Salt Lake Transit News Thread

[Makid]

Isn't part of the drop off also due to Winter Break at the U?

[wrendog]

Frontrunner is too expensive per trip. Much cheaper and more convenient to drive. I would use FR only if an employer paid for it, otherwise, not worth it.

[Future Mayor]

All UTA fares are going to be reduce soon, bus, Trax, FrontRunner and monthly passes. I think it April or May, that is good news to see a fare reduction every now and then rather than simply increases. Hopefully with the fare reduction ridership will grow a little and as gas prices once again begins to rise and more people start riding that the fare collection will cover costs and they won't need to raise them back again.

If I had an option I would prefer to take FrontRunner, even if the perceived cost is higher. I would much rather spend that time sleeping or reading the news or catching up on work stuff. It's not simply about the price of a gallon of gas versus the cost of a fare. There are so many other factors, including car maintenance, car insurance, monthly payments, along with what your time spent driving versus time spent on FrontRunner and what your productive time is worth.

[MetroFanatic]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

All UTA fares are going to be reduce soon, bus, Trax, FrontRunner and monthly passes. I think it April or May, that is good news to see a fare reduction every now and then rather than simply increases. Hopefully with the fare reduction ridership will grow a little and as gas prices once again begins to rise and more people start riding that the fare collection will cover costs and they won't need to raise them back again.

If I had an option I would prefer to take FrontRunner, even if the perceived cost is higher. I would much rather spend that time sleeping or reading the news or catching up on work stuff. It's not simply about the price of a gallon of gas versus the cost of a fare. There are so many other factors, including car maintenance, car insurance, monthly payments, along with what your time spent driving versus time spent on FrontRunner and what your productive time is worth.

It's April 1st. I agree with you though. Riding TRAX everyday all the way to 10000 South gives me a good 30-40 minutes to do my reading for classes so I can just relax when I get home. As much as I'd like to get to and from school faster, I'd much rather let somebody else do it for me there. It's like a contradiction of laziness.

[i-215]

The day is coming (with good planning) that we'll have a good chunk of the valley's amenities located in TODs near the stations.

When that day comes, I can park my car - swipe my UTA pass, and ride to wherever I need to go.

But in the meantime, I've gotta drive. All the shopping and office space are near freeway off-ramps.

[scottharding]

The Tribune (I think it was the Trib, anyway) recently ran an article about how walkable SLC has become, and if a car is still a necessity. The writer parked his car for a full week, and cut all vehicle related things from his lifestyle for that time, to the extent that he wouldn't eat groceries that had been driven home by his girlfriend. It was very informative. He ran all the costs of transit versus what he spends on gas, he tallied times, etc. In the end, he had spent more and more time by abandoning his car. (although he did point out that once insurance, car payments, maintanence, etc. are all factored in, the costs are way in favor of mass transit) However, despite the increased costs and longer time spent travelling, he did point out that he had lost weight, felt healthier, met people, and all together enjoyed this new lifestyle more.
In the end, he summed it up by saying that in SLC, a car is still pretty much a necessity. But I appreciated this: After his week, he decided he only needed ONE car (between he and his girlfriend) and they would be selling the other. While I, like others here, wish for a world where cars are not necessary, I accept the reality that cars are so much an integrated part of society that they've become a necessary evil. However, it would be possible and wise for all households to limit themselves to just one vehicle as the city's mass transit system grows and improves. Imagine if this were the case, and those cars were energy-effecient and used only for long journeys. Two of America's greatest problems, obesity and the environment would be addressed.

[Urban_logic]

I've touched on this a little before, but I'm thinking the next feasible FrontRunner Line would be to Tooele. They have a fast-growing population and should soon have one large enough to support a commuter line. The only problem I see is that existing rail lines are too far north to offer stations for West Valley and Magna. Maybe they could build new rails along the 201 Freeway and build two S.L. Valley stations (West Valley - around 32nd West, then a Magna Station - about 72nd-80th West), then connect to existing rails by the lake. Then there could be a Stansbury Station, Grantsvile Station, and Tooele staion. Only 5 stops, but I think it would be heavily used. I'm sure that the bus commute from Tooele is awful! Then, eventually, we could send one up to Park City and later extend it to Heber down the Hwy 89 corridor. Then SLC will truley be at the center of things (East-West, North-South). Any thoughts? Comments? Critiques?

[WeST]

With this discussion about ridership and price, I am curious about peoples opinions regarding charging for mass transit. What about dropping the price to a insignificant level of a dollar for a ride? This would keep "slackers" from just riding the train all day to sleep or harass riders, but be small enough to not be a problem. If I remember, fares for buses and TRAX only account for 15% of revenues. I think fares are mostly in place to make people feel like they aren't subsidizing the system, but they don't do much. If we are going to have these systems, why not make it appealing as possible?

