The following is a copy of an article published on Transit Tomorrow on September 20, 2026. The full article can be found here
For the founder of the Bacalia Group, the problem goes beyond dock security. The next generation of marina infrastructure needs to be built with energy continuity, recovery capabilities, and safe operations in mind.
Before being operational, a marina may need repairs. Rebuilding a dock provides a solution to one question; reestablishing the people, services, and trust that make it valuable provides an answer to another.
Giuseppe Cicatelli, Executive Chairman of Grand Caribbean Marinas and Founder and Principal of Bacalia Group, believes that his experiences during Hurricanes Irma and María serve as a springboard for a more comprehensive conversation about the future of coastal infrastructure. Reconstruction, energy disruption, business interruption, insurance coverage, and contingency planning should all be discussed together rather than in various files opened at different phases of a disaster.
How to replace what a hurricane damages is not the only forward-looking question. It is how to lessen the likelihood that the same operational problems will occur in the future.
Grand Caribbean Marinas reinforces its strong position in becoming a consolidator of marinas and plans to become a multi-state operator in the United States, over the medium term.
The Disturbance Is Not Limited to the Storm
A single property cannot plan in isolation, as seen by the magnitude of Puerto Rico’s 2017 devastation. Irma and María rendered the island’s electrical grid unusable, and it took almost 11 months to restore power to all consumers whose buildings were judged safe for reconnection, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office.
The contrast between fixing a facility and rehabilitating its surrounding systems is crucial for a marina operator. What happens if a dock is operational before power, communications, transportation access, or critical suppliers are reliable should be considered in a recovery plan.
According to Cicatelli’s published account of investing in Puerto Rico, the effort involves more than just money; it also involves hiring and training local personnel and navigating post-hurricane permitting. Relationships and operational participation are positioned beside the initial investment choice.
When it comes to hurricane recovery, that viewpoint proposes a different definition of preparedness, one that goes beyond simply having a contractor on hand to include an awareness of the interdependencies between actual repairs and a running business.
Not Forecasting the Next Hurricane, but Preparing for a Changing Climate
The climate argument demands accuracy. As the climate warms, NOAA predicts rising tropical-cyclone rainfall rates and average intensity. However, forecasts for the overall number of storms are less definite and do not support the straightforward premise that there will be more hurricanes worldwide.
Another factor is sea level rise, which can exacerbate coastal flooding even in the absence of a change in the intensity of a specific storm.
These results do not necessitate treating Irma or María as evidence that either catastrophe was caused by climate change. They lend credence to a more pragmatic conclusion: infrastructure that is anticipated to function for many years should be evaluated in light of future circumstances as well as the circumstances surrounding its initial construction.
Making judgments on exposure, maintenance, engineering, and recovery capacity is the challenge facing marina owners. It is not a viable business strategy to accurately predict the next storm. It involves getting ready for a variety of harmful situations.
The Operating Plan Should Include Insurance
One of the most obvious links between physical risk and business continuity is insurance. Operators are advised by BoatUS’s marina hurricane guide to thoroughly examine their policies, paying special attention to what is and is not covered by business-interruption insurance, and to record facilities and equipment both before and after a storm.
Before filing a claim, an operator should have a helpful conversation with a broker about which assets and causes of loss are covered, whose exclusions or deductibles apply, and how the policy handles an interruption in operations. Restoration times, paperwork requirements, and if any utility-related interruption protection is applicable under the actual wording should all be examined in the same assessment.
These are inquiries to confirm, not advantages to presume. A marina should not base its recovery plan on the assumption that it would be compensated for each loss, upgrade, or closure period.
The implications for management are just as significant. The order of repairs, coverage, and liquidity availability must all be taken into account. Insurance can assist in funding rehabilitation, but it cannot take the place of the choices needed to complete it.
Before Communications Break Down, a Backup Plan Needs to be Effective
Staged storm plans, defined vessel-owner roles, designated teams, advance contractor arrangements, and frequent practice are all advised by BoatUS. It also highlights the necessity for employees to prepare their own homes and the significance of adhering to evacuation regulations.
When considering contingency planning as an operational discipline as opposed to a document, that is a helpful standard. Who has the authority to order a shutdown? When is the deadline for finishing vessel preparation? If the office and its regular communications are shut down, what information is still available?
Making decisions while there is still time to act safely is the first step in reducing effect. Property protection must be subordinated to staff protection, and when conditions worsen, work must be clearly limited.
The plan should also outline the initial safe actions to take following the incident, such as inspecting staff, limiting dangerous places, documenting damage, getting qualified inspections, and informing customers of what they can and cannot use. Reopening ought to be a planned process rather than a single statement.
Having a Generator Is Not the Only Aspect of Energy Resiliency
Essential functions should be the starting point for the power question. Which services must continue to run, which can run at a reduced capacity, and which should be closed until they are safe and inspected?
Operators can then compare backup solutions to real loads, operational time, fuel availability, maintenance, and equipment exposure. Installing panels alone should not be seen as assurance of continuity; instead, a proposed solar-plus-storage system should be evaluated to see if it is properly designed and approved to run safely during a grid outage.
The same attention should be paid to communications and operating records. Before the next emergency, a plan that relies on a single connection, technology, or individual may require an alternative.
Maintaining all services during a hurricane is not the goal. Its goals are to safeguard individuals, support necessary operations when practical and safe, and lessen the fragility of the path back to operation.
Rebuild the Entire System, Not Just the Damaged Part
Because the old architecture is familiar, reconstruction provides a challenging tension: swiftly restore service while avoiding repeating vulnerabilities.
BoatUS’s guidelines, which list elevation, potential storm surge, dock and piling arrangement, and storage structures as elements in a marina’s storm readiness, demonstrate why site-specific evaluation is important.
Together with utilities, access, and the circumstances anticipated during the asset’s service life, a forward-looking engineering evaluation should look at how these components interact. If the facility may be rendered inoperable by another weak point, stronger individual components do not constitute a comprehensive plan.
Depending on the location, the study may take into account safeguarding electrical equipment, changing piling or anchoring configurations, enhancing drainage, or simplifying the isolation and repair of damaged areas. These are not a general specification or a guaranty of hurricane-proof infrastructure; rather, they represent possibilities for qualified assessment.
Additionally, operators must distinguish between financing an improvement and restoring an insured asset. In order to prevent a last-minute decision between speed and resilience, engineers, insurers, lenders, and permitting authorities should be included in this discussion early on.
Measure Recovery Rather Than Merely Reconstruction
The necessity of treating resilience as an ongoing management obligation is the most significant link between Cicatelli’s hurricane experience and the marina industry’s future. It should have an impact on engineering choices made after the storm, operational choices made during the disruption, and investment choices made prior to the storm.
A more helpful assessment would inquire about the speed at which employees can be accounted for, whether important documents are still available, when vital services can safely resume, and which dependencies still keep clients and nearby companies from coming back.
The goal is not to operate continuously at all costs. It offers a safer, more reliable recovery with less avoidable harm and delays.
Therefore, the next investment choice for the marina industry involves more than just what a facility can endure. It concerns what can be restored by the company, in what sequence, and with what ability to deal with the event that follows