The staff plan is strongly opposed by almost all the business, environment and community leadership in town, as well as the San Pedro Chamber of Commerce, and the Coastal and Central neighborhood councils.

These groups want an upgraded, modern cruise terminal adjacent to downtown; a promenade from bridge to breakwater; a rebuilt and slightly expanded Ports O’ Call with a conference center; shared parking structures (not built along the waterfront) that would serve downtown and POC visitors; as well as transit, bike and red car links that tie all these things together.

The final decision will be made by the Board of Harbor Commissioners sometime between now and mid-March. Port Executive Director Geraldine Knatz has urged the public to let the commissioners know what they want along our waterfront. The CSPNC also asks constituents to make their views known by emailing the harbor commissioners at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it Bob Henry is the executive officer to the commissioners.

The Coastal San Pedro Neighborhood Council (CSPNC) has long opposed building a cruise ship terminal at Kaiser Point, where it will dominate Cabrillo Beach and interfere with recreational boating in the Outer Harbor, including access to the West Channel passage to the Cabrillo Marinas.

The Port plan for a cruise terminal near Cabrillo Beach would require more than 600 bus trips daily to transport passengers to and from cruise passenger parking areas near the Vincent Thomas bridge, as well as hundreds of trips daily by support vehicles and trucks.

The Chamber of Commerce also opposes the idea, believing that building a cruise terminal and berths near the beach will draw tourists away from downtown, harming existing businesses there and at Ports O’ Call. The Port plan also calls for a massive expansion of POC, which the chamber feels is not sustainable and will hinder downtown’s renaissance.
Business, community and environmental leaders are also critical of the port plan because it puts long-term cruise terminal parking along the waterfront and does not provide transit or a red-car link between the waterfront, POC and downtown. The Port’s plan is based on an economic analysis of the cruise industry conducted in 2006, a study now out of touch with current economic developments.

Supporters of the Port plan maintain that without a cruise terminal and berths at Kaiser Point the cruise industry will leave San Pedro, in part because larger cruise ships cannot turn around under the bridge and find it unsafe to back down the channel.
But existing ships regularly back down the Main Channel without tugs. Larger cruise ships coming to the Port beginning in February will, as with current ships, navigate the channel without tugs. Even Director Knatz has testified before the commission that backing down the channel is, at worst, an inconvenience, and that some of the cruise lines prefer the current berthing near downtown to the proposed terminal near Cabrillo Beach.

The plans for the port favored by the chamber and the neighborhood councils include the Sustainable Waterfront Plan and enhanced versions of Alternative Four, which was included in the environmental impact statement written by the Port. Though they have different names, the Sustainable Waterfront Plan and “Alternative Four with enhancements” are virtually the same.

In particular, the sustainable plan is built around four key components in the belief that each component should enhance and sustain the others, and that the combination creates a world-class attraction. The four components are a revived downtown San Pedro, a modern cruise ship terminal near downtown, an enhanced Ports O’ Call, and the vision to reserve the area south of 22nd street for recreation, museums, boating, education, biking, scientific research, and compatible low-key commercial development.

Advocates of the Sustainable Plan point to the state Tidelands Act, which says waterfront should be dedicated not just to industrial and shipping uses, but also to recreation, habitat preservation, swimming and boating.

The plan’s supporters, including CSPNC, argue that the area south of 22nd Street is unique and that the harbor commissioners’ duty is to think of the needs of future generations, not short-term economic gain for one industry. The area south of 22nd Street can be a magnet to draw people to our town, and it will fill a desperate need for recreational space in Los Angeles County. The right thing to do is preserve this land for use by the millions of people who live within an hours drive of San Pedro; not dedicate it to the cruise ship industry and to those who can afford thousands of dollars for a cruise ship holiday.

Peter M. Warren is a member of the Coastal San Pedro Neighborhood Council, Chair of its Port and Environment Committee, and serves as its representative to the Port Community Advisory Committee.