Forty-two percent of those who responded to an Argus-Courier online poll June 7, 2006 said they would never ride a North Bay commuter train.
Twenty-four percent said they would ride it frequently and 25 percent said they would ride it occasionally.
Asked if they support a quarter-cent sales tax increase on November's ballot to fund a commuter train from Cloverdale to Larkspur, 51 percent said yes and 49 percent said no.
Most said they feel the addition of a commuter train will not substantially reduce traffic congestion on High-way 101. Forty-three percent said they think the train would reduce traffic, while 57 percent said it would not.
Here are the comments of those who took the survey:
1
I think this project is a waste of tax dollars to subsidize a few elitist types who can pat themselves on the back and say 'Look at me, how much more eco-conscious could I possibly be? I support public transit'. While in reality there seems to be little real consideration of the cost per consumer mile that it will take to maintain this boondoggle.
2
It sounds good on paper, but it will cost at least 4-5 times more than projected, because the same so-called environmentalists will cause so many delays that the costs will sky-rocketed...Every independent study shows that rail ways are never are cost effective. It may sound like a "solution" but in reality it will be another waste of tax payers money.
3
Although it won't change traffic too much in the next few years, we should have a train down 101 because eventually the freeway will be so full it will become completely useless to drive.
4
The tax should really be a gas tax rather than a general sales tax. This is to be fair to non-commuters.
5
it's past time to make this happen; eventually, trains should cross on the Golden Gate Bridge into the City...
6
The rail would go right through my back yard. I am torn. The noise would be horrendous and we may have to move. But, I support public transportation and alternative transportation whenever possible. A quiet rail would get my vote...
7
It will reduce, but probable not significantly.
8
I think it a good idea but people love their cars. Also people will not walk. Once they get off the train they will have to walk or take a bus. People will circle a block 10 times to spend 5 minutes trying to park themselves on the blvd. so they can be right in front of the store they want. They won't park the next block over even if its easier, quicker and safer than parking on the blvd. because they are to LAZY to walk one block. That is one reason. The other reason is for every person who takes the train twenty new houses will be built moving in 15 people who won't take it. The only way to stop the congestion on the roads is to stop the congestion in the towns and STOP building.
9
too little too late
10
Can't get the train soon enough! With the growth in Sonoma county getting anywhere on 101 is impossible already. We need a train. It's a no brainer.
11
I drive a carpool to school and work with 2-4 other families from Petaluma to the Marin Civic Center area every day. We would much rather be taking the train daily where the kids could make use of their time and get a bit of homework done so that their commute time isn't wasted. We would also welcome the a bit of exercise walking from the station to school/work. In recent years, even the carpool lane is congested almost all year round. Where commutes used to be over 45 minutes only in the Fall, they are heavy the entire school year. What a waste of gas and time!
12
A North Bay commuter train is the only way to improve the traffic flow without a severe impact to the environment.
13
The issue of congestion is a bit of a red herring. Although developers do not like to admit it, suburban freeways have been proven to be out of date by the time they are built. Also, our diverse population of different ages and means has a right to transportation access. We need many ways of getting around and many kinds of energy sources. This would offer us some protection against complete loss of regional transportation. Our current single system model is an approach that always is more vulnerable to disaster than an interlocking mixed system.
14
I've made it from Petaluma to the Golden Gate Bridge toll booth in 35 minutes so what's the big deal about a 34 min trip to Larkspur?
15
We desperately need transportation alternatives. High gasoline prices create the perfect incentive to prepare for the future when single use vehicles will become obsolete.
16
Long time needed----
17
The addition of the commuter train to the area is long, long overdue. It is what the area needs, and will benefit the entire community.
18
It can't hurt!
19
After the third lane is added to Hwy 101, there will be no more room for more. This train service will be needed to pick up the slack when that happens.
20
People Always say gas is too expensive here is the chance to do something about that.
21
Lets repair the badly damaged roads we have now first then maybe a train ride back to the future.
22
I have worked in Santa Rosa for 15 years and would love the opportunity to not drive !!!
23
I think giving easier and faster access, would only cause MORE traffic on our city, as well as bring in specific type of people or an element do NOT want in our City.
24
I am retired thus no commute.
25
Trains are for losers and the poor who can't afford a Lexus
26
Stupid, stupid, idea. People want to be able to get into SF with one mode of transportation. A rail that only moves through some of the North Bay and doesn't go into SF is a ridiculous idea. If they were serious about helping the transportation problem around here, they would bite the (monetary) bullet and propose to extend BART into the North Bay. The cost would be exorbitant, but it is one I would support through a even larger sales tax increase.
