A Strategy to Improve Public Transit with an Environmentally Friendly Ferry System

Final Implementation & Operations Plan July 2003

San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority Dear Governor Davis and Members of the California Legislature:

After two years of work, the San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Finally, as the Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) Authority (WTA) is delivering an Implementation and Operations details, this system is environmentally responsible. Plan. It is a viable strategy to improve Bay Area public transit with an environmentally friendly ferry system. It is a well- From beginning to end, this plan is built on solid, conservative thought-out plan calling for a sensible transportation investment. technical data and financial assumptions. If the State of California It shows how the existing and new individual ferry routes can adopts this plan and it is funded, we can begin making expanded form a well-integrated water-transit system that provides good water transit a reality. connections to other transit. The current economy makes it tough to find funds for new When you enacted Senate Bill 428 in October 1999, the WTA programs, even those as worthy as expanded Bay Area water was formed and empowered to create a plan for new and expanded transit. The Authority understands the economic challenges it water transit services and related ground transportation faces and is already working hard to overcome that hurdle. terminal access services. It was further mandated that the Today, the Authority’s future is unclear, pending your consideration. Authority must study ridership demand, cost-effectiveness But the prospects for expanded Bay Area water transit — and and expanded water transit’s environmental impact. From that the benefits it can bring to the region — are clear. mandate, we determined that the Authority’s mission is to build We are grateful to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, and operate a cost-effective, convenient and environmentally the U.S. Coast Guard, local and county elected officials throughout responsible ferry system that will enhance commuter choices the Bay Area and concerned citizens, like the members of Bluewater and the Bay Area’s public-transit system. This plan accomplishes Network and other environmental organizations, who helped that mission. us create this plan. We also appreciate the countless hours our We are committed to building the cleanest water-transit system advisory groups spent with us during the past two years, in the world. In three years, we can have ferries in service that reviewing technical studies and system-planning strategies are ten times cleaner than today’s fleet. Meanwhile, our proposed to ensure that this plan is well-thought-out. research-and-development program will be developing true zero- We also thank the San Francisco Bay Conservation and emissions ferries so we can deploy them as quickly as possible. Development Commission (BCDC), the regulatory agencies, the People will leave their cars and ride this system. Our ridership existing ferry operators and the other transit agencies that study used state-of-the-art private sector market research that provided enormous help to our staff and technical consultants will guide us in building a large, loyal patron base of commuters and who are committed to doing whatever they can to help and recreation travelers. improve Bay Area transportation.

This proposed system is cost-effective and compares favorably This Implementation and Operations Plan presents the first steps with other Bay Area transbay transit. This system is also safe. to improve Bay Area public transit with an environmentally Statistics show that people riding Bay Area ferries are riding the friendly ferry system. We look forward to working with you and region’s safest form of public transit. We will make it even safer. taking the next steps to make this plan a reality. Furthermore, expanded water transit adds enormous resources Sincerely, for emergency planners should an earthquake or other disaster strike the Bay Area.

Charlene Haught Johnson President, San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority QUOTED…

“The State of California made a “The WTA's plan for developing “We are working to transform the huge investment in studying how clean technologies for the next former Alameda Naval Base into ferries can give Bay Area fleet of ferries is visionary. The a flourishing new regional hub commuters and recreational standard has been set high for for housing, employment and visitors more transit options. improving air quality and recreation. Ferry service will be The opportunity to build a water preserving the health of the Bay. very important to the multi-modal transit system for the region’s Environmentally friendly ferries transit approach we are planning future is exciting. I’m pleased by reflect the values of North Bay to meet public transit needs. all the hard work, top expertise residents.” Alameda Point is a great example and public participation that has of the concept being promoted by — Cynthia Murray gone into the WTA’s plan.” the WTA to enhance ferry ridership Supervisor Marin County by putting residents, workers and — Don Perata visitors within close distance of California State Senator Oakland ferry terminals.”

— Doug Yount Deputy City Manager Alameda “For California to meet its long-term air quality goals, it is critical to move beyond traditional technologies to zero- and near-zero emissions technologies. Clearly putting a transit system in operation that demonstrates state-of-the-art emission control technology and the development of zero-emissions ferries will help achieve our air quality goals and be a model for other regions to follow.” — California Air Resources Board

“We now have over 7,000 people “Ferry transportation provides “Integrating various modes of working in the biotech industry in an environmentally friendly transportation builds momentum South San Francisco and we have commuting alternative to the toward a society no longer reliant greater employment to the tune of congested roadways in many of on automobiles. Using bicycles 30,000-40,000 new jobs in the city. our nation’s metropolitan areas. as a way to connect to ferries We look forward to adding ferries Ferries also play a critical role in supports a clean, healthy commute to the many transit options our city the evacuation of citizens during environment.” offers its businesses and residents.” emergencies, as demonstrated in — Leah Shahum New York City in September 2001. — Pedro Gonzalez Executive Director The Maritime Administration Mayor San Francisco Bicycle Coalition; South San Francisco actively supports the expansion Director of this water mode to promote Golden Gate Bridge Highway mobility and reduce congestion and Transportation District for our citizens.”

— Margaret D. Blum U.S. Department of Transportation Maritime Administration TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 THE DEMAND ...... 06 1.01 Why must San Francisco Bay Area water-transit service be expanded? 06

2 THE ROUTES ...... 12 2.01 What is the route selection process? 12 2.02 What is the existing system? 18 2.03 What is the proposed new system? 20 2.04 What is the safety plan? 23

3 THE CONNECTIONS ...... 26 3.01 How does the San Francisco Bay Area water-transit 26 system fit into the overall transit system?

4 THE TERMINALS ...... 32

5 THE BOATS ...... 36

6 THE DISASTER RESPONSE PLAN ...... 42 6.01 What is the disaster response plan? 42

7 THE BAY ...... 46 7.01 What are the environmental impacts? 46

8 THE RIDERS ...... 50 8.01 Who will ride water transit? 50

9 THE FINANCES ...... 54 9.01 How much will it cost? 54 9.02 How will it be funded? 57 9.03 Is it a good investment? 57

10 THE AUTHORITY ...... 58 10.01 How will the WTA operate the San Francisco Bay Area water-transit system? 58 10.02 How will the WTA be structured? 58

11 THE FUTURE ...... 62 11.01 What are the next steps? 62

THE DATA (APPENDIX) ...... 64 This plan shows how expanded Bay Area water transit that is affordable, reliable, convenient, flexible and clean will get drivers out of their cars and onto environmentally responsible state-of-the-art passenger ferries.

THE DEMAND drivers out of their cars and onto What is the existing system? environmentally responsible state-of-the- Why must San Francisco Bay Area art passenger ferries. • Oakland-Alameda-San Francisco EXECUTIVE SUMMARY water-transit service be expanded? • Harbor Bay-San Francisco •Vallejo-San Francisco Growth projections show 1.2 million new THE ROUTES • Sausalito-San Francisco Bay Area jobs in the next 25 years and New water-transit service will operate • Larkspur-San Francisco a 1.4 million population increase. only where environmental impact is •Tiburon-San Francisco (privately run) controlled and limited, and where localities During the next 25 years, there will are committed both financially and be a 30 percent increase in region-wide What is the proposed new system? politically to expanding and supporting travel and a 40 percent increase in ferry service. • Expansion of existing routes transbay travel. The proposed new routes are good New Routes Bay Area residents rank traffic among transportation investments comparable • Berkeley-San Francisco-Mission Bay their top concerns — seven out of ten to other transit modes. • Richmond-San Francisco say they are willing to pay higher bridge •Treasure Island-San Francisco tolls if the money is used for congestion- Federal accident data shows that Bay • Antioch/Pittsburgh-Martinez-San Francisco relief projects. Area water transit is the region’s safest public transit. • Hercules/Rodeo-San Francisco Water transit is an environmentally • South San Francisco-San Francisco responsible and economically affordable Expanded recreational service is also •Redwood City-San Francisco public-policy choice. Water transit’s being planned, to provide transit access •Port Sonoma-San Francisco (further study) operating costs per seat and subsidy per to many of the Bay Area’s treasured passenger are comparable to Bay Area resources, particularly on weekends when Other Routes for Future Study rail and bus services. bridge-corridor traffic congestion is • East Bay-Peninsula becoming an increasing problem. • Hunters Point Water transit is affordable and rapidly • Moffett Field deployable. Unlike rail, it can be launched In 23 years, ferries have been used six quickly, at low initial cost and with times in the Bay Area to replace other This plan estimates that the first new great flexibility. Unlike buses, ferries are disabled transportation links. Water service could begin within three years of unhindered by traffic congestion. transit uniquely provides flexible, vital funding. Some routes could take up to transportation support in response This plan shows how expanded Bay Area eight years to begin operations. to a natural or man-made disaster that water transit that is affordable, reliable, shuts down bridges and roads. 06 convenient, flexible and clean will get The proposed expanded water-transit Expanded water transit will significantly The Authority’s R&D program is studying service initially has a higher cost-per-rider increase the capacity for bicycles to the fuel-cell technology that will lead than several existing ferry operations traverse the Bay and connect to the Bay to zero-emissions ferries (ZEFs) on San due to costs associated with: Area bike trail network. Francisco Bay as soon as possible.

• New emissions monitoring protocol Good connections between transit systems On-board emissions monitoring of are essential to increase transit ridership three existing vessels found that the • Planning and implementing good on all systems, and subsequently, reduce current water transit fleet is far less connections with other transit traffic congestion. The Authority will polluting than previously thought. Using • Acquiring new riders who are not as work with other transit operators to build knowledge gained in this study, the readily inclined to ride transit good connections. Authority recommends on-board emissions monitoring of all Bay Area What is the safety plan? THE TERMINALS passenger ferries. The Authority is working with the Coast New ferry terminals on the San Francisco The Authority recommends building Guard, California Maritime Academy Bay shoreline will serve as the backbone two vessel classes during the first ten and others to ensure that the Bay Area’s of the water-transit system by: years: 149-passenger boats designed to safest transit system maintains the • Seamlessly connecting water transit to travel 25 knots or less, and 300–350- utmost safety as it expands. The Safety landside transit passenger vessels designed for speeds Plan proposes development of mutual up to 30–35 knots. assistance plans, increased training and •Providing standard, predictable features for emergency drills, installation of closed- passengers The Authority’s study found five circuit TV cameras to monitor unmanned propulsion systems using existing areas and development of preventive • Enhancing shoreline access for both technology that meet the California Air passengers and non-passengers maintenance programs. Resource Board’s (CARB) suggested emission standard of 85 percent cleaner The terminals’ standard modular design than EPA’s 2007 Tier II standard. One of can be adapted to fit into the features of THE CONNECTIONS these systems is immediately deployable: each specific location and will be enhanced a diesel engine with selective catalytic How does the San Francisco Bay by the host community’s aesthetic reduction (SCR) and a particulate trap Area water-transit system fit into the design choices. (PT). The others require regulatory overall transit system? The San Francisco Ferry Terminal, the approval or further technology The new water-transit system will include major hub of the proposed system, will development before they can be used. likely see a five-fold increase in passengers. ground transit connections to buses This emissions standard will be mandated The Authority has accounted for these and shuttles, and it will also encourage in the Authority’s vessel performance costs and will work with the Port pedestrian and bicycle access. specifications and the cost of this of San Francisco, The Golden Gate Bridge, technology is accounted for in the Water Transit-Oriented Development Highway and Transportation District vessel capital budget. (WaTOD) in places like Jack London (GGBH&TD) and others to ensure Square in Oakland, Alameda Point, appropriate facilities are created. Vessel design specifications require both Hunters Point and Oyster Point in South bow- and side-loading capabilities to San Francisco can promote sensible land THE BOATS accommodate existing and new docking use and build significant ridership from configurations. This maximizes fast patrons who will walk, bike or take transit New vessels can be deployed within passenger loading, including bicycles, to ferries. three years that are ten times cleaner than carriages and wheelchairs. existing ferries, and 85 percent better than EPA’s standards for 2007 marine engines. 07 The vessel acquisition plan accounts for The Final Environmental Impact Report proved unwilling to regularly use other issues beyond initial purchase cost, (FEIR) that accompanies this plan is a forms of transit. including operating cost, maintainability, Program EIR that follows state and transit-cycle times and life-cycle costs. federal guidelines in studying the overall The types of Bay Area travelers most Federal law requires that passenger impact of proposed expanded water likely to ride water transit are those who ferries must be built in the United transit. care most about their personal travel States. Eleven U.S. shipyards satisfy all experience, want to arrive as quickly as recommended construction requirements. The areas of study that have generated possible and want to help the environment. the most discussion are whales, seals and sea lions, birds, dredging, plants, Analysis identified eight specific market THE DISASTER-RESPONSE PLAN wetlands and wake. Among those findings: segments and plotted their geographic distribution, which gives the Authority What is the disaster response plan? • Despite the fact that there have been no the data to effectively market and advertise reported collisions with whales and that an Experience in the Bay Area, New York water transit to build patronage. extensive watch-and-reporting system City and elsewhere shows that expanded already exists, the Authority will require This plan uses the data from state-of- water transit can play a vital role in sonar on ferries to further reduce the the-art private-sector market research emergency evacuations and in maintaining possibility of collision. Higher safety — including more than 3,000 passenger vital transportation links. The Authority will standards requiring a second officer on the surveys and 850 phone interviews — to continue working with other agencies bridge also will strengthen the water system. analyze Bay Area travelers, predict water- responsible for the Bay Area Trans Response transit ridership through 2025, identify Plan. With agreement from the Metropolitan •Two seal feeding and resting areas are near the specific types of travelers likely to Transportation Commission (MTC), the existing routes and a third is near a proposed ride ferries and provide a “roadmap” Authority will take the lead role in updating route. Federal guidelines suggest staying showing how to maximize ridership. the Regional Ferry Contingency Plan. more than 100 feet from seal “haul-outs,” but the Authority will adopt a Final Program The study found six factors that influence THE BAY EIR finding that routes should be more than Bay Area travelers’ mode choices: 900 feet away from these habitats. • Need for flexibility What are the environmental impacts? • Site-specific study is needed to determine expanded water transit’s impact on rafting • Desire to help the environment This plan eliminates more than 130,000 birds, but the proposed ferry service will daily vehicle miles from Bay Area affect only a small percentage of the Bay • Need for time savings, which includes the roads and reduces the most harmful outside existing shipping routes. importance of reliability emissions of smog-producing nitrogen oxides (NOx) and cancer-causing • Most ferry wakes will fall within the range of • Sensitivity to personal travel experience, particulate matter (PM). wind-generated waves. Further mitigation is such as a need for “personal space” or quiet possible by speed reduction, “route bending” • Insensitivity to transport costs Some dredging would be required, but to direct wake away from the shore, or the total dredging for the recommended increasing distance from the shore. • Sensitivity to stress routes is less than 0.8 percent of the annual average dredging in the Bay’s THE RIDERS The study further identified eight traveler Long-Term Management Strategy. market segments, their characteristics Who will ride water transit? and where they live. Site-specific environmental studies are required before any new water-transit Water-transit patronage on existing and The knowledge gleaned from the route can be implemented or any new routes will grow about 12 percent ridership study will help the Authority new terminal can be built. annually and will draw most of its riders create effective marketing and advertising 08 from vehicles. These are people who have campaigns to build patronage, optimize terminal locations, schedules and fares; ridership forecasting, terminal design THE FUTURE and, build good feeder connections. and intermodal planning. The first step toward expanded water THE FINANCES The Authority will continue to build transit is taking a solid, well-thought-out constructive relationships with the Toll Increase Expenditure Plan that includes How much will it cost? Metropolitan Transportation Commission ferries to Bay Area voters in 2004. (MTC), elected officials, community Expanded water transit will cost $646 leaders, regulators, public interest The second step is to ensure that the million over ten years, with $396 million groups, the business community and federal Ferry Boat Discretionary Fund is in capital costs and annual operating transit operators. expanded in the next transportation costs from $3 million in year one to $46 reauthorization bill and that, like other million in year ten. Approximately 25 How will the WTA be structured? regions with large ferry systems, the Bay percent of the operating budget is for Area obtains a set-aside for its water- landside connections. The Authority will operate in the public transit system — already the nation’s interest. It will be structured to plan third largest. How will it be funded? and operate expanded water transit, with the flexibility to link the organizational Third, the Authority will continue This plan requires funding from new structure to the necessary developing seeking new funding sources. transportation dollars. A variety of sources responsibilities and respond to changes for new funds from federal, county, local in the operating environment. The Authority will use the knowledge and private sources have been identified. gleaned from the state-of-the-art market The Initial Phase will employ 12–14 people research study to market and brand Is it a good investment? during this two-to-three-year period of advertise water transit. The search for system planning, coordination and funding will continue as the Authority The total investment per passenger is infrastructure development. Prospective keeps working with the existing ferry comparable to the most effective new routes will be planned, schedules operators, the American Public Transit investment in other modes. This study and fares developed and funding sought Association and others in these efforts. shows passenger catchment areas around in collaboration with existing ferry the shoreline are most effectively served operators. The Authority will assist Water Transit-Oriented Development by ferries. In these areas, ferries will communities in terminal design and (WaTOD) will continue to be explored relieve more congestion per dollar spent planning, and will build good connections and discussed with officials and than other modes. with employers and other transit stakeholders around the Bay. operators. The design and construction THE AUTHORITY The research-and-development program of new vessels will also be initiated. will continue pushing toward the goal of How will the WTA operate The staffing level for the Operating Phase zero-emissions ferries (ZEFs). The Authority the San Francisco Bay Area will be determined by several factors will keep working with Bluewater Network water-transit system? relating to the extent of operations, and other interested groups to deploy including the number of new routes and ZEFs as soon as possible. The Authority will be a focused regional the number of vessels in operation. New Additionally, the Authority will keep agency dedicated to safe, cost-effective responsibilities related to ferry and making a difference for the Bay Area in and environmentally responsible intermodal operations will be added, as other ways. One example could be a joint water transit. well as vessel and facilities maintenance. program with the Golden Gate National Outsourced functions such as accounting The Authority will manage continued Recreation Area (GGNRA) that uses and human resources will move into investment in clean-marine technology, ferries to bring students and others to the organization. advanced vessel design, systems planning, historical- and environmental-study sites. safety and disaster-response planning, The San Francisco Bay Area is one of the world’s most beautiful places, but the traffic is an ugly picture — and getting worse. There is an urgent need to alleviate traffic congestion and improve mobility if we are to head-off major

THE DEMAND social, environmental and economic problems. Most of the recommended 1 remedies, however, have very steep price tags and very long timelines.

