.11.. an x. 1: . . . TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Mom-Emmo?? DEPABMNT 0F Wm EESOURCES W1. 01mm 111. EVALUATION OF MARKET CONDITIONS .Physical Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 'Topography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 01mm 1 Economic Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ?En?ii'Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .-. . . . ?Market Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ion fi' Local Support and Statewide Interest . - - - - . . - - - - . (3 HAPEERIVATTEWDANCEPROJECTIONS Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . Source of Attendance . . . . . . . . Resident Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Recreation Areas . . . . . . . . :Facilities During Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Lower Overlook . . . . . . . . . er Ove r100131811 HatChery SCOQE Of F?CilitieS 3911? Ridge Complex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l3 Exhibits . . . . .13; 15 ?55 :39. . 3; .r Iv? were or CONTENTS (Continued) Restaurant and Snack Bar . . . . . . Audio-Visual Presentation . . . . . . Bar Historic Area. . . . . . Steam?l'rain . Fish Hatchery isitgtion Projections . . . . . . . . . . . . I general Assumptions . . . . . . . . . Method of Analysis for Annual Projections Independent Check on Base Year Projections Distribution of Visitation . . . . Weekly Distribution of Visitation . . . . Weekend?Weekday Distribution of Visitation Ratio of Sunday to Saturday Visitation . . . Hourly Distribution of Visitation . . . . CHAPTER V. ECONOMIC JUSTIFICATION . . . . . . . . . Benefit-Cost Analysis . . . . . . . . MathOdOlogY~Determination of Benefits . . . . . of Costs . . . . . . COmPutation of Benefits . Computation of Costs frBenefit-Cost Ratio CONCESSION ANALYSIS . . . . . . ii WtW?wmm: Page ll u. - - TABLE or (Continued) 311301! Bar, and Gift Shop 0 I I I I FIGURES Projection of Per Capita Annual Use . . . . and Oroville Visitor Facilities ?1 . . . . gerojected Distribution of Visitation TABLES Hourly Distribution of Visitation . . . . . Oroville Visitor Facilities . . . . . . . .y 0f Benefit Value . . . . . I and Replacement Cost - . . I 9 I W??i?s . i at Oroville Visitor Facilities . . . . . . . . . . Computation of Visitor Day value of Benefit at 'xg?omparison of Trends of Visitation at Hoover Dam Oroyille Visitor Facilities, Summary of Projected Vis1tor Origin at Visitor Facilities 1969 . . . . Estimation of Visitation Included For.Assignment 1: _7 Estisste of Total Present worth Project Benefits US1ng a Visitor?Day value of $0.Oroville Visitor Facilities, Visitation Projections Oroville Visitor Facilities, Folsom.Lake Recreation Area Survey - 196M, Summary of User Origin . . . . 0 Estimate of Total Present WOrth Operation, maintenance, Page ?Frtihi: -.-. TABLE or come (Continued) mares (Continued) Estimate of Total Present Worth Project Costs . Estimated Annual Operations Statement for First Year of Project - Restaurant . . . . . . . . . Estimated Annual Operations Statement for First Year of Project - Snack.Bar . . . . . . . . . Estimated Annual Operations Statement for First Year Of P13038313 Gift Shop 0 a I Estimated Annual Operations Statement for First Year of Project - Lodge Concession . . . . . . Estimated Annual Operations Statement for First Year of Project - monorail . . . . . . . . . . Estimated Annual Operations Statement for First Year of Project - Steam Train Concession . . . Estimated Annual Operations Statement for First Year of Project - Trackless Train . . . . . . Oroville Visitor Facilities, Estimated Revenue, Costs (Including Rent to State) and Return to Concessioner in First Year of Project . . . .1 iv ll-l 1+2 1+3 45 16 1+7 STATE OF CALIFORNIA THE RESOURCES AGENCY OF WATER RESOURCES EDMUND G. BROWN, Governor HUGO FISHER, Administrator, The Resources Agency of California Director, Department of'water Resources ALFRED R. Chief Engineer JOHN R. Assistant Chief Engineer -0- SACRAMENTO DISTRICT Carl.A. Werner . . . . . 45 Ma GW FairehildDistrict Director . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chief, Planning Section . . . . . . . Chief, Special Investigations Section This study was conducted'by Shire Toknno . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Senior Economist, water Resources Rolfe Thompson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Junior Economic Analyst And coordinated'with Harmon Rowe . . . . . Jehn Hightower . . . max Day . . . . . . Thomas E. Downs, Jr. Bert F. Williams . John F. Shrawder . Donald E. Owen . . Walter L. Terry . . Warren J. Cole . . . . . T. J. Nelson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Department of Parks and Recreation . . . . Department of Parks and Recreation . . . Department of Parks and Recreation . Office of Architecture and Construction . . . . . Department of Fish and Game . . . Department of Conservation . Department Of Water Resources Department of water Resources Department of water Resources . Department of water Resources I I I I a CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The Oroville Visitor Facilities are an integral part of the State's resource development program. The implementation of the plans to develop visitor facilities at the Oroville Dam will be an important contribution to the economy of the area, state, and Nation. It is the obligation of the state government to keep the public informed of the ewenditure of public funds . These Oroville Visitor Facilities will afford the public an opportunity to view the State's activities in the use and preservation of its resources. The proposed plan, when implemented, will present to the public the interactions of the resources which are available and being developed within the State to . enhance the well-being of the State and Nation. The focal point of the facilities will he on Kelly Ridge, from where the dam, reservoir, and the surrounding area may be seen in panorama. The visitor center building, exhibits, Curry-Bidwell Bar State Historical Monument area, picnic facilities, parking and land? seeping, and construction overlook are parts of a master plan. The switchyard, power plant, and some of the fish hatchery will afford the public an opportunity to view some of the State's activities. Visitors Will be moved over the large area by monorail and steam train. This analysis contains an evaluation of market conditions, attendance projections, and economic justification of the facilities and 90151088510115 . This office report will reguire final review prior to the Pulolioation of the master plan report . -1- .33. fut-=1- . ?Va .. agar-'31] CHAPPER II PURPOSE AND SCOPE The State