 |
Re: 4 hour commute from Northbay, or two hours from Petaluma, either sucks....
Author: BOB2
Date: 01-14-2020 - 13:18
I was at a meeting last night, on a controversial subject, on the use of LOS versus VMT only to address traffic and environmental impacts from new developments. And, one of the folks noted that, he had two employee's in his office right at the Lake Avenue Gold Line station, who drove, that both lived within a five minute walk from the Allen Station.
Let's see, a five minute walk, an average 4 minute wait for the train, a three minute train ride, and a five minute walk over to the Office building. Or, get in my car, drive to the office in about 7 minutes (with signal times), walk from the parking structure into my building 3 minutes....
Or, ten minutes, by car, instead of 17 minutes (on average) by train, for about a two mile trip. And, of course, they are getting free employee parking (with a supply cost at this location of as much as $15 per day) but no free employee transit passes. So yeah, the time and cost of using Metro, isn't worth the transit fare and time cost, including wait and access times, versus the "user" in-vehicle time and fully allocated operating costs.
The situation here is that these "rational" consumers are living too close to work (so much for some of the more simplistic "jobs housing" balance theories about reduced vehicle usage) to efficiently make use of that transit alternative. Whereas, ironically, if these two co-workers of his lived further out the I-210, in similar walking circumstances (or even further), the transit would become the faster and cheaper alternative.
Being not a particular fan of SMART's management, and the clear lack of experience or understanding of public transit and rail systems, but a clear skill for riding out the politics of Marin and Sonoma, and making up lots of excuses. I'm not that surprised by SMART's resulting poor performance. Now, of course, I realized a long time ago, that Mouse could give a rat's a$$ about actually fixing any of this. But SMART is messed up, and sure could work one hell of a lot better.
And, at the same meeting, we got a presentation from MTA security on why there have been so many complaints about "quality of life" crimes on the Gold Line (fare evasion, alcohol induced behavior, public urination in stations and cars).
MTA has diverted a large portion of their budget to LAPDOG, who only patrol "in the their City" and get off in Highland Park, whereas the Sheriff's used to patrol the whole line.
MTA staff were truly embarrassing in some of their presentation, and clearly don't "get it", but what really showed that, was that this evening information meeting apparently required a paid "entourage" of 11 people, including senior uniformed Sheriff's, senior uniformed MTA, four of his staff, and two more folks from maintenance...
Now, for you other taxpayers out there, that is 11 personnel, at a fully allocated cost rate of well north of $150 per hour, for a two hour meeting, and another hour of travel time. And, these folks are going to a meeting, where what the folks are really complaining about, is the "lack of visible uniformed patrol and enforcement" personnel on the Gold line...
And maybe, it's just me, but maybe they've got their staffing budget and personnel scheduling priorities a little bit off....? Maybe, just a little too "top heavy" on that "chief to injun" ratio?
Let's see, a five minute walk, an average 4 minute wait for the train, a three minute train ride, and a five minute walk over to the Office building. Or, get in my car, drive to the office in about 7 minutes (with signal times), walk from the parking structure into my building 3 minutes....
Or, ten minutes, by car, instead of 17 minutes (on average) by train, for about a two mile trip. And, of course, they are getting free employee parking (with a supply cost at this location of as much as $15 per day) but no free employee transit passes. So yeah, the time and cost of using Metro, isn't worth the transit fare and time cost, including wait and access times, versus the "user" in-vehicle time and fully allocated operating costs.
The situation here is that these "rational" consumers are living too close to work (so much for some of the more simplistic "jobs housing" balance theories about reduced vehicle usage) to efficiently make use of that transit alternative. Whereas, ironically, if these two co-workers of his lived further out the I-210, in similar walking circumstances (or even further), the transit would become the faster and cheaper alternative.
Being not a particular fan of SMART's management, and the clear lack of experience or understanding of public transit and rail systems, but a clear skill for riding out the politics of Marin and Sonoma, and making up lots of excuses. I'm not that surprised by SMART's resulting poor performance. Now, of course, I realized a long time ago, that Mouse could give a rat's a$$ about actually fixing any of this. But SMART is messed up, and sure could work one hell of a lot better.
And, at the same meeting, we got a presentation from MTA security on why there have been so many complaints about "quality of life" crimes on the Gold Line (fare evasion, alcohol induced behavior, public urination in stations and cars).
MTA has diverted a large portion of their budget to LAPDOG, who only patrol "in the their City" and get off in Highland Park, whereas the Sheriff's used to patrol the whole line.
MTA staff were truly embarrassing in some of their presentation, and clearly don't "get it", but what really showed that, was that this evening information meeting apparently required a paid "entourage" of 11 people, including senior uniformed Sheriff's, senior uniformed MTA, four of his staff, and two more folks from maintenance...
Now, for you other taxpayers out there, that is 11 personnel, at a fully allocated cost rate of well north of $150 per hour, for a two hour meeting, and another hour of travel time. And, these folks are going to a meeting, where what the folks are really complaining about, is the "lack of visible uniformed patrol and enforcement" personnel on the Gold line...
And maybe, it's just me, but maybe they've got their staffing budget and personnel scheduling priorities a little bit off....? Maybe, just a little too "top heavy" on that "chief to injun" ratio?
