As state officials ponder where a possible new state office building should be located, one element to their decision may be a just-completed survey of those who would work there.
The location search has already been narrowed to a downtown site, above a current State Office Building parking garage on Willoughby Avenue, and a Mendenhall Valley site at Vintage Business Park.
The survey shows that several times as many of the new building’s workers live in the Mendenhall Valley or even further away than live downtown.
The survey did not ask employees where they’d prefer to work.
The survey was conducted earlier this month of employees in several departments likely to work in the new building, if it is eventually built.
They currently work at the Department of Labor building at the foot of the Juneau-Douglas Bridge, the Fish & Game building in Douglas, and the Public Safety Building downtown, all of which are considered substandard by state officials.
According to the survey, few of the workers in those buildings currently live downtown.
Even including the many employees who live on Douglas Island, nearly two-thirds of employees live in Lemon Creek or further away, with most living in the Mendenhall Valley.
Downtown resident Ellen Carrlee, who fears the possible impact of the downtown site on her Calhoun Avenue home, said the survey shows the building would be best located in the valley.
“As for the traffic flow on Willoughby, things are going to get hairy,” she said.
The valley’s Vintage Park location is already set up to handle large amounts of traffic, she said.
The survey also asked about commuting data, including methods and times. Sixty percent of the employees went to work at 7 a.m., with another 29 percent at 8 a.m. and 10 percent at 6 a.m.
Most of the employees drove to work, about 83 percent, while 13 percent walked, 11 percent carpooled, 6 percent biked and 5.5 percent rode the bus. Some used more than one method of transportation on their commute.
Sen. Dennis Egan, D-Juneau, questioned why the survey hadn’t asked where employees preferred to work.
“It sounds like they’re explaining why they want to use Vintage Business Park,” he said.
A decision on location is imminent, state officials say. A committee of representatives from departments using the building will soon review the information complied by consultants ECI/Hyer Architects, and will make a recommendation.
State procurement manager Vern Jones said late Wednesday that decision was still being deliberated.
The decision will then have to be approved by Department of Administration Commissioner Becky Hultberg, and likely Gov. Sean Parnell, officials said.
• Contact reporter Pat Forgey at 523-2250 or at patrick.forgey@juneauempire.com.
Comments (34)
Add commentWell, Duh! Thats what we've
Well, Duh! Thats what we've been trying to tell you.
That's like saying
That's like saying "Move the capitol to where most of the people are"
My math & needing coffee
My math is bad, so I deleted my post. I should stay away from math.
No, that would mean moving
No, that would mean moving the jobs. Not the same thing. This is saying, if you are looking at two locations, put it closest to the people who will be working there instead of making them drive across town.
Fbomb, when I add Downtown
Fbomb, when I add Downtown and Douglas I get 36.6. Not sure how you came up with your number. Maybe included Lemon Creek? I think Lemon Creek is about halfway and doesnt really count for either one.
Math
Fbomb; I think you might have added wrong. I come up with 11.8+24.8=36.6%. Did you get 46% somehow different or is it an error?
"customers"
What services need to be in the capitol?
I think the location group should be asking questions which identify the best service location for those that use the services of these departments.
If they are direct service units maybe they should be located in other cities.
Commutes
"The survey shows that several times as many of the new building’s workers live in the Mendenhall Valley or even further away than live downtown."
This statement skews the issue somewhat. If the new building is in the Valley, the Douglas and Downtown people have a longer commute, and they represent 36% of the workers.
If commuting miles are a factor in this decision, then perhaps it's worth finding the location that has the lowest aggregate person-miles associated with it. For instance, if located in the Valley, the Valley person-miles might be 45%*2 miles, the Downtown person-miles are 24.8%*11 miles and so forth. Might turn out that Lemon Creek is the optimal location based on that metric.
What will 'offices' look like ten years from now? Given the rate of advance in telecommunications and networks, how many people will need to be at a desk?
State of Alaska needs to move towards working from home!