of California is constructing one of the world's greatest public works developments, the California State water Project, of which.the Oroville Dam and reservoir is the key feature. This key feature of the State water Project will he the highest dam.in the United States and'will require 80,000,000 cubic yards of fill material. The State water Project is essential to meet the water needs of California's increasing population growth. The State?s policy is to provide visitor facilities at appropriate sites of the State Water Project, both during and following construction. The purpose of such facilities is to control the public in a safe and orderly manner so that it will not interfere with construc- tion or operation activities, to provide education and information about the project to the public and to provide a location and conveniences for the public where it can best view the project. In keeping with the State's policy such visitor facilities are being planned on Kelly Ridge which?will overlook the Oroville Dam.and reservoir. The scope, level and variety of visitor facilities and services to be provided'will'be commensurate with the magnitude of the project and with public interest in its construction and operation. Public interest in Oroville Dam.already is high. A?ore than'l,500,000 visitors watched .construotion during the first two and a half years. .1..- 3 The Oroville visitor facilities will include a means of access ?0 and parking at agpropriate locations and, commensurate'with acceptable standards, buildings, landscaping, sanitary facilities and water, audio- visual displays, refreshmen? concessions, guide and interpretasive services, tours, and other services. ?nal. . rm cuikm?w - . . . .. surnames 0F MQRKET CONDITIONS . To properly evaluate the economic aspects of facilities, both ities and the justification, it is necessary to examine the market conditions. These considerations may be broken down into two broad categories: 1. The physical considerations 2. The economic considerations Physical Considerations The physical considerations which are relevant to this analy- sis include the topography and climate of the area and its relationship to the overall market. Topography The micro-features of the area consist of foothills above the fell line of the Sierra?Nevadas and the Sacramento Valley. The facilities are located at a mean elevation above sea level of about 1,200 feet. This affords 3a. panoramic view of the reservoir which will he created by the construction of the dam, and the Sacramento Valley. Consideration must also be given to the topographic effects of the Coast Range, which tends to physically separate the Sacramento Valley from the Populated my Area. While this physical barrier may not appear to be evident from a topographic point of View, this range of moun- tains affects the climate of the Sacramento Valley. from the standpoint of the number of people who will utilize these facil- .., :?Tr . - a; is .. Climate The climate of the area is similar to that of the Sacramento Valley. There is a wet season during the'winter and a dry seasOn in the summer. The winters are relatively mild, though freezing temper- atures are not uncommon during the late fall, winter and early'spring months. Fogs of varying densities occur frequently during the winter months in the valley, but as a rule the Oroville area is free from valley fog. The foothill area surrounding Oroville is noted for its thermal belt which has been an important consideration in.the analysis of the visitor facility. Normally, the rainy season begins in late September and continues through late march, with a range in average annual precip? itation of about 20 to 25 inches. Thunderstorms, snowstorms, or hail- storms, rarely occur in this area. However, gentle rains may continue for weeks. During the spring, and occasionally during other seasons, winds of relatively high.velocity sweep over the valley. While these windstorms are generally of short duration and seldom inflict serious damage, the visitor facility area is somewhat more protected than the valley. The summers are characterized by low relative humidity, high temperatures, and clear blue skies. High summer temperatures are between 95 and 100 degrees, whereas the temperatures in the Bay'Area for the comparable period are between 75 and 80 degrees. This dif- ference in temperature, which can present a real in the projections of attendance, has been taken into consideration. This is a factor which cannot be quantified but cannot be overlooked in this analysis. nan-mammals-"J ..- ..-.-1- :13; 1 Economic Considerations Some of the more significant economic considerations analyzed in this study included transportation, communications, the market area, and population. Transportation The development of the area has been enhanced by the trans- portation system.nhich serves the area. The major highways which.provide access to the Uroville area consist of US99E, which is a.proposed free- way, and State Route 70, the alleviater route from the valley over the scenic Sierras to Nevada. There is also a.mwriad of county roads, and other improved roads, which afford access to the proposed visitor facilities . The main line of the western Pacific Railroad Feather River Route passes through Oroville and affords transportation'within the State, as well as for out-of?state visitors. The Southern Pacific Railroad also serves the area. Recently, improvements have been made at the Oroville airport and increased air traffic is anticipated in the future. Communications The coverage of an area by'various communications media such as radio, television, and newspapers has a decisive affect on the recreational market patterns. In addition to orienting residents of a given area toward a given trade center they serve as a basic market- ing attraction. It is reasonable to assume that the proposed visitor facilities will receive intensive coverage through local media and from.Sacramento. Considerable coverage has already been given to the Oroville Division of the State water Project. It is reasonable to -6- . .. . - -.. . .expect future coverage to continue at an equal or greater level. This activity?will'be extended throughout the nation. Market Area Technological innovations have markedly-changed the marketing framework in the area. These innovations include transportation, me? chaniZation, and concentrated shopping areas in recent years. The resident market considered in this analysis consists of persons living within the counties which are generallijithin a 3-hour driving time of the proposed site. This is a very important consider? ations-the State of washington, with a.population