|
Post by BreannaF on Feb 28, 2008 21:36:02 GMT -8
Somebody tell me if I'm missing something here: - We obviously need to build new ferries for the PT-Keystone route.
- We are covered for this year, but need to get a ferry built in a hurry so that the route is covered in Summer of 2009.
- The reason we are even considering building a "Steilacoom-Class" ferry immediately is that it can be online by next summer (a year plus from now).
- We know that the Steilacoom-Class ferry is not suitable for this route, and in fact, once a new replacement ferry is built the following year, this now one-year-old will be of little use on any WSF run.
- If we get to work right away on an "Island Home-class" ferry, it would not be ready until Summer of 2010. However, this would represent a ferry that would actually be useful to WSF on this route and others for many years into the future.
My conclusion from all of this is that we are paying $20 million or so for a boat that will really have one truly useful year of life, then will be used by WSF in the future as they use the Hiyu now. That would be as the ferry that is really too small for most uses but is used when "better than nothing" is needed. If that's what we need, then the Hiyu has done a good job of that for us. So, how much of that $20 million are we really spending on essentially one year of ferry service on this route? Sure, we are "out of options" due to past bad decisions by management. I'm just wondering what the cooler, non-political heads can think up. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PS (slightly off topic) I will be retiring the signature pic I've been using the last few weeks. While I was sure that the SS (Sailing Ship) Windsurfer would meet the expectations of the citizens of Port Townsend by being both of a limited capacity and able to navigate Keystone Harbor, it has been pointed out to me that it is a passenger-only ferry and not a car ferry. I will withdraw my suggestion.
|
|
|
Post by In Washington on Feb 29, 2008 7:06:40 GMT -8
Poor WSF management... There has been some. Now let's get the legislators in Olympia to stand up and shoulder some of the blame for not creating sustainable funding (Ms. Haugen) since MVET disappeared. Reading some of Ms. Haugen's comments makes my gag reflex work overtime. As a Transportation Commission leader she should be taken to task for not supporting WSF for almost 7 years. I may be the only one who thinks this but it looks like Olympia thought WSF was kidding when they said they would run out of money for vessel repairs and maintenance if no funding was provided as a replacement. No replacement money came and here is what we have. Show us the money Mary! There are and have been hard working people at all levels of WSF who saw this coming and worked to bandaid the problem. WSF like BCFerries has dedicated and intelligent employees who get little credit for their incredible positive daily efforts and great criticism when things go awry. WSF has a remarkable safety record and that is thanks to the men and women who are the operations backbone of the fleet. From deckands and traffic attendants up to several of the manager level staff, some of whom were deckhands and traffic attendants themselves. Ms. Haugen would have us think that WSF employees are overpaid and treats us like, to quote Sid Morrison's (previous DOT head before Doug MacDonald)secretary: "her drunk Uncle Jack". Building even one Steilacoom design is one too many. Island Home sounds to be the right boat and it is supported by people who know ferries and not politicians who now are jerking their knees like they are having convulsions. Stepping off of my soapbox now... P.S. I try to sign on under my username but have never received an activation code. I am trying to be a team player!
|
|
|
Post by BreannaF on Feb 29, 2008 8:31:26 GMT -8
Actually, I don't disagree with most everything you said. I think I need to explain myself, just in case.
First, while I generalized a lot by referring to "WSF management", please understand that in the above sense, I was really referring to the few people/executives who are sitting in the "big offices on the top floor", many of which could have made better decisions or could have made their needs better known to our legislators. I agree there are managers out there doing a great job working with what they have.
Second, I think our legislators are WAY too political, but that is pretty obvious. I believe that they are more the problem than anyone at WSF, but it is difficult to pin them down on anything -- they can always just claim that they didn't understand the issue. It simply amazes me that we can elect someone as a "leader" and then they will fail to actually lead. Not only that, these perfectly sane people will lose all common sense about how our infrastructure actually requires sufficient maintenance to keep going. No, they cannot make everyone happy. Deal with it! Sure, I want low taxes as much as the next guy. But I would rather they come up with a reasonable plan that will keep our roads and bridges and ferries from crumbling away to dust.
