Salt Lake Transit News Thread

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by CONative

Hey Everyone -

I'm in town on business and thought I would check things out.

Concerning light rail miles....you must not realize that Denver has the 112 light rail and commuter rail FasTracks extension program passed by voters a few years back. That will bring Denver's total to close to 150 miles. This is already passed and in progress - not speculation or a thought. So, it's just a matter of time. We currently have another light rail line currently under construction (due to FasTracks) from Downtown to the western Suburbs.

I was aware that Denver had several additional lines planned or in construction phase I just wasn't sure how many miles were in the process of being built. I've also look at the denver maps and the system that is projected is very impressive with a combination of light and commuter rail.

[Urban_logic]

Originally Posted by cololi

I don't consider a transit line that runs in a freeway right of way that is at grade with the freeway an elevated rail line. This is the same thing as running in any other right of way, only it is a limited access freeway. In the bay area the area that immediately comes to mind as an elevated rail is the section that runs near the Oakland coliseum and airport to the bay tunnel. That is elevated, above grade, with all kinds of roads under it. But if I remember correctly, it is still primarily in it's own right of way. It makes sense to elevate in areas where city blocks are only 200-300 feet wide. If you were to bridge every cross street, you basically have an elevated rail. SLC blocks are 660 feet wide. We don't need to elevate.

Well, considering that most Bay Area freeways are elevated - but the trains deviate away from the freeways in some areas (In Walnut Creek, it branches away from the freeway and heads north for about 10-15 miles over the city. On the penninsula and toward Oakland Airport, it does the same thing) where it is clearly elevated rail. Then, it moves underground in dense urban areas and between freeways along narrow transit corridors. The key is that it stays off the road - whether by sky, freeway, or underground. It makes it cheaper to do the freeway thing when possible rather than make the whole thing elevated rail. You are right, there are always concerns and issues, but that won't stop us from working through them. Surface transit has similar problems - instead of cars wrecking into bridges, they have to worry about trains wrecking into cars and pedestrians. There are always problems, but that shouldn't stop us from innovating!

[Urban_logic]

Originally Posted by CONative

Hey Everyone -

I'm in town on business and thought I would check things out.

Concerning light rail miles....you must not realize that Denver has the 112 light rail and commuter rail FasTracks extension program passed by voters a few years back. That will bring Denver's total to close to 150 miles. This is already passed and in progress - not speculation or a thought. So, it's just a matter of time. We currently have another light rail line currently under construction (due to FasTracks) from Downtown to the western Suburbs.

Well, if you want to go down that route - talk only exsisting and under construction - then the SLC Area has 80 commuter rail (40 exsisting, 40 under construction) and 40 miles of light rail (20 exsisting, 15 currently under construction, 5 soon to break ground). That's a total of 120 miles. The Draper existention I think is more substasive than just a "speculation or thought" and should break ground momnetarily. That would bring us to about 125 miles. Add in the FrontRunner extensions that will happen, just not for a few years, that will extend rail to Payson and Brigham - another 40 miles. Then there are the speculative thoughts of a Sugar House line, Foothill line, and SLC trolley system (easily another good 30 miles). That would put us at just about 200 miles. It sounds like the SLC Area is sneaking up on you!

[cololi]

Originally Posted by Urban_logic

There are always problems, but that shouldn't stop us from innovating!

No doubt, but elevated rail is not always an innovation or the best alternative for all locations.

[bammbammz]

true!!! but elevated trains look COOL!!!....saltlake4life

[urbanboy]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

I agree, population doesn't have to equal sprawl. I look at it like this, as the population increases the demographics groups will increase and each demo will prefer a different type of lifestyle. So while I see that the mega will continue to grow outward, it will also continue to grow upward.

Outward growth will continue along the spines, (I-15) (1-80) into southern Utah County and into Northern Juab county (Nephi) and up to Brigham City to the north. It will also grow outward to Tooele and Grantsville, and even some growth to the east along I-80, I-84 and US 40. These tend to be the natural growth directions. I feel that this growth can be handled in an appropriate way, with smart land use patterns and preservation corridors. The growth I fear and that many of us fear is the growth of Cedar Valley, while I would prefer it didn't grow like it is projected to, if it does have to grow I hope that it to will grow in a responsible manner.

