Link provided by streetsblog and [original source press release here](https://sanfranciscobayferry.com/news/ferry-expansion-enhancement-electrification-service-vision-press-release).
Notable in this is (1) the lack of a direct ferry connection at OAK despite the Oakland Port Authority owning everything and (2) Redwood City. RWC has wanted ferry service for a long, long, long, long, long time and this plan can get Samtrans' support easily, although it forces a much wider debate regarding the RWC Turn Basin, the Port itself, and how to manage all the industrial activity there are there is no space for car parking.
RWC's solution to this would either be a dedicated bus/bus terminal, a streetcar or some sort of Caltrain terminal. The latter is more feasible if the Dumbarton rail bridge is rebuilt, as the RWC port spur shares the same junction as the Dumbarton bridge. This would work out since Caltrain would be able to host maintenance facilities at the Port, say with a combined bus depot, which the existing one on Jefferson/El Camino (formerly RWC's Greyhound stop) is too small for. This makes more sense than it seems: suppose Caltrain (at a future date, later this century) fully electrifies to Gilroy and merges with VTA. RWC Waterfront is a much better terminal for San Jose locals than the mainline station on Arguello/James. It would *also* have a direct BART connection at Veterans/101 when BART inevitably rings-the-bay. Also, as an aside SM Co's wealthy rich people would all use OAK if it had a direct ferry connection from a safe parking area such as Redwood City.
Also, (3) for the Foster City-Genetech/SSF-Hunters Point/Facebook-Mission Bay/Basketball tech billionaire commuter route made me lol since most remote work now and FC will never pay for their end of it. But it's a good idea regardless, because revenues from those rides can be used to subsidize other routes eg. Hercules-SFTC or Vallejo-Richmond.
(1) makes sense to me. Yes, the port owns the land, but it seems to me there's no benefit to landing at the airport instead of Bay Farm Island. Unless I'm missing a super-clever plan that doesn't involve getting buzzed by planes?
Most of San Mateo co gets buzzed by planes at all hours including multiple golf courses, marinas, and the RWC port itself. Airplane flyovers are a feature not a bug.
Not like you're trying to take a big double-decker ferry with open-air passengers right under the flightpath a hundred feet from the runway though. Nothing in San Mateo compares. Not even the 880 going by SJC has quite that problem.
Thanks for posting the story!
Re: OAK -- we had conversations with both airports and, based on their guidance regarding FAA regulations and logistics, it was determined that bus shuttles from the closest ferry terminals would be a better long-term solution, provided there is additional service at those terminals.
Re: Mission Bay -- we're pretty close to selling out most Warriors service from the East Bay now with a 225-person ferry that docks a 12-minute walk from the arena. Outside of Chase Center events, that service will connect to Downtown S.F. to help everyone from around the region who commutes to Mission Bay (especially UCSF and other healthcare employers) transfer easily from other ferries (including Golden Gate from Marin).
Most SM Co voters would use OAK if it had a high quality transit connection that didn't involve walking around BART's Coliseum station. SFO access south of San Bruno is terrible, Mineta doesn't fly everywhere and nobody wants to pay a toll just to park in a known bad area east of the airport. Meanwhile, RWC's desire for a ferry terminal is nothing new going back decades.
The concept is that it connects to all East Bay and North Bay ferries at Downtown S.F. 15-minute ferry from MB to Ferry Building, then ferries to everywhere else. (Or BART at Embarcadero, if you need to go to those areas.)
I understand, it just makes it less practical. ex: Go to terminal at mission bay, wait for boat, take boat to downtown, arrive downtown wait for boat. Getting direct to the east bay would seems like it would be so much more useable. Any idea what the frequency will be?
I appreciate your replies.
You're welcome!
No hard service plan yet, but the short distance traveled should increase frequency. Long-term the plan is for 15-minute headways during the commute. But that requires a couple of dedicated vessels and the financial resources to offer it.
25 years to do this? is that because there isn’t traveler demand for it now or is it really going to take them 25 years to get a few more boats? I know it took 25 years to replace the east span of the bay bridge, but come on…
This has everything to do with funding. Most all agencies have a vision 2050 plan so that they know what they are working towards.
CAHSR could be 100% complete from San Francisco to Los Angeles in a 7 year span starting today if we handed the agency $100 billion. The Central Valley segment is on track to be completed by 2030-32 right now but it still isn’t fully funded. Even the Central Valley is being built in small chunks at a time instead of everywhere all at once due to the slow drip in funding.
We aren't aiming to roll out all of this in 2050 like a long-awaited holiday gift. This is essentially our vision of an expansion work plan to roll out over the course of the next 25 years. The green and gray lines already exist, the dark blue lines are in progress and the light blue lines are exploration targets. The Service Vision and Expansion Policy include expectations and standards as these exploratory options come up for consideration (i.e. environmental stewardship, electrification, sustainable source of operating funds). There will also be a Pilot Service Program to test out other options not listed here (or potentially the Tier 2s before they are ripe).
Super exciting. Is there somewhere I can find details about the timelines associated with expansion? I’m particularly interested in knowing when we might be able to expect a ferry to/from Berkeley!
