interesting Brookings report on transit and work in the Bay Area. (San Francisco: apartment, vs)

[neutrino78x]

Interesting. Speaking of reports from the Brookings Institute.

Here we have two reports on access to work locations via public transit. They say that in San Francisco, 85% of work locations are in areas with good transit coverage, whereas in Silicon Valley, 92% are. Furthermore, in San Francisco, 35% of work locations can be reached in 90 minutes via transit, and in Silicon Valley, 61% can.

I am surprised that Silicon Valley has more access, but the idea that most jobs are accessible via transit is certainly something that I have found to be true in my experience. I can't afford a car and actually don't know how to drive either...lol...but I still manage to get to work on time, via public transit. I am very rarely late. I might be ten minutes late every three months.

Anyway check out the reports:

The one for SF-Oakland-Fremont.

The one for Silicon Valley.

Transit is actually pretty good in the Bay Area. We just have a lot of people who don't use it, especially down here in Silicon Valley. Although, down here, you also have the idea that some employers built their campuses in areas that were awkward to reach via transit. Google, for example, chose to build their campus quite far away from the light rail. Contrast that with Cisco, who is located right along the light rail line, and Apple, located less than a mile from the closest public transit bus stop.

[jade408]

You forgot to look at the "labor access rate." Only 1/3 of the workforce can reach the job in 90 minutes or less. Just because there is "transit" doesn't mean that it is actually useful.

For example, there is a bus stop across the street from my apartment. That bus goes to about 50% of my typical destinations. And it is fairly speedy. Unfortunately on the weekend it only runs once and hour. And only from 8a-8p. So while it could get me downtown reasonably fast, I am SOL if I out after 8. Or miss the bus for that hour. It is faster to walk.

That means that transit isn't particularly useful because it runs in frequently. The bus runs my life vs supporting my life.

Not contrast that with a bus that runs every 10 minutes. You know if you miss the bus, you'll only need to wait 10 minutes. You can have one more drink, go to the bathroom or give one last hug without worrying about the bus schedule. You don't have to plan your schedule around he bus. People want to have the privilege to plan their own schedule and do things at their own speed. Bad transit means you are limited to the bus schedule.

Now let's talk about the so called jobs access. What it doesn't talk about is how often that transit runs, and the hours it serves. If you don't work 9-5 (give or take), you are SOL with most of the transit lines that serve offices. What if you are the person who has a shift from 5p to 12a. What are your options?

[neutrino78x]

Yeah Silicon Valley was better on both measurements.

SF needs a lot of improvement in this regard, it seems. Down here in Silicon Valley, certain bus lines do run 24 hours. Unfortunately not all.

Still, I feel like people are typically just not familiar with the options they have. So many times, I hear that, for example, someone wants to go from San Mateo to San Francisco, and they act like CalTrain doesn't exist.

It is also true that, in many cases, if someone works weird hours, it is less likely that transit will be able to help them. In my own case, that is especially true, because the bus I take into my suburb will stop running after a certain (albeit late) hour. I ran into that problem often when I was working private security. On my last job assignment with my new employer, I got off at 2130, but when I made it all the way home, it was 0005. They want me to meet with them on Tuesday to get a new assignment at a different client. Hopefully it will have better working hours.

Most of us do work roughly 9-5, though, which is why there is a morning rush hour and evening rush hour.