1.01 Why must San Francisco findings from a Final Program There have been significant, worthwhile Bay Area water-transit service Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) public investments in rail systems and bus and describes the added disaster- operations, but the natural advantages of a be expanded? response capability that expanded water water-transit system have not been fully The San Francisco Bay Area is one of transit can bring to San Francisco Bay. appreciated. A more robust water-transit Earth’s most beautiful places, but the traffic system on San Francisco Bay makes sense. Water transit can reduce congestion is an ugly picture — and getting worse. along a number of the Bay Area’s Water transit expansion must begin today There is an urgent need to alleviate traffic worst traffic choke points. It can be because severe traffic congestion is not congestion and improve mobility if we environmentally responsible, by every simply a problem on the distant horizon are to head-off major social, environmental reasonable criterion. As a public policy — thousands of Bay Area residents see it and economic problems. Most of the choice, it is affordable compared to other through their windshields every day, recommended remedies, however, transit investments, with operating costs despite the fact that the region’s economy have very steep price tags and very Water transit is per seat and subsidy per passenger that has slowed since 2001. Even though long timelines. different. Unlike rail, compare favorably to Bay Area rail and nearly 32,000 Bay Area jobs were lost, 1 Water transit is different. Unlike rail, bus services. And studies show that a several highway corridors are often expanded ferry service expanded ferry service can be launched well-planned, well-thought-out and at capacity, just one accident, breakdown, quickly, at low initial cost and with great effectively marketed expansion of water or emergency away from gridlock. can be launched flexibility. Unlike buses, ferries are not transit that is convenient and reliable will The fact is, for the last 40 years, Bay Area hindered by traffic congestion on roads pull commuters and recreation-seekers quickly, at low initial traffic has steadily increased regardless and highways or in tunnels. out of their cars and onto ferries. of economic conditions. Traffic levels will cost and with great This Implementation and Operations Plan Furthermore, expanded water transit continue to increase, in spite of periodic flexibility. Unlike buses, (IOP) shows how Bay Area ferry service can operate safely and provide the Bay economic downturns. can be safely expanded to bring new Area with a robust, flexible and effective Caltrans reports that its Bay Area ferries are not hindered service to new places and add more emergency response capability if monitoring program found traffic delay service to existing routes. It details a the region is hit with a natural or nearly doubled from 1992 to 1998 — from by traffic congestion on ten-year timeline for this expansion, man-made event that disables roads, 64,100 hours to 112,000 hours. Its 2000 the project’s cost and where the funds other transit, bridges or tunnels. roads and highways or report labels I-80 from Hwy. 4 to the Bay will come from. This IOP also discusses Bridge toll plaza as the most congested in tunnels. 010 Figure 1 Bay Area freeway — whose travelers suffer 10,340 vehicle hours of daily delay. Meanwhile, the San Mateo Bridge has 4,230 vehicle hours of daily delay, and I-880 from West Oakland into the Bay Bridge Toll Plaza has 3,380 vehicle hours of delay.

Looking ahead, population-growth and job-growth data show even more alarming congestion problems just over the horizon that threaten to choke the region’s economy, worsen the air and further erode Bay Area residents’ quality of life.

In 1975, the Bay Area (Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano and Sonoma counties) population was approximately 4.8 million residents. The 2000 census indicates a population of 6.8 million — nearly two million more people than 25 years ago. Fast-forward ahead another 25 years and there will be an additional 1.4 million Bay Area residents, with 1.2 million new jobs accompanying that population surge.

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) expects that between 1990 and 2020, the average hours per day that vehicles are delayed will increase 249 percent. In its 2002 San Francisco Bay Crossings Study, MTC predicts that the next 25 years will unleash a 30 percent increase in region-wide travel and a 40 percent increase in transbay travel in addition to today’s congestion.

Examining the worst transbay corridors, MTC expects that Bay Bridge traffic will increase by 50 percent and be “at capacity” for nearly five hours a day during the morning and afternoon rush hours. The San Mateo Bridge will show a 75 percent increase in traffic. Golden Gate Bridge traffic will grow at a lower rate, but will still be 27 percent higher than in 1998. 2 “People are stretched so far between their home and job that they have no personal life to speak of.”

Senator Tom Torlakson of Antioch, Senate Select Committee on SF Bay Area Transportation, June 3, 2002

Furthermore, MTC predicts that many increase patronage on a more between their home and job that they Congestion today is most acute at the more Bay Area workers, due to high comprehensive water-transit system. have no personal life to speak of.” 3 various San Francisco Bay crossings, with housing costs, will be living far from their the worst in the Bay Bridge and San jobs, forced to crawl back and forth along Clearly, the first step on the long road Survey research has measured the impact Mateo Bridge corridors. According to MTC, the brutal I-80 corridor commuting and to a better Bay Area transportation future of that reality. In November 2001, merely “continuous stop-and-go conditions” polluting instead of volunteering or must be taken immediately so the region’s two months after 9/11, Bay Area residents exist on the Bay Bridge (a.m. westbound, parenting. While trips through the Bay economy does not choke 20 years from told Evans/McDonough Company, a p.m. eastbound), the Hwy. 92/San Mateo Bridge corridor are expected to increase now. But congestion is a serious problem respected public-opinion research firm, Bridge (p.m. eastbound) and I-880 from 43 percent by 2025, Carquinez Bridge trips today — and it is simply going to get that traffic remains the region’s top Grand Avenue to the Bay Bridge will increase even more (58 percent). worse tomorrow. concern — not safety and security, just 60 (a.m. northbound). 6 days after the tragedies in New York, at And because of the immense cost and the Pentagon and in rural Pennsylvania. It Despite the current economic downturn, Targeted Water Transit-Oriented lengthy time required to put most planned was not the economy, after 32,000 lost BART is running at capacity through Development transportation solutions in place, the Bay Area jobs in 12 months. the Transbay Tube during peak hours. Bay Area’s congestion problems beg for Commuter bus service is dependent Recognizing the growing geographic an affordable alternative that also offers It was traffic congestion. upon traffic flow, thus relying on more disconnect between housing and jobs, some near-term relief. road capacity and more dedicated An update survey was conducted in the Authority has carefully examined High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes February 2003. Despite the worsening efforts to generate Transit Oriented for significant expansion. Bay Area Residents Believe economy, traffic remained a top concern Development (TOD) in the Bay Area. The Problem is Now along with unemployment and the 1 There are several specific locations economy, as shown in Figure 2 on page 9. US Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Annual People are getting sick and tired of being Employment Statistics 2000–2001 where Water Transit-Oriented Development People are so concerned about traffic that 2 stuck in traffic. The time it takes and the MTC, Regional Transportation Plan, August 2001, pp. 20–21 (WaTOD) can make a positive difference seven out of ten said they are willing to 3 Senate Select Committee on SF Bay Area Transportation, stress it causes are dramatically changing for Bay Area residents, such as Jack June 3, 2002 pay increased bridge tolls if the money 4 people’s quality of life. 4 EMC, 1400 phone interviews with residents of Alameda, London Square in Oakland, Alameda Point, is used for congestion-relief projects. Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara Oyster Point and San Quentin (if the state Senator Tom Torlakson of Antioch, a Seventy-six percent of Bay Area residents and Solano counties between November 7–19, 2001; margin of error 2.7 percent eventually vacates the prison). In each of member of the Senate Transportation surveyed in May 2002 by MTC ranked 5 J. Moore Methods, Inc., 900 phone interviews with residents these locations, studies show that effective Committee, identified the essence of “reducing traffic congestion” among their of the nine Bay Area counties between May 3–15, 2002; margin water-transit service can generate today’s Bay Area traffic woes when he top-three concerns, just behind spending of error 3.3 percent 6 more desirable TOD, and in turn those said, “People are stretched so far tax money wisely (86 percent) and Draft Regional Transportation Plan, August 2001, p. 18 5 012non-driving residents and workers will improving public education (82 percent). Figure 2 MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES FACING THE BAY AREA

Unemployment 19%

Traffic/Transportation 17

Economy 15

Education/Schools 8

Affordable Housing 7

Crime/Violence 5

State Budget/Taxes 5

War/Terrorism 4

Poverty/Homelessness 3

Rapid Growth/Overpopulation 3

Higher Cost of Living 2

Government Distrust 1

Environment/Pollution 1

Police Issues 1

Health Care 1

Other 4

NA/DK/Refused 3

Source: Evans/McDonough Company, January 20-29, 2003

HWY. 24 IN OAKLAND The balance of this Implementation and Operations Plan will detail how water transit can once again play a meaningful role in the economic, environmental and social health of the Bay Area. And it can do so in a manner that is safe and affordable for passengers, cost-effective for policymakers and a sensible investment for taxpayers.

Figure 3 MTC’s Bay Crossings Study identified six projects to improve the Bay Area’s transportation picture. They include:

•A new BART crossing with new San Francisco stations * •A new Mid-Bay Bridge from I-238 in the East Bay to I-380 just north of San Francisco International Airport*

• Expanded San Mateo Bridge capacity

• Dumbarton Bridge western approach roadways reconstruction

• New and expanded express bus service by expanding and creating new express bus and carpool lanes

• Commuter rail service on a rehabilitated Dumbarton Bridge

* MTC Commissioners voted July 24, 2002 to remove this project from further consideration Sources: MTC Bay Crossings Study and Authority Study 14 By comparison, this water-transit plan Thus, this plan shows how well-thought- pollutants 85 percent below 2007 EPA project costs up to $646 million, including out, new and expanded water transit that Tier II engine standards. The EPA Tier II new terminals. Deployment of expanded is affordable, reliable, convenient, flexible standard is three times cleaner than the water transit can begin taking cars off the and clean will get drivers out of their cars existing fleet. A reduction to 85 percent road in three years. and onto environmentally responsible, below Tier II is ten times cleaner than the state-of-the-art passenger ferries. existing fleet. That most stringent This is a critical point. The Authority’s standard is suggested by the California Air primary objective is to design a water- The vessels and propulsion systems Resources Board (CARB), and is the transit system that takes people out of cars, recommended in The Boats chapter standard the Authority shall mandate. rather than one that simply draws riders consist of currently available and from buses, BART or Caltrain. affordable technology that reduces

Finally, an expanded San Francisco Bay Area water-transit system is not a new idea, but it is a good idea that has worked before and can work again.

Prior to construction of the Bay Bridge and Golden Gate Bridge in the 1930s, when the Bay Area’s population was about a quarter of what it is today, ferries on the Bay carried 15 times the passengers carried today. More than 250,000 passengers went through the Ferry Building each day, using more than 320 ferry boat arrivals and departures that connected to streetcars every 90 seconds.

The balance of this Implementation and Operations Plan will detail how water transit can once again play a meaningful role in the economic, environmental and social health of the Bay Area. And it can do so in a manner that is safe and affordable for passengers, cost-effective for policymakers and a sensible investment for taxpayers.

SAUSALITO FERRY PASSING ALCATRAZ 15 16 2 THE ROUTES must proveviable. principle thataroute and drivenbythe the bestavailabledata detailed, groundedin selection processwas The year-long route .Createatransitoptionthat isanattractive 2. Enhanceregionalmobilityviaawater- 1. transit system: in planningthisproposed water Five goalswere identifiedandfollowed routes. onexistingferry expands service next tenyears,and(3)asystemthatonly that couldbeimplementedwithinthe Initiative, (2)asmallersystemofroutes the BayArea a large comprehensive systemsuchas The different proposed systemsare (1) impact ofvariousinvestmentlevels. the economicviabilityandenvironmental “systems” ofroutes, todetermineboth done through theevaluationofdifferent Thiswas facilities andrelated services. transit system,”itsassociatedlandside and operationofa“comprehensive water- r the submissionofaplantoincrease Legislation creating theAuthoritydirects 2.01 the key bridgecorridorsthroughouttheBayArea. transit playsameaningfulroleinreducingcongestionandproviding mobilityin network. WhileitcarriesonlyafractionofthetotalBayAreatravelers, water W process? egional mobilitythrough thedevelopment alternative tothe automobile intermodalservice complementary transit system,itslandsidefacilities and ater transit today is a small but growing part oftheBayArea’stransportation ater transittodayisasmallbutgrowingpart What istherouteselection Council’s Water Transit • • detailedstudy: further for hurdles inorder toberecommended more passed theviabilitytest,itfacedtwo term inorder tobeproposed. Ifar a route mustprove viableoverthelong data anddrivenbytheprinciplethat detailed, grounded inthebestavailable routeyear-long selectionprocess was To Provide thatisreliable, water-transit service 5. Offeratransitoptionthatcanbeinitiatedin 4. Recognize andminimizeenvironmental 3. environmental flaws? Does theroutehavefatal investment? Is therouteagoodtransportation safe andfullyaccessible a timelyandcost-effectivemanner intermodal services landside facilitiesandcomplementary issues associatedwithwatertransit,its

build acomprehensive system,the oute • •T • without aminimumlevelofridership: transit agenciesandrecognizes that This isaconceptemployedbymost level ofridershiptobeconsidered viable. potential routes musthaveaminimum establishing therequirement that The Authoritybeganwiththelatterby common sense. market research andgoodold-fashioned application ofproven private-sector the world’s besttransit-planningexpertise, The route-selection approach combines V iability discourage ridership wouldbesoinfrequentit The service discourage ridership public subsidy low, requiringanunacceptably large wouldbeunreasonably The fareboxrecovery he farewouldbesoexpensiveit Potential routes were studied with the understanding that water transit that only benefits a small segment of Bay Area residents would be a poor use of scarce transportation dollars. Additionally, routes with small ridership would fall short of the mandate to improve Bay Area mobility.

A review of 2000-2001 data from existing Bay Area transit agencies, including ferries, showed a viability range of successes and concluded that new water-transit routes able to perform in that range or better should be considered as potentially viable. This level of viability varied between 450 and 1,650 passenger trips per day. From this data, the ridership model Finally, these market segments were That review resulted in a number of (See Figure 5 on Pg. 15, “Cost-Effectiveness identified distinct “markets” of select correlated to the demographics of each improvements that were incorporated Measures For Bay Area Transit Operators.”) commuters. These markets are intended geographic area around the Bay. This into the model. to reflect how different commuters allowed the modelers to evaluate the Predicting Water-Transit Ridership select travel modes. Eight statistically effect of the various sensitivities on each Second, the model’s ability to predict the significant markets were identified individual ferry route. future was validated by testing how well Predicting ferry ridership has historically depending on commuters’ values about it forecasts current commute conditions. been difficult because water-transit riders time, concern for the environment and The result of this effort is a ridership Validating to an extensive set of existing often choose their travel mode based on stress. The inclination of commuters to forecast model that recognizes the portion conditions, the results were within 5 factors other than the ride’s time and cost. select ferries varies with their sensitivity of the population that selects commute percent of existing observations. Most forecast models place a premium to each of these values. modes for reasons beyond time and cost on time and cost, ignoring factors like of the trip. While this portion of the overall Finally, the model’s sensitivity to headways, reliability, the need for flexibility, stress, Using MTC’s regional transportation population may be small, it can represent parking costs and toll increases was tested sensitivity to “personal space” and a model as a base, the market data was a significant reduction in peak-hour trips and ridership to other potential routes desire to help the environment. correlated to census track data to develop in key bridge corridors. was examined. The forecasts, with the ferry ridership forecasts based on different sensitivity analyses, are shown The ridership study conducted for this Association of Bay Area Governments Since these market-based techniques in Figure 4 on page 14 [Water Transit plan takes a different approach, using (ABAG) projections of 2025 land uses and traditionally have not been used for public Ridership Sensitivity Analysis]. Also, private-sector, market-based techniques the constrained Regional Transportation transit, the Authority took two steps to conservative forecasts were used for this to identify how these factors affect Plan (RTP) investments. This is ensure the forecast procedures and analysis (frequent headways, with ferry commuters’ travel-mode choices through extremely important because future results were appropriate. First, a peer parking charges, but no toll increase or more than 3,000 on-board ferry passenger transit ridership will depend not just review panel of modeling experts was parking charges for other transit modes). surveys and 850 random-sample phone on changes in population, but also on formed, with members drawn from the interviews of Bay Area commuters. changes in demographics. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MTC, the Federal Transit Administration, Washington State Ferries and the UC-Berkeley Institute for Transportation Studies.

17 Figure 4 Cost Effectiveness

The next hurdle for these routes is cost- effectiveness — whether they are a good transportation investment and comparable to other transit modes when considering factors such as implementation costs, operations and environmental mitigation.