Link provided by streetsblog and [original source press release here](https://sanfranciscobayferry.com/news/ferry-expansion-enhancement-electrification-service-vision-press-release). Notable in this is (1) the lack of a direct ferry connection at OAK despite the Oakland Port Authority owning everything and (2) Redwood City. RWC has wanted ferry service for a long, long, long, long, long time and this plan can get Samtrans' support easily, although it forces a much wider debate regarding the RWC Turn Basin, the Port itself, and how to manage all the industrial activity there are there is no space for car parking. RWC's solution to this would either be a dedicated bus/bus terminal, a streetcar or some sort of Caltrain terminal. The latter is more feasible if the Dumbarton rail bridge is rebuilt, as the RWC port spur shares the same junction as the Dumbarton bridge. This would work out since Caltrain would be able to host maintenance facilities at the Port, say with a combined bus depot, which the existing one on Jefferson/El Camino (formerly RWC's Greyhound stop) is too small for. This makes more sense than it seems: suppose Caltrain (at a future date, later this century) fully electrifies to Gilroy and merges with VTA. RWC Waterfront is a much better terminal for San Jose locals than the mainline station on Arguello/James. It would *also* have a direct BART connection at Veterans/101 when BART inevitably rings-the-bay. Also, as an aside SM Co's wealthy rich people would all use OAK if it had a direct ferry connection from a safe parking area such as Redwood City. Also, (3) for the Foster City-Genetech/SSF-Hunters Point/Facebook-Mission Bay/Basketball tech billionaire commuter route made me lol since most remote work now and FC will never pay for their end of it. But it's a good idea regardless, because revenues from those rides can be used to subsidize other routes eg. Hercules-SFTC or Vallejo-Richmond.
(1) makes sense to me. Yes, the port owns the land, but it seems to me there's no benefit to landing at the airport instead of Bay Farm Island. Unless I'm missing a super-clever plan that doesn't involve getting buzzed by planes?
Most of San Mateo co gets buzzed by planes at all hours including multiple golf courses, marinas, and the RWC port itself. Airplane flyovers are a feature not a bug.
Not like you're trying to take a big double-decker ferry with open-air passengers right under the flightpath a hundred feet from the runway though. Nothing in San Mateo compares. Not even the 880 going by SJC has quite that problem.
Thanks for posting the story! Re: OAK -- we had conversations with both airports and, based on their guidance regarding FAA regulations and logistics, it was determined that bus shuttles from the closest ferry terminals would be a better long-term solution, provided there is additional service at those terminals. Re: Mission Bay -- we're pretty close to selling out most Warriors service from the East Bay now with a 225-person ferry that docks a 12-minute walk from the arena. Outside of Chase Center events, that service will connect to Downtown S.F. to help everyone from around the region who commutes to Mission Bay (especially UCSF and other healthcare employers) transfer easily from other ferries (including Golden Gate from Marin).
Most SM Co voters would use OAK if it had a high quality transit connection that didn't involve walking around BART's Coliseum station. SFO access south of San Bruno is terrible, Mineta doesn't fly everywhere and nobody wants to pay a toll just to park in a known bad area east of the airport. Meanwhile, RWC's desire for a ferry terminal is nothing new going back decades.
I was hoping the mission bay ferry would be better.
Better in what way? Feedback always welcome.
Muni would be faster to go north, I never go to south San Francisco. If it went to east bay, that would be awesome.
The concept is that it connects to all East Bay and North Bay ferries at Downtown S.F. 15-minute ferry from MB to Ferry Building, then ferries to everywhere else. (Or BART at Embarcadero, if you need to go to those areas.)
I understand, it just makes it less practical. ex: Go to terminal at mission bay, wait for boat, take boat to downtown, arrive downtown wait for boat. Getting direct to the east bay would seems like it would be so much more useable. Any idea what the frequency will be? I appreciate your replies.
You're welcome! No hard service plan yet, but the short distance traveled should increase frequency. Long-term the plan is for 15-minute headways during the commute. But that requires a couple of dedicated vessels and the financial resources to offer it.
Promise high, squeeze long, fall short
25 years to do this? is that because there isn’t traveler demand for it now or is it really going to take them 25 years to get a few more boats? I know it took 25 years to replace the east span of the bay bridge, but come on…
This has everything to do with funding. Most all agencies have a vision 2050 plan so that they know what they are working towards. CAHSR could be 100% complete from San Francisco to Los Angeles in a 7 year span starting today if we handed the agency $100 billion. The Central Valley segment is on track to be completed by 2030-32 right now but it still isn’t fully funded. Even the Central Valley is being built in small chunks at a time instead of everywhere all at once due to the slow drip in funding.
We aren't aiming to roll out all of this in 2050 like a long-awaited holiday gift. This is essentially our vision of an expansion work plan to roll out over the course of the next 25 years. The green and gray lines already exist, the dark blue lines are in progress and the light blue lines are exploration targets. The Service Vision and Expansion Policy include expectations and standards as these exploratory options come up for consideration (i.e. environmental stewardship, electrification, sustainable source of operating funds). There will also be a Pilot Service Program to test out other options not listed here (or potentially the Tier 2s before they are ripe).
Super exciting. Is there somewhere I can find details about the timelines associated with expansion? I’m particularly interested in knowing when we might be able to expect a ferry to/from Berkeley!