Salt Lake Transit News Thread

[urban.cyclist]

Originally Posted by s.p.hansen

Having a concrete curb protecting pedestrians and bike lanes seems safer than not.

The problem is where there isn't concrete. And that cyclists are hidden behind parked cars. Drivers turn in to driveways without looking for cyclists in the lanes. They pull out into the lanes so they can see past the parked cars. I've even experienced idiots parked IN the lanes. The lanes Are also disconnected from traffic at intersections.

In short, yes, the curb dies protect cyclists, but it makes conflict points much more dangerous. I know from painful experience.

[UrbanDesign]

Originally Posted by StevenF

I am extremely interested in this idea of using my phone. I have an Apple Watch and I could tap on and tap off with just that.

Majority of students taking the red line would also love it, myself included!

[curtb87]

Originally Posted by UrbanDesign

During the UTA segment of the conference, was there any mention about updating their "tap on-tap off" system to include the NFC protocol in cell phones? That would be a great step forward if people could buy tickets on their phones!

UTA has supported Apple Pay for a year now

http://www.rideuta.com/news/2014/11/apple-pay-on-uta/

[Hatman]

At a separate meeting I attended, a UTA person mentioned offhandedly that they are 'looking into' mobile ticketing, whatever that means. What I suspect it means is that there is some study to see how much money it will cost vs how many new riders it will bring in. I also suspect this will mean UTA will enter into a contract with a separate contractor to do a mobile ticketing app, the same way that they have a contractor run the Ticket Vending Machines on rail platforms. Who knows how long it will take to get this stuff set up, but the end result would be exactly what you want: being able to buy a ticket in advance online and then tap on with your device. The tap readers have long been able to read anything with a NFC chip, including phones. It's a software issue, not a hardware issue (which only adds to my confusion as to why UTA hasn't utilized their hardware better).
What would be really cool is if the app that gets developed could link your phone (or whatever) with your transit pass (EcoPass, Hive Pass, Student pass, etc) so that you wouldn't need to carry around the separate pass or even your wallet.

[StevenF]

Originally Posted by Hatman

At a separate meeting I attended, a UTA person mentioned offhandedly that they are 'looking into' mobile ticketing, whatever that means. What I suspect it means is that there is some study to see how much money it will cost vs how many new riders it will bring in. I also suspect this will mean UTA will enter into a contract with a separate contractor to do a mobile ticketing app, the same way that they have a contractor run the Ticket Vending Machines on rail platforms. Who knows how long it will take to get this stuff set up, but the end result would be exactly what you want: being able to buy a ticket in advance online and then tap on with your device. The tap readers have long been able to read anything with a NFC chip, including phones. It's a software issue, not a hardware issue (which only adds to my confusion as to why UTA hasn't utilized their hardware better).
What would be really cool is if the app that gets developed could link your phone (or whatever) with your transit pass (EcoPass, Hive Pass, Student pass, etc) so that you wouldn't need to carry around the separate pass or even your wallet.

I know with the apple pay system you can put in store cards for some stores in it, so you don't have to carry all the different cards in your wallet. I would imagine UTA could just set up a similar thing like that for tapping on and off.

[jtrent77]

Originally Posted by StevenF

I know with the apple pay system you can put in store cards for some stores in it, so you don't have to carry all the different cards in your wallet. I would imagine UTA could just set up a similar thing like that for tapping on and off.

Here in DC they did some testing using phones as payments (we are a tap on / tap off system rather than a single fare). I don't think it is as simple as you hope as they found a lot of problems and after the trial it was not renewed (although likely it will come at SOME point).

[Makid]

The Q2 Ridership numbers have finally been released. Nearly 2 months late but later is better than never.

http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Documents/Ridership/2015-q2-ridership-APTA.pdf

Here is the breakdown for the UTA area:

Frontrunner had 15.6K average riders daily. This is up 3.67% over Q2 2014.
Trax had 60.4K average riders daily. This is down 1.96% over Q2 2014.
Buses had 68.4K average riders daily. This is up 6.87% over Q2 2014.

Total Ridership averaged 153.4K daily. This is up 2.54% over Q2 2014.

These numbers are at odds a bit with the information we have heard from UTA. They said that total ridership was down 1.5% through May of this year.

With them saying that through August ridership had done a turn around and was now up about .5%, this means that June, July and August had to have had a larger than normal ridership increase.

I can't wait to see what the Q3 numbers are with the information coming out that some lines that had hours/frequency increased are up anywhere from 10% to 30% in ridership.