Historically, Bay Area water-transit service has compared favorably with other transit modes considering several traditional key measures of cost effectiveness. The following table shows ferry service compared to other similar successful transit services in the Bay Area. It is important to note that the evaluation of transit systems using limited numerical measurements often ignores many of the benefits provided by transit. However, using the key measures of farebox recovery and subsidy-per-passenger, the Vallejo and Alameda/Oakland ferry services perform as well or better than many other transit services.

Comparisons of the effectiveness between future transportation investments are difficult because each transit mode offers widely varying benefits and its own particular problems. Fixed rail investments, such as BART and Caltrain, provide reliable, safe and desirable service to both urban and suburban commuters. However, these modes require high initial investments and take a long time to implement. On the other hand, express bus service can be deployed quickly and cheaply, but buses share the bridges with other traffic, so its service is affected by — and can contribute to — roadway congestion. This plan evaluated the cost effectiveness of ferry expansion, both qualitatively and quantitatively, to address these differences between modes.

Source: Authority Ridership Study Figure 6 The comparison in Figure 6 focuses on for comparison. Where no plans existed, the effectiveness of specific ferry routes bus service running at similar headways under consideration. In consultation with from similar origins was compared. Actual MTC and environmental organizations, bus service would likely be implemented the Authority identified “comparable” differently than analyzed here, serving investments in other modes to serve slightly different origins on different routes. the same destinations as the proposed The intention of this comparison is only ferry service. to identify order-of-magnitude differences.

In general, these “comparable” investments The cost differences between implementing were express buses. Where possible, buses can be small, with buses being existing bus expansion plans were used cheaper to purchase and operate and

Figure 5

, , ,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

Sources: MTC Statistical Summary of Bay Area Transit Operators; Alameda/Oakland and Harbor Bay Ferry Reports; AC Transbay Statistics based on October 2000 reports and do not include deadhead time; 2000 National Transit Database, San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission. * Further study needed to determine costs. 19 Assumptions: Ferry seating per USCG certification; other modes include some standees. Source: Authority Ridership Study ferries having higher passenger capacity, It is worth noting that the proposed water- Therefore, these costs are initially higher, with some shifts also from BART, but generally shorter routes and longer transit service expansion has a higher but will incrementally decrease as new essentially no impact on AC Transit. The effective lives. Figure 6 on page 15 shows cost-per-rider than several of the existing routes mature and the system achieves alternative mode investment (primarily that the majority of new ferry routes are ferry operations. Among the reasons: economies of scale. buses) would take riders from the existing cost-effective investments. For the ferry services and BART, with few of the Hercules/Rodeo-to-San Francisco and • New environmental monitoring Finally, the overall impact on bridge new riders coming from cars. corridors was analyzed to identify ferry Richmond-to-San Francisco routes, the • Planning and implementing good connections impacts to other transit providers as In the Golden Gate Corridor, ferry and bus cost effectiveness for buses is better than with landside transit the comparable ferry service. Investments well as the effectiveness of removing expansion would have a similar effect on made in both modes were also compared • Current water-transit riders are the cars from those corridors. reducing highway traffic. An expanded “low-hanging fruit” with the lowest patron- bus service would also depend heavily to see if the investments could be In the Bay Bridge Corridor, ferry riders acquisition costs on adequate capacity of the ferry service, complementary. In every case, it was would come primarily from highway users, found that bus and ferry investments are complementary and that the traffic Figure 7 reductions resulting from investments in both modes is greater than the reduction from investment in one mode or the other.

The comparison in Figure 7 uses information developed for MTC’s Bay Crossings Study to provide an order-of- magnitude comparison between transportation investments. That study investigated a number of improvements in the Bay Bridge, San Mateo Bridge and Dumbarton Bridge corridors. Those alternatives included bus, BART and highway expansion. Figure 7 compares the transit alternatives in that study with the portion of the proposed water-transit service that also would serve those corridors.

Figure 7 shows the trade-offs between different modes, with ferries generally having a low capital investment cost per rider and a potentially higher operating subsidy per rider. However, sensitivity analysis performed on the ferry ridership indicates the operating costs can be

reduced by optimizing ferry headways. * The analysis shows the operating cost could potentially be reduced by half, with a subsidy-per-rider ranging from $5 to 1Ridership based on validated annualization factors (303 BART, 323 AC Transit). Excludes investments in Dumbarton Bridge Corridor $8-per-rider, depending on the route. 2Ridership based on validated annualization factors (303 BART). Capital cost reflects low-range estimate 3Annual ridership based on weekday and weekend forecasts * Includes ridership on existing routes 20 Sources: MTC Bay Crossings Study, Other MTC Sources and Authority Studies A general comparison between the costs of new and expanded service suggests that the limited investment in new routes proposed in the WTA plan would be a cost-effective approach, at least for the initial ten-year period. MTC Resolution No. 3514, October 30, 2002

Figure 8 as it would deliver additional riders to Local Support and Commitment the ferry system. Local support and demonstrated In the U.S. 101 San Mateo corridor, water- commitment are necessary to create new transit service would primarily take traffic water-transit routes. For the potential off the highway, with a smaller shift from new routes that the studies and criteria existing transit systems. show to be viable, the Authority is working in partnership with the localities Environmental Impacts that would help build and host terminals. In that spirit, hundreds of meetings The third hurdle is the environment. with elected officials throughout the Bay Are there any “fatal” environmental flaws? Area were held to obtain their input for If not, will a route have a significant this plan and to discuss specific route impact on the Bay — and if so, what will recommendations and implementation it take to mitigate that impact? issues once viable routes were identified.

The FEIR, as mandated, provides an Implementation of recommended new overall environmental assessment of water-transit service will first occur on four system alternatives, and thus routes where (1) the environmental valuable guidance regarding the impact impacts are either insignificant or most of the proposed routes. However, site- easily mitigated, and (2) where localities specific environmental study will are most committed to supporting be required to determine each route’s ferry service with matching funds for specific impacts. planning, design work and capital funds for terminals.

Source: Authority Studies 21 Deliverability Continuum In the highway and transit construction transit plays a meaningful role in reducing The five existing publicly sponsored or industries, these techniques have congestion and providing mobility in the operated routes, plus the privately run All of these factors, plus cash-flow through shortened delivery times by a factor key bridge corridors throughout the Bay Tiburon service, comprise the current identified funding pipelines, will determine of years. Area. The Vallejo, Alameda-Oakland and Bay Area commuter ferry service. These the timeline for rolling out these routes. Harbor Bay ferry services carry 1,000 routes are supplemented by a number Both within and beyond the initial ten-year peak-hour passengers — almost a half-lane of recreation and tourist routes that 2.02 What is the existing system? horizon, there will be a “deliverability of traffic that might otherwise be using operate between San Francisco’s Ferry continuum” whereby proposed routes go Water transit today is a small but growing the Bay Bridge. The Larkspur, Sausalito Building and Pier 41 (Fisherman’s Wharf) through the journey of studies, permitting, part of the Bay Area’s transportation and Tiburon services carry nearly 1,700 and Sausalito, Tiburon, Alcatraz and terminal planning and construction, vessel network. While it carries only a fraction peak-hour passengers, which adds up Angel Island. There are also a number of acquisition and the many other steps of the total Bay Area travelers, water to nearly a full lane of bridge traffic. “dinner cruise” boats, general excursion required to launch water-transit service. vessels and special PacBell Park service Sites with environmental impacts or significant community opposition will take Figure 9 longer to deliver (if they can or should be delivered at all) than sites without these challenges.

This plan estimates that the first new service could be started within two years of receiving funding. Assuming a typical permitting process, some of the sites could take up to eight years before service could begin.

It is important to note that the delivery of water-transit service could be significantly accelerated using a number of industry techniques, such as:

•Design-build construction of terminals and vessels

• Staff dedicated to focusing on permitting issues common to all terminals (such as the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission [BCDC] and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)

• Use of consultants as needed to make sure lack of staff availability does not affect project delivery

•Aggressive leveraging (or advancing) of local funds

• Development of system-wide mitigations to address site impacts 22 Source: Ferry Operators to Giants games from Larkspur and Golden Gate Bridge Corridor Marin County commuters. The Golden Individually, each of these transit operators Oakland. Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation provides good service. However, each The Sausalito to San Francisco service is District (GGBH&TD) has tied the service offers service without the advantage of a Figures 9, 10 and 11 summarize information the best Bay Area example of a ferry to a network of free connecting shuttles, regional plan to coordinate with each other about the existing ferry services. service whose passengers leave their cars providing one of the best Bay Area or with other operators’ landside transit. at home. Nearly all its riders either walk, examples of good transit connections. The proposed new water-transit system Each of these existing routes plays a key ride bicycles or take shuttle buses to the role in the mobility of those living in the includes expanded service on existing Sausalito terminal. The Tiburon to San Francisco water-transit routes, service on seven new routes, and communities they serve: service is one of the oldest ferry services The Larkspur to San Francisco route is the the institutional framework, authority in the Bay Area. It operates without and funding to begin coordinating Bay Bridge Corridor flagship water-transit service in the Bay public subsidy. Area. It provides unparalleled service to these services. The Alameda-Oakland water-transit Figure 10 service also consistently ranks near the top-performing Bay Area transit services, when measured by fare box recovery and subsidy per passenger. It provides convenient commuter service from Alameda and Oakland to San Francisco, as well as midday recreation service to and from Jack London Square in Oakland.

Harbor Bay to San Francisco is an excellent example of a transit system designed to fit the surrounding community. Because of its location in the heart of a residential development, people can easily walk or ride bicycles to and from the ferry.

Bay Bridge and Carquinez Bridge Corridors

The Vallejo to San Francisco ferry service is one of the most efficient transit systems in the Bay Area. It has consistently generated more than 70 percent of its revenues from fares. Strong demand from commuters not only led to increased water-transit service, but also increased ridership on Vallejo’s commuter buses to San Francisco.

Source: Ferry Operators 23 Studies indicate a much greater affinity for water transit by people who choose to live by the water. Martinez, as well as Pittsburg and Antioch in Eastern Contra Costa County exemplify those types of waterfront communities.

Figure 11 2.03 What is the proposed daily passenger trips between Richmond new system? and San Francisco and service could begin quickly due to the existing infrastructure. Bay Bridge Corridor Comprehensive waterfront planning could tie together walk- and bike-access between Berkeley to San Francisco to Mission Bay — residential development and the ferry Water-transit service to-and-from Berkeley terminal, minimizing the need for expensive is forecast to have one of the highest parking facilities. Additionally, the riderships of new routes within the proximity of new development, such as the Bay Area. However, depending upon the art community moving into the old Ford location, development of a terminal in Plant, allows water transit to serve both Berkeley may offer some environmental commuters and non-commuters. challenges, including addressing impacts to the adjacent Eastshore Park from both Treasure Island to San Francisco — vessels and vehicles accessing a potential Development on Treasure Island could terminal. Despite these challenges, one create a significant demand for transit cannot ignore the projected ridership of services between the Island, San Francisco 2,276 daily passenger trips in 2025. This and the East Bay. The ridership model reflects the increasing congestion on both forecasts 3,587 daily passenger trips to I-80 and BART, as well as the need for San Francisco in 2025 and 1,000 trips to additional transit alternatives to serve the East Bay. These forecasts will change communities such as Emeryville that are depending on evolving development plans along the East Bay shoreline. proposed for Treasure Island.

Richmond to San Francisco — The Richmond Bay Bridge and Carquinez waterfront is ideally suited for water transit Bridge Corridors to San Francisco. Richmond has an existing terminal site, as well as substantial Martinez-Antioch/Pittsburg to San Francisco development potential in and around the — Studies indicate a much greater affinity waterfront that could complement ferry for water transit by people who choose service. The 2025 forecasts estimate 1,854 to live by the water. Martinez, as well as 24 Source: Ferry Operators Figure 13 Pittsburg and Antioch in Eastern Contra Martinez, the Contra Costa County seat, Costa County exemplify these types off the congested Hwy. 4 corridor. of waterfront communities. Initial 2025 Additionally, these communities could ridership forecasts identified 600 daily potentially offer good connections to Martinez passenger trips and 1,000 Amtrak that would complement ongoing WTA Plan* Pittsburg/Antioch passenger trips. waterfront planning.

However, a potential combined service Benicia — Like many of the Bay’s historic not only delivers greater ridership to-and- waterfront communities, Benicia offers a from San Francisco, but also provides number of features that could potentially a connection between the two areas that benefit new water-transit service. It could take county workers traveling to has an attractive downtown close to the

Figure 12

* Includes ridership on existing routes ** Passenger trips

Source: Authority Ridership Study 25 waterfront, an affordable housing stock Benicia’s waterfront could significantly to the waterfront. This area, coupled Francisco east of U.S. 101. Employers in to attract Bay Area commuters, and increase the viability of water transit from with potential redevelopment in nearby this area include Genentech, Hitachi, adequate land on the waterfront for Benicia — thus further study of this site is Rodeo, provides a new potential market Toshiba and United Parcel Service. Many terminal and parking development. recommended. for water transit. The ridership forecasts water-transit passengers using a new Forecasts show an estimated patronage of for a Hercules/Rodeo ferry terminal ferry terminal near Oyster Point Marina 600 daily passenger trips in 2025. This Hercules/Rodeo — Hercules is undergoing predict 903 daily passenger trips in 2025. will use shuttles and SamTrans buses that patronage is less than would be expected an incredible transformation. Historically, Placing a terminal in the Hercules/ already serve Caltrain and eventually will from this type of waterfront community. Hercules has been a bedroom community, Rodeo area would be critical and connect with the new BART extension. However, the presence of the nearby housing residents who worked and shopped could significantly affect the potential Ridership forecasts for 2025 predict 2,187 Vallejo ferry service undoubtedly affects in other Bay Area cities and towns. ferry patronage. Continued study in passenger trips to-and-from South San Benicia’s ridership. While ferry service Applying principles of new urbanism, city partnership with local agencies is Francisco. Development of water transit may not be viable at this time, changes in leaders are developing a new commercial recommended to capitalize on a potential to South San Francisco also will provide and residential area immediately adjacent ferry terminal at this site. future flexibility for service to San Figure 14 Francisco International Airport and Golden Gate Bridge Corridor emergency access to the Peninsula.

Port Sonoma to San Francisco — There is Redwood City to San Francisco — Water significant interest among local and county transit from Redwood City will carry elected officials, as well as business and commute traffic between the Peninsula civic leaders, for water transit to help and San Francisco. The Peninsula-to-San relieve traffic congestion in northern Francisco corridor along U.S. 101 and Marin County, as well as Napa and Sonoma I-280 is the most heavily traveled in the counties. The ridership model shows a Bay Area, and even small improvements demand of 1,392 daily passenger trips from in mobility can provide significant relief Port Sonoma to San Francisco in 2025. during commute periods. Forecasts predict Authority staff held eight meetings with 1,477 daily passenger trips to and from local stakeholders over an 11-month Redwood City in 2025. A Redwood City period, examining three suggested sites to terminal also will serve the city’s growing attract commuters from Santa Rosa, waterfront business and residential Petaluma, Sonoma and Novato. As a result communities. The Pacific Shores Center of these meetings, it is recommended that development, located immediately Port Sonoma on Hwy. 37 undergo further adjacent to one of the potential terminal study, including ridership, conceptual site locations, currently provides more than design, a site-specific EIR (including studies 1.5 million square feet of office space. In of wetlands and endangered species) and addition, water-transit service to cost-effectiveness analysis. potential development sites like Abbott Labs, adjacent to the Port of Redwood City, could easily link employees living in Bayshore Corridor (U.S. 101 in San the East Bay to jobs on the Peninsula. Mateo and Santa Clara counties)

South San Francisco to San Francisco — Other Possible Expansion This route will serve commuter traffic between the Peninsula and San Francisco, Recreation Service — Planning for a as well as potential trips to the growing recreation water-transit loop, which number of businesses in South San would serve Golden Gate National 26 People riding Bay Area ferries are riding the region’s safest form of public transit. Water-transit passenger safety is better than rail, and significantly better than roadway transit.