[cololi]

Originally Posted by Urban_logic

I've touched on this a little before, but I'm thinking the next feasible FrontRunner Line would be to Tooele. They have a fast-growing population and should soon have one large enough to support a commuter line. The only problem I see is that existing rail lines are too far north to offer stations for West Valley and Magna. Maybe they could build new rails along the 201 Freeway and build two S.L. Valley stations (West Valley - around 32nd West, then a Magna Station - about 72nd-80th West), then connect to existing rails by the lake. Then there could be a Stansbury Station, Grantsvile Station, and Tooele staion. Only 5 stops, but I think it would be heavily used. I'm sure that the bus commute from Tooele is awful! Then, eventually, we could send one up to Park City and later extend it to Heber down the Hwy 89 corridor. Then SLC will truley be at the center of things (East-West, North-South). Any thoughts? Comments? Critiques?

I think you are on to something, maybe about 30 years down the road. The commuter bus system to Tooele works fine right now if you are going downtown.

[Future Mayor]

This is a rumor I have heard, I am simply relaying what I heard and not giving support to it.

As we have heard Front Runner will eventually extend to Payson, is is rumored that way off in the distance due to the supposed inevitably development of the Cedar Valley that Front Runner will turn west from Payson loop around Lake Mountain into Cedar Valley and rejoin the main line in the Lehi area. If that were the case it would have to loop in both directions. Again this is just a rumor and considering where I heard it there probably isn't much validity behind it. Looping FrontRunner would be a huge waste of time and resources. Even if Cedar Valley develops like some project looping it is just stupid. Eventually extending the main line to Nephi would make sense and if (please say it aint' so) Cedar Valley does develop it would simply make more sense to run a Front Runner spur, Trax spur of BRT from the Cedar Valley to the Lehi FrontRunner station.

[arkhitektor]

Originally Posted by WeST

With this discussion about ridership and price, I am curious about peoples opinions regarding charging for mass transit. What about dropping the price to a insignificant level of a dollar for a ride? This would keep "slackers" from just riding the train all day to sleep or harass riders, but be small enough to not be a problem. If I remember, fares for buses and TRAX only account for 15% of revenues. I think fares are mostly in place to make people feel like they aren't subsidizing the system, but they don't do much. If we are going to have these systems, why not make it appealing as possible?

The general public seems to complain enough about how subsidized UTA is already, lowering fares would only make this worse. As it is now, I would guess that fewer than 35% of riders (at least on FrontRunner) are actually paying their own fares. Every school in the metro offers ed-passes, and many employers buy or help pay for eco-passes for their employees.

I think that a better solution than lowering fares would be to get more employers into the eco-pass program with some kind of incentive. This would get more people on the trains without making riders pay for it themselves. At least this way, someone is paying for them and helping UTA make up more of their operating costs without taxes.

I also suspect that once the students who currently ride finish school and enter the workforce, they'll be much more likely to continue the habit of using public transportation, even if it means footing the bill themselves.

As for slackers and vagrants riding for free, charging fares seems to do little to deter them. I got on a TRAX train at Central Station Monday morning that had at least 20 sleeping homeless on each car. Its freezing cold and they have nowhere to go, so who can blame them, but I suspect most paying customers were put off by the fact that they were outnumbered on the train by homeless men who didn't get off the train, even when it left the free fare zone.

[Future Mayor]

One possible incentive that I am just sort of winging is that most office towers require so much parking per sf, if I'm not mistaken. So while it would be difficult for the city to calculate a reduced number of parking stalls that are required for a new office building maybe the incentive comes in that employers can offer a transit pass and reduce the number of stalls required per sf.

I totally just made that up. Is this even how it works with sf and required leased parking spots?

[cololi]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

One possible incentive that I am just sort of winging is that most office towers require so much parking per sf, if I'm not mistaken. So while it would be difficult for the city to calculate a reduced number of parking stalls that are required for a new office building maybe the incentive comes in that employers can offer a transit pass and reduce the number of stalls required per sf.

I totally just made that up. Is this even how it works with sf and required leased parking spots?

You aren't just winging it. SLC incorporates a reduced parking option for employer sponsored transit programs. It is completely based on the type of program. UTA has a number of options available, and the City reduces the parking requirement based on what program the employer uses, the number of employees that use the program, etc. it is good for first time set up, but almost impossible to regulate after the first year or so and as businesses close, move, etc.

The minimum requirements are different based on use. Residential is off of number of bedrooms or units and other uses are based off of square footage, number of employees, etc. In downtown, there is also an exception for the first x amount of square footage. Other zones have similar reductions.

[Urban_logic]

Originally Posted by cololi

I think you are on to something, maybe about 30 years down the road. The commuter bus system to Tooele works fine right now if you are going downtown.

I don't know about 30 years. I was thinking more 15-20 years (so around 2030). They deffinately aren't yet big enough to get the most "bang for the buck" with a FrontRunner line, but based on how fast they have been growing, I'm thinking it could be feasibly done in about 15-20 years.

