Comment EI-20655
Received or sent (printed as 11/20/2014)
Port Canaveral rail. I understand this study is to address Environmental concerns. Mine is what will happen with the infrastructure when this venture fails and is abandoned in place. Summery. There must be a reclamation plan and funding identified to remove the 11 miles of track, and removing any causeway or trestle structures built to accommodate the project and restore the area to its original condition. The new rail will also be on a raised bed which will create a damming effect in an area prone to flooding. That must be addressed as well. I have not seen or heard of an economic analysis or a business plan that shows this venture can compete with Miami or Ft. Lauderdale to the South or Jacksonville, Savannah or Charleston to the North. These ports have container operation and most have multiple staging tracks and vacant land for storing containers. Port Canaveral has no such available property. Tampa Bay on the West coast of Florida is already a industrial port area that will not have an environmental impact like Port Canaveral. On the Southern end of Tampa Bay is Port Manatee that specializes in refrigerated products and produce and sand. Port Manatee has a rail head in place and does not need to build 11 miles of new track in environmentally sensitive lands. It's location in the State has the same advantages as Port Canaveral but with existing rail.
Submitted by: John Ells · Merritt Island, Fl
The Board publishes this comment in its environmental-comment table for this proceeding. It is quoted here as printed; nothing is inferred from it, and it states the commenter's own position in their own words, not this record's.
Permanent address docketyard.org/d/FD-35852/comment/EI-20655 · back to the docket sheet