Recreational Area (GGNRA) sites such as factors that would seriously affect the Expanded Service on Existing Routes — The unequaled water-transit access and the Fort Mason, Fort Baker and Crissy Field performance of ferry service. The Authority’s enabling legislation directed potential for excellent transit connections. (Torpedo Wharf), is now underway. These Authority is moving forward with this plan to focus on new ferry routes. As a result of these benefits, the Authority routes are being developed by GGNRA additional planning activities for: Expanded service on existing routes can will continue to work closely with Marin and would provide transit access to many only be implemented with the concurrence County and the GGBH&TD to study a of the Bay Area’s most treasured and East Bay-Peninsula – In addition to of the existing public provider of the ferry future San Quentin Ferry terminal. Figure 8 pristine natural resources. In addition, recommending routes from Oyster Point service. However, expansion of service on page 17 summarizes the route they would reduce congestion and and Redwood City to the San Francisco on existing routes, in some cases, holds implementation schedule. improve mobility on weekends, which are Ferry Terminal, the Authority will great potential for increasing ridership. increasingly matching weekdays for the conduct other studies of service from While the Authority has no ability to Water Taxi Service – The focus of this plan duration of traffic congestion. The these two cities directly to the East Bay. expand service on existing routes, both is on routes that are viable public transit Authority will continue to work with the ridership and environmental effects services. Several local governments and Hunters Point Shipyard Development – In businesses are expressing an interest in GGNRA to develop and deliver this the future, ridership demand may increase of expansion on the Vallejo, Larkspur, expanded recreational service. Alameda-Oakland, Harbor Bay and water taxi service to enhance recreational, with the development of new residential tourism and economic development and commercial projects. The City of San Sausalito routes have been investigated. Airport Service — This will serve water- That work is incorporated into the projects. In the future, the Authority may transit passengers between downtown San Francisco is completing its negotiations consider operating this type of service or with the Navy on the transfer of this studies included in this plan. This plan Francisco, Oakland International Airport also includes programmed funding for be a resource to entities interested in and San Francisco International Airport former base for redevelopment. As this starting and funding water taxi service project progresses, the Authority will future vessels, facilities and operating — including direct water-transit service expenses, which are funds greatly needed by providing expertise in areas such as between the two airports. The Authority work with the City and its development system planning, vessel design and team to update ridership studies and by existing water-transit operators who believes that the ridership model have limited funds for expansion. terminal planning. underestimates potential demand for this provide the technical assistance needed service. Thus a specific study of airport- to plan ferry service out of Hunters Point. Future Routes — Several sites hold great 2.04 What is the safety plan? to-airport service using a more appropriate Moffett Field – Changing circumstances in promise for future water-transit expansion. transit model is recommended. the proposed land use and management One example is San Quentin, which is being Safety Plan of the former naval air station may merit considered for reuse by Marin County Others — Several other routes also were Passenger ferries share the 548-square-mile additional ridership study. The Authority should the state decide to close the investigated, but ridership forecasts using Bay with commercial shipping, cruise will continue to monitor this site and prison. San Quentin offers potentially current ABAG data show that they are ships, fishing boats, excursion boats, work with local officials to conduct that unconstrained land-use flexibility, only marginally viable or have other the U.S. Navy, recreational sailors, power- study if circumstances merit. 27 boaters, kayakers, windsurfers and boardsailers. The U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) is responsible for vessel traffic safety, and the existing water-transit operators have been full and active partners in efforts to maintain a safe operating environment on San Francisco Bay.

Preparation of this plan included detailed risk-analysis of existing traffic on the Bay, as well as computer simulation of the proposed routes and headways to measure the impacts of increased ferry service and identify where potential problems may lie. Working with the Coast Guard, California Maritime Academy and others, the Authority is putting forth a plan that meets all regulatory and operational requirements.

Bay Area Water Transit Is Safe

People riding Bay Area ferries are riding the region’s safest form of public transit. Water-transit passenger safety is better than rail and significantly better than roadway transit (buses, shuttles, trolleys, cable cars — heretofore referred to simply as “buses”).

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) reports that there were no fatalities on Bay Area ferries between 1997 and 2000. Meanwhile, there were four reported patron fatalities on buses in 2000 and, in 1999–2000, there were ten reported patron fatalities on rail.

Analysis of 1997–2000 data from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) shows the rail-passenger injury rate was more than double the rate for water transit. The bus passenger injury rate was five times higher than ferries.

28 TIBURON FERRY Work is continuing with the existing operators, the Coast Guard and others to ensure Bay Area water transit is not only safe on a day-to-day operational level, but also is secure from outside threats.

From 1997–2000: the “Risk-Based Decision-Making Process” •Require a licensed master to complete an • Creating coded signals and responses to used by the Coast Guard. This plan extended familiarization training program report suspicious activity • Bay Area water transit averaged .3065 accounts for traffic coordination with all aboard the hull and route before being •Requiring positive identification before patron injuries per million passenger commercial shipping and recreational qualified as master-in-charge allowing any contractors, vendors or others miles (Alameda-Oakland, GGBH&TD, boating within the Bay. It includes Vallejo Transit) access to vessels findings derived from sophisticated Heightened Security Following 9/11 •Rail averaged .67025 patron injuries per computer traffic simulations conducted •Providing additional security training to crew million passenger miles (BART, Caltrain, as part of this study. The Coast Guard, the existing Bay Area • Developing a security plan to account for SF MUNI) water-transit operators, the maritime After a series of intensive workshops, unions and harbor and port officials potential threats, outlining preventive • Buses averaged 1.55425 patron injuries per the Safety Plan Work Group proposed acted quickly following 9/11 to ensure measures and detailing an action plan in million passenger miles (AC Transit, BART a number of recommendations and best that maximum safety procedures were the event of a threat or actual emergency motor bus [’97–’98 only], GGBH&TD bus, practices that are in the Safety Plan. in place and followed. Beginning Additionally, the Coast Guard is deploying SamTrans bus, SF MUNI cable car, SF MUNI Those recommendations include: immediately after 9/11, and spelled-out trolley, SF MUNI bus, Vallejo Transit bus) armed, uniformed “sea marshals” on •Develop and exercise vessel mutual in response to a Coast Guard directive, passenger ferries. assistance plans the operators increased security on Increased Safety for Expanded all passenger ferries. The steps taken Work is continuing with the existing Water-Transit Service • Develop and enforce standards for emergency include: operators, the Coast Guard and others to training and conduct drills that meet or ensure Bay Area water transit is not only • Ensuring that access to all vessel operational Because water transit is regulated by exceed Coast Guard standards safe on a day-to-day operational level, areas, including machinery spaces, the Coast Guard, it is subject to rigorous but also is secure from outside threats. • Develop, implement, enforce and audit pilothouse and gear lockers, remain safety standards. In order to properly standard procedures for emergencies, adverse locked at all times and accessible only to prepare for increased ferry service, a weather and normal operating conditions authorized crew work group of operators, regulators and other stakeholders — including the Coast • Consider installing closed-circuit TV cameras •Posting night watch security guards Guard — was formed to review current in unmanned engineering spaces with at terminals practices and procedures so the Bay can monitors on the bridge be made even safer for everyone. This • Conducting diligent onboard inspection for Safety Plan, which is included in the • Design and implement a preventive unattended passenger bags, briefcases and maintenance system that meets or exceeds Appendix, was compiled by following packages after each run, before the next manufacturer’s service requirements boatload is allowed to board 29 By definition, Bay Area water transit begins and ends at the shoreline. Since most people don’t live or work at the water’s edge, they must travel from home to the ferry, and from the ferry terminus to their trip destination. THE CONNECTIONS 3 3.01 How does the San Francisco Good Connections Bay Area water-transit system fit Partnerships with other transit providers into the overall transit system? are essential to deliver potential riders to ferry terminals. However, a well- By definition, Bay Area water transit begins designed and situated ferry terminal and ends at the shoreline. Since most can also generate riders through good people do not live or work at the water’s connections to existing pedestrian edge, they must travel from home to the and bicycle infrastructure. ferry, and from the ferry terminus to their trip destination. Pedestrian Access The challenge is to create a convenient People who do not ride water-transit system that effectively serves Pedestrian access at terminals for both these people while recognizing the huge commuters and recreation-trip passengers transit are clear about land-use challenges that constrain large- will be linked to existing and planned scale parking at many of those terminals. paths and trails, such as the Bay Trail. their reasons. First and This plan acknowledges the state mandate Pedestrian access design should include foremost, it is the lack to integrate water transit into the Bay wide sidewalks, trees, lighting, seating Area’s overall transit system in order to and public open spaces with views. Far of good connections. build ferry ridership. A manual from an amenity or “extra,” this pedestrian summarizing the transit industry’s best orientation is an important investment practices to achieve those connections in growing transit ridership and is as is in the Appendix to this plan. The new valuable as funds spent for other service recommended, and the suggested transit connections. enhanced service on existing routes, fully accounts for that need.

30 Figure 15

Pedestrian access at terminals for both commuters and recreation-trip passengers will be linked to existing and planned paths and trails, such as the Bay Trail.

Bicycle Access other San Francisco Bay Area transit operator can significantly increase Most, if not all, of the Bay Area’s bicycle ridership without building “intermodal network stops at the shoreline. Bike transit.” This means creating good connections across the Bay currently connections by coordinating with other depend on limited access to existing bus transit modes to ensure that their service or rail transit. For example, BART prohibits comes together at the same place and bikes during peak hours and limits them time. This ensures that riders are quickly, to only some cars during off-peak hours. easily and safely transferred from one Buses can carry only two bikes at a time. mode to the other.

Ferry routes extend the bike network Good connections can refer to multiple across the Bay. Ferries are able to carry 25 transit agencies’ service converging on a or more bicycles, significantly expanding single location. An example is the San capacity for bikes to traverse the Bay. Francisco Ferry Building where water It is therefore essential that the ferry transit, SF MUNI’s “F” Line streetcar and terminals connect to the Bay Area bike GGBH&TD buses all converge. Or, it can network. To ensure the safest possible be a single operator such as GGBH&TD connections, the Authority will encourage coordinating its own feeder buses to the that class one (bike or multi-use paths) or Larkspur Ferry Terminal with the arrival class two (bike lanes) will be provided at and departure of GGBH&TD boats. ferry terminals, as well as on roads leading to terminals. Terminal design will The fact is, only a small percentage of include safe bicycle storage for those who Bay Area residents can travel from home do not take their bikes onto the ferry. to their desired destination via a single public transit mode. No one transit Transit Access operator can succeed alone, which means good connections are needed if we are To effectively build dedicated ridership going to increase transit ridership and in the real world of California’s “auto- subsequently reduce traffic congestion. culture,” neither the Authority nor any

< Sources: ABAG and Authority Studies 31 When it comes to Bay Area transit, the carpool, 28 percent take another form Appropriate Parking Thus, when ferry terminals need parking sum is truly greater than the parts. of transit (such as bus to BART) and 20 lots, they should be sized appropriately percent walk or bike. Parking demand at the proposed ferry and should provide attractive options Transit operators including BART, terminals is dependent upon adjacent land that encourage walking, bicycling and GGBH&TD, AC Transit, SamTrans and Another key factor that feeds people’s use, the size of the terminal’s ridership the use of bus or rail to reach the SF MUNI have joined the Authority in this perceived need to drive is the geographic catchment area, the ability to operate ferry terminals. Measures to minimize effort. All who participated in the disconnect between jobs and housing. effective transit feeder service and the the demand for parking spaces could Intermodal Working Group recognized the Bay Area housing costs will remain beyond local communities’ views about parking. include car-parking charges, car-share importance of good connections, and the reach of many people who work in programs and preferential parking for However, a ferry system should maximize shared their experiences of the the region, creating the need for long car- and van-pool users. difficulties related to accomplishing this commutes until more effective land-use walk, bicycle and transit access, and task. As the Authority moves forward, it and transit strategies are introduced. minimize the need for parking lots, in the intends to continue working with the spirit of the San Francisco Bay Plan. other Bay Area transit agencies and MTC because this work will be among the most important in getting more people onto public transit.

This new water-transit system includes an expanded land-transit system to serve ferry terminals. It was developed in cooperation with existing transit agencies and provides additional buses and service hours. Overall, nearly one-quarter of the estimated operating costs go to the land-transit connections that will bring riders to the ferry terminals.

The lack of good connections for most transit riders, combined with California’s strong driving culture, remain the greatest barriers to increased transit use.

Recent studies by BART and MTC reinforce this point. The “1998 BART Station Profile Study” shows that nearly half of all BART passengers (49 percent) drive from home to BART, compared to 26 percent who walk, 23 percent who take another transit mode and 3 percent who bicycle.

For those who use transit for the majority of their commute between home and work, MTC’s “Commute Profile 2001” found that 40 percent drive to and from the transit portion of their commute, while 12 percent

32 SAUSALITO FERRY TERMINAL Maximize Land Use — Water Transit both the capital cost of the terminal WaTOD Examples Additionally, Jack London Square is Oriented Development (WaTOD) parking and the impact of that parking undergoing a renaissance that will provide on waterfront scenery. Most Bay Area Jack London Square the opportunity to integrate these transit residents view Sausalito as unique. systems directly into new development. As discussed in The Demand chapter, Development of the Jack London Square However, through effective waterfront Approximately 900 housing units have been water transit can play a significant role ferry terminal provides a great opportunity planning, many of Sausalito’s qualities built in the area in the last three years, in enhancing land use in select Bay Area for connectivity because it is Oakland’s can be duplicated at other ferry and about 300 more units are planned. locations where it is desirable to create gateway for two transit systems — terminal sites around the Bay. More hotel, retail and entertainment mixed-use neighborhoods along already Amtrak/Capital Corridor train and the ferry. space also will be built. developed waterfront. Clearly, placing Nearby connections also are available to ferry terminals close to large job centers Case Studies BART and AC Transit, potentially linking A number of different ferry terminal and residential areas means more people major regional and inter-regional transit sites within the Jack London Square area, can reach water transit via foot, bicycle or The application of these principles services in one location. including the current Clay Street location, shuttle, which is the experience in cities will vary greatly depending on the like New York, Vancouver and Sydney. opportunities and constraints of the Figure 16 individual terminal sites. The following Creating effective WaTOD will create more case studies effectively demonstrate viable transit choices for people who would how the principles can be applied. rather not drive. They can choose to live and work in locations that make it easy Two sites — Jack London Square in to leave their car at home — or to not Oakland and Oyster Point in South own a car at all. San Francisco — hold great promise for WaTOD and improved transit While many world-class water-transit connections. Another location, Hunters systems, such as Vancouver and Sydney, Point Shipyard Development in San effectively integrate ferry service into Francisco, could become a model urban surrounding land uses, one of the best WaTOD site if proposed development examples of complementary land uses plans are approved. Additionally, serving water transit can be found in locations such as the Port of Redwood the San Francisco Bay Area. City, Martinez, Alameda Point and Antioch are good candidates. At each, The Sausalito Ferry Terminal is located effective water transit can be an adjacent to a waterfront business- and enormous asset for those who live, shopping-area that attracts both Bay Area work, shop and recreate there. residents and visitors arriving by ferry. Surrounding the commercial area is a Frankly, it is difficult to find consensus relatively dense residential community among Bay Area transportation stake- that is extremely desirable due to its holders, but one point everyone agrees waterfront location. Little parking is on is the desire to increase the number provided at the ferry terminal, and the of transit riders who leave their cars available parking is expensive, so this at home. Sensible WaTOD, particularly community reaches the ferry terminal via as part of a transit system that makes free shuttle buses, a short walk or a good connections, is the best way to bicycle ride. increase the number of travelers who consistently use transit. The result is a transit service that is JACK LONDON SQUARE TERMINAL — TRANSIT CONNECTIONS (CONCEPTUAL DESIGN ONLY) used primarily by non-drivers, reducing Source: Authority Study 33 A key to the development of an intermodal terminal at Jack London Square will be connections to rail and AC Transit’s bus network.

were reviewed for opportunities to improve Therefore, a key to the development of Figure 17 water-transit connectivity. Each of the an intermodal terminal at Jack London sites investigated offers both advantages Square will be connections to rail and AC and disadvantages to ferry service. Transit’s bus network. These connections must duplicate the frequent and The ultimate location of a ferry terminal convenient connections provided by SF must be included in a comprehensive MUNI at the San Francisco Ferry Terminal planning process that balances local and to fulfill the ridership potential. This AC regional needs. To demonstrate the Transit service would connect the water- principles of connectivity, the Authority transit system to downtown Oakland studied a ferry terminal location further employers such as Caltrans on Franklin south than the Clay Street location, Street, state and federal employees on Clay near the foot of Harrison Street. Street, and private sector businesses such This demonstration site was chosen as Clorox and APL Limited on Broadway. because of its proximity to the Amtrak station, adjacent housing and As shown in Figure 17, the ferry terminal future development. must overcome the barrier established by the railroad tracks that bisect the Jack Currently, the terminal at Jack London London Square area. The sketch shows a Square serves primarily commute and direct pedestrian connection over railroad recreation trips from the East Bay to San tracks between the ferry and a new bus Francisco. However, downtown Oakland hub located at the existing Amtrak station. has the second greatest job density That connection also ties the three transit (behind the San Francisco Financial systems (Water Transit, Amtrak, AC District) in the Bay Area. That job density, Transit) to established bike and pedestrian coupled with new development along the access, allowing all transit modes to benefit Jack London Square waterfront, highlights from a single infrastructure investment. Oakland’s unfulfilled potential as not just an origin, but also as a destination JACK LONDON SQUARE TERMINAL — MULTIMODAL ACCESS (CONCEPTUAL DESIGN ONLY) for water transit. Source: Authority Study 34 Figure 18

POTENTIAL OYSTER POINT TERMINAL SITE NEAR GENENTECH

Oyster Point Again, the key to the success of this service will be providing good connections Like Oakland, the Oyster Point terminal between water transit and the workplace. is forecast to serve primarily people Many Peninsula commuters are using commuting into San Francisco — in this shuttles to travel to and from Caltrain, case from South San Francisco. However, and they are eager to do the same with water transit could be a significant water transit. The map of the Oyster commute option into South San Francisco Point vicinity (Figure 18) shows how for employees at waterfront companies shuttle bus service could effectively and such as Genentech. conveniently tie water transit to employers and other transit systems. In At Oyster Point, Genentech and addition, the terminal would fit into the surrounding light industrial companies, planned Bay Trail, allowing a direct like UPS, employ thousands of people transit connection along the shoreline for who live in San Francisco and the East bikers and pedestrians. Bay — enough to potentially make water transit viable. By putting a ferry terminal near Genentech and UPS, it will be easier and more desirable for workers to ride ferries instead of driving across the Bay Bridge, the San Mateo Bridge, and up and down U.S. 101.

