[Saint John] Port Development

[bingun]

I know I've already posted a few links, but the video below from CPKC features the best drone shots of the Americold site. It gives a much better perspective on its scale and position relative to other port infrastructure.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/cpkcrail_...=ACoAAB60-LYBLJx341_6NGaWezg48llkr3M8m-Y

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

Here's a slighter further zoomed out still from that video... would be nice if it was uploaded in 1080p or 4k on YouTube.


full size (the video on FB was 1440P)

Amazing to see the AIM site cleaned up like that.




Talk about a much more productive use of this part of the port where Americold will be going. Now, just need to do something about AIM and that derelict pier.

[sailor734]

Does anyone know if the seaborne end of Americold's shipping is all traditional containerized or could RoRo play a part?

Could that derelict pier (I think it was slips 13/14 or 14/15 back in the day) become part of a Ro Ro facility?

[KnoxfordGuy]

Any plans for that overgrown pier sticking out into the harbour? Looks like it hasn't seen action in decades.

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

Originally Posted by KnoxfordGuy

Any plans for that overgrown pier sticking out into the harbour? Looks like it hasn't seen action in decades.

No such plans have been made public... yet.



Though it's nice to know the Prime Minister himself has seen the port and that decrepit pier with his own two eyes. I'd call that pier a shovel ready project of national interest if there ever was one. It's out of the way of the bulk of the port's operations at the moment, and now would be as good a time as ever to start the process of filling in and expanding that pier. It's certainly gotta help that the location in question is connected to the rail network, and accessible to barges to offload large amounts of fill. This thing has be a ruin for far too long.

I really hope Susan Holt has a bigger vision for Port Saint John expansion than simply fixing Simms Corner and enhancing the rail connections. The Prime Minister has specifically called for the premiers to be ambitious and think big with their projects of national interest. So I hope there's far more to the province's wish list than what we've heard so far.

When it comes down to it, though, it's not up to the Port to decides what type of expansion happens or not, it's up to the Minister of Transport and the Prime Minister. Hopefully it helps that Saint John has a member of the Prime Minister's cabinet for the first time since the 1980's... even if the West Side docks are not longer in Wayne's riding, most of the port's workforce are his constituents.

[bingun]

Originally Posted by KnoxfordGuy

Any plans for that overgrown pier sticking out into the harbour? Looks like it hasn't seen action in decades.

There would need to be a significant investment and engineering to remediate that pier for long-term use, and to my knowledge, it has never been publicly discussed. Probably more dredging too, I am not sure if they are doing any there currently. It's essentially shelter for the tug base at this point, and the tugs will be moving soon anyway.

I don't really see the point, to be honest, shipping has changed a lot, and piers and slips like that don't really serve a strong purpose, hence the huge changes at the container port to eliminate them.

It is an eyesore, but so is the old Lantic sugar site, and I'd rather that was rejuvenated first. Can Susan Holt give a nudge to the judiciary to have the AIM case fast-tracked so that space can be utilized fully?

[darkharbour]

Originally Posted by EnvisionSaintJohn

No such plans have been made public... yet.



Though it's nice to know the Prime Minister himself has seen the port and that decrepit pier with his own two eyes. I'd call that pier a shovel ready project of national interest if there ever was one. It's out of the way of the bulk of the port's operations at the moment, and now would be as good a time as ever to start the process of filling in and expanding that pier. It's certainly gotta help that the location in question is connected to the rail network, and accessible to barges to offload large amounts of fill. This thing has be a ruin for far too long.

I really hope Susan Holt has a bigger vision for Port Saint John expansion than simply fixing Simms Corner and enhancing the rail connections. The Prime Minister has specifically called for the premiers to be ambitious and think big with their projects of national interest. So I hope there's far more to the province's wish list than what we've heard so far.

When it comes down to it, though, it's not up to the Port to decides what type of expansion happens or not, it's up to the Minister of Transport and the Prime Minister. Hopefully it helps that Saint John has a member of the Prime Minister's cabinet for the first time since the 1980's... even if the West Side docks are not longer in Wayne's riding, most of the port's workforce are his constituents.

Not disagreeing, but those are not small projects. Simms Corner alone I have heard publicly will be at least $80 million, and if you add in a bunch of other rail improvements, we're into the hundreds of millions.

[sailor734]

But when you stop and think about it what does "fixing" Simms Corner actually accomplish? Sure you fix people getting stuck in traffic when trains go through but other than that???? Does it make getting containers to and from the port faster? easier? cheaper? Seems like it would fix a local traffic snarl but that is hardly Nation Building.