27
The train would be a tremendous improvement over the Golden Gate bus service, whose schedule is so traffic dependent. It shouldn't take 2 hours to get from SF to Petaluma on public transit! Ultimately, the train would be much better if it could connect directly to BART for easy access to the city and airports.
28
It's about time!!!
29
The reduction in congestion would at least be for the individual driver who decides to ride the train.
30
The train is a total joke. It is being pushed by people who love trains, but would not take one to work. David Schonbrun, a proponent, lives and works in Mill Valley. He'll never need to take a train. The people I commute with each day are mostly in trucks. They can't take a train. This is a horrible misguidance of tax payers dollars.
31
this is something we've needed for years to improve quality of life, congestion on 101, and reduce cost (considering the price of gasoline). Extending rail into the city would be the ultimate coo!
32
It will work, if done right. For example, having two way tracks, not a shared track where one train has to yield. The stops have to be convenient even if the tracks have to be moved. For example, the tracks at the Marin civic center are way to far away. No one will walk the distance. Make it convenient and people will use it.
33
It's an excellent way to reduce traffic while increasing shopping opportunities and tourism in this area.
34
Why not yesterday?
35
Can't we think of something better than a sales tax that punishes the working class folks in this community who are under so much financial pressure. Something more progressive, like a tax on actual increased property values this facility brings? Just don't tax the people making lower incomes, who are unduly punished by yet another sales tax. I'm glad it's not a bond proposal.
36
A commuter train is the most practical approach to reducing congestion, pollution, and fuel consumption in the North Bay - such a solution is long overdue and it's unbelievable that it hasn't happened yet.
37
The freeways need to be widened first. This is not the egg-basket of the world. It is a busy city next to Highway 101... one which grow a lot faster than the current city council wants to admit. We need tools which attract young families to help balance the out-of-balance demographics. I see nothing currently that accomplishes this. We pretend that the cost of housing is an inhibitor. However other cities that remain truly attractive places to live find ways to attract young families- in fact we break the doors down in order to get in! A train is real nice. However it won't solve any problems.
38
We don't need a North Bay Bart, we need more travel lanes on 101. I don't understand the difficulty in understanding this. I've had it with all the protest to save the spotted lizard or slimy snail, we need four travel lanes each direction. The pollution from sitting in traffic at a stand still is worse then the impact of some extra asphalt.
39
Should have been accomplished 20 years ago.
40
The train is a great idea but Hwy 101 really needs to be widened north of Novato to north of Santa Rosa.
41
Spending my teens and early 20s in the Midwest where trains were a way of life. I have certainly missed the convenience and would love for my family to be able to experience the freedom that having a train available would provide.
42
Though the commuter train may not substantially reduce the 101 congestion in the near term, it will offer other travel options and kick start development around the train stops which will eventually be a factor in substantially reducing automobile use relative to growth of the area.
43
too costly existing train tracks are in disrepair
44
Rail service succeeds when its the main method of public transit over longer distances. Rail service should replace the 101 corridor busses so they can be redeployed to bring people to and from their local train stations. Rail schedules should peak during commute hours, but support all-day travel along the route. Transfers among transit agencies must be painless on opening day. Having lived in Chicago, where rail lines radiate from the city in all directions and are packed with commuters using monthly passes and shoppers who don't care to drive, I know that reliable service makes a very comfortable commute. One can do work, chat or relax while traveling and, best of all, forget about (or finish) work before getting home at night. Its also a really good feeling to pass the traffic stuck on the freeway while traveling at 60 MPH and always arriving at the scheduled time. We're too smart to put all our efforts toward one freeway that will never be big enough to handle future demand. That third lane will be full when it opens, while a rail system needs only more frequent scheduling to handle increased demand.
45
We need this due to the fact Buses cut half of their route schedules. It would also make it easier to get to Santa Rosa or to the ferry. I think it will cut down some of the traffic that goes to the ferry station.
46
Although I thoroughly enjoy sitting in traffic with my blood pressure rising as exhaust fumes foul the air, I might still consider voting for the rail. I think about it a little while fuming in traffic before I decide for sure though.
47
the train will not reduce highway traffic, but it will help. Contrary to what people think about subsidies, the car has the most, to many to list. But lets list the largest subsidy; every road and parking lot in the world. While were at it lets list one more, Highway patrol. Well , I think you get the idea .
48
SMART, done as light, inter-urban rail with a reasonably affordable fare structure, it has the potential to be a great service. If SMART is done as heavy rail and is "gold plated" like everything else the Golden Gate Bridge District touches, it will be so expensive that it will never reach it's full potential. The San Diego Trolley system is a magnificent example, as is the system in Sacramento. Hopefully SMART will engage an experienced rail operator and NOT try to provide the service themselves.