OYSTER POINT TERMINAL — INTERMODAL CONNECTIONS

Source: Authority Study 35 36 4 THE TERMINALS receive information. buy theirtickets and through theterminals, way passengersmove standardizing the system isachievedby Creating awater-transit of abeautifulbay, andmustbeinharmonywiththeirsurroundings. community.each uniquewaterfront Theterminalsarealsoontheshoreline character oftheterminalscanandshouldbeacentralelementin defining F • • buy theirtickets andreceive information. passengers move through the terminals, by achieved Creating systemis awater-transit transit tolandsidetransit. system—andconnecting water a ferry routes into a seriesofseparateferry system,turning backbone oftheferry However, theterminalsalsoform with beautiful bay, andmustbeinharmony terminals are alsoontheshoreline ofa each uniquewaterfront community. The should beacentralelementindefining of character waterfront communities, andthe terminalsare historicgatewaysto Ferry •T Francisco Bayshoreline willalso: terminalsontheSan water-transit terminalsmustfulfill.New water-transit just oneoftheessentialfunctionsthat Providing adirect transitconnectionis erry terminals are historic gateways to waterfront communities,andthe terminalsarehistoricgatewaystowaterfront erry visual aesthetics desired Display thehostcommunity’s passengers andnon-passengers Enhance shorelineaccessforboth passengers standard, predictablefeaturesfor ie the ferry systemtogetherbyproviding ie theferry their surroundings. standardizing theway the terminalscanand must bemade. for passengermovementandqueuing Therefore, adequateaccommodation nearly fivetimeshigherthantoday. operations The terminalcouldseeferry expansion. water-transit hub fornearlyalloftheplanned Terminal, asthe Ferry whichserves be giventotheSanFranciscoDowntown the Bay, specialconsiderationmust terminalsserving When consideringferry confusion. the terminalsquicklyandwithout what toexpectsotheycanmovethrough BART andSFMUNI, Like otherlarge transit systemssuchas passengers willknow in theAuthority’s financialplans. TerminalDowntown Ferry are included costs toexpandfacilitiesatthe The and theotherexistingoperators. longterm leaseholdattheFerry Francisco, theGGBH&TD,whichhasa ofSan especiallythePort parties, include themanyinterested andaffected analyze thealternatives.Planningmust over capacity. studyisneededto Further terminal facilitieswillbeoperatingat W ith theexpectedgrowth, theexisting L ARKSPUR FERRYTERMINAL Building, Figure 19 STANDARD MODULAR FERRY TERMINAL — CONCEPTUAL DESIGN

Source: Authority Study

37 Community Experience location. The character of a terminal comfortable and aesthetically pleasing Passenger Experience will highlight its unique purpose and for all passengers, whether they are in a The ferry terminals will serve as welcoming features, as well as blend in with the hurry or have time to simply watch the For passengers, the terminals will be gateways to each unique waterfront local architecture to create a positive boats come and go. a critical part of their commute or community. The concept is to propose a maritime focal point. recreational trip, and will provide the generic modular design (see Figure 19) The generic modular design allows each safety, efficiency and comfort in an that includes those elements required to Shoreline access and viewpoints will terminal to fit into site-specific constraints attractive setting that they expect. meet the system’s operational needs. In continue to maintain the positive bond and become operational in a cost-effective Terminals will be designed for maximum later stages of planning, this modular between the community and the Bay. manner. It can be reconfigured as passenger efficiency of communication and design will serve as the starting point for The terminal buildings and the areas traffic and vessel activity increase. movement, and these design features detailed work with each community to around them will be created with people will be standardized in all terminals. The develop a terminal tailored to each and their needs in mind. They will be standardization will apply to traffic flow, organization and display of information, and the processes for ticketing and boarding. The terminals will provide a pleasant experience that is an extension of the ferry ride itself: beautiful views, comfortable work and reading space, food service and places to sit and chat with friends.

Each step in the passengers’ journey has been considered in light of their needs. Passengers arriving by bus, shuttle or private vehicle will have short walks from parking or drop-off locations close to the terminal. Bicyclists will be provided with bike racks, lockers or check-in facilities. Pedestrians will enjoy tree-lined walks that are well lighted and marked by helpful signs.

Ensuring passengers’ understanding of the timetables, ticketing and boarding process is also critical. Upon entering the terminal, passengers will have access to tickets, route maps and directions for connecting to land-based transit.

VALLEJO FERRY TERMINAL The terminal buildings and the areas around them will be created with people and their needs in mind. They will be comfortable and aesthetically pleasing for all passengers, whether they are in a hurry or have time to simply watch the boats come and go.

The terminals are designed to handle floating dock (float) on a pedestrian System Needs There are additional advantages. The standardized ticketing, such as bridge (transfer span), pass through a floating dock needed for side-loading TransLink®, that connects with other turnstile and board the vessel. The ferry system operational needs ferries allows for faster loading of bicycles transit. A “proof of purchase” system for include: during bow-loading of other passengers. ticketing and boarding will be further The ticketing system combined with the • Safe and fast vessel docking studied. This will allow passengers to turnstile responds to Coast Guard Similarly, the float needed for bow-loading regulations requiring accurate counts ferries allows the boat to dock and tie-up board quickly and allow the ferry crew to • The ability to dock both bow-(front) or concentrate on vessel handling rather of passengers on board. The passageways side-loading vessels more quickly than for side-loading. Finally, than passenger handling. are designed with a minimum number of the standard vessel door locations used turns, and are wide enough for two people • The flexibility to interchange boats of various by the water-transit system will make it Because the Coast Guard mandates strict to walk and board comfortably side by sizes on the various routes easier to use any boat on any route to passenger load limits, the secure waiting side. For passengers in wheelchairs or any terminal. area is designed to accommodate no needing special assistance while boarding, •Vessel maintenance more than one boatload of people. Those the transfer span will comply with the • Crew and passenger safety waiting will be protected from the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) weather in an area with comfortable at all tidal levels. The most important aspect of these seating, restrooms and large windows needs is the design of the floating dock. with views of the dock and the Bay. If the Bicycle commuters will be able to The existing ferries on the Bay are all boarding area is full, passengers will comfortably load through a separate side-loading, but bow-loading vessels are queue in a covered waiting area until the boarding and disembarking area in the being considered as an option for the new secure waiting area is available. rear (aft) and side of the vessel. This will routes. By accommodating both types of avoid conflicts between bicycles and vessels, the system will provide maximum Moving passengers on and off boats quickly other passengers, and provide additional flexibility to move and dock boats as and safely is necessary to minimize trip time for cyclists to board. The bikes needed. This adds value for day-to-day times and maximize the popularity of the will be stored in racks at the rear of operations, as well as for disaster- system. When boarding, the walk from the the vessel. response capabilities. waiting area to the boat will be safe and as short as possible. Passengers will leave the boarding area, cross over to the

39 Flexibility is just one of several critical factors addressed in the recommended designs for new passenger ferries on San Francisco Bay. New passenger ferries will be affordable, and the vessel research-and-development program THE BOATS

5 will aggressively pursue the goal of deploying zero-emission ferries (ZEFs) as quickly as possible.

Flexibility is just one of several critical • Creation of an in-service emissions is reached and those “ZEFs” are plying factors addressed in the recommended monitoring protocol for passenger ferries the waters of San Francisco Bay. designs for new passenger ferries on San • Identification of five propulsion options that Francisco Bay. New passenger ferries will The Authority is proceeding along that meet one of the most stringent emissions be affordable, and the vessel research- course. Federal design and construction targets ever placed on a public-transit agency and-development program will aggressively funds totaling $2.6 million have been — one of which is immediately deployable pursue the goal of deploying zero-emission awarded to help pay for an R&D project: a demonstration hydrogen fuel-cell ferries (ZEFs) as quickly as possible. • Creation of affordable vessel designs that are environmentally responsible powered passenger ferry. In fact, the vessel research, design and acquisition programs will lead the Bay •A plan for a smooth and economical transition Alternative Fuels and Emissions Area from the existing passenger-ferry from the existing fleet to a new fleet that fleet to one that is ten-times cleaner, will more efficiently and effectively transport This year-long study examined 39 The Authority found using cutting-edge marine technology. water-transit passengers to more locations combinations of fuels and propulsion throughout San Francisco Bay systems. The Authority’s Clean Marine a propulsion system New passenger ferries on San Francisco Ad Hoc Work Group of state and federal Bay will be compatible to both existing that is ten times The Goal: ZEFs regulators, environmental advocates, and new terminals. Because these vessels scientists and naval architects found will be able to load and unload passengers cleaner than existing The course plotted to put clean passenger one propulsion system made of existing quickly and efficiently, water transit will be ferries on San Francisco Bay begins with off-the-shelf technology that today can ferries and can be an even more attractive and convenient budgeting more than $1 million in research affordably achieve emissions reductions travel option that draws more riders. to reach a significant milestone: build and that are at least 85 percent below EPA’s operational within These boats will accommodate bicycles, deploy affordable boats propelled by 2007 Tier II engine standards. This is the baby carriages and wheelchairs, provide three years of technology far cleaner than the U.S. reduction level CARB suggests as the the highest degree of safety, and maintain Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed standard and one the their utility as the water-transit system funding approval. (EPA) 2007 Tier II standards for marine Authority will mandate. This propulsion evolves. engine emissions. system is ten times cleaner than existing ferries and can be operational within The Authority’s studies report a number From that milestone, the course will follow three years of funding approval. of breakthroughs accomplished in the continued research and development past year: until the goal of zero-emissions ferries 40 Technical studies presented to Clean Marine found four other propulsion systems made from existing technology that also achieve CARB’s suggested reductions, but regulatory and technical hurdles remain before they can be deployed.

Clean Marine’s work produced additional key findings:

• Current diesel-powered passenger ferries on the Bay produce significantly less pollution (hydro-carbons [HC], nitrogen oxides [NOx] and particulate matter [PM]) than previously reported

• Several environmentally responsible propulsion alternatives are suitable for paving the way to a “fuel-cell future” that eventually will allow us to run fully electric ZEFs on San Francisco Bay

• Implementation of these propulsion technologies, coupled with the forecast reduction in car trips, will reduce the region- wide level for most significant pollutants

Existing Fleet

The water-transit fleet currently operating on San Francisco Bay is cleaner than previously reported. In-service emissions monitoring protocol — so-called “in-situ” monitoring — was used to test three existing vessels with different engine types during their normal operations. The monitoring, conducted between March and June 2002, helped determine the actual performance of current passenger ferries.

In-situ monitoring was done for another important reason: to create a protocol or methodology to measure future ferry emissions, ensuring that boats are performing as expected and environmental impacts are carefully scrutinized. 41 “The Water Transit Authority is really trying to jumpstart new technologies that will produce the cleanest fleet in the world. There's still a lot of work to be done to implement this vision, but Bluewater Network looks forward to working on this. This planning process has shown the great benefits of collaboration between government, industry and the environmental community.”

Russell Long, Executive Director, Bluewater Network

Figure 20 propels the boat. Thirty-nine components — ranging from sail to mainstream marine technology to new hybrid fuels — were studied. Then, 14 combinations of engines, fuels and drives were identified by Clean Marine to model in order to learn how they perform on the types of boats needed for Bay Area water transit:

•400-passenger traveling at 35 knots for 25 miles • 400-passenger, 25 knots, 15 miles Source: Authority Emissions Testing Study • 149-passenger, 25 knots, 15 miles • 149-passenger, 15 knots, 10 miles This protocol passed muster with CARB, reduction (SCR) and a particulate trap Course to Cleaner Passenger Ferries the Bay Area Air Quality Management (PT), running on diesel fuel and using As a result, Clean Marine’s study identified The process to recommend these District (BAAQMD) and EPA. As a result, mechanical-drive propulsion. five propulsion alternatives that meet propulsion alternatives is fully described the Authority is presenting an in-service CARB’s suggested emissions standards. This propulsion suite can be the “first- in the Appendix in the “New Technologies emissions monitoring protocol for (See Figure 22 on page 39.) passenger ferries and recommends that generation” technology that will allow the and Alternative Fuels Study.” it be instituted on San Francisco Bay. Authority to build a water-transit system However, issues remain before four of To summarize, the Clean Marine Ad Hoc that reduces congestion and improves air these alternatives can be used: quality at a cost that is both financially Work Group sought propulsion technology New Vessels and environmentally responsible. that meets CARB’s suggested emissions • Natural gas fuel does not yet have regulatory goal and also is: approval for use on U.S. passenger ferries Fuels and Propulsion Meanwhile, the vessel research and development program will continue •Technically feasible • The electric drive is not cost-effective for all Among the five propulsion options that pushing forward on the regulatory and • Environmentally responsible sizes and speeds of vessels reduce emissions at least 85 percent technology design fronts so that ZEFs • Economically practical below the 2007 standards, one can be • Battery electric also requires additional can begin operating on the Bay as used today on passenger ferries: a Marine propulsion has three components: research and development before it is small quickly as possible. diesel engine with selective catalytic the engine, the fuel and the drive that enough and powerful enough to work 42 for water transit Figure 21 Work has begun to overcome those technology challenges. The research and development program’s initial project is leveraging a $100,000 federal grant to begin the design work needed to deploy fuel-cell technology as rapidly as possible. In addition to this development of a small fuel cell-battery-electric vessel for Treasure Island service, the Authority will pursue funding to design and build a second experimental vessel testing hybrid diesel/electric technology to serve as a bridge between diesels and the fuel- cell future.

Vessel Design

These aggressive emissions standards not only effect propulsion systems — they have a significant effect on vessel designs as well. Existing passenger-ferries cannot support the required emission- control systems, but the Authority has developed cost-effective designs that will.

For the first ten years, the Authority recommends building two vessel sizes that meet Coast Guard regulations, and may consider applying International Maritime Organization (IMO) regulations where applicable. These vessels will Figure 22 meet the requirements of both the shorter- and longer-distance routes:

• 149-passenger/25 knot for the shorter routes

• 300–350 passenger/30–35 knot for the longer routes

The Draft Vessel Request for Proposals (RFP) in the Appendix sets environmental impact goals that the designers must meet — such as emissions, noise and wake impacts — and allows them the freedom to create a successful design. — — It also provides financial incentives for Source: Authority New Technologies and Alternative Fuels Study 43 beating the standards, and levies Design Specifications and Rationale •Wake-impact limits the Authority is imposing travelers on a trip of 30 minutes or less. financial penalties for failing performance After extensively studying a number of commitments. The key Owner’s The bulk of the new vessels’ design • Dock interface compatibility with existing methods used by water transit around the and new terminals Requirements address: requirements are detailed in applicable world, the Authority selected the best rules and regulations by the Coast Guard, To fulfill the mission of attracting drivers practices for Bay Area water transit, •emissions • wake the American Bureau of Shipping and and getting cars off congested roads, these where currently only side-loading vessels • passenger capacity • service speed the IMO. The design requirements not vessels must help make the water-transit are used. • dock interface • passenger access spelled out by those bodies include: system run as efficiently as possible. • The aforementioned emissions restrictions Rapid loading and unloading can reduce •Passenger access that meets the standards total trip time by up to ten minutes — a of the ADA significant time reduction to time-sensitive Figure 23

Source: Authority Vessel Performance Specs & Draft RFP For example, that study of other ferry Federal law requires that U.S. flag Figure 24 Vessel Maintenance systems identified advantages and short- passenger ferries be built in the United comings of ferries that load through the States. Existing U.S. shipyards that are This study identified two major points: bow compared to those that load through capable of building boats were surveyed several levels of maintenance facilities are doors on the side. Bow-loading operations to the recommended standards needed, and very little maintenance can allow ferries to tie up quickly and unload and 11 were found to possess the be performed at passenger terminals. passengers with a minimum of bottlenecks. following necessary capabilities: Therefore, this plan includes funds for Side-loading operations allow bike and building overnight layover berths. The pedestrian passengers to load and unload •A management team with experience leading the manufacturing operations for high-speed size and extent of these facilities ultimately without disruption to each other and aluminum or composite catamaran and depends upon the size of the water-transit to operate with the existing Bay Area monohull vessels capable of speeds of 25 system, the number of boats operating passenger ferries and terminals. knots or greater in it and the number of operators. To capture the advantages of both, there •A technical team, either in-house or with a The Authority recommends studying the are design specifications for vessels and close subcontractor relationship, with the possibility of establishing a shipyard terminals to accommodate both side- capability to design and production-engineer facility capable of any level of maintenance, loading and bow-loading operations. light aluminum or composite vessels 80 feet including dry-docking and re-engining — This flexibility will allow new vessels or longer configured to service about 75 percent to serve both new and existing terminals, of the fleet, with the remainder going and to handle passenger flow in a variety •An efficient production facility and organization to other shipyards. This strategy, to be of ways. capable of manufacturing and constructing the vessel designs as proven by competitive implemented when the water-transit fleet pricing and delivery schedules in the high- reaches the appropriate size, would lessen Vessel Acquisition Plan speed ferry boat market the dependence on outside contractors, reduce the impact of low-demand periods, New boats will be acquired using • Demonstrable financial strength with and would justify such a facility that is standard procurement procedures outlined reasonable ability to obtain bonding tailored to efficiently service the latest by state and federal regulations. It is technology vessels. There also would be important that issues beyond the initial • The ability to build a production series of efficiencies of scale for the overnight lay purchase cost be considered, such as ferries at a competitive price with relatively berths and stationary maintenance shops. emissions, safety, wake, operating cost, short times between deliveries maintainability, transit-cycle times and Currently, there is no California builder With the planned increase in the number life-cycle cost. that meets all these requirements, but the of vessels to be serviced, however, there likely would be a market for increased Thus, the boat with the best value may Authority will continue to monitor the repair capability in the Bay Area. not turn out to be the least-expensive industry and ensure that all qualified to buy, but rather the one with the builders are able to compete for these There are a number of repair alternatives lowest emissions or the fastest passenger contracts. worth studying, such as a floating dry loading and unloading times that is also dock or marine railway capable of hauling competitively priced. boats onto Mare Island, roving repair trucks and a maintenance barge. The former naval shipyard at Hunters Point may also be suitable for ferry maintenance.

