AgdaPkt 2021.01.11 Amended Joint SA PFA

Browse Search

Executive Summary • DRAFT Ferry Financial Feasibility Study & Cost -Benefit and Economic Impact Anal Table E-2: Waterside Options Pro/Con Table Source: CDM Smith, 2020 Note: At this time, the assumed landside improvements are similar for both options. Vessel needs — Regardless of market served, ferry service requires purchase of two 320 passenger vessels, like the water jet propelled vessels in WETA's "Dorado" class, plus a portion of a spare vessels (to be shared with other WETA ferry services). At $16 million each in 2020 dollars, vessel costs are a significant capital investment with fleet requirements for a single route costing $40 million and a combined route at $80 million. E.2.5 Financial Analysis Section 6 summarizes the financial feasibility of a new ferry service, from a capital and operational perspective, for all three service scenarios. Assumed fares are priced comparatively to other long- distance WETA services (i.e., Vallejo). Service assumptions, capital costs, operating metrics, and farebox recovery ratios are summarized in Table E-3. ■ Farebox Recovery— Considering WETA's minimum 40 percent farebox recovery ratio, projected passenger revenues indicate that both services exceed ferry farebox recovery requirements (40 percent) by the 10th year of operation. • Oakland Route —farebox recovery ratio increases from 52 percent in the first operating year (2025), to 71 percent by year 10 (2034). Over ten years, farebox recovery averages 61 percent. San Francisco Route — farebox recovery ratio increases from 67 percent in the first operating year, to 81 percent in Year 10. Over ten years, farebox recovery averages 74 percent. • Combined Route — farebox recovery ratio increases from 60 percent in the first operating year, to 76 percent in Year 10. Over ten years, farebox recovery averages 68 percent. E -g Smith Allows for two boats to berth at the same time Requires dredging during construction as well as maintenance dredging Compatible with WETA's spare float which is used for Higher cost boarding, when the main float would be taken out of service for maintenance Reduces interferences with vessels using the turning Closer to wetland area basin O.tion 2 — West Side at Westpoint Slough Location Pros Eliminates/Reduces need for dredging both during Cons Within turning basin and adjacent to facilities to the original construction and in future south. Lower cost float, due to smaller float Limited to 1 sided boarding Eliminates need to demolish old wharf structure Float not compatible with WETA's spare float Lower overall cost Source: CDM Smith, 2020 Note: At this time, the assumed landside improvements are similar for both options. Vessel needs — Regardless of market served, ferry service requires purchase of two 320 passenger vessels, like the water jet propelled vessels in WETA's "Dorado" class, plus a portion of a spare vessels (to be shared with other WETA ferry services). At $16 million each in 2020 dollars, vessel costs are a significant capital investment with fleet requirements for a single route costing $40 million and a combined route at $80 million. E.2.5 Financial Analysis Section 6 summarizes the financial feasibility of a new ferry service, from a capital and operational perspective, for all three service scenarios. Assumed fares are priced comparatively to other long- distance WETA services (i.e., Vallejo). Service assumptions, capital costs, operating metrics, and farebox recovery ratios are summarized in Table E-3. ■ Farebox Recovery— Considering WETA's minimum 40 percent farebox recovery ratio, projected passenger revenues indicate that both services exceed ferry farebox recovery requirements (40 percent) by the 10th year of operation. • Oakland Route —farebox recovery ratio increases from 52 percent in the first operating year (2025), to 71 percent by year 10 (2034). Over ten years, farebox recovery averages 61 percent. San Francisco Route — farebox recovery ratio increases from 67 percent in the first operating year, to 81 percent in Year 10. Over ten years, farebox recovery averages 74 percent. • Combined Route — farebox recovery ratio increases from 60 percent in the first operating year, to 76 percent in Year 10. Over ten years, farebox recovery averages 68 percent. E -g Smith