Salt Lake Transit News Thread

[StevenF]

Originally Posted by Hatman

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.

If this ever happened and priced well, Wendover would explode over night.

[scottharding]

I would be on that train a few times a year.

[Hatman]

It's funny how many people think that there is already a train that goes to Wendover. When I worked with UTA, passengers would routinely ask which train goes there, and it became something of a running joke among the UTA employees. Once, during the Christmas rush at Salt Lake Central, a large family group emptied off of TRAX and ran across the plaza and into the waiting FrontRunner. The matriarch was in the back, yelling to all the kids and their kids to wait and find out where the train was going, but they got on anyway. Before she got on the train after them, she asked the UTA train host standing at the door where the train was going. Without skipping a beat, he replied 'Wendover,' (I guess because playing jokes on people is part of the jolly Christmas spirit?) and she totally flipped out. All I remember after that was seeing her family members, who obviously knew what they were doing, pulling her onto the train as she was screaming at them to get off and while the apologetic train host was trying to get a word in above her shouting that he had only been joking. Then the doors closed, and then it was quiet as the train pulled away.
Good memories.

[ThePusherMan]

I'd take a drunk train to Wendover and back probably more often than I would care to admit.

[i-215]

Never could get the whole Wendover thing.

2.5 hours to Wendover
5.0 hours to Las Vegas

I'll take Vegas, please. Of course, I'm on the south end of the Wasatch Front so that flips the travel times 1 hour in favor of Vegas.

[ThePusherMan]

Originally Posted by i-215

Never could get the whole Wendover thing.

2.5 hours to Wendover
5.0 hours to Las Vegas

I'll take Vegas, please. Of course, I'm on the south end of the Wasatch Front so that flips the travel times 1 hour in favor of Vegas.

Yeah Wendover is more like 1.5 from downtown. The other huuuuuuge appeal vs. Vegas is that it is a lot cheaper. Games, drinks, hotels. I've had a lot of fun in Dover for 100 bucks. Can't say the same for Vegas.

[joscar]

Has anyone posted renderings of UTA's new Depot District Transit Center yet? Maintenance Design Group has some on their website: http://maintenancedesigngroup.com/projects/utah-transit-authority-depot-district-transit-center/

The media recently covered the opening of UTA's new natural gas fueling facility, which was built next to the railroad tracks at about 700 West and 400 South. This got me looking into UTA's plans for the area. This new fueling station is the first part of the "transit center" which will replace UTA's current downtown bus operations center.

Much of the historic Denver & Rio Grande shop/freight area just to the west of the tracks at Salt Lake Central will be torn down for this new center. But it looks like the largest building will be rehabilitated and used as the new bus maintenance building. I haven't heard any public announcements about when (and if) construction will start. Though UTA put out a bid last year for demolition at what is think is the site.

[Orlando]

Originally Posted by joscar

Has anyone posted renderings of UTA's new Depot District Transit Center yet? Maintenance Design Group has some on their website: http://maintenancedesigngroup.com/projects/utah-transit-authority-depot-district-transit-center/

The media recently covered the opening of UTA's new natural gas fueling facility, which was built next to the railroad tracks at about 700 West and 400 South. This got me looking into UTA's plans for the area. This new fueling station is the first part of the "transit center" which will replace UTA's current downtown bus operations center.

Much of the historic Denver & Rio Grande shop/freight area just to the west of the tracks at Salt Lake Central will be torn down for this new center. But it looks like the largest building will be rehabilitated and used as the new bus maintenance building. I haven't heard any public announcements about when (and if) construction will start. Though UTA put out a bid last year for demolition at what is think is the site.

Very cool! Thanks for posting!

[s.p.hansen]

Originally Posted by joscar

Has anyone posted renderings of UTA's new Depot District Transit Center yet? Maintenance Design Group has some on their website: http://maintenancedesigngroup.com/projects/utah-transit-authority-depot-district-transit-center/

The media recently covered the opening of UTA's new natural gas fueling facility, which was built next to the railroad tracks at about 700 West and 400 South. This got me looking into UTA's plans for the area. This new fueling station is the first part of the "transit center" which will replace UTA's current downtown bus operations center.

Much of the historic Denver & Rio Grande shop/freight area just to the west of the tracks at Salt Lake Central will be torn down for this new center. But it looks like the largest building will be rehabilitated and used as the new bus maintenance building. I haven't heard any public announcements about when (and if) construction will start. Though UTA put out a bid last year for demolition at what is think is the site.

This is so cool; I love that old building!

[jubguy3]

Ok I am so done with this forum tbh. A train to wendover? That's like a multi billiondollar project to take a train to a city that has like 5800 residents. Building a diesel train line up to park city could easily reach 20 billion dollars not to mention the fact it would be a fucking nightmare

The wendover party bus is what you guys are trying to think of, it's the bus that takes a bunch of people to wendover and then back the next day... Exactly once. And it's designed to do exactly what it's supposed to - a place where there is a market for a 1.5 billion dollar public transportation commuter train to take people to a city with a population of 5800 that is a sad, depressing version of Las Vegas is a place that shouldn't exist.

