Sacramento Transportation

[econgrad2.0]

Originally Posted by Web

so if a downtown arena is built one might be able to use light rail to get to it........wow a novel idea for a cowtown!

Sac has not been a cowtown for sometime now, and I consider myself a cowboy!
This is really great news. My only wish is to keep it running til 3:00am. Then you can have riders from Folsom to Downtown and viceversa after last call. Less intoxicants on the freeways is always a good idea for safety (although a bad idea for revenues.)

[wburg]

Originally Posted by econgrad2.0

Sac has not been a cowtown for sometime now, and I consider myself a cowboy!
This is really great news. My only wish is to keep it running til 3:00am. Then you can have riders from Folsom to Downtown and viceversa after last call. Less intoxicants on the freeways is always a good idea for safety (although a bad idea for revenues.)

I agree completely. Late-night service is essential--and I'm all for reducing the number of drunk drivers driving home through my neighborhood (and econgrad's!) I'd certainly like to have the option to take light rail home from Old Sac or downtown K Street after late-night events.

Obviously, doing that would take some willingness to pay extra (taxes or farebox) for late-night service, or divert funds from other transportation projects' operating fund to pay for it.

[Web]

but many many towns have basically the bar rush on transit!!
I know I used it(busses) many a time growing up......in minneapolis(who is still behind sac in lightrail miles but catching up fast).

they even have a few 24 hr routes.....still
and fares of 1.75......

seems the state subsidizes transit more in minn than cal.

[Deno]

It would help if they got rid of free rides and checked riders tickets more often.

[econgrad2.0]

Originally Posted by Deno

It would help if they got rid of free rides and checked riders tickets more often.

I had no idea they did this. Really?
Is this common practice?
I am also assuming from Web's post that Busses in Sacramento are not 24 hours?

It seems even Cabs are sometimes difficult to get very late at night/early morning in Sacramento.

"Obviously, doing that would take some willingness to pay extra (taxes or farebox) for late-night service, or divert funds from other transportation projects' operating fund to pay for it." Quote from Wburg.

@Wburg: RT stops at 12:30 correct? Is there any source showing costs if RT was 24 hours? I've been searching to no avail.

[downtownserg89]

Econgrad, RT stops running at 9pm! It's very inconvenient for a lot of people, especially some of my fellow sac city friends that attend night classes.

Recently(ish), RT raised its basic fare from a buck something to $2.25 (or $2.50? I forget) and stopped offering transfer tickets (a ticket you get once you board the bus that allows you to board another bus for free). I think RT assumed this would help increase their daily income, but I feel it made things worse. I used to not mind paying $1.50/$1.75 for a bus ride plus a transfer ticket, but now I'm usually discouraged and prefer to just walk. Even San Francisco has a better bus system! $2 for a 2 hour unlimited use transfer ticket, and if you buy it late enough you get the late night ticket, which allows you to use your transfer ticket all night long on the 24 hr routes!


Get it together, Sacramento Regional Transit!

[ltsmotorsport]

They really just need to implement a fare system like BART or Muni where there's a guarantee that riders have paid. It could still be a flat fare for a certain number of hours, but just getting the fare money from the freeloaders would help a lot I'm sure.

[wburg]

RT didn't raise fares to boost their income, they did it because Schwarzenegger cut transportation funds for cities out of the state budget--they had to raise fares and cut service just to keep things operating.

Lots of cities with light rail lines (including Sacramento) use "honor system" boarding--periodic fare inspections by ticket checkers, with fines for violators. Los Angeles' light rail/subway system uses it--and surveys showed that 97% of those riding did in fact pay for their fare. The reason why the "honor system" is used is because it's a lot cheaper to let a few people ride for free than to pay for the additional staff, security systems, enclosed stations, etc. needed to prevent people from boarding without paying. Right now, when a full-length LRV train stops, they can board or exit from sixteen different doors (four per car.) Imagine how much longer it would take to board if everyone had to pass a fare checker, or how much more fares would be if they had to pay sixteen checkers to ensure nobody got on without paying?

Meanwhile, buses of course require payment or proof of monthly fare/pass/etc. for boarding--but buses hold a lot fewer people than an LRV, so they're less cost-effective per passenger-mile.

San Francisco has a pretty darn good transit system. In addition to their advantages of a geographically compact city of rather dense population, and not ripping out their streetcar system entirely the way Sacramento did, the funding level for SF MUNI is also part of their city charter. Although even they have had funding cuts in the past few years.

downtownserg: Are you still taking classes at Sac City? If so, why don't you get the transit pass that lets you ride RT for free? In case you're wondering about whether that counts as "free rides," note that it doesn't--all it means is that Sac City pays RT to handle their students as riders so they don't have to provide so many parking spaces in their auto lot.

[downtownserg89]

Wburg: I just finished up spring semester and am waiting for fall semester to begin. I'm taking the summer off, so I don't get to renew my transit sticker til mid August. Its a great deal, I only pay $7 at the beginning of a semester and I get unlimited RT access for about 5 months. My friend just nagged about paying $100 a month for a transit sticker. I think that's ridiculous and if I were her, I would look into purchasing a moped to get to work.


I do wish lightrail was less trashy. I usually get offered drugs and get mean glares. Oh and this one time, some lady opened up a window and lit a cigarette on lightrail. There was an infant like 3 seats down. There wasn't any security around.

