The following report was commissioned by the City of Richmond to study the issue of ferry service for Richmond. It was prepared by the consulting firm Booz·Allen & Hamilton Inc. with John Eells
Published: March, 2001
Among San Francisco Bay Area communities, the City of Richmond presents a unique a mix of development, economic and transportation opportunities. Less than eight nautical miles north of San Francisco, Richmond is located at the western extreme of Contra Costa County, on a cape separating central San Francisco Bay and San Pablo Bay. Richmond enjoys expansive views of the North Bay, as well as a warmer climate and less fog than most Bay-side communities. An abundance of waterfront includes both un-developed and developed properties, with deep-water access, cargo handling and vessel repair facilities. As a historical freight terminal, Richmond is served by two Class 1 railroads. Richmond is also served by Interstate Highways 80 and 580, providing connection with western Contra Costa County and the central Bay Area, as well as direct connection to Marin County via the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge. Public transportation services to Richmond include BART, AC Transit and scheduled interstate and intercity corridor passenger rail services.
Historically, Richmond’s economy has been focussed on heavy industry, maritime construction, petroleum refining, manufacturing, and freight transportation. Over the last decades, as heavy industry has declined, Richmond has not enjoyed the prosperity and growth that have come to characterize the greater Bay Area. Today, however, precipitous increases in Bay Area property values and living costs have increased Richmond’s appeal as a location for new businesses and residents.
Under the direction of its elected leadership and staff, Richmond has fostered a remarkable transformation of its waterfront. Heavy industrial properties are being re-developed for high technology and other commercial uses, bringing new jobs to the City. Concurrently, residential and service business development is creating new communities around the waterfront. Recreation and entertainment destinations, including a new national historic park, may further increase Richmond’s attraction to visitors.
Richmond is undergoing an economic transformation.
Richmond’s metamorphosis introduces key considerations for those who plan and implement the community’s change. In particular, transportation is among the leading issues associated with Richmond’s development, as it is for the entire Bay Area. New businesses depend on convenient access for their employees, clientele and operations. Likewise, residents require convenient transportation within Richmond and to the rest of the Bay Area.
Richmond’s Water Transit Experience
As population and economic growth accelerate in the Bay Area, new means of mobility are increasingly necessary. Alternatives to automobile transportation are needed to mitigate congestion and pollution. Water transit, vital to the Bay Area from the mid-Nineteenth through the mid-Twentieth Century, has again become an appealing alternative.
Transportation is a key to the community’s vitality and quality of life.
San Francisco Bay could only be crossed by ferry until the construction of highway and rail bridges between the 1930’s and 1960’s. The BART transbay tube further obviated the need for water transit. Nevertheless, in response to local congestion and desire for alternative commute modes, new ferry services have been established. The 1998 Loma Prieta Earthquake presented a crucial need for ferry service while the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge was under repair, leading to several start-ups. Ferry operations currently serve commute markets between San Francisco and Alameda, Oakland, Sausalito, Larkspur, and Vallejo. Additional recreational markets exist for ferry transportation to state and national parks and sports facilities, and for excursions.
Richmond was among the cities served by emergency ferry services following the 1989 earthquake. With the restoration of the Bay Bridge however, the ridership and the viability of the Richmond ferry service quickly declined. More recently, ferry service was provided by the Red & White Fleet, a San Francisco excursion and charter operator, via an agreement with the City of Richmond. Because fare revenue did not sufficiently cover operating costs, the operator was allowed to terminate the service under the terms of the agreement.
Richmond’s recent ferry
experience has not proven its sustainable viability.
The experience of the Red & White fleet service has demonstrated several essential factors of water transit’s success. Principal among these is the realization that while travel time and cost are as important to ferry patrons as they are to other travelers, they are by no means the only considerations that attract riders. To base patronage and revenue forecasts on travel time and cost alone is to ignore many other intangibles that contribute to the appeal of water transit, such as comfort, relaxation, and amenities. The Red & White experience has further illustrated the vital importance of convenient intermodal connections, marketing, and passenger information systems in generating a viable ridership.
Community support has coalesced in support of ferry service.
Despite the lessons learned from the recent ferry experience, there are still questions regarding the benefits of such a service to the City of Richmond. The essential question is: What are the rationales, including economic development, quality of life, transportation, and public perception, for providing ferry service between Richmond and San Francisco? Such rationales may comprise a business case aimed at achieving a number goals, including:
Richmond needs a rationale – a business case – for implementing new ferry service.
» Encouraging and focusing commercial and residential development on the Richmond waterfront;
» Fostering positive public perception of the community;
» Imparting a maritime character to the community; and
» Improving transportation options and quality of life for residents.
Water Transit and Richmond’s Development
The business case for Richmond water transit should represent a synergy between public and private interests in the city’s development. Given the competition among transportation planning and operating authorities in the Bay Area, a new competitor such as Richmond would face tremendous challenges in securing capital and operating funds. Among these challenges is the demonstration of a compelling need for Richmond water transit, particularly according to the viability standards applied to all new starts. Much greater potential exists via liaison with existing transportation entities for the development and institution of new service. Development and business interests have invested in Richmond, and convenient transportation can increase the appeal, value and scope of their investments. An equally vital liaison is that between the City and the public proponents of water transit, a constituency possessed of commitment, talent, and tenacity. In building these liaisons, the City of Richmond can foster communication and understandings, and help build consensus regarding the goals and benefits of water transit.