of about 3emillion people, contributed h6;percent of the world's Fair attendance. A resident market with its high repeat potential is the mainstay of all major facilities of this nature. The nearby residents can easily visit these facilities, whereas many nonresidents are passing through or visiting in the area. For the purposes of this analysis, a 3-hour driving time has been considered to be a reasonable market area. This would afford a family the opportunity to visit the area on a onesday round trip. While there is obviously no absolute limit, it would appear reasonable that regardless of the facility, no sisahle percentage of the population living more than 3 hours from these facilities would man; a one-day visit. Population While_attendance projections include population, the characteristics of the population are pertinent in planning the facili? ties. These characteristics include the population densities, income, .and types of employment. In the Sacramento Valley, according to the census, the second most rural area of California in 1950 was Butte ?County, which a neared the highest rate of urbanization. Butte County, according to t} 1960 census, shows the lowest farm popu' ation within the Sacramento -San Joaquin Valley. The .ncome earned by a family has a bearing up: 1 the kind of recreation it is willing and able to pursue. It is evide. that a family with a high income usually has more money to spend for recreation than a famil: with an income below average. The proposed visitor facilities ll be within financial reach of families With relatively low incomes. By the same token, the quality of the facilities would not be a de?l: errant to the high income family. While no detailed anal-Fain has been made of this factor, it is felt that this is also an important consideration. Although it is not possible to make a detailed analysis of the occupations of the residents who will visit this facility, it is worth considering the overall occupation of the popu- lation. It is expected that the majority of the visitors will consist of those employed in sedentary jobs. These people will be office work- ers whose jobs do not require physical exertion. However, this does not preclude other occupations. The activities considered in planning the facilities are adaptable to a wide range of occupations . Local and Statewide Interest It is important to consider the local interest and support, as well as the State?s need in the expenditure of public funds. This has been a long established State policy. In the public interest, the Proposed facility would foster the conservation and proper utilization of the resources of the State and Nation. Benefits from this project would be generale dispersed throughout the local area and the State. During the course of the study discussions were held with local and other interests to determine the public opinion relative to -8- L. I- -. we :0 ?watts?" the need. for these facilities. The City of Oroville has passed. a resolutic 11 supporting this facility in the Oroville area. State legis- lators 1: we stated that they would. support this program. It is reasonable to assur that this demonstrates sufficient interest to warrant public emendj sures . CHAPTER IV ATTENDANCE PROJECTIONS Introduction It is the primary purpose of this chapter to present projections of attendance in sufficient detail in the planning of revenues, the costs, and general design of the facilities. This chapter covers the rationale and methods utilized in deriving the use projections. The projection of attendance at such facilities depends to a large extent upon variables such as the size of the market, the nature of_the facility, and promotional efforts. Other factors are relevant, but not sUbject to quantitative analysis.? These would include depreSSions, wars, and similar disasters. Those factors which have a direct bearing upon the magnitude of the attendance are discussed in this chapter. These considera- tions include facilities available to the public during the construction period, the scope and nature of the proposed facilities, and the source of attendance. Source of Attendance The source of attendance for the purpose of this analysis is divided into two categories. The first and major category is the resident population. The second and lesser of the two is the attendance expected from the recreation areas which are proposed for the Oroville Division of the State Water Project. Resident Population . As stated in Chapter 3, the resident market is considered to be these living within a 3-hour driving time from the facilities. This area . . . -. . . . . (.?z-ra?l? . . WW 2" 33-1 .- - .. - :u1.13-1- - - -: - - includes the East Bay and extends eastward toward Mbdesto. It includes a large portion of the Superior California population. This population.by the year 1970 is expected to exceed million. As stated previously, nearby residents woul?.he expected to attend the facilities more frequently than those living at a greater distance. This can.be expressed in terms of use factor. It follows then that this factor would decrease in a direct relationship with.the distance removed from the facilities. Recreation Areas While intensive economic studies of the recreation areas have not been conducted, the preliminary planning of the recreation facilities within the Oroville Division have been under'way. The plans include the recreation areas around the perimeter of the reservoir, the fore- bay, the afterbey, and the borrow area from the Oroville Dam. This analysis has taken into consideration the effect of these areas upon the expected attendance at the proposed visitor facilities. These visitors are considered to be the nonresident market. -11- -r - .