As for the upward growth, as I mentioned as the demographic groups increase in size there will be a huge demand for urban living, (I know none of this is news to anyone I just wanted to put it out there). DT SLC will continue to boom, and the downtown as we know it will be greatly expanded in 30 - 40 years. Other urban centers and transit oriented communities will continue to be more popular and will provide more density for those desiring it.

So while the population is going to continue to grow, I don't see the outward growth happening at the same rate as it has in the past.

This is why I highly recommend setting up State-wide urban growth boundaries. Urban growth boundaries aren't a fine line. However, they do put the burden of proof on the developer to show that the new subdivision is consistent with neighboring neighborhoods. There is also some other criteria that each development needs to meet before it gets an approval. This will ensure that when we're growing out, we're growing out responsibly. Only properties adjacent to the urban growth boundaries have the possibility of being developed. When a property is developed, the property or properties adjacent to it then also have the possibility of being developed. Again, the burden of proof is on the developer.

[i-215]

But you're never gonna get that passed at the State Capitol. I'm more likely to talk them into funding my I-415 project, complete with its "iconic bridge."

The reason: Portland has a reason. They have a valley filled with, arguably, the most fertile soil in the world. It's an insurmountably more difficult sale to say "we need to preserve Cedar Valley and the west desert." Sure they have a sense of desert beauty, but nothing compared to the Willamette Valley. Plus Oregon's capitol is filled with hippies. Half of our state legislature are probably developers.

I think your heart is in the right place, but it ain't gonna happen.

Push for TODs and town centers everywhere you can. Plan good freeways, roads, and rail for the rest.

[CONative]

Originally Posted by Urban_logic

Well, if you want to go down that route - talk only exsisting and under construction - then the SLC Area has 80 commuter rail (40 exsisting, 40 under construction) and 40 miles of light rail (20 exsisting, 15 currently under construction, 5 soon to break ground). That's a total of 120 miles. The Draper existention I think is more substasive than just a "speculation or thought" and should break ground momnetarily. That would bring us to about 125 miles. Add in the FrontRunner extensions that will happen, just not for a few years, that will extend rail to Payson and Brigham - another 40 miles. Then there are the speculative thoughts of a Sugar House line, Foothill line, and SLC trolley system (easily another good 30 miles). That would put us at just about 200 miles. It sounds like the SLC Area is sneaking up on you!

The 80 miles of commuter rail isn't all encompassing within SLC metro. Denver and the Front Range cities near Denver metro (Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, etc) also have commuter rail plans that don't have anything to do with our 150+ mile METRO area light rail and commuter rail FasTracks program. This would be the same as the commuter rail on the Wasatch. Denver is also exploring a city trolley system. So, that would put Denver up by hundreds more miles if everything comes to fruition.

I was just pointing out that Denver has a lot of future miles rail currently under construction and "coming soon" as well....and not to assume that everything will stay the way it is now with other comparison cities.

Good to learn of the progressive rail plans of SLC, Provo, Ogden areas though. I hope everything pans out.

[Future Mayor]

I by no means meant to say that Denver was sitting still as far as rail goes. I have to give major credit to Denver Portland and SLC for being aggressive with all forms of rail. Just as you mentioned with Denver, SLC is currently looking at placing trolleys throughout the city and it's neighborhood. All three cities are great examples of being progressive with densities and mass transit and are looked at by many other similar sized and even larger cities as a great way to improve quality of life.

[i-215]

Originally Posted by CONative

The 80 miles of commuter rail isn't all encompassing within SLC metro. Denver and the Front Range cities near Denver metro (Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, etc) also have commuter rail plans that don't have anything to do with our 150+ mile METRO area light rail and commuter rail FasTracks program. This would be the same as the commuter rail on the Wasatch. Denver is also exploring a city trolley system. So, that would put Denver up by hundreds more miles if everything comes to fruition.

I think it may be time for another Aurora v. West Valley City thread!

Look, we can all agree ... we're all kicking Boise's butt!

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by i-215

I think it may be time for another Aurora v. West Valley City thread!

Look, we can all agree ... we're all kicking Boise's butt!

Boise, hell we're all kickin Phoenix and Minneapolis' butts.