Finally, I have said this before, but it bears repeating. The vast majority of the crew working on these vessels are doing a wonderful job at keeping them running, given what they are given to work with.
I just hope the right people make some right decisions before it's too late.
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Feb 29, 2008 9:39:46 GMT -8
P.S. I try to sign on under my username but have never received an activation code. I am trying to be a team player! Did you check your junk e-mail/spam folder? The e-mail with the activation link may have ended up there instead of the inbox. If your e-mail is set up to immediately delete all mail marked as junk/spam, you may want to change that at least temporarily. What username did you sign up as and when did you sign up?
|
|
|
Post by In Washington on Feb 29, 2008 9:47:01 GMT -8
InWashington, all one word. I signed up a long time ago. Not sure exactly. I asked for an activation code again yesterday but haven't seen it. Maybe I only get one chance and I missed it? I'll keep trying or just mouth off as a guest Thanks for any help you can provide.
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on Feb 29, 2008 10:19:55 GMT -8
Somebody tell me if I'm missing something here: - We obviously need to build new ferries for the PT-Keystone route.
- We are covered for this year, but need to get a ferry built in a hurry so that the route is covered in Summer of 2009.
- The reason we are even considering building a "Steilacoom-Class" ferry immediately is that it can be online by next summer (a year plus from now).
- We know that the Steilacoom-Class ferry is not suitable for this route, and in fact, once a new replacement ferry is built the following year, this now one-year-old will be of little use on any WSF run.
- If we get to work right away on an "Island Home-class" ferry, it would not be ready until Summer of 2010. However, this would represent a ferry that would actually be useful to WSF on this route and others for many years into the future.
My conclusion from all of this is that we are paying $20 million or so for a boat that will really have one truly useful year of life, then will be used by WSF in the future as they use the Hiyu now. That would be as the ferry that is really too small for most uses but is used when "better than nothing" is needed. If that's what we need, then the Hiyu has done a good job of that for us. So, how much of that $20 million are we really spending on essentially one year of ferry service on this route? Sure, we are "out of options" due to past bad decisions by management. I'm just wondering what the cooler, non-political heads can think up. The Steilacoom-style "boat we are building is a great candidate for the Port Defiance-to-Tahlequah run," said State Transportation Secretary Paula Hammond. "Are we building a boat we'll never use? No. We're building a boat we'll use there or as a back-up."While I agree that the boat is of limited use, I don't think it'll be one year of use then nothing...as Paula Hammond said in the quote from the Herald above. Think of how useful it would have been to have a spare Steilacoom II hanging around for use at Point Defiance in the last couple weeks...there would have been no need for the Evergreen State to fill in there, freeing her up to keep three boat service at Vashon when it was needed...One extra boat over the last few weeks would have made a heck of a difference. And with WSF's new policy of "60 year boats" the Rhody is past pull date now. After the newer/bigger boats come along and it proves that WSF's Steilacoom II isn't needed, it could be sold--either to Pierce County or some other county agency. (In an ideal world, I realize.) It's just a pity that this had to happen around the same time that the Hood Canal Bridge is going to be closed. Were it not for that fact I think as a resident of Port Townsend I'd be pushing to just hang on a little longer and build three Island Home style boats and skip the Steilacoom II completely. Meanwhile, it seems not everyone is happy about WSF having the Steilacoom II: Wednesday's debate also included an attempt by Sen. Mike Carrell, R-Lakewood, to return to Pierce County the Steilacoom II car ferry under lease to the state for use on Keystone-Port Townsend route.
"This ferry I believe is going to be ruined by what's going on up north," he said. "We want our ferry back."
His amendment failed. heraldnet.com/article/20080228/NEWS01/615140707
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Feb 29, 2008 10:34:54 GMT -8
InWashington, all one word. I signed up a long time ago. Not sure exactly. I asked for an activation code again yesterday but haven't seen it. Maybe I only get one chance and I missed it? I'll keep trying or just mouth off as a guest Thanks for any help you can provide. You signed up on 02/21/2007 based on the profile for that username. I've notified the staff to see if they can help.