- ?ver-wav- gacilities During Construction The visitation which has occurred at the construction facilities provide a primary basis for analyzing the various aspects of the proposed visitor facilities. These facilities consist of the lower overlook which has been in operation, the proposed upper overlook, and the fish hatchery. Lower Overlook Since the opening of the construction-overlook at Oroville in April l963, approximately l,57h,000 persons have visited the facilities. These facilities have been staffed.by personnel from the Department of Parks and Recreation, who provide information concerning the dam and reservoir. A concessionare provides light snacks and gifts for the visitors. The lower overlook has a parking area with a 150 car capacity, which has been adequate most of the time. A.major inadeqnacy of the lower overlook is a general lack of shelter from the rain and excessive heat. Upper Overlook In June of 1966 the facilities at the lower overlook will be moved to the upper overlook to provide visitors with a better view of the con- struction activities. It also will provide parking for 500 cars in antici- pation of the increased visitation as the dam.nears completion. The state- and concessions' facilities will be essentially the same as those at the lower overlook ,but with expanded area. The upper overlook is expected to remove any facilities constraint to construction visitors that may have existed at the lower overlook. Fish Hatchery Visitor accommodations at the Oroville fish hatchery have been Open since the summer of l96h. These facilities, consisting primarily of -12- a parking area and a viewing platforn, have accommodated approximately 100,000 visitors annually'dnring 196h and 1965, primarily during the salmon- run period. The NiMhus fish hatchery near Sacramento has attracted as many as 13,000 persons per day during the salmon runs. The public interest in the fish hatchery at Oroville has been demonstrated during the past two years and it is expected to continue to be substantial in the future. Scope of Proposed Facilities The purpose of this section is to set forth in detail the scope upon the public of the proposed visitor facilities. This part also presents the logic and rationale for the inclusion of each element. A.statement of the range of activities is a necessary prereouisite for the subsequent development of visitation projections, revenue, and operating expenses for both the public and private portions of the'project. Kelly Ridge Complex Ninety percent of all visitors are expected to utilize some portion - of the Kelly Ridge complex. Exhibits The exhibit program on Kelly Ridge will be divided into three interconnected sections: 1; View 'Center 2. Curry-Bidwell Bar Historic Area 3. California Resources 2 Exhibits requiring weather protection and information that can best be communicated in controlled indoor environments will be located in the Visitor Center. These will include: national history,-natural science, 1 Latham, Tyler, Jensen, Inc., Industrial Design Consultants -13- uses of water, role of government, and recreation; as they relate to California's natural resources, with emphasis on water. The Curry-Bidwell Bar Bridge, Toll House, and mother Orange Tree, all of historic origin, will be reconstructed on Ridge. The relationship of these facilities to each other will he maintained'by spanning an artificial body of water to rese?ble a natural setting. Completing the triad of exhibit areas will be a.dramatic outdoor contour map of the State of California, nearly the size of a football field. A series of small exhibit buildings will border the eastern side of the ?State". This exhibit complex will display the georgraphic story of the State's natural resources and facilities with emphasis on water. The exhibits are designed to inform the visitors of the operation and.purposes of the various facilities of the project. .These exhibits are planned as panels with lights and strategic locations, which will be operable by the visitor to enable him to visualize the various features and fr; operations of the project. Restaurant and Snack Bar Two food service areas, a restaurant and snack'bar, will be incorporated in the visitor center building. The restaurant will have a seating capacity of 250 persons and a snack bar will accommodate 100 people. The estimated revenues generated- by these facilities are shown in a subsequent portion of this report. Audio?Visual Presentation - Closely aligned with the enhibit program.will be two auditioriums for audioavisual presentations. movies depicting various aspects of the Resources Agency story and the construction of Oroville Dam.and Reservoir will be shown at regular -. ar. u; - - -1L- intervals. Each auditorium, which will seat 250 people, is expected to be full during period of peak visitation. Gift Shop - Within the confines of the visitor center building will be a concession-operated gift shop where mementos of the visitors experience will be on sale. This gift shop will provide services similar to those provided by gift shops throughout the California State Park System. Curry-Bidwell Bar Historic Area The Curry-Bidwell Bar Historic Area is expected to attract as many visitors as any single exhibit at the Droville Project. The area will contain the reassembled, original suspension bridge, the reconstructed Toll House, and the Nether Orange Tree which will he replanted at one end of the bridge. On the periphery'of this area will be walking trails and picnic facilities which will provide visitors with much of the recreation opportunity available in the old Curry-Bidwell Bar State Park. A.monorail is proposed for transporting visitors from Kelly Ridge to the switchyard area, where the flow of the electricity will be regulated. A terminal will be located north of the suspension bridge with a station at the lodge. Two trains of cars will be scheduled to arrive and depart at intervals necessary to accommodate the traffic. It is estimated that 60 percent of all visitors to the facilities will utilize the monorail and that peak hourly use will approximate 1,000 persons. many people will probably'be attracted to the visitor facilities by the presence of the monorail. .15- Steam Train The steam train will transport visitors from a station adjacent to the Oroville Municipal Auditorium,'Where 1,500 parking spaces will be avail? able, to the switchyard area and a common station with the monorail. The six mile onedway trip will proceed along the south bank of the Feather River, running on portions of the old?Western Pacific tracks, including a 800 foot tunnel bored through solid rock. Approximately 35 percent of all visitors are expected to utilize this facility. Capacity of the steam train will vary as cars will be added as the need arises. The demand for other steam train rides throughout the county, The Super Skunk, Durango-silverton, etc., indicates that this aspect of the facilitieS'will be a substantial inducement to visitation. Powerplant Tours of the powerplant will be served'by an open hO?seat bus. As the bus traverses the tunnel to the powerhouse, a recording will relate information concerning the size of the project and the problems facedxiuring construction. At the powerplant chamber, the passengers will alight and climb stairs to a platform atop the small rooms in the service bay. Here, a four-minute audio presentation will describe the six generators being viewed in their EEO-foot chamber. A glass wall in the chamber will show the rock formations behind the powerplant tells. Panels will display photographs of the chamber during the construction stage. The audio