Salt Lake Transit News Thread

[Liberty Wellsian]

Originally Posted by Hatman

I like that destination pairing.



I wonder if anyone ever considered running TRAX or a streetcar down the 9 line corridor before it was converted into a trail. It could still be done as an upgrade later on, keeping a wide pedestrian trail next to two streetcar tracks. Like the S-Line. (For all my gripes about how the S-Line is run and how extensions are being planned, I absolutely love the linear park the S-Line created!)

...and the development along the line.

There is no way the Ritz development happens without it. Even a meh line seems to be a good weapon to combat urban sprawl.

[brankrom]

Years ago I remember a streetcar line from 900 S 900 W to 900 S 900 E was suggested.It makes a lot of sense because there is a lot of redevelopment potential along 900 S West of State Street and the West side it woefully under-served with transit. The 900 south corridor could be a kick ass density filled corridor but right now it is largely empty.

[Wasatch Wasteland]

I was thinking something like this…

The brownish colored line is to Daybreak via 5600 west. This alignment seemed to make the most sense, as it eliminates most of the needs for a downtown circulator. Everything else is part of the plan for downtown by 2040, with the 400 south extension and the S-Line loop. (S-Loop? S-Cirlce? S-Circulator) However one exception is the 900 south streetcar that has been proposed before, which I do not know the general time frame for. It would probably end where it meets the S-line towards the East.

Also the Yellow Line could potentially be the line that follows foothill drive and I-215 connecting into the main line at Fashion Place. This was discussed last week.

Sorry if the picture is huge.

[Liberty Wellsian]

Originally Posted by Wasatch Wasteland

I was thinking something like this…

The brownish colored line is to Daybreak via 5600 west. This alignment seemed to make the most sense, as it eliminates most of the needs for a downtown circulator. Everything else is part of the plan for downtown by 2040, with the 400 south extension and the S-Line loop. (S-Loop? S-Cirlce? S-Circulator) However one exception is the 900 south streetcar that has been proposed before, which I do not know the general time frame for. It would probably end where it meets the S-line towards the East.

Also the Yellow Line could potentially be the line that follows foothill drive and I-215 connecting into the main line at Fashion Place. This was discussed last week.

Sorry if the picture is huge.

I think you need to go down Indiana(800 S) because 900 S dies after 900 West. It also makes for a seemless connection with trax on central ninth.

[ThePusherMan]

Granary...
Granary North...
Granary Norther

LoL

[StevenF]

Great video about autonomous cars.

• Video Link

[Liberty Wellsian]

Originally Posted by StevenF

Great video about autonomous cars.

• Video Link

10 years from now driverless will be a ubiquitous feature on new cars like cruise control is now. So it will be more like 30 years until the vast majority of cars have it. So really we are 30 years away from the "beginning" and the effects of driverless cars could be just as damaging to the urban fabric as automobiles were in the fifties. What are people going to do when their commute is more enjoyable, safer, and likely will be at a higher speed? Will they really move to the city and share cars or will they move further out on larger lots? When the drivers seat is removed will consumers buy smaller cars or cars with massive TVs, minifridges, etc.

I don't think driverless cars will become the great social technology that this video is envisioning.

[Future Mayor]

One issue with the 9-line Streetcar or Trax is the tracks that run adjacent to I-15 on the east side. A Trax line or Streetcar line cannot cross those at grade, so a tunnel would have to be constructed to cross those. That is a huge expense, most likely more than the entire cost to construct the remainder of the line from W 9th/9th to 9th/9th.

To get under those tracks would involve not only going under the UP/FR tracks, but going under I-15, and there is a vast amount of I-15 bridge supports in that section. So while I'd love to see it, I don't see it happening for a very very long time, and I would estimate that the allowable densities at W 9th/9th would have to be really high in order to even come close to justifying the expense.

[Liberty Wellsian]

delete

[Makid]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

One issue with the 9-line Streetcar or Trax is the tracks that run adjacent to I-15 on the east side. A Trax line or Streetcar line cannot cross those at grade, so a tunnel would have to be constructed to cross those. That is a huge expense, most likely more than the entire cost to construct the remainder of the line from W 9th/9th to 9th/9th.

To get under those tracks would involve not only going under the UP/FR tracks, but going under I-15, and there is a vast amount of I-15 bridge supports in that section. So while I'd love to see it, I don't see it happening for a very very long time, and I would estimate that the allowable densities at W 9th/9th would have to be really high in order to even come close to justifying the expense.

While it could be expensive, I think it would be worth the cost to connect the East and West sides of the city together.

It would be good if there were connections at 6th North, North Temple (Existing), 8th/9th South (9th South until 5th East then north to 8th South to continue west), and 17th South.

The lines would go East/West as follows:

6th North - 2200 West to 4th West (Loops to North Temple E/W Trax)
North Temple - Existing
8th/9th South - Redwood Road (Indian Ave) on the west to 13th East (9th South).
17th South - Redwood on the west to Foothill on the East. This could also be extended north and then east on Sunnyside.