[bingun]

Originally Posted by sailor734

But when you stop and think about it what does "fixing" Simms Corner actually accomplish? Sure you fix people getting stuck in traffic when trains go through but other than that???? Does it make getting containers to and from the port faster? easier? cheaper? Seems like it would fix a local traffic snarl but that is hardly Nation Building.

I think the general idea is that a major redesign of Simms Corner would allow for significantly increased rail cargo out of the port. I am not an expert in rail, so I am not sure if this means longer trains, faster trains, or more trains. If that increase were to proceed without any redesign, the disruption would become untenable for both local residents and the mill, given its current upgrade. The intersection would become a non-stop standstill.

[sailor734]

Yes but that would be the city’s and province’s problem . AFAIK railroads have almost unlimited rights over using their ROW

[darkharbour]

Originally Posted by bingun

I think the general idea is that a major redesign of Simms Corner would allow for significantly increased rail cargo out of the port. I am not an expert in rail, so I am not sure if this means longer trains, faster trains, or more trains. If that increase were to proceed without any redesign, the disruption would become untenable for both local residents and the mill, given its current upgrade. The intersection would become a non-stop standstill.

Yeah it's a major bottleneck for not only the rail - this is the ONLY way rail gets out of the container terminal, for example - but also for the trucks that go to and from the JDI operations nearby amongst other businesses. So even if you don't care about the car/bus/bike/pedestrian traffic issues and are focused on industrial growth, it's going to be an issue as both the port and the mills nearby continue to expand. Not to mention it's a public safety risk, as it cuts off emergency responses if a train goes through, some of which will delay traffic for 15 minutes at a time (as stated by those in the industry) as the port expansion ramps up.

[thefishingnut]

"Eliminates periodic inconvenience to drivers" wasn't one of the criteria that came out of the First Ministers meeting for nation building projects. That being said, surely other important projects will continue or be approved, they just won't be managed like the nation building projects.

I'm not sure a development of the intersection at the same time a huge redevelopment at the mill is taking place would happen. I wouldn't be surprised if this one is punted down the road a bit.

I don't see the practicality of relocating or elevating the rail network.

So what would be the intent if removing the impact of rail traffic on the intersection be - raise all the road beds in some sort of an elevated ramp system?

[sjuser23]

Originally Posted by thefishingnut

"Eliminates periodic inconvenience to drivers" wasn't one of the criteria that came out of the First Ministers meeting for nation building projects. That being said, surely other important projects will continue or be approved, they just won't be managed like the nation building projects.

I'm not sure a development of the intersection at the same time a huge redevelopment at the mill is taking place would happen. I wouldn't be surprised if this one is punted down the road a bit.

I don't see the practicality of relocating or elevating the rail network.

So what would be the intent if removing the impact of rail traffic on the intersection be - raise all the road beds in some sort of an elevated ramp system?

The rail shipments currently are delayed or timed not to hit rush hour traffic. Also train size is limited to not create unacceptable delays on a Provincially Designated Highway. It’s route 100. The change would allow longer trains and the rail to operate on its own schedule.

If this doesn’t happen, picture this scenario, an ambulance, police or fire truck is on route to an emergency at Moosehead, flying down Chesley, over the Reversing Falls bridge just as a train begins its crossing. Do they wait 11 minutes watching the train or do they turn around, back over the bridge, back Chesley, find a route onto the bridge whose ramps aren’t shut down, over the Harbour Bridge to Cagherwood exit. Or up Lancaster and a bunch of streets to reach the Catherwood/Bleury street overpass? Do you want to be the one to make that choice?

[sailor734]

Originally Posted by thefishingnut

"Eliminates periodic inconvenience to drivers" wasn't one of the criteria that came out of the First Ministers meeting for nation building projects. That being said, surely other important projects will continue or be approved, they just won't be managed like the nation building projects.

I'm not sure a development of the intersection at the same time a huge redevelopment at the mill is taking place would happen. I wouldn't be surprised if this one is punted down the road a bit.

I don't see the practicality of relocating or elevating the rail network.

So what would be the intent if removing the impact of rail traffic on the intersection be - raise all the road beds in some sort of an elevated ramp system?

I was told by a pretty solid source that they are looking at a raised roundabout with the rail line under it.

[bingun]

Originally Posted by sailor734

Yes but that would be the city’s and province’s problem . AFAIK railroads have almost unlimited rights over using their ROW

Hence why the city and the province are scrambling to try and get support for changes before the situation comes to a head?