system'will request the visitors to return to the bus for the trip back to the switchyard. In order to handle the anticipated traffic, the "experience? will be limited to five minutes per busload. -16- Indications from powerplant tours at Shasta and Hoover Dam are that Groville will be able to accommodate a maximm of 500 persons per hour- Fish Hatchery The Fish Hatchery, to be constructed on the Feather River opposite the City of Oroville, will. enable the public to view the fish ascending the fish ladder in season, and to visit portions of the hatchery. It will be reachable by railway or by car with adjacent parking facilities. . A room below ground level will permit an underwater View of the "run". Although salmon and steelhead are moving upstream most of the year, at certain seasons the migrants are more dense. I A post button audio system will' explain the life cycle of anadromous fishes. Present plans for the hatchery include visitor walkways and viewing areas around the gathering and holding tanks, the spat-Icing hatchery, rearing grounds, and a section of the spawning channel. An audio presentation at each of the viewing areas will be controllable by pushbuttons . These will explain the hatchery operations . Different tapes will be used to explain the events occurring during different seasons. The visitor capacity at the fish hatchery is planned to be 1,000 people per hour, 'with annual visitation to this facility estimated at 220,000 during the first year of the project. ?sitation Projections This section presents the logic and methods used in deriving the estimates . General Assumptions Three general assumptions used in the analysis of visitation Projections are as follows: -17- 1. Population will continue to grow, increasing to an estimated heo million in the U. s. and 56 million in California by 2020. 2. A high level of employement will continue with an increase in gross national product compounded at 3 percent per year and.per capita disposable income compounded at l?-percent per year. 3. Nb major wars will occur, but sizeable expenditures for defense or conversion of existing defense industries to nondefense uses will continue. method of Analysis for Annual Projections In order to project annual visitations at the visitor facilities, it is first necessary to define the market area from which day use'visita- tion originates. A survey conducted.hy the Department of Water Resources at the present construction overlook supported the assumption that all of the visitation to the visitor facilities would be by those originating for that, day within a 150 mile radius. AS mentioned.previously, the resident market is essentially determined?by the amount of driving time comfortably assimilated by a family or individual in a day, it is logical to conclude that day use visitation at the proposed facilities will likeuise be subject to a 150 mile radial distance of origin for that day of travel. In the absence of other indications from'which to estimate per capita annual use from.the resident martet, the per capita annual use as recorded by the l96h visitation to the construction facilities was used as the most meaningful base from'which to initiate projections. Table 1 shows the estimated population of the resident market in 196h, along with -18- .. a. u. 3333 1960 1969 1959 1978 1988 1998 2008 2018 TABLE 1 Oroville Visitor Facilities Visitation Projections Facilities Overlook Overlook Proposed'Visitor Proposed?Visitor Proposed?Visitor Proposed Visitor Proposed Visitor Proposed Visitor Estimated Per Capita Annual Bee .200 .270 ~19s This is recorded visitation to construction facilities Estimated Resident market Estimated Population Visitation 3,125,000 750,000?/ h,h00,000?/ ,1,200,000 h,h00,000 1,h00,000 1,700,000 2,000,000? 2,200,000 2,h00,000 2,600,000 g] Includes 300,000 nonoresident entries into resident market due to presence of reservoir recreation development visitation to the construction facilities. By dividing visitation by population an annual per capita use of .21LO was derived. The 3.961! per capita annual use is projected to 1969, the initial year of the facilities, at the same rate of increase used by the Department of Parks and Recreation in their planning studies 1] The rate of increase is approximately 2.6 percent per annum or 13 percent in five years. Per capita annual visitation in the resident market is projected to 'be .270. Figure 1 shows this relationship. The estimated 1969 population in the resident market is 1h]. million people. An additional 300,000 non-resident entries are expected to enter the resident market due to the presence of reservoir recreation development. This makes the effective resident market population In; million in 1969. The product of population and per capita annual visitation results in an estimated construction facilities visitation of 1.2 million in 1969. Since 1969 is both the final year of construc- tion and the first year of the proposed visitor facilities, it is felt that the per capita annual use of .270 (which reflects the character- istics of the construction facilities) understates the attractiveness of the change from the construction to the proposed visitor facilities. IThe per capita annual use will increase in 1969 due to the installation of the proposed visitor facilities. This conclusion Was that the visitor facilities will be installed and operative concurrent with the completion of the dean construction. In the event ?uh-mi.- the facilities are not constructed and operative, the construction visitation would be expected to decline sharply from its peak of 17 Projection of per capita recreation use in California based upon use in State and National Parks and National Forests. H. Hjersman and J. McDade, unpublished. -20- .325?! . .300 I ?.279? '3 .2?le .200_ . :3 .100._ I i i i 196k 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 a Year l/ Projection of Per Capita Given Construction Facilities 2 1.2 Million Visitors 2/ Projection of Per Capita Use Upon Installation and Operation of Proposed'Visitor'Facilities l.h Million Visitors 0 FIGURE 1. Projection of Per Capita Annual Use u; - u. Ian- -21- has. CW 1,200,000 in 1969. Due to the increased attractiveness of the proposed visitor facilities it is necessary that per capita annual use he in? creased from .270 to .325. The resultant estimate of visitation in 1969, with the proposed facilities installed, is l.h million visitors. After the determination of the base year visitation in 1969, visitation?was projected for a period of 50 years, corresponding to the prescribed period of economic and concession analysis. The projection of visitation from.1969 to 2018 is expected