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on Feb 29, 2008 12:18:37 GMT -8
InWashington, all one word. I signed up a long time ago. Not sure exactly. I asked for an activation code again yesterday but haven't seen it. Maybe I only get one chance and I missed it? I'll keep trying or just mouth off as a guest Thanks for any help you can provide. In Washington, Could you please send an e-mail with your e-mail address to fobc.groupmail@gmail.com. Thanks, Scott
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Mar 5, 2008 20:13:11 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by BreannaF on Mar 19, 2008 22:28:54 GMT -8
Apparently a decision has been made on which ferries to build: seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004292330_webferry19m.htmlState swaps design on Keystone-Port Townsend ferriesBy Susan Gilmore Seattle Times staff reporter The state will open bids on March 27 for a new 50-car ferry that will operate on the Keystone-Port Townsend ferry route. The bids were to be opened Thursday, but ferry officials said bids would be delayed for a week after the state changed its mind about what ferries would be built. Initially the state planned to build three new 50-car ferries, using a design crafted by Elliott Bay Design and used to build two Pierce County ferries, the Steilacoom I and II. One has been loaned to the state for the Port Townsend run until a new boat is completed next year. But instead of building three of the 50-car boats, as the state originally planned, it will build one of those and two of the so-called Island Home design. Those double-ended ferries are used in New England and serve Martha's Vineyard. The Island Home is also by Elliott Bay Design. Hadley Greene, a ferry spokeswoman, said the Island Home is larger than the Pierce County boats, holding from 60 to 80 cars and 1,200 passengers, and Port Townsend residents and legislators were lobbying for a bigger boat. Further, she said, the Island Home boats are more stable and more similar to the Steel Electric ferries that were pulled from service in November. In December, Gov. Christine Gregoire Gov. Christine Gregoire proposed spending $100 million to replace the four aging Steel-Electric Class ferries with three new boats. The governor said $64 million would come from $350 million set aside for construction of other boats, and $36 million would be from money appropriated for the Mukilteo ferry terminal. The design and construction of the boats will be on an expedited schedule, and Gregoire said she hopes the first boat could be built in 14 months. The contract for the new boat is open to any Washington shipyard. Supporters of the Island Home said that boat will be more suitable to handle the rough waters in the Keystone-Port Townsend crossing. The contract for the first boat will be awarded in early April. Plans call for the second and third boats to be completed in 2010.
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on Mar 24, 2008 16:07:05 GMT -8
Another story on the two Island Home style ferries to be built:
‘Island Home’ gets new home
By Nathan Whalen
Mar 22 2008
The community wants them. Legislators want them. And now the ferry system will get them.
Washington State Ferries is moving forward with the design of two “Island Home” ferries that will serve the Port Townsend to Keystone route in two years. Those two ferries would be in addition to the smaller one the ferry system is planning to build immediately. The smaller ferry would be modeled after the Steilacoom II, which is currently serving the route.
The Island Home ferry, which was designed in Seattle and currently operates in Massachusetts, would hold between 60 and 80 cars and approximately 1,200 passengers. It provides a larger vessel that legislators and community leaders say would be a better fit to the ferry route.
“I think that’s an excellent choice,” Coupeville Mayor Nancy Conard said.
She is also a member of Port Townsend/Keystone Partnership Group. She sees the smaller ferry as more of a stop-gap solution to vehicle ferry service and the Island Home as a better long-term solution.
The mayors of both Coupeville and Port Townsend sent a letter to local legislators and the governor asking that legislation concerning ferries for Keystone include the larger ferries.
The Island Home idea came out of a vessel planning study the ferry system was developing when the antiquated Steel Electric vessels were pulled from service in November 2007 for safety reasons. The purpose of the study was to find a suitable replacement for the 80-year-old ferries.
Legislators asked the ferry system to send some staff familiar with the Port Townsend/ Keystone route to Massachusetts last month to evaluate the Island Home. They seemed impressed with the vessel’s performance.
The ferry system is currently accepting bids for one ferry based on the design of the Steilacoom II, which holds 50 cars and 300 passengers.
Documents originally stated that the ferry system would build between one and three of the smaller vessels, however, that language changed once the Legislature’s direction became clear, said Hadley Greene, spokesperson for Washington State Ferries.
The Legislature is providing $84.5 million for construction of one 50-car ferry and two 60- to 80-car ferries.
Early estimates show the smaller ferry will cost approximately $20 million.