[Urban_logic]

Originally Posted by CONative

The 80 miles of commuter rail isn't all encompassing within SLC metro. Denver and the Front Range cities near Denver metro (Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, etc) also have commuter rail plans that don't have anything to do with our 150+ mile METRO area light rail and commuter rail FasTracks program. This would be the same as the commuter rail on the Wasatch. Denver is also exploring a city trolley system. So, that would put Denver up by hundreds more miles if everything comes to fruition.

I was just pointing out that Denver has a lot of future miles rail currently under construction and "coming soon" as well....and not to assume that everything will stay the way it is now with other comparison cities.

Good to learn of the progressive rail plans of SLC, Provo, Ogden areas though. I hope everything pans out.

True that. As I said before, though, SLC is sneaking up on you! We are actually kicking a lot of mid-western and suthern cities butts (Memphis, Orlando). Even some California cities (San Diego, Sacramento). Then a lot of our neighbors - Boise, Phoenix, Vegas. SLC and Denver are great sister cities!

[Boiseguy]

Originally Posted by i-215

I think it may be time for another Aurora v. West Valley City thread!

Look, we can all agree ... we're all kicking Boise's butt!

boise is a joke... the infrastructure already exists for miles of commuter rail, and plans for light rail and trolley's are on the books and ready to go.. but we don't have a way to fund it because the STATE legislature does not allow us to tax ourselves to pay for it.... it really is retarded, especially considering that MotivPower which builds most of the trains is located in BOISE....
we got some dip shit pumpkin heads up here that's for sure...
comparing salt lake's rail to boise is like trying to compare Spokane's freeway system to LA... LOL...

If and when the funding is allowed.. then perhaps I would say look out for boise... . but until then.. we suck

[Future Mayor]

Nah, you don't suck, your legislature and that stupid law may suck but not you and or Boise itself.

[Orlando]

Originally Posted by i-215

Well, if we're talking dream projects ...

Let me introduce you to Interstate 415, Utah's ultimate infrastructure boost! Complete with a sister network of higher-speed at grade expressways.



If Utah got the money and started building this tomorrow, both Urbanboy and I would probably die of heart attacks.

But for totally different reasons.

I think I would die, too, just not for the same reasons as you. Why don't you move to L.A., Houston, or Phoenix ,you sprawl lover, environmental hater?

[John Martin]

Can someone teach me what insight there is for street cars to be considered superior to buses? I just don't get the idea, just seems like another bus system confined to some strips of metal and a juicier price tag. Is it just the fact that street cars or trolleys (which one?) seem so cool to ride on or is there actually some reasoning behind the whole idea?

[i-215]

Originally Posted by Orlando

I think I would die, too, just not for the same reasons as you. Why don't you move to L.A., Houston, or Phoenix ,you sprawl lover, environmental hater?

Well, it's all gonna fill up with cheap Ivory Homes anyway. May as well plan for the growth.

(And ask anyone here, I do want to move to L.A.)

[bammbammz]

i-215....HELL yessss!!!!! i-415 is simply beautiful.Build it now,cuz we'll all be building it later.WELL, our grand-chillins,children....I Love It.......slcbabeee

[SLC Projects]

Hey I215. I like your I-415 idea. That would take traffic off of Bangerter and Redwood.

[urbanboy]

Originally Posted by John Martin

Can someone teach me what insight there is for street cars to be considered superior to buses? I just don't get the idea, just seems like another bus system confined to some strips of metal and a juicier price tag. Is it just the fact that street cars or trolleys (which one?) seem so cool to ride on or is there actually some reasoning behind the whole idea?

Light rail cars are now being marketed by a number of major manufacturers around the world, with standardized designs once again being produced in quantity like buses. Multiple bidders means that streetcars, while more expensive than buses, will have a sticker price that is definitely competitive with that of the heavy railway equipment. Light rail cars are designed for a much longer service life than buses, carry more passengers per vehicle, and can be quickly coupled into multiple unit trains.

There is an intangible appeal particular to electric railways, a cachet that some have termed the “sparks effect.” Modern streetcars offer a smooth, stable ride that is distinctively different from that of a bus. Light rail attracts passengers who would otherwise not use public transit.