[cololi]

Originally Posted by Urban_logic

I don't know about 30 years. I was thinking more 15-20 years (so around 2030). They deffinately aren't yet big enough to get the most "bang for the buck" with a FrontRunner line, but based on how fast they have been growing, I'm thinking it could be feasibly done in about 15-20 years.

I would love to see all transit be up and running within 2 years of conceptual planning, but unfortunately things don't work that way. A Tooele line is way down my list of transit projects that I would like to see and there are probably about 30 years of construction time to get all of those funded and built, that is why I say 30 years. I guess the cynic in me comes out when dealing with the economics in development. I think it is a great idea to get something out there.

[Urban_logic]

Originally Posted by cololi

I would love to see all transit be up and running within 2 years of conceptual planning, but unfortunately things don't work that way. A Tooele line is way down my list of transit projects that I would like to see and there are probably about 30 years of construction time to get all of those funded and built, that is why I say 30 years. I guess the cynic in me comes out when dealing with the economics in development. I think it is a great idea to get something out there.

I'm deffinately not a cynic when it comes to development. Maybe its the youth in me, but I always dream big, then scale down to reality.

I'm thinking that UTA will need to split eventually. I mean, with commuter rail, light rail, and buses up and down the wasatch front, plus all the expansion, I think it's going to get over-loaded. In the Bay Area, S.F. has a system that runs the city buses and light-rail, then BART runs regional transit. Then, each county has its own local transit agency. The reason I bring this up is that I think we could build a line out to Tooele quicker if we split the load to different agencies. UTA could run regional transit, but then Davis and Weber counties could form a local agency, Utah County could form it's own, then Tooele could form its own. With seperate agencies, multiple projects could go up simultaniously. SLC could have an agency that runs its street car system and city buses, then UTA could run TRAX and FrontRunner. This way, I think Tooele could get a line quicker (like 2025-2030).

[Orlando]

UTAHNS WANT MORE TRAINS!

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_11742737

[arkhitektor]

Originally Posted by Urban_logic

I'm deffinately not a cynic when it comes to development. Maybe its the youth in me, but I always dream big, then scale down to reality.

I'm thinking that UTA will need to split eventually. I mean, with commuter rail, light rail, and buses up and down the wasatch front, plus all the expansion, I think it's going to get over-loaded. In the Bay Area, S.F. has a system that runs the city buses and light-rail, then BART runs regional transit. Then, each county has its own local transit agency. The reason I bring this up is that I think we could build a line out to Tooele quicker if we split the load to different agencies. UTA could run regional transit, but then Davis and Weber counties could form a local agency, Utah County could form it's own, then Tooele could form its own. With seperate agencies, multiple projects could go up simultaniously. SLC could have an agency that runs its street car system and city buses, then UTA could run TRAX and FrontRunner. This way, I think Tooele could get a line quicker (like 2025-2030).

I know that multiple agencies exist in some cities, but did they start out as separate agencies or was a single transit authority split up to form them?

I guess I just can't see the logic in splitting UTA up. Each county having its own transit authority? Then we would have just have more agencies fighting for the same tax dollars and it seems like less would get done, not to mention the waste that would be created by the redundancies that it would cause. UTA is currently building 5 new lines, and they seem to be handling it pretty well. If commuter rail doesn't to Tooele Co. doesn't happen in the next 15 years its not going to be because UTA was too busy to get around to it.

I'm no expert, but from my point of view, it seems that the fact that UTA is a single entity along the entire Wasatch Front is one of the reasons things are going so well right now.

[ragerdude]

I went to the Bike Station open house last week put on by UTA at the city/county building. While there I got to talk to the manager of WFRC and the real estate director for UTA. I mentioned to the WFRC manager about the freeway-like tunnel idea for the foothill corridor I read from a post on here and he said it had never been considered, and with the powers that be it will not get far even though he thought it was progressive thinking. UTA is looking to put in a restaurant next to the Bike Station at Central Station and is looking for local businesses to fill the spot. They already have bids from Blimpie and Subway. Also, in the near future UTA is looking to make profits from various vending and concession options on their property (currently there is a clause disallowing profits from any commercial ativities on UTA property) which should help increase ridership as well as offset the cost of a full fare ticket. Imagine being able to get your breakfast and a newspaper right at the train station or TRAX stop on your way to work or to school and reading and eating on the train during your commute! I also asked about futrure expansion. I was informed that if UTA had their way we would already have service to Las Vegas, Logan, Tooele, Park City and Heber, even to Moab! Unfortunately UTA has no right-of-way to any of these locations and ridership projections do not justify the costs. Does anyone know how UTA gets their ridership projections for undeveloped areas?

[Future Mayor]

I know that with transit and road corridor studies their is a projections model that the firm uses that calculates ridership and traffic demand. These are based on current and future population projections, as well as current and projected ridership trends. They are also able to figure for adjustments in things like gas prices and what effect those would have on ridership. There are many many factors that go into these projections, but that is a brief explanation.