Greene said work is underway to modify the designs of the Island Home into a version that will better fit the Port Townsend/Keystone route. The first Island Home vessel is scheduled to be ready for service by June 2010 and the second ready by December 2010.
The public will have a chance to learn about the latest plans for the Port Townsend/Keystone route by attending a Ferry Partnership meeting scheduled Thursday, March 27, 3 p.m. in Camp Casey’s Auditorium B.
During that meeting, David Moseley, assistant secretary for the Department of Transportation’s ferries division, is scheduled to announce the low bidder for the first replacement ferry.
The meeting will also touch upon plans to mitigate the reduction in service that will take place this summer because only one vessel is able to make the run across Admiralty Inlet. Two ferries used to serve the route during the busy tourist season.
The ferry system is set to increase the number of sailings beginning the week before Memorial Day and continuing until the week after Labor Day.
In addition, each town will receive money to advertise the ferry service changes that motorists will have to endure.
Conard also said that there will be a presentation about the possibility of adding a reservation system at Keystone so riders will have a way of guaranteeing a spot on the ferry.
Following the Partnership meeting, a Ferry Advisory Committee public hearing is scheduled to take place in the same building.
|
|
|
Post by BreannaF on Mar 27, 2008 16:29:46 GMT -8
From the Port Townsend News Leader, 26 March 2008. Yup, the summer season is coming up. One bit of information that stretches my mind here: " Under state law, commercial traffic gets priority over passenger vehicles on all ferries." While I am not opposed to that concept, it DOES mean that we are deciding on commercial traffic over a larger relative number of passenger cars than we were before. So.... trucks and commuters, the people who depend on the route long term, will have space. Tourists, methinks are going ot get the short end of this. BUT, tourists have other options for getting there. Of course, civic leaders in PT will have to complain about something, no matter where the priorities are put...... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- www.ptleader.com/main.asp?SectionID=36&SubSectionID=55&ArticleID=20441&TM=38664.52By summer, reserve your spot on PT-Keystone ferryBy Barney Burke It's not even tourist season yet, but the Port Townsend-Keystone ferry route is already experiencing sellouts. To mitigate that problem, Washington State Ferries is this week announcing a reservation system for all vehicles on the PT-Keystone route. The program is not expected to be in operation until June, and many of the details are still being worked out, but the plan is as follows: • Up to half of the ferry's capacity can be reserved in advance. • There is no reservation fee. • There is no penalty if you don't show up to claim your reserved time. • Reservations are based on existing fare classifications; e.g., most passenger vehicles fall in the "less than 20 feet" class. • Reservations are optional except for commercial trucks, SUVs, RVs and other vehicles with a gross weight of more than 6,000 pounds. "It's not 'the Lexus lane,'" Mayor Michelle Sandoval told the City Council on Monday night, anticipating that some locals might have, well, reservations about the interim system. Last year, some locals opposed plans for a pilot reservation system because WSF had proposed charging $10 per reservation, which might have priced some commuters out of their Friday night drives home. Once the system is implemented, reservations can be made by calling 888-808-7977 or by going to www.wsdot.wa.gov/ferries. Businesses such as hotels and restaurants will be encouraged to learn the online reservation system so they can make reservations for tourists unfamiliar with the system. With reservations, the hope is that tourists might spend more time enjoying their visit instead of having to stay in their vehicles. The Legislature provided $200,000 to modify existing WSF software to make reservations possible on the PT-Kingston route. The Sidney, B.C., ferry is the only other WSF route with reservations. It's unclear whether the reservation system will continue after the summer season, said Hadley Greene, WSF's communications manager. But even with reservations, having just one 50-car ferry instead of two carrying 59 or 63 cars each is expected to cause more sellouts despite longer operating hours. The city is buying a new modular building to replace the Visitor Information Center on Sims Way. This summer, the visitor center then relocates to the Haines Place Park-and-Ride. The current visitor center location becomes a remote ferry parking area. Summer schedule The revised summer schedule has 12 daily round trips, compared to the normal 10 round trips in winter and 15 in the summer. But, the U.S. Coast Guard limited the number of heavy vehicles