to closelv roller the historic trend of Hoover Dam.from the period of 19h6 to 1963, Figure 2. This results in a slight decline in per capita annual use over the 50- year period. Similar declines have been Observed at most of the major dams and reservoirs in the U.S., e.g. Hoover, Shasta, Bonnieville, Grand Coulee, etc. Table 2 presents complete projections of visitation, 'with.the corresponding esthmates of population and per capita use in the resident market during the period 196M to 1969. Independent Check on Base Year Projection As a check upon the reasonableness of the 1969 estimate of l.h million visitors, the projection during the first year of the visitor facilities was grouped by iso??distance zones from Kelly Ridge. This grouping was based upon the origin of visitors interviewed in the . DWR sample survey. After estimating the geographic distribution of the expected l.h million visitors, the total population'within the distance zones was estimated for 1969. From this a per capita annual use from each zone was calculated. This per capita annual use was compared to the per capita annual use compiled at Folsom.Lake in 196M by the Division of Beaches and.Parks. The compilations of the Division of Beaches and Parks were based upon a sireday survey in June of l96h. -22- Index of Visitation Year l=100 200 . v?wu-n Hoover Dam 39116-1963 Oroville Visitor Facilities 1969-1988 1'.le I If. 0 ?if9101112131h151617181920 Year if 1/ Year No. Corresponds to recOrded visitation in l9h6 at Hoover Dam and estimated visitationzh1l969 at Oroville FIGURE 2. Comparison of Trends of Visition at Hoover Dam and Oroville Visitor Facilities -23- TABIE 2 Oroville Visitor Facilities Summary of Projected Visitor Origin at Visitor Facilities 1969 Estimated Sample Estimated.- Auntie]. Per Percent Mileage Population Number of Annual Oapita. of Annual Zone 1969 Visitors Visitation Visitation Visitation 0 .. 10 28,200 10h I 238,000 8.11 17.0 10 20 25,100 68 152,000 6.1? 11.0 20 30 53,200 63 .. 210,000 2.6 10.0 30 - ho 72,1100 97 210,000 2.8 15.0 1+0 - 50 51,900 11:. 28,000 .51; 2.0 sgbtotsagl 232,800 3&6 770,000 3.31 55.0 50 60 35,200 1+ 1h,000 .20 1.0 60 .. 70 2015200 8 111,000 .069 1.0 70 - 80 626,200 98 .35 16.0 80 -. 90 1015700 111,000 .13 ,1.0 90 100 106,900 11 28,000 .26 2.0 100 150 3,070,000 153 336,000 .11 211.0 0 - 150 Total. 621+ 1,h00,000 .318 100.0 Includes 300 ,000 non resident entries into the resident market -22- Table 2 shows the emery of the visitor origin for the Oroville Visitor Facilities in 1969. Table 3 shows a corresponding summary for Folsom Lake in 1961}. The most significant aspect of the two tables is that Folsom Lake received. lL15 and 0.91:3 visits in 1.961% from each person whose trip originated within 50 and 150 mile radii respectively. Based upon million visitors in 1969., Oroville Visitor Facilities are expected to receive 3.31 and .318 visits in 1.969 from each person whose trip originated within 50 and l50 mile radii. The location of Folsom Dam and Reservoir and Groville Dam and Reservoir are similar with respect to climatic conditions physical characteristics, and higl'nvay access . The activity envisioned for the Oroville Visitor Facilities can he enjoyed by everybody, 1while some of the activity at Folsom is more specialized. It is concluded that projections of 1.1} million visitors at Oroville Visitor Facilities in 1969 is reasonable. Distribution of Visitation The visitation in any year is expressed as a percent- age of the total annual visitation. It is derived from information obtained at the recreation areas 511mm below. These areas were con- sidered to be the most comparable from which data were available. Number of Years in Which Distribution by Months as a Percentage of Year Total is Recorded Oroville Dam Construction Overlook Folsom Dam Overlook 3 Shasta Dam Visitor Center 1L 6 Glen Canyon Dam Construction Overlook -25- Zone Subtotal 150 Subtotal TABLE 3 Droville Visitor Facilities Fblsom Lake Recreation Area Survey 196h Population 196k hh,5oo 23h,500 33h,000 110,h00 66,000 789,h00 909,300 3,h88,800 5:187:500 Summary of user Origin Annual Per Sample Percent Number of Annual Capita 0f Annual Visitors Visitation Visitation Visitation 38h 320,688 7.2 9.0 1,810 1,511,577 6.5 h2.6 1,690 "1,011,369 hL2 39.8 23 19,208 .17 0.5 18 15,032 .23 0.h 3:925 h.15 92.h he 35,075 .039 1.0 25 20,878 .0060 0.6 3,992 3,333,820 -6h3 9h.0 -26- Folsom Lake Recreation Area 7 Hearst Castle 2 California State Fair Planning Report by E.R.A. - Seasonal Index of Recreation Activity in Southern California 1 Hoover Dam.Visitor Center The projected distribution at Oroville reflects the fact that the facilities at Oroville are designed for year-round use, the increasing'number of people vacationing in months other than June, July, August, and September, also influenced the distribution. Figure 3 shows the projected distribution at Oroville. Weekly Distribution of'Visitation The weekly distribution was deriued by dividing the total by the number of weeks in the month. Thirty-one day months have h.h3 weeks; thirty?day months, h.28; and twenty?eight day months, h.00. weekendpweekday Distribution of Visitation The construction overlook at Oroville has had a #5 percent weekend to 55 percent weekday ratio visitation. This ratio is biased by the fact that construction is carried on Nonday through Friday and is shut down on Saturday and Sunday. As a result, the construction period shows a greater percentage of visitation during the weekdays than will the visitor facilities. As a general rule, recreation actinity in.the Upper Feather River area has tended to distribute in the ratio of Eb percent weekend to ho percent weekday. Oroville, due to accessibility and a future nationwide increase in'weekday leisure time, is expected to have a ratio of 55 percent weekend; #5 percent weekday, in the post-construction period. -27- Percent of Annual Visita$ion 29 3.5 10 5 0 Jan Feb mar Apr May Jan July' Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Months FIGURE 3. Projected Distribution of Visita$ion at Oroville Visitor Facilities -28- - Ratio of Sunday to Saturday Visitation Discussion with Department of Parks and Recreation personnel and present construction overlook data, indicates that about 60 percent of the weekend visitation occurs on Sunday. Hourly Distribution of Visitation The estimated hourly distribution of visitation was based upon visitor facilities being open 12 hours per day, from 93.311. to 9 p.111. The estimates were based upon the prevailing visitation pattern at the construction overlook plus the projections of Economic Research Associates in their California State Fair Planning Report. Table shows the estimated percentage of daily arrivals by hours and estimated percentage of people in the visitor facilities complex by hours. The average length of stay is estimated at 2.5 hours. -29- TABLEJ-I- Hourly Distribu?ion of Visitation Percentage of People Percentage of Percentage of People Arriving in People Departing In the Compgx 3.