For the lines that end at Redwood, they could be extended North to meet at 6th North. This would create multiple loop options.

There would be multiple North South connections but these could be the main East/West routes outside of downtown.

It would also take 50 years I think for the densities to increase to the point where some of these would be worth the expense.

I do think an 8th/9th south line would be worth the expense now though as it would be a great bridge for the community.

My estimate for total cost for all 3 lines as a streetcar is around $1.5 Billion (includes multiple tunnels/bridges for rail crossings).

My estimated ridership breakdown is based on all lines being complete:

Opening (2025 est): 12,000 daily
5 years (2030): 15,000 daily
10 years (2035): 25,000 daily
20 years (2045): 45,000 daily
30 years (2055): 55,000 daily

These numbers allow for gradual density increases along the lines to account for population growth and economic growth along the lines.

Just a dream for now but a dream within the realm of reality.

[Hatman]

Concerning the crossing of a TRAX/streetcar line and the railroad tracks at 900S/600W, I completely agree that an underpass is the best solution. There is an interim solution, however, that could be used. Tampa Bay operates a streetcar line similar to the S line, in that it has one track and uses passing sidings. It crosses over CSX railroad's track at grade:

Is it a good long term solution? No way. And if it weren't called 'phase-1' or 'interim solution' or something like that, I would never support an at-grade crossing at 900S 600W.

But suppose it is built as a temporary solution just to get the line going, it could be very effective at getting funding for an underpass to be built - not just for the streetcar/TRAX line, but also for the road. Under this solution the I-15 bridge would be rebuilt so that the whole thing could be one optimized stucture; UDOT would get a new freeway bridge, FrontRunner would get space for a 2nd track, and 900S and the streetcar/Trax line would get an underpass. Road over trains over roads and trains combined. It would be an awesome place to take a picture.

Neat video, Steven. I think I'll repost it on the Autonomous Cars thread in Transportation. And, Liberty Wellsian, I am not so worried about autonomous cars causing another urban-planning disaster like in the 50's, because this time the whole model of ownership will be so different. (Why would you want to own a car if an autonomous taxi service is cheaper, just as convenient, and offers you all the newest updated features - meanwhile your own car sits idle 95%+ of the day, doesn't update, and costs money to licence, register, insure, park, and maintain, etc). With the full cost of transportation broken out and exposed for what it is, I suspect people will be much less willing to live the illusion of 'independence' in the suburbs. They will realize they are completely dependent on their transportation providers, even more so than the people who live in more urban areas. Like how my suburban coworkers are jealous that I get more options for internet in Salt Lake City than they do. For these reasons and more, Autonomous Cars will probably change society more, and do so even faster than what this video says.

For example, these last few maps of proposed TRAX lines have been drawn with colored lines linking stations. If TRAX cars become autonomous just like cars do, each car in a TRAX train could independently go to different destination. The maps would then be drawn with colored destinations (stations) and uncolored lines connecting them, because the TRAX cars would not navigate by 'line' but by destination. There could be all kinds of destinations downtown, all kinds of branch lines (such as to 9th and 9th) and amazing frequencies all day long. And then imagine the density allowed by such a transit system! So no, I am not scared of another suburban disaster.

[RC14]

^
To your point, I have heard that Lyft is investing allot of money in autonomous cars. I believe Lyft and Uber will run autonomously long before most people own autonomous cars. In fact, as you said, they will probably make owning a car at all unnecessary.
I would kind of like to see a system where people could still own their own cars but set them to work for Uber or Lyft. Just like how those companies work now except with autonomous cars. This would make it so Uber and Lyft would not have to maintain a fleet and the owners of the vehicles could make passive income off of the service.

[StevenF]

Originally Posted by RC14

^
To your point, I have heard that Lyft is investing allot of money in autonomous cars. I believe Lyft and Uber will run autonomously long before most people own autonomous cars. In fact, as you said, they will probably make owning a car at all unnecessary.
I would kind of like to see a system where people could still own their own cars but set them to work for Uber or Lyft. Just like how those companies work now except with autonomous cars. This would make it so Uber and Lyft would not have to maintain a fleet and the owners of the vehicles could make passive income off of the service.

My understanding is Uber is financing most of their development for autonomous cars themselves and Lyft received 500 million from a car company to develop a system as well. We as a car buying populous will take 20 or so years before fully adopting autonomous vehicles after they are on the roads. It takes about that 20 years for the current stock of cars to be removed from the roads due to accidents or they are no longer serviceable and they get scrapped. Now when it comes to Taxies, that change will happen a lot faster as those cars get replaced like ever 4-5 years.

[Hatman]

SLC to Park City bus ridership up 45% in four years, costs down by 20%

Great news! now:

1) Increase the frequency, with the goal of all day service (at least hourly during off-peak hours).

2) Start setting aside ROW for a FrontRunner line, such as in the median of I-80, and save space for a platform near the Park City Intermodal Center.