It would be nice to see all modes increase by 3-4% each quarter so that the year end increases are up the same percentages or higher.

Of course, if Prop 1 passes tomorrow in all UTA areas, we may see larger increases in the reports over the next couple of years.

We will find out tomorrow night/Wednesday morning about Prop 1. I voted for it and I hope others will/did too.

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by Makid

...

Of course, if Prop 1 passes tomorrow in all UTA areas, we may see larger increases in the reports over the next couple of years.

We will find out tomorrow night/Wednesday morning about Prop 1. I voted for it and I hope others will/did too.

I also voted for it and got everyone in my house to do so, too.

[Palladio]

Originally Posted by Hatman

At a separate meeting I attended, a UTA person mentioned offhandedly that they are 'looking into' mobile ticketing, whatever that means. What I suspect it means is that there is some study to see how much money it will cost vs how many new riders it will bring in. I also suspect this will mean UTA will enter into a contract with a separate contractor to do a mobile ticketing app, the same way that they have a contractor run the Ticket Vending Machines on rail platforms. Who knows how long it will take to get this stuff set up, but the end result would be exactly what you want: being able to buy a ticket in advance online and then tap on with your device. The tap readers have long been able to read anything with a NFC chip, including phones. It's a software issue, not a hardware issue (which only adds to my confusion as to why UTA hasn't utilized their hardware better).
What would be really cool is if the app that gets developed could link your phone (or whatever) with your transit pass (EcoPass, Hive Pass, Student pass, etc) so that you wouldn't need to carry around the separate pass or even your wallet.

You can currently use both Apple Pay and Google Wallet to pay your fare on UTA. I want to say that has been out for about a year now, but I could be wrong. I can confirm that mobile ticketing is something UTA is actively looking at, but I'm not sure if we'll see it anytime soon. The model in mind is something akin to Portland's TRIMET mobile ticketing system. It works well because anyone can use their phone to pay for a fair, regardless of if it has an NFC chip. The downside is, the transit agency can only tell when you used the ticket, not where or on what mode. So all the awesome live information UTA gets from Farepay, University Passes and EcoPasses wouldn't get collected. That being said, the info can't be collected with paper passes either. Part of the debate is if creating this mobile ticketing system will be worth it, if say in 4-6 years every phone comes standard with a NFC chip.

[jedikermit]

Originally Posted by Stenar

I also voted for it and got everyone in my house to do so, too.

Same...but I know a lot of very vocal, very annoying people who didn't. And somehow I'm still friends/related to them. Uggggh.

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by jedikermit

Same...but I know a lot of very vocal, very annoying people who didn't. And somehow I'm still friends/related to them. Uggggh.

The proponents didn't sell this very well. I don't think many people knew what it was about. Because of that, I'm predicting that it won't pass.

[Deek1978]

I voted against it. I'm sorry, but I try to follow the advice of Benjamin Franklin Abraham Lincoln random made up internet quote that I like:

"It is the duty of every person living in the colonies to pay as little in taxes as they legally can get away with."

I don't have much say in the matter of whether or not we're taxed, but when I do, my vote will be for me to keep my money. Always.

[jedikermit]

Yupppppp.

[Makid]

Originally Posted by Deek1978

I voted against it. I'm sorry, but I try to follow the advice of Benjamin Franklin Abraham Lincoln random made up internet quote that I like:

"It is the duty of every person living in the colonies to pay as little in taxes as they legally can get away with."

I don't have much say in the matter of whether or not we're taxed, but when I do, my vote will be for me to keep my money. Always.

This is why you should have voted for it. Let me explain why:

Goal - Keep more of your own money.

This tax actually allows that. For example:

Less people driving on the roads due to increased transit offerings (faster commutes and less gas usage).
Less repair costs and tire replacements due to less wear and tear as well as increased funds directed to local road improvements and repairs.

The average person spends about $150 to $200 on car repairs each year. Your repairs may be higher or lower.

State Gas tax brings in about $80 on average per driver per year. Again, your values may vary.

This is before the gas tax increase happens at the end of the year. That will bring it up to if not over $100 on average.

Proposition 1 is an average of $50 per person or $150 per family.

It would reduce your gas consumption by reducing people on the roads. It would also reduce repairs and wear and tear on your vehicle while also prolonging your tires.

Estimated saving of Prop 1 on a per person level (not counting the tax itself) is $55.

This means that by voting against it, you might have cost yourself $5.00 a year. $5.00 being the difference between the with/without Prop 1.