[econgrad2.0]

I'm not a PT guy, but I have been nieve about it. I always assumed it was 12:30am, NOT 9:00pm. That's terrible! Downtownserge complains RT is trashy too? My first reaction was "ok, more security", which unfortunately would raise costs. Sad thing is, if everyone was courtious, clean, and honest, RT wouldn't be trashy.
Is there anything going on to increase the hours of operation at all? (What if you worked at night and did not have a car?)

[wburg]

The article posted yesterday (the one you responded to) mentioned that RT is planning on restoring some evening service due to higher sales tax revenues. More money has to come from somewhere (more revenue, new funding sources etc.) to fund operations. The cuts to state funding a couple of years ago resulted in RT cutting back service so the last departing runs for any bus line or light rail depart no later than 9 PM--by 10 PM, there is effectively no public transit system.

Not sure how much you're reading into downtownserg's statement about "trashy." Was he referring to the state of the car, or that the people on it weren't dressed fashionably? As a pretty regular RT rider, the cars are generally clean, but people do sometimes leave empty bottles, fast-food bags, newspapers etc. on the cars. Poor people ride transit too, so you get to see a broad spectrum of working-class fashion. Commute-hour riders tend to be a wider mix of social strata, with a lot of business suits, and during the school year, a lot of students.

In addition to service cuts, RT has also had to cut levels of things like maintenance and cleanup of cars--once again, more operation funds could potentially be used to shorten maintenance cycles, provide more crew to clean up cars, or more on-car security (there are security staff on the cars, but they aren't officers that can issue fines--that would cost more.)

[downtownserg89]

Hehe I wasn't talking about trashy fashion on lightrail. During commute hours, ligtrail is very normal. Business people, students, and simply regular people.

Around 6 to 9 pm, lightrail gets very janky. Kooky people talking to themselves, gang related activity, etc. I've been riding lightrail since the womb, so I have just about seen it all, from drug deals to fights, people making out, performing sexual oral activities, and hip hop dance parties.

I don't encourage wholesome honest families to ride lightrail at night. However, once downtown becomes more dense and alive, I feel lightrail at night will consist of a mix of interesting people, from kooky to normal and sane, and would offer great opportunities for people watching like SF transit does.

[Lipani]

Originally Posted by wburg

there are security staff on the cars, but they aren't officers that can issue fines--that would cost more.

I think that's a huge mistake and security should be a higher priority in their budget. In San Diego the busiest trolley stations have security guards on location most of the day (and most of them are armed). While living in Sac, I never felt too comfortable taking light rail outside of commuter hours. The security guards on there were a joke; in most cases they looked no older than 20 and armed with pepper spray.

Are state employees still getting a steep discount on monthly passes? I recall an acquaintance who mentioned he was only paying around $25 per month. Granted, this was five years ago and may no longer be the case. Charging $100 per month (for almost everyone else) on a transit system that shuts down at 9pm, and with spotty security, is absolutely ridiculous.

[wburg]

Lipani: It's not a discount RT offers for state employees--some state agencies pay the balance of the monthly pass and the employee pays the rest. RT still gets $100 a month for the monthly pass, but the employer pays part and the employee pays part. Some private companies do the same thing, as an alternative to paying for an employee parking space (although employee parking spaces are currently a better tax write-off.) So really, anyone can get this "discount" if their employer offers it.

Considering the current state of transit funding, increased security presence (and the higher expense of armed security) would mean cutting even more buses and trains, or less maintenance. Remember, if they increase funding in one area, they have to decrease it somewhere else.

[NME22]

"SACRAMENTO, CA - A new study promotes the need for more bridges connecting Sacramento with its much smaller neighbor, West Sacramento.

Currently, the Pioneer Bridge on Highway 50 is the main connection between the two cities. "

http://westsacramento.news10.net/new...-bridges/77236


Have to get the plans in the works to add more bridges now before more homes are built in West Sac and the railyards or your going to have to deal with the NIMBY's.

[ThatDarnSacramentan]

Even before potential NIMBYs in West Sac are addressed, there's already a whole river bank of NIMBYs on the Sacramento side.

[NME22]

Originally Posted by ThatDarnSacramentan

Even before potential NIMBYs in West Sac are addressed, there's already a whole river bank of NIMBYs on the Sacramento side.

It's a Sacramento tradition to be a NIMBY.

[Web]

how many of you want a bridge right next to you , having cars at 2nd floor level 20 ft from your window.......think about it

[ThatDarnSacramentan]

Originally Posted by Web

how many of you want a bridge right next to you , having cars at 2nd floor level 20 ft from your window.......think about it

Don't ask me, I'm moving to Portland.

The only way I see another bridge being built is if it were down where the Auto Museum is, but that location doesn't make much sense since it would only be able to connect to Front Street.

[NME22]

Originally Posted by Web

how many of you want a bridge right next to you , having cars at 2nd floor level 20 ft from your window.......think about it

That's an extreme hypothetical. It's usually just a traffic thing that people complain about, which is what building bridges could alleviate as the cities grow. Harder to get it done after the people are already there was my point though.

Sure I'd be upset if i had a house on the river and they built a bridge right over me. But the city has to take care of the greater good of millions of people and not just the concerns of a few. In 15 or 20 years, the chances are that most of the people living in the few homes affected won't be there, but the need for the bridges will.

When the subdivision or neighborhood was built where you live, it increased traffic, displaced animals from their natural habitat and affected people in more ways than one and so on. Just kinda the way it works.