Source: Authority Vessel Performance Specs & Draft RFP 45 46 6 THE DISASTER-RESPONSE PLAN a links —sometimesfor oth Area toreplace six timesintheBay have beenutilized In 23years,ferries few months. and sometimesfora few er

transportation hours ordays, emergency following transportation throughout theworldofassisting with intheBayArea and Ferries havea history r comprehensive multi-modaltransportation Bay Area Trans ResponsePlan—the coordinating ofthe themaritimeportion r that theWTA canplayavaluablerole in the CoastGuard andothers,itisclear Additionally, afterconsultationwith MTC, r sites, aswellevacuateciviliansand personnel andequipmenttoreach disaster the abilityoffirst-responder emergency eight newterminalswillgreatly enhance new bow-andside-loadingferries pointoutthatthe31proposedofficials capacity. Countyemergency services increase theregion’s emergency response expand BayArea willsignificantly water-transit Implementation oftheAuthority’s planto man-made disaster. inresponsesupport toanaturalor but alsotoprovide vitaltransportation to besafeandsecure initsdailyoperations, W 6.01 plan? with emergency transportation following with emergencytransportation F esponse toaBayArea regional emergency. egional emergency-response planningby estore regional mobility. ater transitnotonlyhasaresponsibility erries have a history intheBayAreaand erries haveahistory What isthedisasterresponse short-term response.short-term an essentialelementofimmediate and catastrophic eventsinwhichferrieswere r Area, NewYork andtheIstanbul-Izmit to moveemergency personnel.TheBay as wellthepotentialimmediate need Area untildisruptionscanbealleviated, move peopleandgoodsabouttheBay The Authorityrecognizes theneedto links. disruption offixedtransportation cannot eliminatethepotentialfor probability ofdamage inthefuture, it While thisinvestmentwillreduce the Area. (SeeFigures 25and26,pp.44-45.) disruptions canbethroughout theBay study showedhowextensivetravel r andthelikely has focusedonearthquakes For years,BayArea disasterplanning disaster inNewYork. and the9/11 Loma PrietaEarthquake the role ferriesplayedfollowingthe1989 The mostnotablerecent examplesare large passengerloads efficiently. are enormouslyvaluableformoving shows thatferries’flexibilityandsize natural orman-madedisasters.Experience oad closures thatresult. Arecent ABAG egion ofTurkey allhavewitnessed natural orman-madedisasters. throughout theworldofassisting contingency whendisasterstrikes. normal timesandprovides acritical alternative totheautomobile offered bywatertransitpr system isessential.Theextrachoice r r for afewmonths.Whathasbeenseen for afew other six timesintheBayArea toreplace In 23years,ferrieshavebeenutilized bridges andBART. built-in flexibilitythatislackingwith facilities forthoseroutes provide a andadditionaldocking service of ferry late 1930s.Thegradualre-establishment the completionoffirstbridgesin was theonlywaytocross theBaybefore system.Waterof itstransportation transit makes watertransitanaturalcomponent population centersclustered neartheBay, The geographyoftheBayArea, with The BayArea edundancy in our transportation edundancy inourtransportation epeatedly isthatsomelevelof transportation links transportation hours ordays,andsometimes — sometimes ovides an during Bay Area experience with sudden increases high-speed vessels were borrowed New York 16. All New York ferry terminals are now in ferry use include: from Washington State and used to operating again, and the Port Authority supplement the single-vessel Vallejo to In recent years, the private operator New has plans to invest $133 million in the • 1979 BART transbay tube fire San Francisco ferry service that was York Waterway developed trans-Hudson next five years to upgrade existing water-transit service to augment the PATH • 1982 Marin County mudslides that blocked operating at that time. terminals or build new ones. (See train that connects New Jersey and lower access to the Golden Gate Bridge “Launching a Flotilla of Ferry Terminals,” Most recently, the terrorist attacks on Manhattan via two routes underneath New The New York Times, April 7, 2002, in • 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake that blocked New York caused many people to seek York Harbor, including one with a terminal The Data [Appendix].) access to and damaged the Bay Bridge the safest way to leave the San Francisco at the World Trade Center. Financial District, and both the GGBH&TD Istanbul • 1997 BART strike and the Alameda/Oakland ferries ran The terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center also destroyed the PATH system extra unscheduled service to meet In August 1999, an earthquake measuring • 1998 power outage that shut down BART terminal beneath the complex. Water the demand. Extra service also was 7.5 on the Richter scale struck the transit was used to evacuate many people • 2001 terrorism warnings for the Bay and operated in November 2001 when Istanbul region, leveling more than from lower Manhattan to New Jersey, Golden Gate bridges Governor Davis and the FBI issued threat 100,000 buildings and killing and to bring emergency personnel to the assessments describing potential approximately 18,000 people. While As Bay Area water transit has expanded, disaster site. The Coast Guard estimates terrorist action against the toll bridges. bridges across the Bosporus were not the capacity to respond to emergencies that approximately one million people For several days, GGR&HTD water-transit affected, access roadways were and the has increased as well. There was no were moved on 9/11 using ferries and a service carried 50 percent more riders ferry operator Istanbul Deniz Otobusleri East Bay-to-San Francisco ferry service variety of other vessels. than normal. (IDO) used its four fast car and truck when a January 1979 fire shut the BART catamaran ferries (part of a fleet of 26 tube for 12 weeks, but excursion vessels After the Loma Prieta Earthquake, daily New York Waterway alone evacuated vessels developed in the past 15 years) to were used to establish service from ferry ridership tripled to 20,000 trips 160,000 people to New Jersey on 9/11. provide rapid relief and rescue services Oakland and Berkeley to San Francisco. a day once the expanded network was Normal daily ridership on the fleet of 23 across the Sea of Marmara. In 1982, rain-induced mudslides on Waldo in place. Current daily water-transit vessels was 34,000 a day. Since the Grade closed the Golden Gate Bridge ridership is now approaching 15,000 trips, terrorist attacks on the World Trade approach for a day-and-a-half, and the three and the emergency capacity today could Center, the system has chartered 11 Benefits of Expanded Ferry Network Larkspur ferries to and from San Francisco handle many more trips than it did after additional vessels, including whale- Recent experience shows that emergency carried 12,200 passengers in one day — the earthquake. watching boats, and is carrying 60,000 ferry service provides immediate response more than triple the normal ridership. passengers a day. In 1989, there were six vessels in the capability, and operators can place When the Loma Prieta Earthquake Bay Area used in ferry service — Because the PATH train to lower Manhattan additional vessels in service even before damaged the Bay Bridge and BART today there are 13. The hourly seat will be out of service for two to three official procedures are formally implemented temporarily shut down the transbay tube capacity on water-transit routes was years, this water-transit ridership is by MTC, Caltrans and the Governor’s Office until it could be thoroughly inspected, 2,500 people in 1989 — today it is expected to continue growing and new of Emergency Services. While growth of excursion vessels and dining yachts more than 5,000. Adding the excursion vessels have been ordered to replace the Bay Area water transit to date has were the only way to transport workers and dining vessels that could be chartered vessels. expanded the capacity to carry extra used effectively on shorter crossings passengers on an emergency basis, the from San Francisco back to the East Bay Other New York ferry operators also (San Francisco to Oakland or San capacity is still well below potential need. for a few hours. Within two days, have increased service and there are Francisco to Sausalito), Bay Area water-transit service using excursion plans to establish additional terminals in For example, closure of the Golden Gate water-transit passenger capacity vessels was established between Oakland lower Manhattan to accommodate the Bridge is projected to boost peak hour increases from 8,700 people per hour and San Francisco to supplement BART. increased service. The New York demand to 10,000 passengers between in 1989 to 14,500 in 2002. Within a week, temporary routes were Waterway terminal at the World Financial Marin and San Francisco according to the established from Berkeley and Richmond, Center was closed for several months, 1999 MTC Regional Ferry Plan Update. and within two weeks, two additional and service was diverted to Piers 11 and That is about three times the capacity of

47 Figure 25 the combined existing Sausalito, Tiburon has consulted with MTC, who currently and Larkspur water-transit services. is responsible for the Regional Ferry Contingency Plan, and there is agreement The recommended service level in this that the WTA should undertake the lead plan would lower the gap to 50 percent role in this important effort. of the emergency demand level. Then, by using excursion vessels and shifting The Regional Ferry Contingency Plan must capacity from other water-transit routes accurately assess current emergency- — if facilities were compatible — the response assets, develop viable contingencies emergency demand level could be met. for a variety of possible emergencies and Because few vessels have the speed to disasters, and create a workable business operate efficiently on the 11 nautical-mile- resumption plan for the local maritime crossing from San Francisco to Larkspur, an community, including ferry operators, emergency plan for the Golden Gate excursion operators, water taxi, tug and corridor should emphasize service on the tow operators and commercial fishermen. shorter crossings to Sausalito and Tiburon. Then, this plan must be tested and Likewise, emergency service between San practiced through simulations of the Francisco and the East Bay should focus on various emergency and disaster scenarios service to Oakland, Alameda and Berkeley. to make sure it works. These cities provide the shortest crossings, and thus the most efficient use of ferries. The update has begun. Following discussions with MTC staff, the WTA convened an For the Peninsula, Oyster Point in South initial meeting on March 5, 2003, where San Francisco is well situated to provide the Coast Guard, ferry operators and emergency access in case highway travel excursion vessel operators discussed the between San Mateo County and San next steps required to update the Regional Francisco is disrupted. The proposed Ferry Contingency Plan, such as: ferry terminal could support the operation of San Francisco International Airport by • Identifying necessary alternative ferry landing transporting both passengers and airport sites for first-responder access and civilian workers who otherwise would be unable evacuation to reach the airport if the bridges and • Creating a detailed, up-to-date inventory of road approaches are damaged. available resources, including barges, docks, floats, fueling facilities and marine Next Steps construction contractors

The Regional Ferry Contingency Plan, part •Developing maritime emergency response of the Bay Area Trans Response Plan, has plans to determine the logical sequence of not been updated since 1996. During the maritime response based on various disaster past seven years, much has changed scenarios around the Bay in terms of available vessels and other emergency response • Determining and communicating the levels of assets, as well as the location of significant authority throughout the Bay Area Trans job centers where likely emergency Response Plan evacuations would be needed. The WTA

48 Source: ABAG “We have examined the WTA's plan for Contra Costa County and we believe that the new ferries and terminals proposed will be critical emergency-response assets should there be a natural or manmade disaster that closes key roads or bridges.”

Warren E. Rupf Sheriff, Contra Costa County

Figure 26 • Designating the Authority as the public entity responsible for Master Agreements with private maritime operators in order to ensure they are financially reimbursed for responding to emergencies, and

• Seeking and advocating for funding from homeland security or transportation sources for planning, training and investing in vessels, facilities and equipment.

Over the next several months, the WTA will continue the work necessary to update the Regional Ferry Contingency Plan, with the participation of MTC, the Coast Guard, the U.S. Department of Transportation, the Coastal Region Office of Emergency Services (OES), the National Guard, California Highway Patrol, the Ports of Alameda, Oakland and San Francisco, and the aforementioned maritime operators.

Once the Regional Ferry Contingency Plan is complete, the WTA will serve as coordinator of the ferry portion of the regional Trans Response Plan, working with OES, MTC, Caltrans and others to test the plan through simulation exercises and implement the plan in response to a natural or manmade disaster.

Source: ABAG 49 50 7 THE BAY and evaluations. site-specific studies will besubjectedto consideration, they advanced forfurther terminals are As routesand study isafirststep. This environmental r andallothers who elected officials of regulators, environmental activists, continues underthewatchful eyes species, developmentandopen space, and commerce, humansandotheranimal This complexco-existenceof recreation passenger ferries. vessels, othercommercial craftand fishing boats,cruiseships,military kayakers, oiltankers,containerships, swimmers, powerboaters,windsurfers, and plantsshare theBaywithsailors, Whales, seals,fish,birds, marinemammals andcommerce. ofindustry on acentury basins, aswellcitiesandtownsbuilt composed ofmarshes,wetlandsandtidal There are about1,000milesofshoreline 350-feet deepattheGoldenGate. 18-feet deep,butplungestomore than 548-square-mile Bayisgenerallylessthan to theSantaClaraCountymarshes, America. From theSacramentoRiverDelta andSouth along thePacificCoastofNorth San FranciscoBayisthelargest estuary 7.01 and accountsforthatcost. asignificantfinancialcost,andthiswater-transit planrecognizes carry in protectingtheBay, anddevelopingcleanmarinetechnology. Bothprinciples This planwasbuiltontwoironcladprinciples:takingaleadership role impacts? ecognize that San FranciscoBayisa What aretheenvironmental Environmental QualityAct(CEQA). the requirements oftheCalifornia that created theAuthority, anditmeets as directed bytheenablinglegislation that pr (FEIR) The FinalEnvironmental ImpactReport done toevaluatethepotentialimpacts. specific environmental studiesmustbe one newterminalisbuilt,extensivesite- new boatislaunchedonthatroute or But before onenewroute iscreated, one are minimized. terminals ontheBayanditshabitat ensure thattheimpactofvesselsand Furthermore, thisplanisdesignedto technology asquicklypossible. zer while developing (p. 36),making — andasdetailedin next tenyearsonthe548-square-mile Bay 31 more passengerferriesoverthe This planproposes addingasmany be protected. natural resource andtreasure thatmust accompanying thisplanbegins ocess. ThisEIRisprogrammatic, them ascleanpossible o-emissions The Boats chapter • • • • large project, andare related either: actions thatcanbecharacterizedasone which maybeprepared onaseriesof CEQA definesaProgram FEIRas“an program. and Program FEIRfocusesontheimpacts terminal individuallyandin-depth,this Rather thanstudyeachproposed route or in similarways.” environmental effectwhichcan bemitigated authority andhavinggenerallysimilar orregulatory the sameauthorizingstatutory as individualactivitiescarriedoutunder or govern theconductofacontinuingprogram; regulations, plansorothergeneralcriteriato in connectionwithissuanceofrules, contemplated actions; inthechainof as alogicalpart geographically; mitigation relevant totheoverall Figure 27 Thus, this environmental study is a identifies that with an expanded water- first-step. As routes or terminals are transit system, there is the potential, Sightings of Gray Whales in San Francisco Bay (Spring 2000) advanced for further consideration, they albeit small, of a ferry striking a whale. will be subjected to site-specific studies Existing practices combined with some and evaluations. operational and technical improvements should significantly reduce the possibility The Program FEIR accompanying this of a whale strike. plan evaluated the routes proposed by the Authority for implementation within Most whale sightings are by the captains the first ten years. and crew on ships, including passenger ferries, who make it standard practice to Fourteen environmental studies were maintain close watch for whales. conducted in the areas of: Information-sharing is an important step • Dredging • Navigation in avoiding vessel collisions with whales. •Wake Analysis • Biology When ship captains see a whale, they •Water Resources • Air Quality radio the Coast Guard who passes along • Cultural Resources • Land Use the location to all other ships in the • Noise • Aesthetics Bay. Ship captains increase vigilance •Transportation • Geology when they receive a whale-sighting • Growth Inducement • Energy report, presuming other whales may be in the Bay. If a whale is sighted, NMFS The detailed results of those studies are guidelines require maintaining a distance in the Program FEIR. The following is an of at least 100 yards. overview of the Program FEIR’s findings about the areas of greatest concern, as The Authority will require that all expressed in the Program FEIR scoping passenger ferries are equipped with comments and other feedback during the sonar to further ensure that collisions past 18 months. These topics include: with whales do not occur.