Simms Corner is probably the most expensive component, but if they also include some other improvements, perhaps changes to other crossings, the increased number of tracks out to Bayshore that the CEO mentioned, and something like signalling improvements, you've got a nicely packaged Saint John Rail Infastructure project to partner with the feds on.

Originally Posted by sjuser23

The rail shipments currently are delayed or timed not to hit rush hour traffic. Also train size is limited to not create unacceptable delays on a Provincially Designated Highway. It’s route 100. The change would allow longer trains and the rail to operate on its own schedule.

Exactly this. The port and rail companies are currently being strategic with their timing to avoid too much pushback and disruption. But if the port ramps up as planned to 1M TEU or other cargo like vehicles, no amount of strategic timing will help, and the intersection will be a nightmare. We can say that's too bad, but realistically, the other local businesses and citizens will start to get heated, and it will become a political issue.

It's also worth noting that the province is awaiting the completion of the Harbour Bridge project to refurbish the reversing falls bridge. Combining this disruption with improvements to Simms Corner makes perfect sense, and it will be disruption-free for the long term.

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

Originally Posted by darkharbour

Not disagreeing, but those are not small projects. Simms Corner alone I have heard publicly will be at least $80 million, and if you add in a bunch of other rail improvements, we're into the hundreds of millions.

I'm sure if we put a price tag on all the expansion projects that have gone into the port of Saint John since 1867, the price tag would be in the multiple billions when adjusted for inflation.

I think we should be trying to get the Prime Minister to put his money where his mouth is when it comes to Port Saint John, since he literally never shuts up about "building big", "building bold", and "building now". And good on him


As Sailor pointed out, and I'd tend to agree with his assessment here, Simms Corner is mainly a municipal/provincial traffic issue, and not so much an issue for the railways connected to the port, which have the right of way at Simms Corner. I'm not saying rail tunnels, overpasses, and other solutions to deal with those trains crossing Simms Corner shouldn't be looked at nationally important projects related to the port, they should be. I just think further port expansion should also be part of the overall project.

I think if Premier Holt wants to make a stronger argument for a national transportation corridor, and tie the Simms Corner re-design, and enhancing Port Saint John's operations into that, I think she should consider pushing for a bigger vision here... like connecting Port Saint John, Canada's fastest growing container port, to the Trans Canada Highway system. This connection would ultimately mean better connecting Port Saint John to Fredericton, the city where the premier is from. To me, that sounds more like a project of national interest than fixing a single problematic intersection.

Originally Posted by bingun

There would need to be a significant investment and engineering to remediate that pier for long-term use, and to my knowledge, it has never been publicly discussed. Probably more dredging too, I am not sure if they are doing any there currently. It's essentially shelter for the tug base at this point, and the tugs will be moving soon anyway.

I don't really see the point, to be honest, shipping has changed a lot, and piers and slips like that don't really serve a strong purpose, hence the huge changes at the container port to eliminate them.

It is an eyesore, but so is the old Lantic sugar site, and I'd rather that was rejuvenated first. Can Susan Holt give a nudge to the judiciary to have the AIM case fast-tracked so that space can be utilized fully?

According to the port's publicly available land use plan (which dates back to 2011) both of these sites in question are noted for future expansion. So I wouldn't say it needs to be a one or the other type situation. Moreover, the port's land use plan is likely in need of being updated very soon, as it was stated it was only supposed to last for 10-15 years.





Shipping has definitely changed a lot, and if the tugs are being moved, now seems like a good time to start thinking about how to remediate and expand that pier, and same thing with the sugar refinery site across the harbour.

There may not be much of a point to keeping the slip in tact at the West Side Docks, but there's definitely a point in dealing with that decrepit pier and expanding the port's footprint sooner rather than later... especially when the PM is talking a very big talk about investing in nation building projects.

According to the port's land use plan, it looks like their plan is to eventually fill in the slip. Across the harbour, they seem to indicate a desire to expand to the south of the sugar refinery site. Though, the city's future land use plans for the sugar refinery site and lower cove seem to be in conflict with the port's land use plans.


The city's future land use plans

Perhaps something like where the slip is filled in and the port expands to the south of the sugar refinery site could be ideal:



Engage in land reclamation projects at the West Side Docks and to the south of the Sugar Refinery site for the port. Then basically do a land swap with the city for the sugar refinery site in exchange for port owned land on Charlotte Street and the Lower cover loop for future mixed use developments.

