Moving away the great cruise ships, Venice risks to per year lose 365 million euros and 6.800 places of job



Today the Harbour Authority of Venice has introduced three alternatives to the transit of the cruise ships through the channel of the Giudecca and the basin of San Marco and has emphasized the necessity to maintain to the terminal cruises to Marine, pain the risk of the loss of the great cruise ships that to Venice 365 million euros would per year cost and 6.800 places of job.

The harbour agency has rimarcato the economic impact of the crocieristico traffic to Venice that, second the data elaborated from House Foscari and the University of Padua, is worth (direct expense) 435 million euros, of which 365 million (about 90% of the total) coming from the ships of advanced tonnage to the 40,000 tons. "To renounce to this traffic - it has found the Harbour Authority - it would mean to lose: 5.4% of the GDP local (if it is considered that the GDP of the municipality of Venice can be estimated around 6,72 billion) and 6.800 places of job (on a total of 7.600 total units of the section equivalents to the 6,6% of the occupation total of the municipality of Venice that counts 103 thousand unit today)".

"He is therefore obvious - it has still emphasized the harbour authority - than features of an economic section with a remarkable impact on the territory and that it must be preserved also respecting the indications taxes from I decree sure Clini Passera "Broken" (2 March 2012). I decree (article 2 codicil b) - it has remembered the agency - prohibits the transit through the channel of the Giudecca and the basin of San Marco of the ships used after the transport of goods and advanced passengers to 40.000 tons of tonnage and beginning from applies to such prohibition the availability of practicable ways of navigation and alternatives to those prohibited (article 3)".

The Harbour Authority has explained that, beginning from these indications Harbour office and Magistrate to Waters, the agencies that of it have responsibility, have characterized some possible alternatives and the relative considerations for their feasibility. The harbour agency however has restated the necessity to allow the landing place of the cruise ships with the Terminal of Marine: the current positioning of the terminal - it has observed - "is to the base of the success of the Venetian port of call as "homeport" (port of arrival and departure) as it possesses four pre-requisitioning fundamental ones at the same time: nautical accessibility, fleeting accessibilities goods, accessibilities and efficient connection with the international airport Marco Polo".

One of the navigation ways characterized alternatives - it has specified the Harbour Authority - consists in the "realization of a ship canal to south of the Island of the Giudecca: the crocieristico traffic does not move away from the historical center - it has found the agency - but allows to maintain the terminal Marine and avoids any interference between fleeting traffics and goods". An other consists in the income "through the mouth of Malamocco using however a "insufficient resource": navigation through the Channel Malamocco Marghera currently used from the ships goods. The interference between traffics goods and passengers who would create themselves along the channel Malamocco Marghera - has evidenced the harbour agency - it would have implications important such to penalize the traffic considerably goods. The interferences are bearable or ovviabili with reasonable costs on the draft from Malamocco to Fusina. It is for that it has been time makes advanced the perspective hypothesis of a new marine station to Dogaletto, than but it only lacks acquisibili terrestrial accessibilities in the long period and with high environmental costs also. The hypothesis of a Marine station to Marghera, to north of Fusina - second the harbour agency - instead anticipates invalicabili limits: dimensions of the channels and the inadequate basins of evolution, commercial terminals already in use, and above all a esiziale interference between traffics goods and passengers for the traffic goods. The economic and social costs of such solution would have important dimensions: 10 million occupied tons and 2,000 in less, as well as long times of realization".

"It appears therefore obvious - it has concluded the Harbour Authority - than the maintenance of the Marine one remains the more rational choice and it win, is therefore necessary to characterize (in order to apply I decree) to a way alternative in order to reach it". The agency therefore has introduced the three characterized hypotheses: "the Channel Vittorio Emanuele III° where - to clearly of the connected prejudicial tie to the interference with the dangerous traffics - the necessity of an increase involves section channel from Fusina until the basin of evolution n. 1 (from the cost of about 600 million euros); the Channel of the Trezze Nord for which sussiste the same necessity of an increase section channel from Fusina until the basin of evolution n. 3 (from the cost of about 400 million euros); the Twisted Channel Sant'Angelo that deviates from the Channel Malamocco Marghera before the area of greater interference between the traffic fleeting and the traffic goods from the cost of 65 million euros". Besides these hypotheses the Harbour Authority has mentioned that introduced today from the president of Venice Confindustria, Luigi Brugnaro: the Channel of the Trezze South for which sussiste the same necessity of an increase section channel from Fusina until the basin of evolution n. 3.