that can be loaded on Steilacoom II. No more than four semi-trucks and four other vehicles in excess of 6,000 pounds can be carried at one time. In turn, the number of passenger vehicles allowed on the same run might be as few as 22 at 3,200 pounds each. Under state law, commercial traffic gets priority over passenger vehicles on all ferries. Thursday meetings David Moseley, recently appointed assistant secretary of transportation, is planning to attend two ferry meetings on Whidbey Island this Thursday, March 27. Moseley is expected to announce the results of bidding to build one Steilacoom-based ferry for the PT-Keystone route. Those bids are being opened Thursday morning. It is expected to cost around $20 million and be delivered by Mother's Day 2009, said Greene. Legislation signed March 25 by Gov. Chris Gregoire authorizes construction of two more ferries for the route, based on Massachusetts' Island Home, which holds 76 cars. Those two ferries are expected to cost about $30 million each and be delivered in July and December 2010. At Thursday's ferry partnership group meeting from 3 to 5 p.m., Moseley will discuss the bids, the reservation system, and mitigations for reduced service. At the ferry advisory committee meeting from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m., Moseley will discuss ferry funding passed by the Legislature last year as well as studies on service levels and forecasting requested by the Legislature. City optimistic Although the city officials did not get everything they asked for, "We did get the right vessel decision," said City Manager David Timmons. On Monday, Timmons outlined a group of capital projects - from the Upper Sims Way improvements to new sidewalks on San Juan Avenue and downtown - that he thinks should be a priority while the city endures three years of curtailed ferry service. Congress might be looking to fund such projects as an economic stimulus, he said. Regarding replacement of the eastern span of the Hood Canal Bridge for an estimated six weeks in May and June 2009, Timmons said that state officials might fund a Port Townsend-Edmonds car ferry after all. "They've assured us they're going to move it forward," he said, provided a vessel is available. Meanwhile, the council agreed, the city would be wise to partner with everyone - from other local governments to the Chamber of Commerce and Fort Worden State Park - in marketing the town to visitors. "We're pretty much on our own on a number of fronts," he said.
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Mar 31, 2008 17:05:59 GMT -8
TIME TO START A FIRE!! ;D With the Steilacoom II proposal coming in way over bid, isn't it time to cancel it and bring back a Steel Electric or two? It seems stupid to build a ferry that WSF doesn't want or need. Then energy and effort could focus on planning and building the Island Home class vessels.
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Mar 31, 2008 18:45:39 GMT -8
Just build the Island Home boats and run the Rhody til she hits good old eighty years. The exchange rate is looking good so might want to lock in a deal with the Canadians.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Mar 31, 2008 20:09:25 GMT -8
TIME TO START A FIRE!! ;D With the Steilacoom II proposal coming in way over bid, isn't it time to cancel it and bring back a Steel Electric or two? It seems stupid to build a ferry that WSF doesn't want or need. Then energy and effort could focus on planning and building the Island Home class vessels. I'll say it again. I'll use a larger font if I have to repeat myself about this any more. There are other routes in the Washington State Ferry System besides Port Townsend-Keystone. Point Defiance-Tahlequah, for example, with a rather elderly little tub-toy of a ferry that needs replacing.
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on Mar 31, 2008 20:27:27 GMT -8
TIME TO START A FIRE!! ;D With the Steilacoom II proposal coming in way over bid, isn't it time to cancel it and bring back a Steel Electric or two? It seems stupid to build a ferry that WSF doesn't want or need. Then energy and effort could focus on planning and building the Island Home class vessels. And AGAIN: Traci Brewer-Rogstad, deputy director of WSF, said it would cost $20 million to replace a hull on just one Steel Electric, and take six to eight months. Moreover, Brewer-Rogstad noted, the U.S. Coast Guard has advised that doing so would constitute a "new vessel" that would no longer be grandfathered in terms of the minimum number of watertight compartments and other specifications.Meaning you couldn't use it on the Port Townsend-Keystone route anyway.
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Apr 1, 2008 10:26:54 GMT -8
Actually the idea of bringing back a Steel Electric vessel is now actually being considered by WSF management, according to the WHIDBEY EXAMINER. The article described the Steel Electrics as being "mothballed" rather than officially retired.