•Whales • Wake Analysis • Dredging • Air Quality Dredging • Plants and Wetlands • Birds Nearly eight million cubic yards of sediment • Seals and Sea Lions is dredged each year from the bottom of San Francisco Bay. The Long Term Management Source: Authority Program EIR Whales Strategy (LTMS) for Bay dredging calls for reducing volume and increasing beneficial Gray whale sightings have increased over reuse of dredged materials. the past several years as the species returns Therefore, with mitigations, the total Plants and Wetlands to historic levels, with nearly 50 sightings The Program FEIR study found that dredging for the recommended routes reported in San Francisco Bay in spring 2000. expanded water transit would require would be less than 0.08 percent of the Dredging can impact wetlands as well construction and maintenance dredging long-term average annual volumes as plants, which are indicator species According to the National Marine at some locations. There are several projected in the LTMS. of potentially serious environmental Fisheries Service (NMFS), there have routes that were studied that have very problems. Protected species such as been no documented collisions between high dredging requirements. However, eelgrass, and wetland areas subject to gray whales and any type of vessel in these routes are not now recommended special protection are located

San Francisco Bay. The Program FEIR for implementation. throughout San Francisco Bay. 51 Figure 28 The Program FEIR found that eelgrass Wake Analysis Harbor Seal and California Sea Lion Haul-Out Sites and beds are near the entrance to the potential Richmond terminal. Berkeley, Wake impact affects more than just Feeding Areas Martinez and Port Sonoma all have nearby animals. Wake can also cause shoreline mudflat habitat. erosion and other property damage if not properly mitigated. Site-specific environmental studies of each proposed route and terminal The most extensive San Francisco Bay location must be conducted to fully wake study in history was performed for evaluate impacts on these habitats. the Program FEIR. Measurements were taken at various locations around the Bay, Seals and Sea Lions and “hindcasting” was used to take extensive wind data and map the natural There are six Harbor Seal feeding areas waves generated by the Bay Area’s gusty in San Francisco Bay, and nine “haul-out” winds. sites where seals rest out of the water. There also are two California Sea Lion In most places where current and proposed haul-out sites. routes are located, both existing and new ferries generate waves that fall within the Two seal feeding areas — Castro Rocks range of wind-generated waves. at Angel Island and the southern tip of Yerba Buena Island — are near existing In “soft” shoreline areas that are currently water-transit routes. A third, off Coyote protected from wind, the ferry-generated Point, is near a proposed route. waves could be more significant. However, the significance can be reduced with The NMFS guidelines suggest that ships effective mitigations, such as speed should stay more than 150 feet away reduction or “route bending,” to push the from seals and sea lions that are in the wave energy away from the shore — which water, and more than 100 feet away has proven successful in Scandinavia. from haul-out sites. In addition, wave impacts are generally However, research shows that seals and less significant if ferries can maintain an sea lions are flushed by larger vessels, adequate distance from the shoreline. Where such as ferries, at greater distances. The ferries approach terminals or the shoreline, EIR study recommends that routes be additional study will be required to quantify more than 900 feet away from the Castro site-specific bathometry and various Source: Authority Program EIR Rocks and Yerba Buena Island feeding operational requirements of the ferries. areas. That recommendation will be Air Quality the site-specific EIRs required before new followed and applied to Coyote Point and The bottom line is that no new terminal terminals can be built. any other proposed route location. can and will be constructed, and no new Because the Authority is fully committed route implemented if further environmental to being the leader in clean marine Furthermore, the Bay Area Air Quality study shows wake-generated problems technology, the Program FEIR critically Management District (BAAQMD) conducted cannot be mitigated. examined the net impact of water-transit an independent air quality analysis of this service on Bay Area air quality. Such Plan and concluded that this proposed critical examination will continue with water-transit system will result in fewer future environmental studies, including emissions than the current passenger ferries on the Bay. 52 Additionally, BAAQMD expressed Birds The expanded ferry system will affect California Clapper Rail concerns about localized air-quality only a very small percentage of the impacts around the San Francisco Ferry San Francisco Bay is the most important overall surface area of the Bay outside Clapper Rails are year-round residents of Terminal that the Authority, the Port of habitat for migrating birds along the of the existing shipping lanes, which the Bay, living in salt and tidal marshlands. San Francisco and the existing ferry Pacific Flyway. Roughly 120 waterbird are not currently used by rafting birds. The issue with these birds is whether operators will take into account as species are in the Bay, most of which are However, through observation, anecdotal wake from ferries could swamp their nests, planning continues. waterfowl, gulls, terns, sandpipers and evidence and Geographic Information destroy eggs or kill chicks. phalaropes (small shorebirds that swim). System (GIS) computer mapping evaluation, The BAAQMD analysis is included in the Studies to date show that Clapper Rails the Program FEIR was able to identify that Program FEIR. The Program FEIR describes the potential are clever birds that generally build their if there was an impact to rafting birds, it impacts of enhanced water-transit on each nests far enough away from the shoreline The studies to date show that this plan would generally be limited to routes in category of bird. The Program FEIR so that large waves, which ease as they eliminates more than 130,000 daily the extreme North and South bays. scoping hearings and ongoing dialogue travel through tidal marshes, do not vehicle miles from Bay Area roads. This with regulators and environmental affect the nests. travel shift from vehicles to water-transit Ongoing environmental study connected groups reveal that the California Clapper powered by the recommended cleaner to this plan will continue to examine In most areas, waves generated by ferries Rail, a state and federal endangered engines produces a net decrease in the these issues before any new routes do not exceed the naturally occurring species, was of particular concern, along most harmful emissions of ozone- are implemented. wind-generated waves, so Clapper Rail with rafting birds in general. depleting nitrogen oxides (NOx) and nests should be unaffected by the cancer-causing particulate matter (PM). additional wave energy. However, where Rafting Birds ferries approach the shoreline, certain Additionally, through research the Rafting birds, such as ducks and gulls, Clapper Rail nests could be impacted Authority is now conducting on innovative by wake-generated waves. technologies including fuel cells, ferry- float on the water to rest. During the emission technology during the next 20 Program FEIR scoping hearings, a number Therefore, more research is needed to years should yield even more significant of organizations expressed concern about accurately identify Clapper Rail nesting reductions in pollutant levels. The frequent vessel traffic — whether from sites and determine if effective mitigations Authority will also explore the use of passengers ferries or any other ships exist. Because site-specific environmental low-emissions technology for vehicles it and boats — causing more collisions study is required before any new water- operates or has jurisdiction over. with these birds or making them transit route can be implemented or overly fatigued due to excessive any new terminal can be built, all bird By 2025, this plan will cause a net “collision avoidance.” impacts related to that route or site will reduction in the most harmful NOx and be fully examined. PM pollutants, and an increase of other The Authority consulted with the NMFS, less harmful emissions totaling less than Audubon groups and others to develop 0.3 percent of Bay Area pollution. studies that could effectively evaluate this issue, particularly the expressed concern There are a number of critical questions that “collision avoidance fatigue” could that remain about environmental impacts cause a decrease in reproduction and thus to specific terminal sites. However, through possibly threaten one or more species. future studies and implementation of the mitigations included in the Program EIR, After extensive consultation, experts water-transit expansion on San Francisco determined that this impact could not Bay can be complementary to the existing be effectively evaluated within the Bay environment while effectively serving short time frame of the Program FEIR. thousands of Bay Area travelers. Additional site-specific studies will be needed. 53 This study found six factors that influence Bay Area commuters’ travel choices: need for flexibility, desire to help the environment, need for time savings, sensitivity to personal travel experience, such as a need for “personal space” THE RIDERS

8 or quiet, insensitivity to transport costs and sensitivity to stress.

8.01 Who will ride water transit? purpose and how they arrived at the riders are primarily commuters, however terminal. In addition, data was collected a large number of mid-day, non-work The boats operating in the expanded San from a random sample of 850 potential trips originate from Jack London Square Francisco Bay Area water-transit system ferry riders living throughout the region, in Oakland. must carry sizable passenger loads in who were asked a number of questions order to operate cost-effectively. about attitudes towards transit modes. This study found six factors that influence The data from both the on-board surveys Bay Area commuters’ travel choices: Thanks to the knowledge learned from and the random-sample surveys was the ridership model described in The • Need for flexibility correlated with past MTC surveys and Routes chapter (p. 12), plus extensive census data, and validated for accuracy, • Desire to help the environment market-segment research, the Authority to give the most complete picture of both will be able to locate and attract the existing and future riders. • Need for time savings, which includes the This plan uses passengers needed to fill the boats and importance of reliability make expanded water transit successful. extensive market Existing Water-Transit Riders • Sensitivity to personal travel experience, This plan uses extensive market research such as a need for “personal space” or quiet research to evaluate to evaluate how well-expanded water Existing riders come primarily from areas close to ferry terminals. More than 80 • Insensitivity to transport costs how well-expanded transit will work and to learn about the people who will ride it. The fundamental percent of the riders on the longer routes • Sensitivity to stress water transit will questions answered are: (Larkspur to San Francisco and Vallejo to San Francisco) come from within 15 The research also shows that existing work and learn • Where are ferry riders originating? miles of the terminals. For shorter routes ferry riders: • Why do they choose water transit? (Sausalito, Alameda, Oakland and Harbor about the people Bay to San Francisco), the riders come • Are usually not stressed by their commute primarily from within five miles who will ride it. • How can others be drawn out of their cars • Select ferries partially because of a desire and onto ferries? of the terminal. to help the environment Survey information was collected from Overall, most current ferry riders arrive more than 3,000 current water-transit at the terminal by car. The exception is riders — basic quantitative data such Sausalito, where the majority of riders as where they were coming from, trip walk, bike or ride shuttle buses. Weekday 54 Further analysis determined that three of is composed primarily of these three destinations as quickly as possible. Frazzled The five remaining market segments are: these factors — environment, time and market segments: Flyers are younger people, with middle-to- stress — can be used to identify statistically high incomes. They have small families, but • “Casual Amblers” who are not concerned with any of the factors. They are the oldest significant differences between markets •“Anxious Amblers” who place a premium on because of their need to save time, usually their personal travel experience and a stress- people surveyed, with high incomes and of travelers. Those markets, and their have more than two vehicles per household. free trip. Anxious Amblers are statistically no children. They live alone or with one differences, are described in the market older people, with middle incomes, no kids •“Reserved Recyclers” who place a premium other person. segmentation chart below. and only one worker per household. on stress-free and environmentally friendly • “Calm Chargers” care most about saving Based on this analysis and the information commutes. These travelers are usually •“Frazzled Flyers” who care most about their time. They are younger, high income and from on-board surveys, the ridership middle-age people from small, lower-income personal travel experience and a stress-free households. Generally, there are two or living in households with three or more study found that the water-transit market trip, but also need to arrive at their more workers per household. people, including one child. Calm Chargers generally own two or more vehicles and average one worker per household.

Figure 29

Source: Authority Ridership Study 55 Figure 30 • “Green Cruisers” focus on the environment. They are high-income older people without children, generally living alone.

•“Relaxed Runabouts” place a premium on saving time and environmentally friendly commutes. They are young-to-middle-age working couples, generally have two or more children, high incomes and two or more vehicles.

•“Tense Trekkers” care about all the factors, but are most sensitive to cost. They are among the youngest market segment — generally middle-income working couples with one child and one vehicle.

The importance of this market segmentation can be seen in the maps. The study used MTC- and census-data to develop a geographical distribution of the different market segments. Using ABAG’s projections of future growth, the shifts and changes in the market segments are shown between the 1998 data and the projected 2025 data. (See Figures 30 and 31.)

Future Water-Transit Riders

This geographic and psycho graphic data provides the knowledge to effectively draw more water-transit riders. By knowing the types of people most likely to ride — and keep riding — water transit, where they live and where their destinations are:

•Transit planners can optimize water-transit locations, schedules and fares, as well as good feeder connections

• Marketers can most effectively advertise water transit and brand it into a “top-of- mind” transportation option

Source: Authority Ridership Study

56 The Authority already is using this Figure 31 psycho graphic data for further study of specific water-transit routes.

For example, the Authority is working with the City of South San Francisco and its business community — particularly its fast-growing biotech sector — to determine if there is viable ridership for direct ferry service between Oyster Point and the East Bay.

Although there is anecdotal evidence supporting demand for this route, the ridership model failed to identify it, most likely because ABAG data does not account for the rapid job growth around Oyster Point during the past four years. Therefore, the major South San Francisco employers within the likely Oyster Point catchment area will be working with the Authority to design and conduct employee surveys in early 2003.

These surveys will gather data on workers’ travel patterns and preferences. That data will be combined with the market segmentation psycho graphic data and processed through the ridership model to generate a more accurate forecast of East Bay-Peninsula ferry ridership.

If viable ridership for that route is found, the Authority will be able to proceed with the next system-planning steps as well as launch a highly targeted, cost- effective one-to-one marketing campaign to draw those South San Francisco workers onto ferries.

Source: Authority Ridership Study

57 58 9 THE FINANCES expanded watertransit. of accelerated delivery would bestensure dedicated agency agency. Sucha public water-transit never hadasingle-focus The BayAreahas transit. BayArea transit fundshave accelerated dedicated agency wouldbestensure public water The BayArea hasneverhadasingle-focus behind thenumbers. and keyfactorsforsuccess tells thestory some background abouttheassumptions The numbersspeakforthemselves, but service. the expandedferry costs alsoincludetheadministrationof improved landside connections.Operating of theestimatedoperatingcostsare for million inyearten.Twenty-five percent from $3millionin yearone,to$46 capital costsandoperatingranging ten years,including$396millionin transit thatwillcost$646millionover approach toimplement expandedwater This financialplanpresents aphased environmental payoffs. water transit’s andits publicsupport r context ofotherBayArea congestion- whenconsideredparticularly inthe transit systemissignificantbutaffordable, environmentally responsible water- The costtobuildandoperatean 9.01 anditsenvironmentalpayoffs. public support of otherBayAreacongestion-reductiontransitprojects’costs,water transit’s whenconsideredinthecontext system issignificantbutaffordable,particularly The costtobuildandoperateanenvironmentallyresponsiblewater-transit eduction transitprojects’ costs, How muchwillitcost? delivery ofexpanded water delivery -transit agency. Sucha Source: AuthorityStudy F igure 32 Figure 33

—

Source: Authority Study 59 Clearly, expanded water transit for the Bay Area is a good investment. This plan shows ridership growth will be nearly 12 percent annually. Expanded ferry service will improve Bay Area public transit, which is critical to the region’s economic health.

traditionally fallen short of meeting needs. • The Authority’s enabling legislation Accordingly, even though this plan discourages the expansion of service on identifies and quantifies new funding existing routes without concurrence from the sources, the actual availability of those existing operator. Since the expansion of funds will affect the delivery of a route. those services is affected by a number of factors within the existing operating agency, Changes in these factors and those listed this plan focuses primarily on adding new below could significantly affect the cost routes. However, budgeting for expanded of both building and operating the system: service on existing routes is included on a programmatic level. • The Authority included costs associated with improved emissions controls and safety • Schedules for implementation are based on in its operating budget. Because of this, current knowledge of deliverability issues vessel capital and operating costs are higher at individual sites and reflect a conservative than many of the existing ferry services approach to developing terminals. All new currently operating on the Bay. routes are scheduled to be up and running within ten years. In many cases, individual •For example, the program includes costs routes could be implemented sooner by for adding Selective Catalytic Reduction coordination with adjacent development or (SCR) and Particulate Traps (PT) to engines, streamlining existing permitting processes. plus research and development of zero- emission ferries (ZEFs) and a new long-term • The plan assumes an average terminal cost of environmental monitoring program for water $10 million. These costs include the waterside transit. Additional bridge manning require- facilities such as the float, landside facilities ments are among the added safety costs. including the shelter and other passenger amenities. A limited amount of parking is also • The plan also includes costs for development assumed. Not included are the costs of land of maintenance facilities, purchase of spare dedication and extensive joint-use parking. vessels to boost emergency response capability and improvements at existing hub terminals, • The plan includes routes with significant such as the San Francisco Ferry Building. opposition or potential environmental impacts that may make service overly expensive or infeasible. These routes are PACBELL PARK FERRY DOCK included for budgeting purposes only and are •Renewal of half-cent sales taxes in Contra is light on infrastructure, which allows it water transit is a smart and economically not intended to reflect on the deliverability of Costa, San Francisco and San Mateo to be built and deployed as rapidly as responsible public-policy choice. Among an individual terminal. Nonetheless, if one counties and new half-cent sales taxes in resources are available, without the the findings: terminal becomes infeasible, the Authority Solano, Marin and Sonoma counties need to engage in extensive, costly and anticipates needing the budgeted funds for time-consuming land acquisition and •The total investment (combined operating • An increase in tolls on the Bay Area’s and capital funding) per passenger is improvements to an adjacent ferry route. construction. And because of water state-owned bridges which would generate comparable to the most effective investment transit’s flexibility, it can be easily adapted an estimated $125 million annually in new in other modes 9.02 How will it be funded? revenue starting in 2005 to changing transportation needs as time goes on. • The farebox recovery is competitive with The Authority’s enabling legislation Other revenue assumptions in this other new transit services directed that an expanded water-transit budget include: The Authority’s enabling legislation system must be funded from new requires this plan’s cost effectiveness to • This expanded water-transit system will relieve transportation dollars. This plan • Changes in fares, headways and the health be measured against other modes of more congestion for the money than any accomplishes that mandate by identifying of the Bay Area economy could significantly transit. The results of that study, detailed other form of transbay transit a variety of sources for new money from affect the number of commuters expected in The Routes chapter (p. 12), show that the federal, state, county and local levels, to take the ferry in the first few years of as well as from private sources. operation. The financial health of a ferry transit system is heavily dependent on Figure 34 The Authority has worked hard to expand fare revenues. The Authority has used transit funds for the Bay Area. Hundreds ABAG-developed assumptions that predict of discussions and meetings with staff and significant growth in the next ten years. members of Congress, state legislators, • The fare revenues include additional ridership Bay Area county supervisors and local resulting from increases in tolls and parking elected officials, as well as with the charges at BART stations. These assumptions business community, has led to the are not currently included in the regional expansion of significant political will to transportation model. make this funding plan a reality. •No concession revenue is included, but The previously described budget revenue from paid parking lots is included. also includes cash-flow assumptions incorporating the following new The proposed distribution of funding funding sources: sources is shown in Figure 34.