With technology advancing like it is now, there is no reason why many state workers couldn't work from home and save taxpayers from paying the outrageous lease rates! Sure some people need to actually be at the front desk or whatever, but I think the State of Alaska needs to look closer at this option.
Right now there is a stigma against working from a home office....we need to get over that!
Personally, I wouldnt be able
Personally, I wouldnt be able to get anything done working from home. Too many distractions.
Ever Commute in the real world?
Y'all crack me up! I interned in Seattle 2x per week in college - from Tacoma, 32 miles through heavy traffic, then I paid $12 a day for parking!
People in the 'real' world regularly commute an hour in each direction and think nothing of it, in order to live in a nice area and have a good job at the same time. Come on folks, a little reality check - we are so lucky that nothing is more than15 miles away, with zero traffic to speak of, and we can work and play only minutes from our front doors.
I say build it wherever there can be good parking, and in an area that needs a few more businesses, like coffee shops and lunch places.
Agreed Swimmer, but if the
Agreed Swimmer, but if the majority wont have to be in my way on icy roads every morning, I support that. The minority who will have to commute will be going in the direction less travelled.
Commuting = 3600 miles Per Year Per Valley Worker
Each state worker who lives in the Valley and works in town drives 3600 miles per year to their job site and home again. That's a lot of time, wear & tear, and gas money. Multiply that number by 200-300 employees and there will be significant savings by locating a new state office at Vintage Park.
reading the data from both sides
The road miles traveled are effectively balanced between the two sites. Lemon Creek is approximately midway between the Vintage Park site and the Downtown site. Approximately half of the employees live north of Lemon Creek and approximately half live in Lemon Creek or southward. Were the building located Downtown a higher percentage of employees would walk or ride their bikes to work. Were the building located in Vintage Park the mid-day miles traveled on Egan would generate an estimated 2000 to 4000 additional person-trips per year since the core of State government is Downtown (this includes meetings and maintenance personnel).
• Were the building located in Vintage Park approximately 37% of the employees would have a greater commute distance than if the building were located Downtown, 10% would have an equal commute distance, and 53% would have a reduced commute distance. Between 3% and 5% of the aforementioned employees would arrive by foot or by bike. Travel for meetings and maintenance would generate an additional 2000 to 4000 person-trips per year.
• Were the building located downtown Downtown approximately 54% of the employees would have a greater commute distance, 10% would have an equal commute distance, and 37% would have a reduced distance. Between 13% and 15% of the aforementioned employees would arrive by foot or bicycle. Travel for meetings and maintenance would be negligible.
How did you come up with your
How did you come up with your numbers of who will walk or bike. Just because the ylive in the valley doesnt mean they wont bike or walk to a valley office. I know I would.
"real" world?
What kind of stupid comment is that? Most of us here could care less how long people down south commute. You want to talk about "real" world? How about this....we're already paying more for fuel than virtually everybody in the lower 48. The buildings these offices are currently located in are probably some of the worst buildings the State occupies in urban areas. The Dept. of Labor building has been a problem for at least 10 years that I can recall and has been under a constant state of repair/remodel for quite some time. Arent' the Fish & Game offices located in a school zone? You've got people living in the valley that have to drive through 3 school zones to get to F&G. Opening a building at Vintage would greatly reduce traffic in school zones as well as reducing the traffic coming into town at the same time we have inexperienced high school drivers on the road in the winter time.
If I were still working for
If I were still working for the state, I would have loved to have my office closer to my home in the valley (not that my department is moving anywhere). I agree that the incredible number of school zones slow down the flow of traffic to the downtown area. I think the state would see fewer people showing up late for work. And I believe that a greater number of people would walk/bike. I would have loved to have the options to walk to work instead of spending hundreds of dollars a month to commute back and forth. What a great thing it would be to have the option to eat at home and make the most of a lunch hour!
akbrdguru......
LOL - did you say all that with the back of your hand on your forehead? No offense, but lighten up a little - just sayin' - it seemed like a lot of whining over an 8 mile drive. And aren't you lucky that you get a PFD every year, free cash to help with gas? Glass half full, my friend.
