Post on 11-Jan-2016
description
transcript
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