49
we also need three lanes to Novato and Santa Rosa.
50
It's an enormous expense for a system that will only take 191 Sonoma Co. residents to Marin Co. in the morning.
51
Why should Marin County pay for a rail system it will not use, nor benefit from?
52
This is called the train to nowhere. It is NOT going to Larkspur, they won't have it. The termination point now is San Rafael....no ferry to the city.
53
Construction projects have been coming in over double estimated costs. The SMART rail system will cost too much.
54
the smart will not solve our 101 problems. This fixed rail system will not serve the wide spread populations in Sonoma county. The cost to operate the system could better be served to operate a subsidized bus system or subsided car pool program. In Santa Rosa, there will be no parking at railroad square: Will riders take the city/county bus to the station? The cities are hiding behind this project to advance their redevelopment dreams and not to really solve the commute traffic problem. SMART will make some rich, and the taxpayers poorer. 1/4% sales tax will never begin to really support the smart and with prop 172, measure o and M, open spaces tax and smart, too much. Don Linch, Santa Rosa, ca
55
SMART needs to go back to the drawing board to make a viable plan prior to going to the ballot.
56
The addition of a commuter train to Petaluma is essential-- so much our growing population is commuting to SF and beyond each day. It would be irresponsible to put this opportunity off any longer.
57
You erroneously state that the proposed train would take people from Petaluma to the Larkspur ferry. The City of Larkspur opposes location of a train station in the community and even if it were allowed the location is a hillside almost 1/3 of a mile from the ferry terminal.
58
I would ride everyday!!!
59
THIS TRAIN IS A WASTE OF TAX PAYERS MONEY AND IT AND HE ASSOCIATED TRAIL WOULD CAUSE EXTENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE
60
We need Express buses running on lanes that are already going to be constructed--not a train that doesn't go where people need to go.
61
Any idea on how many people the train will hold? How often will it run? What will be the power source of this train and what will be the economic/environmental repercussions of that power?
62
It is time to have an alternative to auto commuting for conservation of fuel, environment, highway maintenance, public safety, reduced cost for commuters
63
64
Conceptually a good idea, but the reality is a financial nightmare and, according to the EIR, no meaningful reduction in traffic.
65
As proposed, the train will not go to the ferry terminal, but will end in downtown San Rafael. That will require a change and shuttle ride to the ferry terminal. Your description of service from Petaluma to the ferry terminal is misleading about the service the proposed train will provide.
66
Although I love the idea of rail, I have my misgivings about commuters and others actually using it on a long-term basis. However, I would use it when I go to Santa Rosa, providing there is an infrastructure to get me to where I needed to go.
67
I think this is a MUST for our county, environment and the sanity for all commuters! It would be wonderfully welcomed!!!
68
When you count operation and financing, the $340M touted by proponents explodes to over $1B, not counting inevitable increases and cost-over-runs. And those numbers don't count all the extra money going into SMART on the side, such as Measure 2 money. Some of the services promised by SMART, such has the poorly-planned shuttle buses, have not even found adequate funding sources. All for no more than 200-300 people commuting between Sonoma and Marin each day. And there is no guarantee that SMART would reduce the number of cars on the road at all. Meanwhile, Golden Gate Transit, which efficiently carries 30,000 a day, has been starved for funding and forced to cut service. And a sales tax hits people hardest who are on fixed incomes -- the elderly, the disabled. I'd raise my income taxes to improve bus service in an instant, but not for this train, and not through a sales tax.
69
The train won't go to the ferry for a long time, if ever. And besides, my job is a long way from the train station
70
train doesn't operate on weekends and it won't take me where I need to go for work.
71
Cost of the train is far more than SMART claims and the service is unlikely to pan out.
72
SMART's DEIR shows that the train won't reduce congestion. We should expand bus service instead.
73
It'll reportedly cost over $1.2 billion. What a boondoggle.
74
Two years ago they said the start up price for the train was a little over $900,000.00. The cost is too much by the time they start to do anything. Get more GGT buses out there on the road.
75
Sales tax for a train that goes nowhere? No way
76
Public transit will be more essential in the near future.
77
Perhaps a good idea for an urban area, or if you want to CREATE an urban area with increased development. For the Marin/Sonoma mostly rural corridor... it's just another boondoggle at the taxpayer's expense.
78
There really needs to be an easy connector to the city. BART should come to the North Bay.
79
What will be done for people living more than a mile away from a depot?
80
But would its cost equal its benefit?
81
The SMART Board is out of control. A single track train that goes no farther south than San Rafael is a joke.