3) Set a tentative deal with Stadler for the railcars for FrontRunner East, so that they stay in Utah, and so that the cars will be priced in 2016 dollars (cheap!).

[Hatman]

Solving FrontRunner delays may require expensive double-tracking

Link:http://www.sltrib.com/home/3415054-155/solving-frontrunner-delays-may-require-expensive

"We have a prioritized list of places where, if we add some double track, we can reduce some of those cascading delays," Cardon said. "As funds are available, we want to move forward on some targeted double track."

[...]

He said, "UTA decided from the beginning to eliminate those types of delays by building our own system. Now, short term, we have issues with single track. But long term, we have the ability to double track. When that takes place, we will have a system that can be more reliable than any in the country."

Electrifying the line would also help keep trains on time, because electric trains do not break down nearly so often as diesel-powered ones. Less moving parts, less to go wrong. And as I calculated in an earlier post on this threat, if UTA could get a loan to electrify its track, the savings in fuel, maintenance, and breakdown mitigation would pay for the loan and more, long-term.
Of course, double-tracking should happen before electrifying, just in case the second track causes a re-alignment of the original track (it would be expensive to move the catinary wire as well). But if you are going to double-track, I say electrify it at the same time. Do both jobs concurrently so that there is less construction time, and so that construction costs can be combined, to make the whole thing cheaper.

Just do it, UTA. You're going to have to do it someday, so do it now.

[Future Mayor]

If nothing else at least put in whatever conduit and below track crossing, power pole bases, etc. that will be necessary to eventually electrify it. This could eliminate delays on the train when they do decide to electrify it.

[Makid]

I think the cost of adding in the items for electrification is maybe an additional 10% - 20% to the double tracking costs.

I think the estimated double tracking cost for the whole line is about $600 Million since UTA owns about 90% of the land needed.

Going to $700 Million would be easily understandable for adding double tracking and electrification (minus the engines/cars) this would be great. UTA would then be able to start buying electric vehicles and selling off the diesel ones.

Perhaps this could all be rolled up into a single project with local funds (double track) and an FRA loan for electrification) per Hatman's suggestion.

The track is also rated for 110, which could be used if UTA can get the 5 mile segment that UP owns under it's control (with electrification).

I think this would increase ridership fairly well.

On the Frontrunner East option, I think we should also have 1 to the West. A stop in Magna, Tooele/Grantsville and then Wendover.

The Casino's could chip in some funds and UTA could charge $10.00 per person to go past Tooele/Grantsville. Total would be $15.00 each way but I think ridership would be good enough to justify the line if the line can travel at 110mph at least west of Tooele. It would be faster than driving for sure and more convenient for people.

[Future Mayor]

The current Front Runner locomotives have electric engines. The diesel motor within the locomotive is actually what creates the electricity to power the electric engines. I believe that existing locomotives we have can simply remove the diesel component to be switched to fully electric. So that will actually eliminate the need to purchase new locomotives.

[Liberty Wellsian]

I imagine ridership is depressed at the end of the line by the number of stops. It seems to me that Frontrunner should have a daily express From Provo, stop in Orem then direct to SLC blowing by stations in between. Another one back in the evening. If the Train was traveling at 110 it becomes even more appealing.

[Hatman]

FrontRunner's locos could certainly be converted to electric-only locomotives. Just replace the diesel engine with a bunch of inverters and capacitors and stuff. It would look pretty funny to see an MP36 loco with a pantograph on top! However, the issue is not making the locomotive move, but making it run reliably and efficiently, and for that it is best to have a machine designed from the beginning for that purpose, rather than to modify an existing one. For example, the traction motors (the electric component of the current diesel-electric locos) are designed for 3,600 horsepower. Brand-new electric locomotives can deliver at least twice that, just because there is that much power usually available in the catenary wire. The higher horsepower helps them accelerate (and brake) faster. Then there's the issue of warranties, insurance, and whatever, and it becomes unlikely that modifying existing locos would be more economical than selling them to a different transit agency for a good price (UTA already sold 3 of it's excess FrontRunner locos to Minnesota and Boston), and buy new ones.

As for Wendover, if I ever go there I would like to go by train. But I don't think a FrontRunner line is the best way to get there. It's over 100 miles between Tooele and Wendover. It would be better to have a 'Wendover Fun Train' in the spirit of the Reno Fun Train, which is arranged for gamblers to go out for a good time. Imagine catching the the excursion train around dinner time - maybe have dinner onboard in the dining car - cross over the Salt Flats at sunset (it will take a train at least 2 hours to get there at conventional speeds, probably more since that is a VERY busy Union Pacific freight route), arrive in Wendover just at dark, Party in Wendover for a few hours, make your way back to the train, and sleep it off on your way back to SLC.
I don't know how large the market for that sort of thing is here, but it could work.

FrontRunner West is a good idea. Include a stop at the airport (or one that links to it) along the way to Tooele, and you could have one seamless link between the airport, SLC, and Park City.