”, which allow them to buy directly from fishermen, or, in the case of permitted fishermen, allow
them to act as their own dealers.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
30
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
Appendix A.
Inventory References
Boston

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Port Series No.4, 1994 Revision

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Port Series No. 4, 2005 Revision

MassGIS Oliver Online Mapping Tool

Massport, Port of Boston, 2012; Maritime Department Strategic Analysis, 2013

Massport, Cruiseport Boston 2013 Fact Sheet.
Fall River

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Port Series No.4, 1994 Revision

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Port Series No. 4, 2005 Revision

MassGIS Oliver Online Mapping Tool

City of Fall River online property assessment data (property cards)

Massachusetts Highway Department, Project Information - Brightman Street Project F02001

The Federal Register – The Daily Journal of the United States Government , Drawbridge Operation Regulations;
Taunton River, MA, U.S. Coast Guard, October 30, 2012

“Report of Channel Conditions - 400 Feet Wide or Greater (ER 1130-2-316), Fall River Harbor, MA,” U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, New England District, January 31, 2005.

“Fall River Harbor, Massachusetts and Rhode Island Condition Survey, 35-Foot Channels & Turning Basin, 30-Foot
Channels and 25-Foot Anchorage,” Drawing No. FR-282, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District,
January 2005.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Nautical Chart 13226, "Mount Hope Bay", Edition 7,
January 2011 (electronic version)

NOAA Nautical Chart 13227, "Fall River Harbor,” Edition 15, August 2011 (electronic version)

Charles M. Braga Jr. Memorial Bridge, Wikipedia

Veterans Memorial Bridge (Bristol County, Massachusetts), Wikipedia

“Massachusetts Coastal Infrastructure Inventory and Assessment Project Coastal Hazards Commission, South
Coastal – Fall River ,” Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation, prepared by Bourne Consulting
Engineering, July 2009
Gloucester

MassGIS Oliver Online Mapping Tool

City of Gloucester online property assessment data (property cards)

“City of Gloucester Harbor Plan & Designated Port Area Master Plan,” Community Development Department, City of
Gloucester, Massachusetts, approved December 11, 2009

Gloucester Harbor Economic Development Plan, March 2011

Jodrey State Pier Planning and Feasibility Study, Existing Conditions, Trends and Needs,” prepared by The Cecil
Group, Inc. with Fay, Spofford & Thorndike, LLC., June 2009

http://www.massdevelopment.com/real-estate-development/development-projects/jodrey-state-pier/

"Report of Channel Conditions -100 to 400 Feet Wide (ER 1130-2-520), Gloucester Harbor, Gloucester, MA," U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, 2009 with 2012 revisions.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
1
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2

Gloucester Harbor, Gloucester, Massachusetts Condition Survey 16, 18 and 20-Foot Channels, 15 and 16-Foot
Anchorages,” U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, January 4, 2012

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) nautical chart 13281, "GLOUCESTER HARBOR AND
ANNISQUAM RIVER," Edition 19, October 2010. (electronic versions)
New Bedford

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Port Series No.4, 1994 Revision

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Port Series No. 4, 2005 Revision

MassGIS Oliver Online Mapping Tool

City of New Bedford online property assessment data (property cards)

New Bedford/Fairhaven Municipal Harbor Plan, prepared by Fort Point Associates, Inc., Apex Companies, LLC.,
Urban Harbors Institute and FXM Associates, 2010.

"Report of Channel Conditions -100 to 400 Feet Wide (ER 1130-2-520), New Bedford Harbor, New Bedford and
Fairhaven, MA," U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, February 17, 2012.

“New Bedford Harbor, New Bedford and Fairhaven, MA Condition Survey, 10, 15, 25 and 30-Foot Channels, 25Foot Anchorages, and 30-Foot Maneuvering Area,” U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, Drawing
sheets V-101 through V-105, 2012.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) nautical chart 13229, Side b., Inset 6, "SOUTH COAST
OF CAPE COD AND BUZZARDS BAY," September 2010, Edition 31.

New Bedford Harbor Development Commission, Recreational Boating Plan, New Bedford Harbor, May
2010
Salem

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Port Series No.4, 1994 Revision

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Port Series No. 4, 2005 Revision

MassGIS Oliver Online Mapping Tool

City of Salem online property assessment data (property cards)

Salem Harbor Plan, prepared by Fort Point Associates, Inc., January 2008

Salem Wharf Project, Salem, MA, Preliminary Design, prepared by Bourne Consulting Engineering, November 2008

Salem Harbor Plan - The Harbor Today report, prepared by The Cecil Group Inc., 1998

A Site Assessment Study on Potential Land Use Options at the Salem Harbor Power Station Site (2012)

Boston Harbor Cruises website

Brewer Hawthorne Cove Marina website

Pickering Wharf Marina website

Shetland Park website

“Report of Channel Conditions -100 to 400 Feet Wide (ER 1130-2-316), Salem Harbor, Salem, MA," U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, New England District, April 11, 2007.

“Salem Harbor, Salem, Beverly and Marblehead, MA After Dredge Survey, 32-Foot Main Ship Channel, 10-Foot
South River Channel, 8-Foot Channel and Turning Basin,” Drawing sheets V-107 and V-108, U.S. Army Engineers
District, Corps of Engineers, 2007

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) nautical chart 13276, "Salem, Marblehead and Beverly
Harbors,” Edition 23, October 2011. (electronic version)

“Massachusetts Coastal Infrastructure Inventory and Assessment Project Coastal Hazards Commission, North
Shore North - Salem ,” Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation, prepared by Bourne Consulting
Engineering, July 2009

City of Salem, A Site Assessment Study on Potential Land Use Options at the Salem Harbor Power Station Site,
January 2012.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
2
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
Commercial Fishing Operations

HR&A Advisors, Inc. undated. New Bedford, Massachusetts: Market & Economic Analysis. Prepared for
MassDevelopment and the City of New Bedford.

HR&A Advisors, Inc. 2009. New Bedford Harbor Study: A Comprehensive Analysis of Growth Potential for Existing
and Potential Port Industries.

Massport. About Port of Boston. Online at: http://www.massport.com/port-ofboston/About%20Port%20of%20Boston/AboutPortofBoston.aspx).

Mt. Auburn Associates. 2011. Gloucester Harbor Economic Development Plan. Prepared for the City of Gloucester.

Mt. Auburn Associates. 2009. Sustaining Gloucester’s Commercial Fishing Industry: Opportunities and Challenges.

Office of Science and Technology, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA. Commercial Fisheries Statistics.
http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/commercial-fisheries/index.

Northeast Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA. 2012. 2011 Final Report on the
Performance of the Northeast Multispecies (Groundfish) Fishery (May 2011-April 2012)

Northeast Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA.
http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/read/socialsci/createReport.php?state=MA&county=BOSTON

National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Science and Technology, NOAA.
http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/commercial-fisheries/commercial-landings/other-specialized-programs/total-commercialfishery-landings-at-major-u-s-ports-summarized-by-year-and-ranked-by-dollar-value/index. Last accessed 6-4-14.
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
3
Ports of MA Strategic Plan
Technical Memorandum #2
Appendix B: Detailed Marine Infrastructure (separate pdf)
September 12, 2013 Revised Draft
4