There's still the Lorneville piece too, but in terms of the inner harbour, a little bit more expansion could go a long way in terms of giving the port the room it needs to grow. A deepwater port at Lorneville is certainly a tantalizing proposition, too, but I'm not sure it could really be called a shovel ready project.

[sailor734]

https://tj.news/new-brunswick/new-brunsw...y-not-qualify-as-nation-building-leblanc

Not the best news for Holt's #1 priority proposal.

I wonder if Don Dominic would have a different opinion if we were talking about the Port of Shediac?

[bingun]

Originally Posted by sailor734

https://tj.news/new-brunswick/new-brunsw...y-not-qualify-as-nation-building-leblanc

Not the best news for Holt's #1 priority proposal.

I wonder if Don Dominic would have a different opinion if we were talking about the Port of Shediac?

Projects that meet the nation-building standard are also measured against five key benchmarks to determine if they will:

• Strengthen Canada’s autonomy, resilience and security,
• Provide national economic or other benefits,
• Have a high likelihood of being successful,
• Advance the interests of Indigenous Peoples,
• Contribute to Canada’s objectives with respect to climate change.

Premier Holt had put the expansion of the province’s ports in Saint John and Belledune at the top of a list of nation-building projects she submitted to Ottawa.

Speaking with Brunswick News, LeBlanc questioned whether that would make the federal list.

“Now does that reach the national interest threshold? You’d have to see,” he said.

“But in the platform, we also committed $5 billion for a new trade corridors fund which might very well be able to partner for things like the Port of Saint John and Belledune.”

LeBlanc added: “If those projects are submitted, maybe they don’t reach the threshold of national interest, but during the election campaign we committed to a trade corridors fund.”

The New Brunswick MP reiterated that what makes projects “interesting” to the country are those that band together multiple jurisdictions.

Whether it comes from the 'Nation Building Project Fund' or the 'New Trade Corridors Fund', I think it matters not to Port Saint John as long as it happens. The end of the quote, talking about multiple jurisdictions, is valid, and I think that is going to get the majority of the focus in order for Carney to sell this country-wide. Does the average person outside of New Brunswick or the Maritimes even have any basic knowledge of the Port of Saint John?

[Ottawa]

Originally Posted by Ottawa

From 18:25 to 19:05 she says of the "Saint John Trade Corridor" project, which I assume includes the Simms Corner redesign, "those are ready to move, and I think could be moving before the end of this calendar year".

"Ready to move" in my book means design is complete, funding is arranged, and the project is shovel ready. We'll know by Dec. 31st if she was successful.

https://youtu.be/iTFi9VY2CvU?si=TnaR84yK367LgJQw&t=1105

Susan Holt refers to the Simms Corner redesign as pert of the "Saint John Trade Corridor Project". I am assuming the energy distribution project is the "national interest" project.

She is applying for money through what she refers to as the "Major Project Office". That office is set up to look after prioritized projects of different types.

Her comment regarding both Simms Corner and the energy project was that "those are ready to move, and I think could be moving before the end of this calendar year".

That means the design/s is/are complete, and waiting for partners to get onboard.

Simms Corner has been in need of redesign for multiple decades. That was not due so much to trains as it was to car/pedestrian traffic. Now it includes trains and the port and how their prosperity affects the frustration factor and safety for everyone that goes through there. If that gets delayed any further, it will only make the eventual transition that much harder to endure. If trains are being delayed to go through at certain times, everything further down the line is also delayed. That could mean that a shipment could be delayed 24 hours because of a delay going through that intersection. That reduces the reputation and efficiency of the port and the rail system when it could be made significantly more reliable. The money spent there will pay itself back in efficiency gains.

Seeing as how this has been prioritized, and Simms Corner is what I consider "critical" infrastructure locally, but also significant nationally, I am looking forward to shovels in the ground before 2026. That is also Susan Holt's expectation.

[EnvisionSaintJohn]

Originally Posted by bingun

Whether it comes from the 'Nation Building Project Fund' or the 'New Trade Corridors Fund', I think it matters not to Port Saint John as long as it happens. The end of the quote, talking about multiple jurisdictions, is valid, and I think that is going to get the majority of the focus in order for Carney to sell this country-wide. Does the average person outside of New Brunswick or the Maritimes even have any basic knowledge of the Port of Saint John?

There’s definitely a lot of people west of New Brunswick that think Saint John and St. John’s are the same place… but I think the proposal for energy east terminating in Saint John help put Saint John and the port on the map for many Canadians.