82
It's a real estate developer's boondoggle. It will NOT help the congestion situation and would create a host of problems that do not exist now: noise and air pollution, traffic tie-ups in San Rafael, injuries and deaths due to trains/tracks. IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE TRANSPORTATION SENSE!!!!!
83
I think SMART is for the developers who want to build condos and retail shops around the train stations. I don't believe it will serve a significant number of commuters as it doesn't go far enough and doesn't offer sufficient flexibility.
84
Question 1 is highly misleading. Rail is not going to the ferry terminal.
85
Rob our excellent bus systems into ruin when they should be enhanced? Promote new development that will have to use cars for everything else even if they commute by train; tax our elderly and disabled, who can't easily afford the increase; tax people who will mostly never ride this train? Pay OVER A BILLION DOLLARS for a couple hundred cross-county commuters? Heck no! Even if you assume 5000 trips per day (2500 riders per day), a BILLION dollars means subsidizing their trips AFTER their fares to the tune of $20,000 per rider per year!! Since most of those trips will be entirely within Sonoma, that's pretty disgusting!!! And all the lies being told by the SMART Board! It is too bad that the way the SMART Board was set up it that it was set up with the mission to make SMART happen, not with the mission to determine *whether* it SHOULD happen. It is REALLY TOO BAD that most people probably don't know it's the job of the SMART Board and its consultants to SELL this project, not to vet it!! Finally --why ask whether we THINK "the addition of a commuter train will substantially reduce traffic congestion on Highway 101" when the SMART DEIR says that SMART would result in virtually zero service level improvement and zero reduction in congestion? It really burns me when pro-SMART folks imply that it's SMART *or* widening the Highway. Widening the Highway has nothing to do with SMART because SMART would have essentially zero effect on Highway 101 congestion! Plus, for better or worse, widening Highway 101 is a deal that is already well along toward happening. Lying is bad enough; lying for a project this bad is even worse!
86
We're not buying what the SMART board is selling.
87
would this stop in Novato?
88
This commuter train proposal has no technical or economic merit and will drain transportation funding which could be used from other far more effective uses.
89
For more on both sides of this issue, see the new web-site, http://www.smartquestions.org -- apparently just starting, and looks like it will be a great resource.
90
We in Sonoma County use cars too much.
91
We need to reduce our consumption of oil. It is a matter of national defense and the environment.
92
SMART is a waste of taxpayer dollars that should be directed to a system that actually will reduce congestion, which SMART doesn't.
93
SMART can't manage a $4M project for the EIR. What makes you think that they can manage a $400M project to implement the train?
94
First of all the people of Marin County don't give a fat rat's behind about people in Sonoma County. Marin County has bucked any and all measures and solutions to not only SMART but also the HWY 101 widening between Marin and Sonoma. Secondly there is no mass transit in the Bay Area that sustains itself. Each and every form of mass transit is subsidized in some form or fashion. So where is the subsidy for this train going to come from? Future new taxes? How about a toll bridge on HWY 101 over the Petaluma River? If this, and I doubt it will, comes to fruition it will be like Hughes' Spruce Goose, it will fly for a few yards and then be put away in a hangar.
95
Bus Transportation and the addition of the third lane all the way through Sonoma and Marin will benefit more commuters and will cost less. This train will not alleviate any (facts from the DEIR) traffic, will actually cause more congestion in San Rafael, Petaluma, Novato, and Santa Rosa. These are facts. 191 passengers to San Rafael from Sonoma. No Ferry connection in Marin. 131 rail crossings to be negotiated each train. Freight trains running with priority on the same single track. Passenger trains will have to pull over every day to allow the freight trains through. Cost analysis is low. It has gone from $200 million to $484 million in 6 years. New estimates put that cost at closer to $600 million. It will be a boondoggle.
96
It's a nice idea in theory. Everyone would like to see mass transit, and a train has a romantic image. But do not believe it will reduce traffic. Believe coaches could carry more people at much less expense and be non-polluting with advanced diesel or natural gas-powered engines.
97
The North Bay public transportation system is an embarrassment. As a "liberal" community it is virtually impossible to exist without a vehicle and that is inexcusable in today's world.
98
The cost far outweighs the benefit. The consultant's estimated peak hour commuter usage of only 109 riders per day provides no justification for the project. This project is a sentimental journey into the past--not a realistic response to today's journey to work in the 101 corridor.
99
I think this is the most natural solution to a growing problem of congestion and danger on highways.
100
I hope the people on the committee are studying the other cities that use commuter trains and learn from them.
