📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report
This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.
Los Angeles County Grand Jury
• 2016-2017
Make Invsetments that Transform Lives
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 17 findings
F1
Page 103
Metro system transit has not captured enough riders to reach its sustainability and traffic decongestion goals. First/Last Mile implementations shares in the responsibility for this.
F2
Page 103
The so-called “triple-convergence” phenomena (see “A Promising and Difficult Situation” in section II, above) may be contributing to decreasing ridership.
F3
Page 103
Metro’s First/Last Mile Strategic Plan and various associated planning documents are of high quality.
F4
Page 103
Treatment of some specific site details is missing from First/Last Mile Strategic plan.
F5
Page 103
Historically, First/Last Mile implementations have depended upon cooperation of local governmental entities and local funding. This has resulted in some sub-optimum results.
F6
Page 103
Metro’s new policy assuming more responsibility for First/Last Mile implementations is a better approach toward high quality First/Last Mile implementations.
F7
Page 103
Metro has made a smaller relative investment in First /Last Mile implementations than other comparable systems in other California metropolitan areas.
F8
Page 103
Current First/Last Mile implementations show a wide spectrum of quality.
F9
Page 103
Existing First/Last Mile implementations have shown improvement based on experience gained from previous implementations.
F10
Page 103
Exactly how First/Last Mile designs interact with the prime railway design is unclear.
F11
Page 103
Proposed First/Last Mile implementations/improvements are not reviewed by actual users.
F12
Page 103
Safety statistics for existing terminals are critical for their refurbishment.
F13
Page 103
Pedestrian and bicycle safety has deteriorated recently in the County of Los Angeles; First/Last Mile bears some responsibility for this.
F14
Page 103
Policy for bicycle usage to/on/from Metro is not completely developed.
F15
Page 103
Automotive interactions with pedestrians and bicyclists within First/Last Mile zones are not well controlled.
F16
Page 103
New passenger accessories and assists will affect First/Last Mile planning and implementations.
F17
Page 103
Uber/Lyft/autonomous car support is not included in First/Last Mile plans to date. 88 2016-2017 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT V
Recommendations 15
-
R1Page 93Metro should consider strategies that are effective against “triple-convergence” in support of its ridership goals.
-
R2Page 93Metro should continue producing high-quality First/Last Mile planning documents.
-
R3Page 93Metro should take responsibility for the quality of the resulting (from 2. above) First/Last Mile implementations.
-
R4Page 93Metro should deal with more site-specific design problems in their First/Last Mile planning documents.
-
R5Page 93Metro should further extend its influence over communities for First/Last Mile implementations with more extensive collaboration and funding.
-
R6Page 93Metro should budget more of its funding stream to First/Last Mile implementation (see 5, above).
-
R7Page 93Metro should explicitly include First/Last Mile design considerations beginning at the earliest stage of its system expansion designs.
-
R8Page 93Metro should formalize actual user reviews for refurbishments and new developments.
-
R9Page 93Metro should use safety data from existing terminals as the highest priority consideration for refurbishments.
-
R10Page 93Metro should expand and make consistent the pedestrian and bicycle facilities at each terminal.
-
R11Page 93Metro should encourage or require First/Last Mile designs that constrain automobile speeds and maximally separate vehicle routes and pedestrian and bicycle paths in terminal footprint areas.
-
R12Page 93Metro should further develop bicycle usage policies to/on/from Metro and First/Last Mile support for bicyclists.
-
R13Page 93Metro should explicitly provide for the use of accessory items on trains – rolling carts, baby carriages, etc.
-
R14Page 93Metro should anticipate the development of potential new accessories and assists within First/Last Mile plans and implementations.
-
R15Page 93Metro should plan for Uber/Lyft/A-Car ports at Metro terminal. 2016-2017 LOS ANGELES COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT 89 VI RESPONSES REQUESTED California Penal Code Sections 933(c) and 933.05 require a written response to all recommendations contained in this report. Responses shall be made no later than ninety (90) days after the Civil Grand Jury publishes its report and files it with the Clerk of the Court. Responses shall be made in accord with Penal Code Sections 933.05 (a) and (b). All responses to the recommendations of the 2016-2017 Civil Grand Jury must be submitted on or before September 30, 2017, to: Presiding Judge Los Angeles County Superior Court Clara Shortridge Foltz Criminal Justice Center 210 West Temple Street Eleventh Floor-Room 11-506 Los Angeles, CA 90012