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Apr 1, 2008 11:36:51 GMT -8
WSF may consider bringing Steel Electric ferry back to Keystone routewww.whidbeyexaminer.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=1203Agency forced to rethink vessel construction plans after bid to build new ferry comes in $9 million over budgetBy Kasia Pierzga Examiner Staff Writer News that the only bid to build a new ferry for the Keystone-Port Townsend route came in $9 million over budget has Washington State Ferries officials scrambling to figure out what to do next. At the Keystone-Port Townsend Partnership meeting held at Coupeville March 27, Washington State Ferries chief David Moseley did not rule out the idea of repairing a mothballed Steel Electric ferry and putting it back into service rather than building a copy of the Steilacoom II, the rented car ferry currently used on the route. "We're going to review all of our options," he said at the meeting. Todd Pacific Shipyards of Seattle was the only firm to bid on building the boat. Freeland-based Nichols Brothers, which has been dealing with a bankruptcy crisis over the past few months, had indicated it would bid to do some of the work as part of a consortium of shipyards, but in the end the company did not submit a proposal. WSF officials had estimated that building a copy of the Steilacoom II would cost $16.8 million, but the Todd bid came in at 25.6 million. State Legislators had opted to build the smaller car ferry because it could be built quickly - just in time to replace the Steilacoom II when it is returned to Pierce County. Construction of the 50-car ferry is expected to take about 12 months. If the project remains on schedule, the new ferry would begin service in May 2009. However, with the bid coming in higher than expected, WSF officials will have to re-evaluate the bid specifications and decide if they need to revise them, which will delay the start of the project. At the partnership group meeting, a number of local residents in the audience urged Moseley not to waste tax dollars building a ferry that's too small for the route and can't handle the rough weather of Admiralty Inlet. Penn Cove Shellfish owner Ian Jefferds said he thinks building the small ferry is a waste of money, and WSF should just scrap that idea and move ahead with plans to build the two larger ferries based on the Island Home design. "That certainly makes a lot more sense than building a white elephant that we can't use here," he said. Jefferds suggested WSF look at renting a boat from the British Columbia ferry system in Canada while the new, larger ferries are under construction. WSF officials said they have considered the idea, but federal law prohibits foreign vessels from being used as ferries in the United States. It would take an act of Congress to change that law, they said. Port Townsend Mayor Michelle Sandoval said she's worried that years of unreliable service on the Keystone route will destroy the local tourism industry. "The more times that people get turned away (from being allowed to board the ferries), they won't come back," she said.
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Apr 1, 2008 11:48:32 GMT -8
According to this article, putting the steel-electrics back into service isn't an option... DOT is expected to reject Todd Shipyards' bid to build new 50-car ferryseattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004319780_webtodd01m.htmlBy Susan Gilmore Seattle Times staff reporter The state Department of Transportation is expected to reject a bid by Todd Pacific Shipyards to build a new 50-car ferry to serve Port Townsend and Keystone. That decision could be made today or Wednesday. "We think we won't accept the bid. It's not a good price. The price isn't reasonable," said DOT Secretary Paula Hammond, adding that the state may rebid the contract. Todd was the only bidder last week to build what the state is calling a Steilacoom III, a boat modeled after a Pierce County ferry, Steilacoom II, that has been leased to the state for the Port Townsend-Keystone route. Todd bid nearly $26 million to build the ferry, while Washington State Ferries had estimated the cost would be between $13 million and $17 million. Hammond said she doesn't understand what went into the state's estimate or why the Todd bid came out so high, but Steve Welch, head of the shipyard, said one reason is the requirement that the boat be built in a year or the shipyard could face a $6,000-a-day fine. David Moseley, head of the state ferry system, told a gathering of ferry riders Monday night in Bremerton that Pierce County has agreed to extend the loan of its boat until October 2009, which might give the state more breathing room in getting a new ferry built. However, a spokesman for Pierce County Executive John Ladenburg said the county has only agreed to extend the lease until August 2009. The state has asked for another two months, but no decision has been made. Hammond pointed out that the Pierce County boat, nearly identical to the one the state