101
Talk, talk, talk. In the past twenty years since I became old enough to vote, I've voted "yes" countless ballot measures for commuter trains. Do you folk really think 'If you build it they will come?' I hope they do but I don't want to get stuck with the bill if they don't. Where will they park their cars? Will the cost of a train ride be less expensive then GG Transit? I grow tired of this issue but haven't lost interest, yet.
102
No way Marin County is going to support a train that doesn't reduce congestion on Hwy 101
103
SMART fails to be truthful and open with the voters especially re costs. How can a few hundred million dollars in tax receipts over time pay for the over a billion dollar predicted cost?
104
Commuter rail would be a god-send to the North Bay.
105
Smart train is another boondoggle politicians are using to boost their public image. The general public will end up subsidizing an overly expensive, tax drain that will ultimately benefit a few , like the commuter? ferries. If either the ferries or this commuter train were required to be financed ridership fares, your paper wouldn't be conducting this poll.
106
The primary question, "What would be the most effective and efficient mass transit system for the North Bay?" was never asked. A special interest group lobbied the legislature for the train. We already have Golden Gate Transit providing commuter service to San Francisco. Why haven't we looked at a Bus Rapid Transit system, such as the one being started in Eugene OR? It could use the train right-of-way and possibly provide better service at less cost. Golden Gate Transit might be able to provide better service for a fraction of the cost of the proposed train.
107
Increased development generated by rail will only add to our problems and decrease the quality of life for all of us.
108
Given the train will cost over $25 per person per ride(!) -- by their own figures -- I think we save money by just offering a free bus service!
109
Riding a car to the train to a boat is never going to happen...We should have a NORTHBAY (SONOMA COUNTY) ferry terminal at Port Sonoma.....It makes sense, is time efficient (which will be the only way a commuter service will work). Why aren't we considering a train to Port Sonoma?
110
I'd like to see the rail connect directly to the ferry terminal
111
I think a commuter train is a great idea, though I think it's optimistic to think that it would reduce traffic significantly in the short term.
112
Rail is very costly to build, operate and maintain. It also requires high density populations in order to succeed. The real questions are who will pay for it and who will ride it? So far, citizens of Sonoma County have been unwilling to support significant increases in funding for transit or highways. Most of us live here for the rural and suburban lifestyle. Rail requires population densities that the majority of people living here do not want. As for relieving traffic congestion, you only have to look as far as the immediate Bay Area to see some of the worst congestion in the State with BART running right along side.
113
Right now to get to SF from the North Bay, there is only one option: Golden Gate Transit. In order for ANY commuter option to work and reduce congestion on 101 it must: Be convenient/run frequently (including evenings); Run on weekends; Be ON TIME.
114
I am not opposed to the concept of a type of rail service on the existing right of way, however what is being proposed is not backed by proper vision and approach. The lack of scientific analysis in the DEIR leaves me shaking and wondering, are the forces behind this endeavor living in a vacuum? Around the globe there are rail projects that have successfully addressed the environmental and financial issues encumbering this proposal. Provide the public with real solutions in an honest and insightful manner and they will support it, any other approach, such as what we are currently assessing is fruitless.
115
Improved bus is all we need, and a much better bargain. Let's not saddle ourselves a huge commitment to a bad idea for the next twenty years. It may look good at first blush, but SMART isn't vision; it's a pipe-dream.
116
I just wouldn't ride it, so I shouldn't have to pay for it. I ride the bus which gets me from close to my home to close to my job in San Francisco and I think the money should go there (to bus).
117
Hundreds of millions of dollars to move a very small amount of humanity up and down a corridor that is serviced by an existing freeway. Way too much of a cost to satisfy the desires of the railroad junkies.
118
All the level crossings across major streets will delay traffic and eventually kill a few people. The level of subsidy contemplated is outrageous, over $2,000 for every County household, yet even the proponents claim less than 2% of residents will use it. Use the right of way for an express bus service, one way in alternating directions morning and afternoon. Run freight trains, especially for garbage, at night when the trains won't cause massive delays at level crossings. This train to nowhere for nobody is the dumbest idea out of Berkeley for years, and as an ex-Berkeley resident I can testify that that is a real achievement.
119
Trains have no flexibility as compared to buses. You can't change the route (without a huge capital expense), you can't change the baseline expense without shutting down the line. Trains stop traffic everywhere they go.
120
No train through the wetlands. No one way train. It must go in middle of 101 and go both ways. The southbound backup evenings in Marin is horrible.
121
Just expand the freeway, abolish the commuter lane, and expand bus service. Simple...
122
I would use this Monday through Friday to commute from the South end of Petaluma to the North end of Santa Rosa. It would change my life to be able to commute this way.
