Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.
-
Upload
mary-harrington -
Category
Documents
-
view
226 -
download
2
Transcript of Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.
![Page 1: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E.Art Anderson Associates
![Page 2: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
POF System Sustainability is EverythingSuccess of Mass Transit Systems is primarily driven by
human factors – for POFs, ferry terminals are a major factor
Economics of Mass Transit Systems in general and Passenger Only Ferry Systems specifically must rival those for the automobile – currently this an Apples to Oranges Comparison
Flexible terminals can mitigate many human factors and improve the life cycle cost of the POF system.
![Page 3: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Baylink Ferry—San Francisco Bay Area
Vallejo Ferry TerminalM/V Intintoli
![Page 4: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
The Water-Linked TODTriple Bottom LineHuman/Social Factors
Modal Pre-Disposition (competing mode factor)Quality of Service (Level of Service Measure)
Economic FactorsOverall system cost (normalized to = $/Passenger-Mile)System permanence (degree of system subsidy normalized
to equal 100% - acceptable fare box recovery rate)Environmental Factors.
System Sustainable Use Factor (Renewability %)
![Page 5: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Level of Service (LOS) ConceptsFixed Route transit systems use a six level measurement
system graded A – FLOS metrics should:
Represent the passenger point of viewBe easily quantifiable in terms of LOSUse measures already in use by other agencies
Transit systems are optimally designed to meet LOS C or D
![Page 6: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Baylink Ferry – SF Bay AreaLOS Calculations
LOS Category Score WeightWeighted
Score Comments
Modal Pre-Disposition C 8 24 Ferry faster than rush hour in car
Service Frequency D 2 4 Less than 40 minutes during rush hour
Hours of Service D 1 2 Daytime service
Service Coverage C 1 3 Good intermodal connectivity on both ends
Passenger Load C 2 6 Rarely exceeds 300 pax/boat
On-Time Performance C 2 6
Indexed LOS <C 2.8125
![Page 7: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Economic FactorsOverall System Operation Cost
Baylink Ferry System, San Francisco Bay AreaCapital Costs - Present Worth (PW) Annual Depreciation Costs (at 3%)
Year Built First Cost
Service Life Extension (SLE) Cost
Service Life Extension Date
SLE Added (Years)
Initial Life Cycle (Years)
Remaining Life Cycle (Years)
PW - Annual Straight line Depreciation
Boats (300 Pax) M/V Vallejo 1991 4,000,000 1,000,000 2001 10 20 11 195,716 M/V Mare Island 1997 8,000,000 0 20 7 587,413 M/V Initintoli 1997 8,000,000 0 20 7 587,413 M/V Solano 2004 11,000,000 0 20 14 656,729Vallejo Terminal 1990 4,000,000 0 30 10 240,815Ferry Maint Facility 2007 16,000,000 0 30 27 582,788San Fran Terminal (Shared) 2001 4,000,000 0 30 21 86,985 Total Annual Capital Cost 2,937,859
Annual Operations & Maintenance CostsPresent Annual Cost
Boats 6,800,000 Facilities 1,750,000
Total Annual Cost 11,487,859
Ridership Statistics
Per Trip Routes/wk
Avg Miles per trip
Annual Ridership Capacity
Annual Passenger-miles
Cost per Passenger-ride
System Cost/Passenger-Mile
Ridership Capacity (current schedule - one way trips) 300 177 27 2,761,200 74,552,400 $4.16 $0.15Half-Capacity 150 177 27 1,380,600 37,276,200 $8.32 $0.31Actual Ridership 177 27 650,000 17,550,000 $17.67 $0.65
![Page 8: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Economic FactorsOverall System Operation CostOut-of-pocket cost to operate an automobile ~
$0.50/passenger-mile (single occupancy)Above cost does not include all infrastructure costs (only
those funded with gas taxes)Total System Operating Cost for Baylink example
($0.65/passenger-mile) compares well with single occupancy automobile, especially if infrastructure costs are added
![Page 9: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Water-Linked TOD ModelHercules, California
Hercules Waterfront
![Page 10: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Hercules TerminalSan Francisco Bay Area Prototype Terminal
WTA Ferry Terminal—Option 1
![Page 11: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
WTA Terminal Concept Design
![Page 12: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
POF Float ComponentsFloatPier-to-Float GangwayGangway Landing
PlatformFloat RampsLoading PlatformTransfer Gangway
![Page 13: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Transfer Gangway Operation
Loading Platform and Transfer Gangway in “Up” Stowed Position
Transfer Gangway Moved Laterally to Match up with Boat Door Spacing
![Page 14: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Transfer Gangway Operation
Loading Platform Lowered to Match up with Boat Freeboard
Transfer Gangway Deployed – Note: Goal is to Moor Boat & Deploy Transfer Gangway in 30 Seconds
![Page 15: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Vallejo Ferry Maintenance Facility – Service Barge - Notch
![Page 16: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
South San Francisco – Prototype Transfer Gangway – Geometric Analysis
![Page 17: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
South San Francisco – Prototype Transfer Gangway – ADA Compliant Design
![Page 18: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Trinidad & Tobago – NIDCO Water Taxi Terminal Upgrades
Existing Pontoon System – San Fernando Existing Terminal _ San Fernando
![Page 19: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
NIDCO Water Taxi Terminal Upgrades – San Fernando Terminal Fabrication Drawings
![Page 20: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
NIDCO Water Taxi Terminal Upgrades – San Fernando Maintenance Area Fab Drawings
![Page 21: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
ConclusionsADA compliant, flexible POF terminals can be
implemented using permanent, semi-permanent, fixed movable platforms or through the use of hydraulic/manually movable components
Sustainability and long-term success of a POF system are interdependent and are both enhanced by the economic advantages and the improved human-factors related performance resulting from flexible terminal design
Understanding and de-conflicting maintenance activities and Work Flow significantly improves life cycle costs and system sustainability
![Page 22: Patrick R. Vasicek, P.E. Art Anderson Associates.](https://reader030.fdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022020716/56649eba5503460f94bc1d94/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)