This is also without the items that can't be quantified such as:

Cleaner air - reduces medical expenses and missed work. Saving medical expenses and possibly increasing your bank account if paid hourly. (This also would save your coworkers money as you wouldn't be as sick and needing to go to work while sick to maintain a paycheck level.)

Stress reduction - reduces stress while driving in heavy traffic, this will extend your life while reducing medical costs.

Increased business relocation - Taxes could go down if more businesses came to the area that currently skip it due to the air quality and transportation levels.

Increased Tourism - Same as business relocation reasons.

The items that can't be quantified are the main reasons that I voted for it and I think the same for those that did.

The pocket book savings are minor compared to other items.

[s.p.hansen]

Originally Posted by Deek1978

I voted against it. I'm sorry, but I try to follow the advice of Benjamin Franklin Abraham Lincoln random made up internet quote that I like:

"It is the duty of every person living in the colonies to pay as little in taxes as they legally can get away with."

I don't have much say in the matter of whether or not we're taxed, but when I do, my vote will be for me to keep my money. Always.

You'll just pay for it out of your property taxes. Look at the rate of property tax increases over the same period of time when we haven't raised the national fuel tax to accommodate inflation and greater efficiency. But hey at least if it comes out of your property tax at a local level for roads it won't take any money from out of state visitors...

[stayinginformed]

Originally Posted by Deek1978

I voted against it. I'm sorry, but I try to follow the advice of Benjamin Franklin Abraham Lincoln random made up internet quote that I like:

"It is the duty of every person living in the colonies to pay as little in taxes as they legally can get away with."

I don't have much say in the matter of whether or not we're taxed, but when I do, my vote will be for me to keep my money. Always.

“I like to pay taxes. With them, I buy civilization.” --Oliver Wendell Holmes

[Stenar]

Well, it looks like Prop #1 lost. :/

[Makid]

Originally Posted by Stenar

Well, it looks like Prop #1 lost. :/

It did pass in Weber and Davis Counties though.

I am still somewhat hopeful that the final ballots will push SL County into the win column even though it is a long shot.

It is sad that people would rather pay property taxes than allow tourists and convention attendees to help pay for infrastructure.

With Utah County, I think UTA should scale back plans to expand service. Keep Frontrunner on the current schedule, Orem/Provo BRT on schedule but other routes scale back a bit based on current usage.

SL County (if it doesn't pass), UTA should scale back service at the Southern End of the County and focus on the denser areas (90th South and North). Leave some service at the south end of the county but don't increase any service as revenue is available. Use it where people will use it.

Davis and Weber Counties, increase bus service while also increasing the length of the Double Tracking for the Frontrunner line. Possibly even increase service frequency. Check into possibly electrifying the full line for additional savings that can be put to an additional side track in SLC to allow for expanded frequencies on the North End. Expand and push through BRT plans in the area.

Lastly:

In total, I think this brings Davis and Weber Counties closer to what SL County currently pays. It also keeps Utah County at the bottom for what they get. At last count, Utah County was receiving service above what they contribute, this is why they should drop in service. Weber and Davis Counties want service so they should get it. SL County already pays the most but service should be moved to where it would have the most impact (North of 90th South) with minimal service to the South (mostly to connect to existing Trax lines).

I do wonder how much of the failure in SL County was due to UTA and not Roads. SL County is mostly built out, when UTA specific items are voted on the results are highly for them. I think that maybe it was the Roads portion that killed it in SL County. I also think that if they had stated in the Prop 1 information what transit increases would have occurred, this would have pushed it easily over the line in SL County. People like specifics rather than hearsay.

[jedikermit]

Originally Posted by Makid

I do wonder how much of the failure in SL County was due to UTA and not Roads. SL County is mostly built out, when UTA specific items are voted on the results are highly for them. I think that maybe it was the Roads portion that killed it in SL County. I also think that if they had stated in the Prop 1 information what transit increases would have occurred, this would have pushed it easily over the line in SL County. People like specifics rather than hearsay.

I honestly think Joe Citizen, who cares enough to vote, but not enough to pay attention to details (3/4 of voters)(I made that up) cared less about UTA issues and more that it was "more taxes," no matter what was being done with the money. Proponents of the measure didn't advertise it well, but I don't know how many voters really paid attention to that. I don't think they put as much extended thinking into it as you're giving them credit. They're short-sighted, and just see it as the guvment taking more from them, regardless of what they and their city, state, community would get in return.

[Future Mayor]

Only an estimated 34% of the votes have been counted on Prop 1 in SL County and the difference is only 1.8%. I wouldn't say it's dead yet.