wants to build, was built by Nichols Brothers Boat Builders from Whidbey Island in 2005 for $12 million. "The bid has doubled. We're not sure why," Hammond said. Welch asserts that Nichols Brothers underbid that boat and later went bankrupt. Hammond said the state has been scouring the nation looking to buy or borrow ferries, but has been unsuccessful. One issue raised in Bremerton is whether the state requirement that the boat be built by a Washington shipyard makes sense with only one bid for the new ferry. Hammond said she was shocked that there was only one bidder, and up until the day the bids were opened fully expected to have at least two bidders. "We thought a little competition would be healthy. It's not a good climate when you only get one bidder," she said. "We don't know if this speaks badly for boats built in Washington. We want boats built here and maintained here. I'd hate to see us build up an industry in another state, but we have to look very carefully at that." In a letter to Moseley, Welch listed several changes that need to be made to the Pierce County ferry design to meet the state requirements, and said that's one reason the bid was so high. "The compressed schedule has made the procurement of key, long lead-time equipment such as the propeller and shafting very risky," he wrote. "While each individual change may seem inconsequential, the sum of these changes has resulted in a vessel procurement that is not the Pierce County ferry." Welch also wrote, "should the state be amendable to revised contract terms, I am confident we could quickly agree on ways to more efficiently design and build this important vessel." Hammond said what the state won't do is refurbish the 80-year-old Steel Electric Class boats that she pulled out of service in November. "The benefit's not there," she said. "It would require too much hull repair."The state originally planned to build three boats like the Steilacoom II, but now said it will build just one of those boats and two of the Island Home design, a boat that operates in New England. The state will look at how quickly those boats could be built. The Legislature this year appropriated $84.5 million to build three new boats to replace the Steel Electric Class vessels. Susan Gilmore: 206-464-2054 or sgilmore@seattletimes.com Copyright © 2008 The Seattle Times Company
|
|
|
Post by BreannaF on Apr 1, 2008 12:11:39 GMT -8
Actually the idea of bringing back a Steel Electric vessel is now actually being considered by WSF management, according to the WHIDBEY EXAMINER. The article described the Steel Electrics as being "mothballed" rather than officially retired. Yeah, it says that. But I'm pretty sure that the only reason that he is saying that the use of a Steel-Electric is still under consideration is to quiet the folks who insist on pursuing that unwise option, giving leaders time to figure out what they are really going to do. If we need to, we can call the return of the S-E's "possible", but truly incredibly unlikely. When they come up with their final solution, then they can say that the new option is better than rebuilding an S-E ( of course it will be), and retire them. Stuff like that happens in politics all the time. Besides, a "mothballed" ferry still might qualify for that old tax credit issue that is causing them problems, while a "retired" ferry could be more problematic in that regard.
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on Apr 1, 2008 14:27:41 GMT -8
Actually the idea of bringing back a Steel Electric vessel is now actually being considered by WSF management, according to the WHIDBEY EXAMINER. The article described the Steel Electrics as being "mothballed" rather than officially retired. Not according to the head of the DOT: Reviving rusted 80-year-old ferries not an option, Hammond saysBy Scott North and Jerry Cornfield Herald Writers OLYMPIA — State ferry officials are scrambling for options after a bid for a new 50-car ferry came in $9 million higher than anticipated. They are studying if it is possible to negotiate down the new boat’s cost, possibly through change orders. They are weighing whether to reject the bid and instead pursue building two to three larger ferries of the Island Home design. One option that won’t be pursued is spending more money trying to repair one or more of the state’s Steel Electric ferries, which were retired in November over questions about cracks, leaks and corrosion in their 81-year-old hulls, state Transportation Secretary Paula Hammond said Tuesday. “We’ve done that cost-benefit. We know that it is not a good solution,” Hammond said. “As far as I’m concerned, I don’t think that is an option and I don’t think anybody else does either.” The notion that the Steel Electrics could be recalled from retirement surfaced last week at a meeting in Coupeville attended by David Moseley, the state’s new deputy transportation secretary for ferries. Moseley reportedly told the group that he wanted to study all options, and did not expressly rule out bringing back a Steel Electric. That