• An increase in the amount of the federal Ferry Boat Discretionary Fund in the 9.03 Is it a good investment? Transportation Reauthorization bill (TEA) Clearly, expanded water transit for the that in turn could lead to annual Bay Area is a good investment. This plan appropriations and grant awards of shows ridership growth will be nearly $5 million per year from this program 12 percent annually. Expanded ferry • Local funding of some terminal service will improve Bay Area public development costs transit, which is critical to the region’s economic health. • Local funding of some operating costs from developer contributions, employers or Importantly, this plan shows expanded * Toll revenues calculated at 2002 dollars. other local sources water transit can be successfully built Source: Authority Study incrementally. The nature of this system 61 “The Authority shall operate a comprehensive San Francisco Bay Area regional public water-transit system that includes water-transit terminals, feeder buses and any other transport and facilities supportive of the system.” THE AUTHORITY

Section 66540.24, California Government Code 10

10.01 How will the WTA operate • It will successfully attract funding to help The Evolving Organization the San Francisco Bay Area ensure water transit’s continued viability and value The Board water-transit system? • The working relationships already formed The Authority Board of Directors is Upon approval of this Implementation and with community leaders, regulators, public- the policy-making entity guiding the Operations Plan by the State of California, interest groups and other transit operators development of a long-range plan for the the WTA (the Authority) is charged are significant, valuable and not easily implementation of expanded water transit with the responsibility to provide new replicated without losing important time and for updating that plan on a regular water-transit service for the region and to in moving environmentally responsible basis. It is also responsible for overseeing expand or augment existing services water transit forward the operation of the expanded service as where demand has been demonstrated. • The Authority can leverage the investment new routes are established. The Authority will operate expanded made in clean-marine technology, advanced The Board is composed of 11 members The Authority will vessel design, systems planning, safety water transit safely and cost efficiently. It appointed by the Governor, the California and disaster-response planning, ridership operate expanded will also be environmentally responsible. Legislature and local agencies that forecasting, terminal design and intermodal currently operate ferry services. They The Authority will be a dedicated, focused planning to begin work to reduce water transit safely are appointed to eight-year terms. The regional agency that works. It is best congestion and improve air quality Authority also has a Community Advisory and cost efficiently. positioned to operate Bay Area water Committee (CAC) and a Technical transit because: It will also be 10.02 How will the WTA be structured? Advisory Committee (TAC) to assist them • It can use the institutional knowledge built in making their decisions. An appropriate organizational structure environmentally while creating this plan to expedite the must be established to manage and control transition of Bay Area ferry service from a Initial Phase responsible. collection of individual routes to a more the various activities necessary to efficiently efficient and valuable water-transit system and successfully provide expanded water With the enactment of Senate Bill 428 in transit. This organizational structure must 1999, the Authority was assigned the • It will focus on ferries and maximize water be linked to the developing responsibilities responsibility for developing a long-range transit’s benefit to Bay Area travelers of the Authority over time, respond to plan for the implementation of expanded changes in its operating environment, and water transit and updating that plan on a above all, operate in the public interest. regular basis. 62 Figure 35

63 This planning responsibility is the first item and new routes, advocate for federal and Operating Phase for service on new routes. It also will of business for the Authority and includes state funds, and market water transit to monitor performance. the current activities of developing both build awareness of — and greater As the Authority initiates new routes this Implementation and Operations Plan ridership on — a total Bay Area water- or adds service on existing routes, the Intermodal Operations will be responsible and the Program FEIR. transit system. organization must evolve to properly for bus operations and also community manage these new responsibilities. and corporate transit support. Good Upon approval of the IOP, there will be a Infrastructure development will be The Initial Phase activities remain, and connections to the terminals will be period of two-to-three years where the accomplished in conjunction with local additional responsibilities related to negotiated with existing transit operators primary focus of the Authority will include agencies. As plans for new terminals ferry operations and intermodal whose service areas include a new planning, coordination and development and routes develop, the Authority will operations are added under the general terminal. In some cases there may be activities. These activities can be classified assist local agencies in the design and identification of Operations. Vessel a need for the Authority to operate as system planning and coordination, construction of terminals. This will and facilities maintenance will also be its own feeder bus service. and infrastructure development. They are include capital planning, environmental added responsibilities. considered the continuing activities of planning, permitting and financing. Engineering will be responsible for the the Authority as assigned by legislation, As the size of the organization increases, design and construction of vessels, vessel and will always be a permanent part of Also, the design and procurement of new it makes sense to move outsourced and facilities maintenance and repair, its responsibilities. vessels will be initiated. In anticipation functions such as accounting, contracts, electronics, and research and of new services and new vessels, the risk management and human resources, development. Research and Development System planning and coordination involves: Authority will continue its research into the organization as part of the will continue to investigate new and development activities to achieve administration function. technologies leading to a cleaner and • Detailed service planning for prospective deployment of zero-emissions ferries more efficient ferry fleet. Emission new routes (ZEFs) as quickly as possible. Ferry Operations include terminal Monitoring will continue to verify that the operations, vessel operations and • Collaboration with the existing operators emission standards established for the Environmental monitoring will be service planning. new fleet of ferries is achieved. • Environmental monitoring conducted to see that the site specific environmental documents are prepared in Terminal Operations will be responsible Responsibilities for the Community and • Building good connections with landside accordance with the suggested mitigation for terminal security, ticketing and Government Relations, Planning and transit serving new terminals measures identified in the Program FEIR. fare collection, concessions, customer Development, and Administration information and terminal upkeep. functional areas are similar to those Service planning for prospective new Building good connections with landside identified for the Initial Phase and are routes is the ongoing work necessary to On new routes, Vessel Operations will be transit to serve new terminals involves more completely described in Figure 36. follow up on the route recommendations planning and implementing landside service responsible for the operation, by qualified contained in The Routes chapter (p. 12), operated by existing transit operators, personnel, of the Authority’s fleet of ferries. The functional organizational structure as well as any new future route for the Operating Phase of the Authority’s employers and the Authority itself, In providing additional service of existing recommendations that may be developed. development is shown in Figure 36. The if necessary. routes, Vessel Operations will take the number of employees for this phase will The Authority’s enabling legislation lead in negotiating with the public operators The functional organization structure for be determined by several factors, including stipulates that it “shall set fares for travel for increases in their frequency. this initial phase will be similar to what the number of new routes, the method on the water transit system that it operates, is in place during the preparation of this In any case, Vessel Operations will be of providing the service and the number and define and set other fares and fees plan, as shown in Figure 35. It will be responsible for the provision of services, of vessels in operation. for services related to the water-transit staffed by 12 to 14 people. compliance with regulatory requirements system without the approval of the and safe vessel operations. Public Utilities Commission.” Ferry Service Planning will use data The Authority, in collaboration with the from detailed patronage forecasts to existing ferry operators, will address develop initial operational requirements schedule and fare coordination for existing 64 Figure 36

65 66 11 THE FUTURE a difference. convinced itwillmake are buyingand they knowwhat for it,providedthat and arewillingtopay want congestionrelief Bay Arearesidents to BayArea votersin2004. out Expenditure Planthat water transitistakingasolid, wellthought Therefore, thefirststeptoward expanded the Toll Increase Expenditure Plan. projectsmention theotherworthy in deploying newvesselsandroutes, notto This newfundingsource iscriticalfor increase onstate-ownedBayArea bridges. they are willingtofundthrough a$1toll Expanded watertransitisoneprogram convinced itwillmakeadifference. they knowwhatare buyingandare and are willingtopayforit,provided that Bay Area residents wantcongestionrelief Keep LookingforFunding anddeployingnewferries. forward the groundwork formovingthisplan work duringthepasttwoyearshaslaid systems planningandcommunityoutreach community andthepublic.TheAuthority’s membersofthebusiness elected officials, amongBay Area service water-transit There forexpanded issignificantsupport 11.01 deploying newferries. and past twoyearshaslaidthegroundworkformovingthisplanforward systemsplanningandcommunityoutreachworkduringthe The Authority’s Area electedofficials,membersofthebusinesscommunityand public. amongBay forexpandedwater-transit service There issignificantsupport What arethenextsteps? includes ferries Authority’s institutional knowledgeis site-specific environmental studies. The r and privatefundingopportunities, other transitagencies,pursuing public sites, planninggoodconnections with this plan—studyingpotential terminal tofurther working locallywithofficials Concurrently, theAuthoritywillcontinue Keep Working thePlan transit expansion. development contributionstowater- r continue withBayArea electedofficials dollars.Anddiscussions available ferry Public Transit Association toincrease groups liketheAmerican and industry operators withtheexistingferry partnering funding sources. TheAuthorityis Third, mustcontinueto find other efforts third largest. system, whichalready isthenation’s obtains aset-asideforitswater-transit bill andthat,likeotherstates,theBayArea reauthorizationin thenexttransportation Fundisexpanded BoatDiscretionary Ferry in Washington toensure thatthefederal The secondstepistokeepworkinghard esolving local concerns andpreparing egarding countysalestaxplansand (p. 26),WaTOD canmakeahuge As discussedin Development (WaTOD) Keep ExploringWater Transit-Oriented andprogressing.chapter (p.12)isunderway continuum describedin system.Thedeliverability water-transit working thisplantobuildanexpanded this. TheAuthorityintendstocontinue foraprojectMomentum isimportant like plan forward. committees isintegraltomovingthe involvement oftheAuthority’s advisory Thecontinued to launchtheirservice. Authority tomovequicklybutjudiciously leaders are committedtoworkingwiththe andcommunity plan. Localelectedofficials terminal isexcitedandenergized bythis Each communityhostingaproposed new access totheBayforrecreation. system thatalsoenhancespeople’s in thespiritofbuildingaviabletransit boaters, bicyclists,andparkadvocates, continue workingwithrecreational and shoreline use.TheAuthorityalsowill astheyplantheirnewterminals officials proving tobeatremendous assettothese The Connections The Routes chapter Concurrent with taking the existing collection of individual ferry routes and transitioning them into a coherent system, the Authority will plan and execute an integrated marketing and brand-advertising campaign to make water transit top of mind to Bay Area travelers.

difference for the Bay Area. Building Strait. They have been fully engaged routes and transitioning them into a hand and the research and development sensible in-fill development near ferry on the Community Advisory Committee coherent system, the Authority will plan and is underway. The Authority is actively terminals helps with the region’s two and are determined to move the execute an integrated marketing and seeking additional funds to design and greatest challenges: limited housing and planning process through the brand-advertising campaign to make water build the prototype vessel that goes traffic congestion. deliverability continuum. transit top of mind to Bay Area travelers. with it.

In addition to the Jack London Square Moving forward, the Authority will work The extensive amount of ridership data Other cutting-edge vessel research and and Oyster Point case studies, exciting with BCDC, MTC and all other stakeholders collected and modeled to prepare this development will be pursued. Marine future WaTOD prospects exist in Marin to identify places where WaTOD can make Implementation and Operations Plan engineers and naval architects are County and on the island of Alameda, a positive difference for a local community provides the perfect blueprint for effective, studying the use of Surface Effect Ship as well as in Martinez, Antioch and the and the Bay Area region. targeted marketing and advertising. The technology to determine if it makes sense Mission Bay section of San Francisco. Authority will immediately begin taking for next-generation Bay Area passenger Market Water Transit steps to launch this program. ferries. Inside and out, the vessels Marin County officials are prepared to deployed on San Francisco Bay will be study WaTOD feasibility at San Quentin BART’s popularity goes beyond the Keep Innovating the cleanest, safest, most environmentally should the prison be vacated. Although construction and operation of a great responsible passenger ferries in the world. this project could easily have a 20-year transit system. Thirty years of marketing The multi-million-dollar research-and- timeline, the Authority is ready to assist and advertising have successfully created development program budgeted in this And they will be even more because county officials in planning water-transit a solid niche for BART in the hearts plan will bring the world’s first zero- water-transit innovation will not be facilities at San Quentin. and minds of Bay Area travelers, whether emission passenger ferries (ZEFs) to San limited to technology. or not they ride BART. For example, Francisco Bay. It is too soon to predict On Alameda, development planning polling shows BART is overwhelmingly exactly when the first such ZEF will be Keep Making a Difference underway to convert the Alameda Naval popular in Marin County, even though launched, but the Authority’s commitment for the Bay Area Air Station to public use includes WaTOD BART does not serve Marin. to this project, with the invaluable help at Alameda Point, with the proposed of concerned advocates like Bluewater The Authority intends to develop creative new ferry terminal serving as the Water transit can achieve similar Network, will make this environmental ways to use water-transit resources to transportation hub. popularity — and commensurate increased breakthrough a reality as soon as possible. add value beyond its transit mission. For patronage — through marketing and example, joint planning with officials at Local officials in Martinez and Antioch brand advertising that highlights both The $100,000 federal grant to design a the GGNRA could lead to historical, are enthusiastic about the economic and the aesthetic and practical benefits that prototype fuel-cell propulsion plant for a cultural and environmental education lifestyle benefits WaTOD can bring to ferries provide. Concurrent with taking Treasure Island passenger ferry is in programs for Bay Area students of all ages. their communities along the Carquinez the existing collection of individual ferry 67 64 THE DATA (APPENDIX) .Vessel PerformanceSpecs&DraftRFP— 3. .Protocol forMeasurement ofAirPollutantEmissionsfrom Ferry 5. Measurement Passenger ofAirPollutantEmissionsFrom In-Service 4. OperationsonSanFrancisco Risk-basedPlanforSafeFerry 2. NewTechnologies &AlternativeFuelsWorking Paper— 1. TECHNICAL STUDIES 1 Terminal Architecture andEngineering—GenericTerminal Design 11. Terminal Architecture andEngineering-Terminal DesignGuidelines 10. Terminal Preliminary — SiteAssessmentReport 9. ConceptualTransit Plans— 8. .IntermodalandTerminal AccessStudy-JackLondonSquare Site 7. .IntermodalandTerminal AccessStudy-Terminal GoodPractice 6. 4 RidershipModelForecasts -Sensitivity Analysis— 14. RidershipModelCalibrationandValidation — 13. RidershipModelForecasts — 12. 5 MarketSegmentationforRidershipForecasting — 15. 17. Inventory ofBayArea Water Inventory andFacilities — Transit Services 17. ModeChoiceModels— 16. Boats — — Ferries -EmissionDataReport Bay — Prototype — — Study — Design Guidelines— Systematics Systematics f. e. Vessel CostEstimates d. ShipyardEvaluation c. Phase2DesignReport b. 350Passenger, 35knotPassenger OnlyFerry RFP a. 149Passenger, 25knotPassenger OnlyFerryRFP g. MaintenanceFacilities Report V Parsons Brinkerhoff essel Profiles ABSG EF&EE Arup Parsons Brinkerhoff Arup Cambridge Systematics Arup Cambridge Systematics EF&EE Glosten/Herbert Cambridge Systematics Arup Cambridge Cambridge JJM A PTM 30. Glossary ofTerms30. Glossary Terminals,”29. Newspaperfeature, “LaunchingaFlotillaofFerry 28. FinalProgram Environmental (FEIR) Table ImpactReport ofContents 27. CaliforniaGovernmentCodeSecs.66540.72(Statutesof2001 and1999) ADDITIONAL MATERIALS &RESOURCES BAAQMDComments 26. 25. MTC Comments IOPPublicComments 24. Working Group Rosters 23. 22. PublicOutreach MeetingsChronology BayMinutes andAgendas 21. North 20. TAC Roster, AgendasandMinutes 19. CACRoster, AgendasandMinutes 18. Board AgendasandMinutes PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The NewYork Times .SOSAdHocWork Group h. RidershipModelPeer Review Panel g. f. NewTechnologies &AlternativeFuels Working Paper Peer Review Panele. IntermodalAdHocSubcommitteeoftheTAC d. Ferry OperatorsAdHocSubcommitteeoftheTAC c. EnvironmentalOrganizationAdHocSubcommitteeoftheTAC b. CleanMarineAdHocWork Group a. R egulatory AgencyAdHocSubcommittee oftheTACegulatory , April7,2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: URS Corporation

RIDERSHIP MODELING AND MARKETING APPROACH: Cambridge Systematics

SYSTEM PLANNING AND DESIGN: ARUP Nancy Whelan Consulting Pacific Transit Management Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas

FERRY VESSEL TECHNOLOGY: ABS Consulting Engine Fuel & Emissions Engineering Glosten-Herbert John J. McMullen Associates Walther Engineering

PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL: CH2M HILL Jones & Stokes Associates The Bay Planning Coalition The Next Generation

PUBLIC OUTREACH AND SURVEY RESEARCH: Barnes Mosher Whitehurst Lauter & Partners Carter, Wetch & Associates Evans/McDonough Company Laurel Marcus & Associates Lindsay, Hart, Neil, Weigler Public Affairs Management The Roanoke Company Zell & Associates

COMPUTER/TECHNICAL SUPPORT: Leon Willard The Team DESIGN AND PHOTOGRAPHY: The San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority assembled a team of leading firms in Rory Earnshaw environmental planning, transit planning, vessel technology and ridership modeling. Working with the Bob Ecker Eileen Collins Graphic Design Authority, the project team produced the detailed analysis required to make sound public-policy Amy Hornick decisions about Bay Area water transit. The Authority thanks the project team members for their work. Chris Purdy Subset: Carolyn Gerin, Alice Bybee, Ithinand Tubkam G. Justin Zizes, Jr. San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority 120 Broadway, San Francisco, CA 94111 415.291.3377 · www.watertransit.org

BOARD OF DIRECTORS Charlene Haught Johnson, President Capt. Nancy Wagner, Vice President Hon. Albert Boro Hon. James Fang Joseph Freitas, Jr. Hon. Anthony J. Intintoli, Jr. Hon. Beverly Johnson Dr. Rocco L. Mancinelli Hon. Gavin Newsom Marina V. Secchitano Anthony Withington

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Thomas G. Bertken

STAFF Tristan Bettencourt, Administrative Assistant Steve Castleberry, Manager, System Planning Mary Frances Culnane, Manager, Marine Engineering Melanie Jann, Manager, Business Services Lisa Klairmont, Executive Manager & Secretary of the Authority Heidi Machen, Public Affairs Officer Steven Morrison, Project Manager, Implementation & Operations Plan Veronica Sanchez, Manager, Community & Governmental Relations Karen Shelver, Administrative Assistant C