Kpawsuh - I used to live at Lena and drove to town every day, which was lovely in the summer, I listened to language tapes, but in the winter - point taken.
It's actually a 14 mile
It's actually a 14 mile drive. My beef isn't so much with the drive as it was with your assertion that we in Juneau don't live in your "real" world. The "real" world is wherever you happen to hang your hat, my friend. You want to complain about long commutes down south? Maybe that's the price you pay for more affordable gas?
akbrdguru.....it was more about
how really insulated we become here. We forget that there are pros and cons to every place you could live. Many have never lived anywhere else, and either don't know or have forgotten the kinds of commutes, long bus/train rides, crime, traffic, etc. etc. people in - other parts of the states - take in stride, as part of life. (or that they have to do, because homes are not affordable in whatever city they work in).
You seem to be very focused on gas prices - I'm assuming you car pool?
The "real" world has nothing
The "real" world has nothing to do where you "could" live. It's all about where you actually do live. Just because we drive 20-30 minutes to get from the valley to downtown and not the hour or more that some down south drive, doesn't mean we should be singing songs and dancing a jig all the way to work. If the State is looking to build a new office building, it just makes sense to put that building closer to where the majority of those employees live. This also leaves more valuable properties downtown open for private sector development. Out of curiosity, I wonder if CBJ is giving a property tax break to SOA?
And no, I don't car pool. Nobody in my office lives in the valley and my wife and I don't share the same upbeat spirit to the start of a new day. lol
Swimmergirl nailed it
Couldn't have said it better myself. Time for some folks to get a dose of reality.
Elbow room
Build the darn thing where there is room for expantion? That would be a start on a localised area where one could attend to state business without having to drive all over creation!
Be carefull of what you wish for
If you relocate this buiding to the Valley, with it will come some of the other elements found in the downtown area. Are you ready to deal with the street people of downtown? They will be coming too. More buses, taxi's, street vendors, tourists and tourist shops. How about a few more bars too? More cars and parking issues. Personally, I don't care either way, but I do think you should think about it before you start chanting "Build it here!" because if you build it, they will come.
Why would a state office
Why would a state office building in the valley bring more tourists there? The docks are still downtown, and government offices aren't exactly touristy destinations.
Let's take a look
Tourists visit the SOB for many reasons, the library is a good example or how about listening to the organ music, getting something to eat, or just seeing the building itself. My point is, the more you make the Valley like Downtown, the more it is going to become like downtown. I am not saying that is good or bad, you decide.
But they aren't moving the
But they aren't moving the SOB. And it's likely they frequent the SOB because it's convenient. Tourists need to hop on a bus to see anything in the valley, and I doubt they'll make that extra stop on the way to the glacier to see a cubicle hive.
As an outsider looking in - I
As an outsider looking in - I like the look and feel of a thriving downtown area with office buildings and commerce and even housing and transportation and parks - especially in a capital city. Density in a downtown area is good, in my opinion.
It projects vitality.
Build it and they won't come?
There are more tourists running up to the valley than just the buses headed to the glacier. There are bicyclists, rafters,fishermen, whale watchers, airport travelers and more. All of these tourists will be in the vicinity. If you build a fancy, new, architectually advanced building and put some artwork on the walls and some artifacts in the lobby, you are going to see this building on the tour maps as a site to see. I would not be surprised to see you stick your head in there to take a look too.
What about convenience access to other state offices?
There's a lot of talk about convenience for state workers, but what about sensible organization for state business? It makes sense for state offices to be close together, at least the sort of administrative offices the capital tends to support, so different departments and divisions can more easily share resources and so that staff can more easily meet. This results in less taxpayer money wasted on redundancies and paid travel time. I have a unique perspective on exactly how often admin and management staff travel locally to meet and plan and it happens frequently. the key here is efficient design for taxpayers, not state employees. state employees are paid for their time, and paid fairly well compared to overall market. i haven't read a single concern about business sense and tax payer accountability here.