news didn’t sit well with some state lawmakers. Rep. Judy Clibborn, D-Mercer Island, chairwoman of the House Transportation Committee, said she would oppose spending money to fix up and use a Steel Electric. “That’s an absolute no,” she said Monday. The state budget contains $85 million for new smaller ferries and no money for Steel Electric repairs. Pulling the Steel Electrics forced the state to temporarily shut down ferry service between Keystone on Whidbey Island and Port Townsend on the Olympic Peninsula. That’s because the Steel Electrics were the only ferries in the state fleet that were small and agile enough to negotiate narrow Keystone Harbor while at the same time permitted by the Coast Guard to transit challenging Admiralty Inlet. The state restored ferry service between Keystone and Port Townsend after Pierce County agreed to lease the ferry system it’s Steilacoom II ferry. Although the Steilacoom II has operated on the run to mixed reviews, the state had sought bids for construction of a 50-car ferry of the same design, believing the vessel could be built swiftly. Todd Pacific Shipyards of Seattle entered the lone bid on the boat at a price of $25,985,125. Ferries engineers had estimated the cost of constructing the new craft to be $16.8 million. Todd Chief Executive Stephen Welch last week explained in a letter to ferries officials that the additional cost was the result of physical changes requested by the state, including adding a double bottom to fuel tanks, crew quarters, complying with newer safety and construction standards and paying higher costs of materials and labor. Hammond said she expects to announce this week what to do about the bid. One option is to move up bidding on larger, more robust Island Home-class ferries that could carry more cars and people than the Steilacoom II, she said. Ferry officials believe it could be possible to have an Island Home vessel on the route by early 2009, she said. Meantime, state officials are again scouring the nation, looking for other ferries that may be pressed into service to help carry traffic while new boats are being built. A search last summer turned up no suitable vessels, but Hammond said taking a second look makes sense now. Pierce County officials have made it clear that the state ferry system can only use the Steilacoom II for about a year, she said. “They are sensitive to their need to use their own boat,” Hammond said. “They paid for it.”
|
|
FNS
Voyager
The Empire Builder train of yesteryear in HO scale
Posts: 4,948
|
Post by FNS on Apr 3, 2008 12:34:40 GMT -8
WSDOT to re-bid contract for 50-car ferries
Date: April 3, 2008
Contact: Joy Goldenberg, WSDOT Ferries Division Communications Manager
SEATTLE – The Ferries Division of the Washington State Department of Transportation announced today that it is rejecting a $26 million bid from Todd Pacific Shipyards to build a 50-car ferry. At the March 27 bid opening Todd was the sole project bidder. Its bid was higher than the WSDOT engineer’s estimate of $16.8 million.
After reviewing the bid to understand discrepancies between the two amounts, WSDOT determined that it was too high and decided not to award a contract. One source of a portion of higher costs is state specifications for the vessels have been strengthened since Nichols Brothers constructed the Pierce County-style vessel three years ago. The changes to the specifications include improved safety, security, and quality.
“The tab to taxpayers is too high. We will find solutions to bring down the construction costs,” said Ferries Division Assistant Secretary David Moseley.
The WSDOT engineers plan to talk with representatives of local shipyards about how the bid can be better defined before advertising again for the contract. Changes could include providing incentives to shipyards for completing the vessel ahead of schedule without jeopardizing ferry safety and extending construction time if it would result in cost savings.
“Over the next several days we will incorporate lessons learned from this process into a new bid package,” Moseley said. “We are still moving forward to build the new vessel as quickly as possible, and I’m optimistic a new bid will result in cost savings over the last bid.”
The WSDOT expects to re-bid the 50-car ferry contract in the next few weeks and award a contract by mid-May.
|
|
|
Post by DENelson83 on Apr 3, 2008 14:50:02 GMT -8
Just build the Island Home boats and run the Rhody til she hits good old eighty years. The exchange rate is looking good so might want to lock in a deal with the Canadians. As in get a Canadian shipyard to build new WSF vessels? Jones Act! Jones Act! Should get a MARAD waiver first.
|
|
FNS
Voyager
The Empire Builder train of yesteryear in HO scale
Posts: 4,948
|
Post by FNS on Apr 3, 2008 15:51:18 GMT -8
Or, get FSG to build this and carry her on the top of the CC as she makes her way to North America! ;D
WSF would be celebrating a completed ferry done in record time!! ;D ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2008 19:58:46 GMT -8
|
|