Quote:
Originally Posted by John Martin
I'll just warn you that I'm one of the few (if not the sole one) here who isn't part of "the choir," as I remain skeptical of the ongoing TRAX expansion and frenzy, and frankly, am still of the opinion that it's not good enough to justify the costs. I ride TRAX and UTA buses only because I have to pay for it in my tuition, but I'll admit, I think the trains are neat and we have a very nice set of vehicles, stations, etc.. I've ridden many transit systems around the world and none I've seen are as clean and well cared for as UTA. It's difficult for me to talk ill of it, but it has some major faults.
Earlier today I decided to take the 223 bus from the U campus to my parent's house in Holladay. It's a fairly straight shot and goes very close to where I need it to, so I like the route. The best part is that it takes almost exactly 30 minutes, while driving is only ten minutes shorter, and TRAX + the 45 bus would take up to twice as long. Furthermore, the 45 stops much further from the house so it's much less convenient. There's a major problem with the 223 bus, though, which is that it only runs every two hours. I don't blame UTA for this; hardly anyone rides the 223. On the latter half of the route it usually runs empty (as does the 45 for that matter). I have to arrange my whole afternoon around its schedule if I intend to take it. Even if the commute time with TRAX is nearly twice as long, it usually makes more sense to take one of the frequent trains in this case, because they'll get me there sooner. I can't help but wonder what could've been had TRAX not been built, and all the bus lines arranged to make TRAX the primary artery out of the suburbs. It's supposed to enable the suburbs, but for me it doesn't.
I'm not trying to start an argument or anything. I've heard many of the arguments again and again, and I'm simply not convinced that TRAX has made things better for the suburbs. Now I realize that I may be an exception to overall trends, and TRAX might be the best thing that happened to some people, but I can't help that. TRAX has made the transit system less convenient for me. I'm just trying to voice an opinion that never gets light around here.
|
Get him (
)! I'm just kidding. I think the expansion of the system of TRAX is a good thing for the west side of the Salt Lake Valley. People should be motivated to ride transit for more efficiency reasons vs. being a saint. And what I mean is that riding TRAX (if you live by TRAX) rewards you by basically emancipating you from traffic. Many people who ride the bus LONG DISTANCES do so because they are poor and or they don't have obligations like jobs or family to get to quickly, or they are just extremely committed idealists for the environment or anti vehicle beliefs (the idealists are the saints of transit if you will).
I think it's a reasonable expectation for the Wasatch Front to be able to make major inroads with passenger rail or BRT into major swatches of the Salt Lake Valley (especially if it is cheap like the West Jordan extension). That does not mean that I think we should make it so that every person who sprawls away from the core has a train within a mile of their home or even BRT for that matter (we can't subsidize infinite distance).
The key thing to remember with Light Rail, BRT or on a lesser scale with a streetcar, is that you are doing it right if you develop density around the lines. I think the idea is that Utah isn't Portland and doesn't have the political will to curb aggressive sprawl, but when the freeways clog up (which they will; the Mountain View Corridor will clog up when it is a road and a freeway), at least you have the ability for an urban counter culture to thrive and be a very viable alternative. If density develops along all these lines without a doubt, it is going to be easier to get anywhere in the valley via a train (unless you have an SUV full of 6 kids to haul around). If we have apartments, condos, city style row houses, retail and services crop up near these lines, then the thing becomes a sustainable subculture in and of itself. It doesn't necessarily amend sprawl or pulling energy out of the core, but it does make such a system sustainable in regards to energy and finances. However, that can only be done to such an extent until it would just take way too long for the system to ever become dense enough along the way to keep expanding at this aggressive of a rate.
Again, I don't think people in the burbs are entitled to all live near trains (and sorry this includes a lot of the east bench which is basically just richer more established sprawl). If people are fortunate enough to already live in the suburbs where it is most beneficial for the overall system to add an extra light rail extension, good for them. If they aren't so lucky, then those who want that convenience should move closer to an existing line.
So basically John I agree with your sentiment of skepticism about always giving the burbs rail or even BRT. I think the Salt Lake City area and the Denver area are both going to have to answer the question of how much is too much in regards to expanding rail and BRT transit out to the burbs since we are both basically doing projects that are proportionally the same when you look at system creation to population size and its distance from the core.
I think Frontlines 2015 and FasTracks in the Denver area are both great projects and I support them because the Mountain West has always been shafted when it comes to transit spending and I'm glad we got to have our chance to build our systems while the Federal Government was still able to help build the infrastructure. I don't think there will be a window for this kind of scale in system expansion for some time in the United States.
When both Denver's and Salt Lake City's projects conclude, and thankfully ours will be much sooner, I think we need more people like you, John, bringing up critical questions about continually feeding the burbs with rail and BRT transit instead of the core. Where are we hoping all this density will be located? Well, I would like more of that density near downtown. I remember when we had this debate over the Airport TRAX line extension out to that future green planned community near the Great Salt Lake and I can see where you are coming from a bit more on this now. Sure it's sustainable financially and environmentally, but it just spreads out the density and keeps it from being concentrated near the core. If the majority of the workplaces in that project were manufacturing I think it would be best.
To sum it all up. I'm glad Frontlines 2015 happened and in the future I would like to see more money spent on transit improvements closer to the city cores of Ogden and Salt Lake City (which means cities are going to have to seek after local bonds or Federal Aid). To conservatives reading this, I only respond with, our Middle East spending adventures and our spending programs on old people so that they can have 20 magical years of cruise ship voyages because their hips will be paid for by us, are depleting the funds exponentially faster than infrastructure spending adventures and do nothing for our growth; so aim the bigger cannons in the foreign policy and entitlements direction.
--End of disorganized response.
Prev
]
.
Linear Mode
