Over how many years is that 600 million dollar investment amortized? How many vehicle miles of travel are diverted from the 101 corridor over the lifespan of that 600 million dollar investment? How many additional parking spaces would be needed to accommodate that demand at the destinations, and how much would those have cost? So how much is a new parking space in the Marin market costing these days? How much did the new lanes on 101 cost per lane mile? What is the marginal cost per passenger mile fully allocated over the life cycle of the SMART investment compared to the alternatives? Do you actually know? Do you really even care?

This project is a long way from my view of what the optimal project and operating regime should be for the potential passenger demand in this corridor. But, at 5,000 future riders there is as much as @125,000,000 capital cost reduction in costs for additional parking spaces at destinations alone in todays costs alone. The capital cost of private vehicles to carry the same number of folks over a 30 year project life is another $312 million, without operating costs and insurance costs. Do you really think freeways and cars come with no real costs, either? Or, would facing those "facts" make for a less dramatic rant?

Yes, I too find the Larkspur extension figure to be low, given the increasing congestion on the 101 south of Larkspur, and into the City. And, I find your numbers to be equally weak and incomplete. Your rant makes for a good raging soundbite against the evil wasteful SMART. But, with no comparisons, context, or real analysis, your rant doesn't really tell us the information necessary to assess the benefits against the costs of this project, does it?

So, as you like to say, let's face facts, you really haven't provided enough facts to really prove or disprove anything about the value or merits of this investment. But, I doubt that really concerns you very much.