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