Richmond’s development and business community may be a vital liaison for developing water transit.
Public Subsidy
Public subsidy for new ferry service in the Bay Area, whether for capital facilities or for operations and maintenance, is in short supply. Existing ferry services receive all the money currently available for local water transit. According to the criteria currently used by Bay Area transportation funding agencies, a new Richmond ferry service is not particularly competitive with other proposed transportation improvements.
Public subsidy for new ferry services is in short supply.
It may at first seem desirable or necessary for the City of Richmond to establish a new transportation agency to compete for capital and operating subsidies administered by the MTC. However, this course may introduce its own difficulties over the long run. The principal challenges to securing public funding arise not from the City’s eligibility, but from the limitations placed on available funding and from MTC’s priority for maintaining existing services rather than establishing new ones. In addition, since MTC does not encourage the establishment of new transit operators, the City could actually diminish its chances of securing funding from MTC as a new transit agency, rather than in league with an existing operator. Liaison with AC transit may be a particularly viable means of implementing new service.
Forming a new Richmond water transit agency is not a viable approach.
The formation of the Bay Area Water Transit Authority (WTA) reflects the coalescing of support for water transit development throughout the Bay Area. However, the WTA anticipates dedicating its first two years to establishing its role and developing an implementation and operations plan for approval by the California State Legislature. Whereas the City of Richmond should maintain active interest in, and support for the WTA’s program, the WTA does not represent an immediate or definite source of funding for a new Richmond ferry service. Ultimately, funding for new services under the WTA may be a function of electoral support for new revenue sources, and will be the subject of competition.
At present, the greatest opportunity for public subsidy of new water transit services lies via the United States Maritime Administration (MARAD) and their alternative fuel research and demonstration program. The program is aimed at fostering alternatives to diesel fuel, the dominant marine fuel for ferries, in such forms as Compressed Natural Gas (CNG), Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) and hybrid fuel mixtures. MARAD has solicited the interest of public-private partnerships in demonstrating advances in vessel, propulsion, and fuel logistics technology in revenue service, and offers substantial subsidies for initial capital costs. Should Richmond be willing to take the risk of an early application of developing technologies, there may well be key local partners, including natural gas suppliers, marine equipment manufacturers, ship designers and builders, and environmental agencies and groups.
The Maritime Administration offers to support new technology demonstration.
Next Steps
Richmond’s development and transformation is a work in progress. While major economic and demographic changes are occurring, the case for new system deployment and operation is not very competitive purely in terms of the criteria by which local transportation propositions are evaluated. Further, while Richmond may be growing in population and economic activity, its commute market to San Francisco is already well-served by BART and AC Transit, and current regional economic forecasts do not indicate appreciable growth over the next 20 years.
Richmond’s water transit market has not been quantified.
Water transit may be an extremely compelling cause, rather than an effect, of Richmond’s development. To develop ferry service on this more speculative basis will require the City to work with development and business interests that can share both in the rewards of Richmond’s economic growth, and in the effort to improve its infrastructure and quality of life. Further public-private partnership may in fact enable Richmond to take advantage of federal subsidy for new ferry vessel and propulsion technology, the most viable capital subsidy currently available.
Public-private partnerships can help make water transit a cause, rather than an effect.
If ferry service is to be a part of Richmond’s vision for its future, the City itself needs to develop and execute a strategy for water transit implementation, articulated for all the potential supporters and opponents of the initiative. Such a plan should be based on plausible forecasts of ridership and revenue, levels of initial service that are attainable yet appealing to riders, and the lowest possible capital and operating costs. The plan should also articulate the City’s vision for how ferry service will contribute to the quality of life of its residents and the character of the community. The best course to establishing service quickly is one of liaisons – with an established operator, with vested business and development interests, with the community, and with entities interested in advancing ferry technology via a compelling service demonstration. Richmond should not aim at strict compliance with existing requirements for public subsidy, but should make its own case for ferry service based on the greatest benefit to its riders and potential for success as an independent operation.
New Richmond ferry service should depend on its own case and support, rather than on public funding sources.
To further develop the case for ferry service, the City of Richmond may follow these courses over the near term:
» Maintain contact and participation in the activities of the new Bay Area Water Transit Authority. The WTA may eventually represent a viable source of funding for a new Richmond service.
» Quantify the pure transportation potential of Richmond ferry service, via preference survey and ridership forecast.
» Explore the potential of the United States Maritime Administration’s alternative fuel program as a potential means of subsidizing a new technology demonstration service.
» Develop a coalition among developers, local businesses, constituencies, and residents to articulate a common understanding of the rationale for ferry service, the challenges and risks, the funding requirements and a strategy for implementation.
Based on these actions, the City may subsequently pursue funding for vessels and facilities, and institute a viable level of transportation service with minimal fiscal risk to the City.
