The Haines Chamber of Commerce says that a financial plan for improvements to the Small Boat Harbor should be in place before construction starts. Under the Haines Borough’s current timeline, work on the expansion project would begin in the fall or next spring.
The comments of the business group were among 15 written ones on the project submitted during borough review of the 65 percent plan for construction.
Seven of the comments voice concerns about the size of a three-acre parking lot on the site, but others question future funding and whether the improvements will pay for themselves or create a financial burden.
“Before I can recommend support of this harbor project to our membership, I must have a better understanding of how we are going to pay for the full expansion including the infrastructure required to make the expanded harbor and the parking area usable,” chamber president Kyle Gray wrote the Haines Borough Assembly March 25.
“From everything that I am hearing from the federal and state governments, the likelihood of getting funding for this project from outside the community is slim,” Gray wrote.
The $21.1 million project for a 700-foot wave barrier, dredging, parking lot, and sewer outfall is an estimated $1.6 million over budget. The final project – including pilings and floats for 45-50 vessels, a “drive-down” float and a new boat launch – would cost an estimated $30 million.
The borough was awarded $19.5 million in state funds for the project which must be spent on completed construction by July 2017.
It was unclear this week how the comments might be incorporated in the plan. Asked if the assembly would respond to the comments before the project goes further, manager David Sosa said the comments were collected on behalf of the borough’s Ports and Harbors committee. “(They) were reviewed by the (harbor committee), so I would expect any reply to come from that body,” he said.
Ports and Harbors committee chair Norman Hughes said the written comments “won’t affect the 65 percent design but may affect landscaping… The footprint is cast.”
“I’d think the assembly would look at (the comments) and review them. I’m assuming they’d get a copy of them,” Hughes said.
Dick Somerville of PND Engineers told the assembly on March 24 that by the time he returns to Haines in late May with a 95 percent design, the plan would be all but final.
“We’re working on contract documents now. With each progression in design you get more locked in, no doubt. At 95 percent, (the assembly) would be looking at a document that would nearly be bid ready,” Somerville said.
The main purpose for the project is to expand the number of slips available for boaters, but critics of the project question where money for those will come from. To date, fishermen have cited the Haines Borough’s economic development fund as a possible source.
Cost of the project in light of the state’s economic downturn was cited by several citizens who wrote letters.
“It makes no sense to me to spend $19.5 million on a project that results in a partial job,” wrote Diane LaCourse. “Completion of the total project will require a lot more money. It is unlikely we will get another big pot of money from the state.”
She said fishermen should pay for long-term parking and a boatyard. “We will need some source of revenue to offset the additional operation and maintenance costs.”
Former borough Mayor Stephanie Scott said the harbor expansion is warranted but the shortfall in funding can’t be dismissed.
“Apparently, it is considered prudent to proceed without full funding in place. That being said, we might ask ourselves, ‘Proceed with which?’” Scott wrote. “The (borough’s Ports and Harbor committee) has settled on proceeding with the development of parking for slips that cannot be rented because the funds for floats are not in place.”
Scott said the project also should not diminish Lookout Park, saying the waterfront is used by residents who aren’t boat owners. “At some time, (boat owners) are most likely going to need the support from all of us to bond for the completion of the harbor. I think it would be prudent to show that the harbor expansion is a multi-perspective endeavor.”
Assemblyman George Campbell has been the most vocal critic of the project. He and former assembly member Debra Schnabel were dissenting votes when the assembly approved a preliminary design of the work in February 2014.
“If we get down to 95 percent and find out this is going to be a $60,000 (annual) expense above the existing harbor (costs), am I going to vote to saddle another $60,000 facility?” he asked at the March 24 meeting.
Other assembly members at the March 24 meeting said they agreed with Campbell’s request for a cost-benefit analysis of the improvements but were unwilling to slow the project schedule.
Member Diana Lapham likened the project to launching a new business, with initial outlays paid back over time.