terminal operational sustainability - passenger- only ferry routes and systems

Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E.Art Anderson Associates

POF System Sustainability is EverythingSuccess of Mass Transit Systems is primarily driven by

human factors – for POFs, ferry terminals are a major factor

Economics of Mass Transit Systems in general and Passenger Only Ferry Systems specifically must rival those for the automobile – currently this an Apples to Oranges Comparison

Flexible terminals can mitigate many human factors and improve the life cycle cost of the POF system.

Baylink Ferry—San Francisco Bay Area

Vallejo Ferry TerminalM/V Intintoli

The Water-Linked TODTriple Bottom LineHuman/Social Factors

Modal Pre-Disposition (competing mode factor)Quality of Service (Level of Service Measure)

Economic FactorsOverall system cost (normalized to = $/Passenger-Mile)System permanence (degree of system subsidy normalized

to equal 100% - acceptable fare box recovery rate)Environmental Factors.

System Sustainable Use Factor (Renewability %)

Level of Service (LOS) ConceptsFixed Route transit systems use a six level measurement

system graded A – FLOS metrics should:

Represent the passenger point of viewBe easily quantifiable in terms of LOSUse measures already in use by other agencies

Transit systems are optimally designed to meet LOS C or D

Baylink Ferry – SF Bay AreaLOS Calculations

LOS Category Score WeightWeighted

Score Comments

Modal Pre-Disposition C 8 24 Ferry faster than rush hour in car

Service Frequency D 2 4 Less than 40 minutes during rush hour

Hours of Service D 1 2 Daytime service

Service Coverage C 1 3 Good intermodal connectivity on both ends

Passenger Load C 2 6 Rarely exceeds 300 pax/boat

On-Time Performance C 2 6

Indexed LOS <C 2.8125

Economic FactorsOverall System Operation Cost

Baylink Ferry System, San Francisco Bay AreaCapital Costs - Present Worth (PW) Annual Depreciation Costs (at 3%)

Year Built First Cost

Service Life Extension (SLE) Cost

Service Life Extension Date

SLE Added (Years)

Initial Life Cycle (Years)

Remaining Life Cycle (Years)

PW - Annual Straight line Depreciation

Boats (300 Pax) M/V Vallejo 1991 4,000,000 1,000,000 2001 10 20 11 195,716 M/V Mare Island 1997 8,000,000 0 20 7 587,413 M/V Initintoli 1997 8,000,000 0 20 7 587,413 M/V Solano 2004 11,000,000 0 20 14 656,729Vallejo Terminal 1990 4,000,000 0 30 10 240,815Ferry Maint Facility 2007 16,000,000 0 30 27 582,788San Fran Terminal (Shared) 2001 4,000,000 0 30 21 86,985 Total Annual Capital Cost 2,937,859

Annual Operations & Maintenance CostsPresent Annual Cost

Boats 6,800,000 Facilities 1,750,000

Total Annual Cost 11,487,859

Ridership Statistics

Per Trip Routes/wk

Avg Miles per trip

Annual Ridership Capacity

Annual Passenger-miles

Cost per Passenger-ride

System Cost/Passenger-Mile

Ridership Capacity (current schedule - one way trips) 300 177 27 2,761,200 74,552,400 $4.16 $0.15Half-Capacity 150 177 27 1,380,600 37,276,200 $8.32 $0.31Actual Ridership 177 27 650,000 17,550,000 $17.67 $0.65

Economic FactorsOverall System Operation CostOut-of-pocket cost to operate an automobile ~

$0.50/passenger-mile (single occupancy)Above cost does not include all infrastructure costs (only

those funded with gas taxes)Total System Operating Cost for Baylink example

($0.65/passenger-mile) compares well with single occupancy automobile, especially if infrastructure costs are added

Water-Linked TOD ModelHercules, California

Hercules Waterfront

Hercules TerminalSan Francisco Bay Area Prototype Terminal

WTA Ferry Terminal—Option 1

WTA Terminal Concept Design

POF Float ComponentsFloatPier-to-Float GangwayGangway Landing

PlatformFloat RampsLoading PlatformTransfer Gangway

Transfer Gangway Operation

Loading Platform and Transfer Gangway in “Up” Stowed Position

Transfer Gangway Moved Laterally to Match up with Boat Door Spacing

Transfer Gangway Operation

Loading Platform Lowered to Match up with Boat Freeboard

Transfer Gangway Deployed – Note: Goal is to Moor Boat & Deploy Transfer Gangway in 30 Seconds

Vallejo Ferry Maintenance Facility – Service Barge - Notch

South San Francisco – Prototype Transfer Gangway – Geometric Analysis

South San Francisco – Prototype Transfer Gangway – ADA Compliant Design

Trinidad & Tobago – NIDCO Water Taxi Terminal Upgrades

Existing Pontoon System – San Fernando Existing Terminal _ San Fernando

NIDCO Water Taxi Terminal Upgrades – San Fernando Terminal Fabrication Drawings

NIDCO Water Taxi Terminal Upgrades – San Fernando Maintenance Area Fab Drawings

ConclusionsADA compliant, flexible POF terminals can be

implemented using permanent, semi-permanent, fixed movable platforms or through the use of hydraulic/manually movable components

Sustainability and long-term success of a POF system are interdependent and are both enhanced by the economic advantages and the improved human-factors related performance resulting from flexible terminal design

Understanding and de-conflicting maintenance activities and Work Flow significantly improves life cycle costs and system sustainability