-30.. ECONOMIC JUSTEFICATION henefituCost Analysis Benefits and costs measured in.money terms are expressed as a ratio by dividing costs into benefits. These costs and benefits are measured from the same point in time by means of "present value? tech, niQpes. A project must have a benefitncost ratio in excess of unity to be economically justified. Nethodologthetermination of Benefits The unit value for a visitor-day of recreation was derived with some allowances made for the unique visitations to the project. Each.visitor is considered a recipient of one visitor-day of recreation benefit. 0f the total estimated number of visitors to the proposed facilities, 10 percent were excluded from.benefit computation on the assumption that they originate from other recreation areas around the reservoir and are counted for benefit at those areas. It is estimated that an additional 10 percent of the total number of visitors will not utilise ant of the public facilities and will be attracted solely by the concession facilities, e.g. monorail, train, boat ride, lodge, etc. This 10 percent is likewise excluded from benefit computation. The remainder of the visitors are considered users of some or all of the public facilities and are beneficiaries of the public development. It is estimated that 2.5 hours will be the average length of stay in the visitor facilities complex. -31- Methodolow-Determination of Costs The visitor facility complex is viewed as a recreation entity, separate and distinct from the reservoir recreation development which is included as a project purpose of the Oroville Dam project. As such, there is no apportionment of Oroville Dam project Joint costs to the visitor facilities. The estimated economic costs of this project are capital costs, interest on capital during construction, right?of-way acquisition, and present worth of annual operating, maintenance, and replacement costs. Coyputation of Benefits . The difference in travel cost per visitor day betWeen the 50th and 90th percentiles of visitor days, arrayed in order of distance from Oroville is considered to be the value of a visitor day. One hundred and fifty miles is considered to 'be the maximum radius from which benefits to the visitor facilities will be considered. Visitors with a place oi? residence in excess of one hundred and fifty miles from Oroville are assumed to originate within this radius for the purpose of determining the unit value. In this case the value is calculated to be $0.50. This value times total estimated visitation over the 50-year period is calculated, and the product converted to present worth. The resultant is total present worth project benefits of $20,000,000. Cogutation of Costs The computation of the costs resulted in total present worth project economic costs of $12,000,000. -32.. Benefit-Cost Ratio The rehio of total project benefits to total project costs is 1.67 to 1.00. This greater than unity rahio indicates the project is economically justified. The fellowing tables Show the above procedure. gr .TABLE 5 Computation of Visitor Day value of Benefit at Oroville Visitor Facilities Retina Trip Distance - 90th Percentile .-.-. 152 miles Round. Trip Distance - 50th Percentile 60-mi1ee' 152 miles on $.075 $11.1t0 $5.13 60 miles 55.075 .-.. $3.20 $0.91 (90th) $1.1+7 (50th) $0.91 .. $0.56 Rounded'Visitor Day Value - $0.60 Ratio of length of stay to total trip time in hours 2/ Average number of people per car -3h- TABLE 6 Estimation of Visitation Included For Assignment of Benefit Value Estimated Visitation Yemar Estimated Visitation Included for Benefits?/ 1969 1,h00,000 1,130,000 1978 1,700,000 1,380,000 1988 a 2,000,000 1,620,000 1998 2,200,000 - 1,780,000 2008 2,h00,000 1,9ho,000 2018 2,600,000 2,110,000 This is the estimated actual visitation less 19 :percent which is not considered recipient of benefit. -35- TABIE 7 Estimate of Total Present Worth Project Benefits Using A Visitor?Day Value of $0.60 Present - Total Decade Visitor-Day Worth PJ-I. of Decade Decade Visitation For Benefit Value at 11% Benefit 3. 12,600,000 80.60 0.8219 $6,218,000 2 15,000,000 80.60 0.5553 811,998,000 3 17,000,000 $0.60 0.3751 $3,826,000 18,600,000 $0.60 0.25311 $2,828,000 5 20,200,000 80.60 0.1712 $2,075,000 8mg 0' '0'0 This is a straight line intemolation from the yearly estimates in Table 6 136.. TABIEB Estimate of Total Present Worth Operation, Maintenance, and. Replacement Cost (Thousands of Dollars) Amual O. M. and. RI $257 Present Worth 0. M. 8: R. Deoadal Decadal PM. Factor ?22222 ?22222 2:22.. 1 $257 $2570 0.3219 2 257 2570 0.5553 3 257 2570 0-3751 257 2570 0.253h 5 257 2570 0.1712 Total Present Worth M. 82 R. Costs Present Worth Annual Cost .$2112 1h27 96h 651 tho $53511 . . - - - a -. . TABEE 9 Estimate of Total Present worth Project Costs (Thousands of Dollars) State share of capital costs Interest on capital costs during construction Right-oflwey.Acquisition costs Operation, maintenance, Replacement Costs Total project present worth economic costs Source: Section -38- $5,836 233 may 5 59h $11,771 .. . CONCESSION ANALYSIS Introduction The estimate of demand for the cdncession facilities at minimal fee chargeS'was based upon historical data at other recreation areas, opinions of experts in concession management, and an evaluation of the conditions unique to_the proposed visitor facilities at Groville. Restaurant, Snack Bar, and Gift Shop Historical data concerning food and gift concession-facili? ties seldom.indicates a percentage of actual use. They for the most part, show only per capita expenditure. As a result, no attempt'was made to derive the percentage of visitors purchasing food and gifts at specific prices. It was assumed that the proposed facilities would be of sufficient size to accommodate the demand. Estimated revenue was based upon.per capita food and gift expenditures at other recrea- tion areas. This resulted in an estimated per capita expenditure for the food and gift concessions. It does not, however, imply that everyh one will utilize these concessions. The following recreation areas and per capita expenditures for food and gifts were used for estimates of the proposed visitor facilities. Per Capita Per Capita Expenditure Expenditure Recreation Area For Food For Gifts Big Sur State Park $0.19 $0.03 Hearst Castle 0.25 0.52 Present Construction Overlook 0.12 