Report to Massachusetts
Ferry Compact Members:
Ferry Demand Estimation Methods
and Ferry Service Trends
June 25, 2014
Thomas J. Humphrey
Central Transportation Planning Staff
Objectives
• Review state-of-the-art of demand estimation
for ferry service
• Review recent trends in passenger ferry
service
Why Predict Demand?
Important to know your market:
• Which services make best use of limited
available resources?
• What level of service is appropriate ?
Demand Estimation Review
• Few ferry feasibility studies are published
• These provide little detail about demand
estimation methods used
• No consensus on the best methods
Demand Estimation Review
(Cont’d.)
• Most services studied were not implemented
• Demand estimates often based on assumed
conditions 10 or 20 years in future
Demand Estimation Review
(Cont’d.)
For ferry demand estimation, it is reasonable to
adapt methods applied to land transportation
Demand Estimation Review
(Cont’d.)
Most transit demand forecasting methods
address a few basic questions:
Demand Estimation Review
(Cont’d.)
1. How many people want or need to travel between
the points that will be connected by the service?
Demand Estimation Review
(Cont’d.)
2. How large a share of this total travel could the
new service attract?
Demand Estimation Review
(Cont’d.)
3. Would new service be different enough to
generate significant numbers of trips that would
not have been made anyway?
Demand Estimation Review
(Cont’d.)
Accurate Demand Estimates Matter!
• Analysis of failed transit services often find that
ridership never approached projections
• With better estimates, these services might not
have been run, preventing…
Demand Estimation Review
(Cont’d.)
…Problems after a ferry service fails:
• Boat disposition
• Ongoing finance, storage, and
maintenance costs
• Terminal facilities disposition
• Accounts depleted by operating
losses
Demand Estimation Review
Conclusions
• New ferry services should be planned
carefully
• Demand estimation is a key element of
such plans
• Methods to be used for demand estimation
are not unique to ferries
Review of Trends in North
American Ferry Service
Ferry Trends
• In US, 38 states have at least one point-to-point
ferry
• And 4 others have out-and-back tour boats
• There are 270 ferry routes in continental US
excluding Massachusetts
Ferry Trends (Cont’d.)
Ferry Trends (Cont’d.)
Island ferries ─ 43%:
• Many run only seasonally, serving summer
residents and visitors…
• Or accessing parks and nature preserves
Ferry Trends (Cont’d.)
River crossings ─ 22%:
• Used where nearest bridges are miles away but
traffic volume at ferry crossing not sufficient to
justify another bridge
Ferry Trends (Cont’d.)
Ferries across lakes, bays, or sounds ─ 13%:
• Often served by large vessels carrying cars
and trucks along with foot passengers
• May save hours of travel versus land
alternatives
Ferry Trends (Cont’d.)
Commuter ferries ― 13%:
• Repetitive home-to-work trips in AM peak
• Work-to-home in PM peak
• Reduced or no service off peak
• Route count includes only New York and San
Francisco
Ferry Trends (Cont’d.)
Water taxis ― 9%:
• Passenger-only vessels, multiple stops on
urban waterways
• Most have fixed routes and schedules, not
demand responsive
Ferry Trends (Cont’d.)
Passenger-only commuter ferries and water taxis:
• Outside Boston, only New York and San Francisco
have commuter ferries
• Seattle, Chicago, and NY have commuter water taxis
Ferry Trends (Cont’d.)
San Francisco:
• Most ferries provided by
public sector
• Funded by bridge tolls, state
and federal grants, and sales
taxes
• Of 10 routes begun since
1964, 7 are still running
Ferry Trends (Cont’d.)
Seattle:
• Passenger-only ferries now county responsibility
• Funded through property taxes
• Of 5 routes begun since 1986, 2 still running
Ferry Trends (Cont’d.)
Chicago:
• Water taxi service on
Chicago River left
mostly to private
sector
• MPO used CMAQ*
funds to help buy
one boat
*Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality
Improvement Program
Ferry Trends (Cont’d.)
New York:
• City operates Staten
Island ferry
• Other ferries are
private sector
• Of more than 65
routes started since
1985, 24 still running
Factors Contributing to Success
•
•
•
•
Demand Potential
Accessibility
Competitiveness
Funding
Factors Contributing to Success
(Cont’d.)
Demand Potential:
• High residential density near outer terminal
• High employment density near inner terminal
Factors Contributing to Success
(Cont’d.)
Accessibility:
• High parking capacity and/or feeder service at
outer terminal
• Transit connections at inner terminal
Factors Contributing to Success
(Cont’d.)
Competitive :
• Travel times and fares competitive with
existing alternatives
Factors Contributing to Success
(Cont’d.)
Committed funding:
• Committed public funding sources for capital
and/or operating costs exceeding fare
revenue
Factors Contributing to Failure
• Overoptimistic ridership projections
• Postponement or cancellation of major
development
• Noncompetitive travel times or fares
• Budget cutbacks
• Spend-out of demonstration grants
Conclusions
• Requirements for success:
 Know markets to be served
 Be competitive with other modes
 Make terminals convenient for actual
trip ends
 Obtain adequate funding commitments
Questions?