Berkeley - San Francisco route.
$3.35 one-way ticket price (in 2002
Ferry terminals also located in Richmond
Ridership estimates are for the year 2025.
Assumed annual ridership growth rate is
initially between 4% and 7% per year, with
80% of the growth total occurring in the first
2,700 one-way or 1,350 round trips
590 parking spaces required at the
Passenger mission breakdown: 48%
commute, 18% "shopping," 30% recreation,
4% non-commute work-related.
Access breakdown: 74% drive, 22% use
transit, 4% "other" (bike or walk).
The ticket price and farebox recovery rate
validates the preliminary economic analysis
presented elsewhere on this website:- i.e.,
actual cost of $6.70 is reasonably close to the
$6.28 estimate applicable to the proposed
Berkeley Pier 18-knot scenario. The shorter
distance, lower speed, and reduced crew
requirements (single-deck design) of the
Berkeley Pier proposal should more than make
up for the discrepancy.
To estimate ridership statistics for 2010, five
years after startup in 2005, assume growth to 80%
of the 2025 numbers after ten years and
5.5% annual growth for the
previous five years. Five-year levels will then
be 0.8 x 0.945^5 = 0.5566 or 60% of the
announced 2025 numbers.
For the free unconstrained parking
scenario (1800 round trips and 890 parking
spaces in 2025), this works out to 1,080 round
trips per day and 534 parking spaces required
If the subsidy level is lower and the ticket
price is a few dollars higher, then it is
probably more realistic to use the
"constrained parking" estimates (1350 round
trips and 590 parking spaces in 2025). We
would then have 810 round rips per day and
354 parking spaces required in 2010.
This is entirely consistent with the
Berkeley Pier option, which uses a location
immediately adjacent to 410 existing parking
spaces (and existing frequent bus service, and
deep water, and the shortest route, and no
conflict with the Eastshore State Park or
other commercial development or park
The ridership estimate of 810 round trips
per day is fully consistent with the level of
service suggested in the Berkeley Pier
proposal, which calls for eight departures per
day by a single 149 passenger vessel,
accommodating 1192 round trips. The
economic analysis of the Berkeley Pier
proposal assumes the vessel is 2/3 full on the
"forward" commute and 1/3 full on the
"reverse" commute, for a total of 596 round
trips. WTA's data suggests that this
analysis is conservative.
Objections to the Berkeley Pier location are based
primarily on the projected growth of parking
demand, which could exceed the capacity of this part of
the Marina within a few years after 2010. There would be
negative impacts on other Marina
activities if parking becomes scarce or
One approach is to plan to relocate
the ferry terminal to the foot of Gilman Street or
Fleming point as the service matures, provided this is
consistent with land use plans on that portion of the
waterfront. Or, to remain in the Berkeley Marina,
additional parking demand
could be handled in several ways:
1) Suppress ridership growth by
Increasing the ticket price to match the
actual cost. This would lead to an
unsubsidized service with a ticket price
of approximately $6.50. Safeguards to
make the ferry accessible to low and
moderate income riders (e.g. free
passage for bicycle riders and other
selective discounts) would be important if
market pricing is used.
2) Increase incentives and services for
non-automotive access to the ferry
terminal (e.g. parking fees or a dedicated
feeder bus system) to suppress the
projected increase in parking demand.
3) Build a multi-level parking
structure. Cost recovery via parking fees would be
problematic because of the reliance of mearby Marina
activities on free and available parking.
Based on current land uses, determination of the most economical
terminal location beyond 2010 probably depends on the relative cost of
providing adequate parking in the Berkeley Marina
compared to the cost of maintaining a dredged channel to
Gilman Street or Fleming Point.
If Gilman Street and Fleming Point become developed for commercial use or
acquired for park land, similar parking constraints will apply
at those locations and they will not be competitive with the
Berkeley Pier proposal.