0.13 Henry Cowell 0.1h -39- The primary reasons for the dafferenees in the per capite expenditures is the average length of stay in the area. The esti- mated.per capita expenditure fer food and gifts at Oroville are $0.25 and $0.25, respectively. The per capita expenditure for fbod is further divided into $0.15 at the restaurant ana $0.10 at the snack bar. (See Tables 10 - 12.) TABEE 10 Estimated.Annuel Operations Statement For First Year of Project - Restaurant Capital Outlay $150,000 Annual Operations Statement Revenue l.h million at $0.15 $210,000 Eee?e Amortization at 7% over 7 years $28,000 Operating Costs Food 8h,000 Salary and wages 55,000 Miscellaneous 32,000 Total Costs $199,000 Rent 3,000 Coneessioner's Return 8,000 -ho- TABLE 11 Estimated.Annua1 Operations S?atement For First YEar of Project - Snack Bar capital Outlay $50,000 Annual Operations Statement Revenue 1.0 million at $0.10 $1h0,000 Amprtiza$ion at 7% over 10 years $7,000 Operating Costs Fbod h2,000 Salary and.Wages 36,000 Miscellaneous 22,000 Total Costs $107,000 Rent lh,000 Concessioner's Return 19,000 -01- TABLE 12 Estimated.Annual Operations Statement For First Year of Project - Gift Shop Capital Outlay $25,000 Annual Operations Statement Revenue 1.1+ million at $0.25 $350,000 9.02:5. Amortization at over 10 years pr 2 Operating Costs Stock 1755000 Salary and wages 35:000 Miscellaneous 391000 Total Costs $253,000 Rent 27,000 Concessioner's Return 70,000 age. The estimated demand for the lodge facilities was based upon historical data Obtained from.the Sacramento Hotel Association. This data indicated that for the past two years, (l963-l96h) motels in the western United States averaged ??'peroent occupancy. The proposed lodge on Kally Ridge is estimated to achieve 70 percent of maximum, annual occupancy. (See Table 13) ?he, TABLE 13 Estimated Annual Operations Statement For First Year of Project - Lodge Concession Capital Outlay $228,000 Annual Operations Statement Revenue . 70% occupancy 20 units 365 days at $8.00 per unit Ease. Amortization at 7% over 20 years $21,000 Operating Costs Salary and wages 5,000 Laundry 1,800 Utilities 3,700 Miscellaneous I 5,500 Total Costs $37,000 Rent 1,000 Coneessioner's Return 3,000 Monorail, Steam.Train, and Trackless Train The estimate of demand for the transportation facilities was based upon observation of fees charged and demand for similar facilities at other recreation areas. The uniqueness of the proposed facilities at Oroville was evaluated qualitatively, as was the estimated demand at ninimal fee charges. The lack of adeqnate parking facilities on Kelly -h3- Ridge during peak periods necessitates the use of some portion of the transportation system during these periods if the visitor wishes to see the main exhibit area. This physical impetus to use of the trans? portation facilities is considered significant in the estimate of demand for the steam train and monorail. Per capita expenditures at other outdoor, recreation areas are significantly higher for comparable facilities than the estimated $0.65 at Oroville. This would indicate that the percentage oi annual use estimated for each facility is conservative and should be attain- able by adequate performance on the part of the concessioner. The physical design of the monorail and steam.train is characterized by flexibility. In each case, capacity can be increased or decreased'with the addition or subtraction of cars, in the case of the train, and a rail unit in the case of the monorail. The total hourly capacity of the steam train, monorail, and trackless train is approximately 2,500 people. This would indicate an inability to satisfy demand at peak periods; however, capacity can be increased 'with need. ThiS'will presumably be initiated by visitorS'when and as capacity constraints at certain times become apparent. (See Tables lh - 16.) Table 17 is a summary of Tables 10 a 16 plus the revenues and costs estimated in the Loafer Creek, Lime Saddle and Thermalito Forebay areas. -uu_ TABLE 1h? Eetima?ed Annual Operations Statement For First YEar of Pfojeot - monorail Capital Outlay 5358110,,000 Annual Operations Statement Revenue 630,000 adults at $0.50 $315,000 210,000 children at $0.25 52,000 Total Revenue .. $367, 000 gen Amortization at 7% over 10 years $120,000 Fixed Costa County Taxes 5,000 Insurance 20,000 Variable Costs Salary and wages 60,000 maintenance and repairs 52,000 General expense 5% variable costs 5,000 Total Costs $262,000 Bent . 25,000 Concessioner's Return 80,000 -45- TABLE 15 Estimated.Annual Operations smarement ?For First Year of Project - Steam Train Concession Capital Outlay $l,h01,000 Annual Opera?ions Statement Revenue 36h,000 adults at $1.00 $36h,000 1265000 children at $0.50 63,000 Total Revenue $h30,000 Amortization at 7% over ho years $100,000 Fixed Costs County Taxes 9,000 Insurance 20,000 Variable Costs Salary and wages 60,600 Feel 17,700 Maintenance and repairs I 48,300 Train and car expense 71,600 General expense 5% variable costs 10,200 Total Costs $337,000 Rent 25,000 Concessioner's Return 68,000 -45- TABLE 16 Estimated Annual Operations Statement For First Year of Project - Trackless Train Capital Outlay $20,000 Annual Operations Statement Revenue 350,000 people at $0.10 $35,000 Amortization at 7% over 10 years $3,000 Operating Costs I. ., Salary and. Wages 11+, 000 Fuel 2 ,200 Maintenance and. repairs 1,900 . gt Miscellaneous 3 ,700 Total Costs $25,000 321.113. 2,000 i Concessioner's Return 8,000 ESTIMATED REVENUE, cosms (INCLUDING RENT AND 111030011 T0 00110053101102 IN FIRST TABLE 17 OROVILLE VISITOR FACILITIES TO STATE) YEAR 0? PROJECT aE Facility Restaurant Snack Bar Gift Shop Lodge Mbnorail Steam Train Trackless Train Rally Ridge Subtotal Loafer Creek marina Supplies Excursion Boat Snack Bar Laundromat Lime Saddle Mbbile Unit Thermalito Forebay marina Supplies Total In. .0 Es?imated capital out 0 150,000 50,000 25,000 228,000 800,000 1,001,000 20,000 02,710,000 30,000 60,000 05,000 8,000 26,000 $2,883,000 00 I. lay Estimated revenue 210, 100, 1 0 00 0 0 350, 01 36?, 030, 0 35,$1,573,000 25,000 31,500 61,000 11,000 7,000 $1,708,500 0 28,000 7,000 0,000 21,000 120,000 100,000 3,000 $283,000 25,000 10,000 08,000 8,000 5,000 $303,000 $171,000 0 100,000 209,000 16,000 102,000 237,000 22,000 $937:000 0,000 9,000 7,000 2,000 0,000 Estimated Costs Amortization: Operating Re?t 3,000 10,000 27,000 1,000 25,000 25,000 2,000 $97,000 $963,000 $100,500 Total 202,000 121,000 280,000 38,000 287,000 362,000 27,000 $1,317,000 29,000 26,500 55,000 10,000 9,000 $1,006,500 Ret?rh to Concessioner -, 8,000 19,000 70,000 3,000 80,000 68,000 8,000 $256,000 (0,000 1082) 5,000 6,000 1,000 (2,000 1038) $262,000