Upload
franklin-brattle
View
220
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Oakland Airport ConnectorAutomated People Mover forOakland Coliseum BART to Oakland International Airport
Elie JalkhMarwan Bejjani
Steve Raney
Why?• Airport: Doubling capacity. Increasing market
share. Hegenberger, 98th Street - low LOS Parking shortage
• City of Oakland: Redevelopment
• BART: part of ’50’s plan. Unused capacity.
Map
Alameda County Measure B Sales Tax
• Specified APM – airport sensitive about traffic
• Only Sierra Club opposed (cost effectiveness)
• Cost given as $130M “Knew it would cost twice as much” $232M and counting Scrambling for $
September 11• Air passengers up 14% Oct ’01 vs ‘00
• Airport station security
Rider experience• 48% air passengers have carry on bags
• Not fastest mode, but most reliable Hwy 880 LOS F Faster from SF to OAK than SFO
• Closer than parking, moving walkways, 2 floors down
• Seamless ticketing
AirBART / Quality Bus
• Profitable
• 750,000 trips per year, 6.2% share
• Not given a fair shot in EIR
• Signal control, increased service will happen
• Worst case trip time.
TOD• Metroport: 1.3M sq feet, 300 hotel rooms, parking
• BART station: transit village, Hope IV, offices
• More
Parking – 40% of OAK revenue
• OAK losing 2,000 spaces
• Coliseum BART parking – free for day trips
• BART paid overnite parking
• New development has competing parking
• OAK plans to add 2 lots w/ bus.
Economics / Feasibility
• 13 mi BART trip on average: $2.15
• From EIR numbers, does not cover debt service
• 16% share is high. (Reagan: 14%, Atlanta: 8%)
• Annual trip growth
• $232M construction. All BART projects more
• Low fares: OAC $3, BART inflation
Year Trips OAC BART Cost Profit2005 2.4 4.8 5.1 5.7 4.22020 4.2 8.0 8.9 7.3 10.0
Millions
Multiple agencies cooperating
• Conflict over airport station Marketing Construction, traffic impact
• Conflict over strategy
Recommendation: APM is good
• Covers operating costs – improves BART utilization at “low” cost
• Without APM, Metroport won’t be built
• Without removing cars, TOD and air passenger growth would stall
• TOD is crucial for Oakland
• THE END.
AirBART Ridership Statistics
• 1999 463,057 riders 4.68% of airline passengers
• 2000 573,728 riders (24% growth from 1999) 5.40% of airline passengers
• 2001 284,056 riders (through May) Over 750,000 riders anticipated for 2001 6.10% of airline passengers (through May)
Terminal Expansion ProgramWhy Expand?
• 7.0 MAP Comfortable currentterminal capacity
• 11.3 MAP Approximate current passenger load
• 17.7 MAP 2010 passenger load*
• 25.1 MAP 2020 passenger load*
*Regional Airport System Plan Update 2000, Volume II, (Regional Airport Planning Committee, February 2001)
MAP = million annual passengers
TerminalExpansionProgram
Parking garage
Dual-level curbsideroadway
Two-levelterminal
Retain Terminal 1and Terminal 2gates
Central concessions hall
BART-OAK ConnectorStation Location
• Minimize vertical transitions
• Minimize walking distances
• Eliminate crossing roadways at-grade
• Locate station as close as possible to security checkpoint
• Locate station as close or closer to the terminal as most convenient parking space
BART-OAK ConnectorFunding
• Port of Oakland: $25 million in PFCs• Eligibility: project must “preserve or
enhance capacity of the national air transportation system”
• Port of Oakland must own/acquire right-of-way
• Project must primarily serve the Airport (passengers and employees)
BART-OAK ConnectorOther Considerations
• Structural separation
• Construction phasing coordination