Can we talk about actually reasonable stuff like Mountain Accord or the downtown streetcar?

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by jubguy3

Ok I am so done with this forum tbh. A train to wendover? That's like a multi billiondollar project to take a train to a city that has like 5800 residents. Building a diesel train line up to park city could easily reach 20 billion dollars not to mention the fact it would be a fucking nightmare

Why would a train to PC be a nightmare? Please expound on that.

[Makid]

A Frontrunner train to Park City, depending on the route would vary from approximately $1.5 Billion to $5 Billion.

The Mountain Accord with Trax going up LCC and into Park City is estimated to cost between $3.5 Billion and $5 Billion. This gap depends on widening the tunnels/leaving as single track and keeping Guardmans pass open year round.

I think Frontrunner up I-80 in an elevated level would work perfect for a connection to Park City. The largest part of the construction would be the spur from the current N/S line to the PC line around 2100 South.

From there it would be elevated above I-80 all the way to Kimball Junction. That is probably where the line should end as that would be a good terminal and PC buses could transport people to and from the terminal there. If you want to take a train straight into PC, you would take Trax.

With Frontrunner elevated, the impacts to traffic would be minimal for the length of the route.

The stations could be Central Station (SLC), Foothill (Elevated Station), and Kimball Junction.

The line would be double tracked the entire way.

If we wanted to go all out, we would spend an additional $500M to connect Frontrunner to the Airport.

Now, a Wendover line is more fantasy than reality but it is a possibility in the next 50 years.

With the population more than doubling in 30 years, traffic heading both East and West along western I-80 will begin to be a problem, especially with increased trucking on the highway.

So while it doesn't really work now except as a fun train, which should be partially paid for by the casinos.

Even Tooele and Grantsville only get about 1500 riders a day for UTA to SLC. That would need to triple before it may start to sound good for a line there.

This is why a line to Wendover with a stop in Tooele/Granstville makes a bit more sense. For doubling the cost, ridership would be 3 to 4 times higher. Trains passed the Tooele would run every 2 to 4 hours (Weekend/Weekday). This would keep the costs down.

All of this talk about both Park City and Wendover Frontrunner are future fantasy at this point. Park City maybe in the next 15 years, Wendover in the next 30-50 years (without HSR).

So it will happen but after a lot more rail happens in the SL Valley.

[Hatman]

I'm confused by why a rail line up Parley's Canyon on I-80 would need to be elevated. That would add billions of dollars to the cost. A double-track alignment doesn't need more than 25 feet in width. That's just two freeway lanes (12 feet wide each). Adding a two-track rail line to the center of I-80 theoretically shouldn't be more technically complicated than widening the freeway by one lane in each direction.

*Warning: The Following Paragraph Contains Speculative Discussion of Autonomous Cars and their Impacts on Future Infrastructure Needs*
I'm convinced that once the trend towards autonomous vehicles is established that road widening projects will be universally halted, because autonomous cars can use much thinner lanes than human-driven cars do. (Why do lanes need to be 12 feet wide when the car itself is usually just over 6' wide?) The trend will be in road thinning, where the excess width can be put to better uses, such as bike lanes, transit, park strips, or nature restoration. In Parley's Canyon and along the I-80 corridor, this excess width can simply be re purposed to rail down the median. Not a problem.

[Liberty Wellsian]

I think Salt Lake Central should be abandoned as a transit station in favor of the Rio Grande. Frontrunner/Amtrack on 500 West, Trax on Rio Grande St, Bus and Greyhound to the North. Why hasn't this happened?

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by Hatman

I'm confused by why a rail line up Parley's Canyon on I-80 would need to be elevated. That would add billions of dollars to the cost....

Go read his post again. You misread it.

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by Liberty Wellsian

I think Salt Lake Central should be abandoned as a transit station in favor of the Rio Grande. Frontrunner/Amtrack on 500 West, Trax on Rio Grande St, Bus and Greyhound to the North. Why hasn't this happened?

I agree. That would have been a much better choice.

[i-215]

Originally Posted by jubguy3

Ok I am so done with this forum tbh. A train to wendover?

Then you're not gonna like my "I-415" project that stretched from Nephi to Riverdale, then.

[Hatman]

Originally Posted by Stenar

Go read his post again. You misread it.

So I did.

But the point remains, no matter where the rail line would share a ROW/alignment with I-215, it would make more sense simply to treat the tracks as lanes in the center, rather than an entirely new structure.

Originally Posted by Liberty Wellsian

I think Salt Lake Central should be abandoned as a transit station in favor of the Rio Grande. Frontrunner/Amtrack on 500 West, Trax on Rio Grande St, Bus and Greyhound to the North. Why hasn't this happened?

Oh what could have been. The reason this stopped happening (Amtrak called at that station until 1999, the same year TRAX opened and only 9 years before FrontRunner) was because of the Olympics and the Gateway.

A fun experiment is to use Google Earth to look back at the layout of downtown transportation infrastructure in 1997. The tracks are still in place to serve both the Rio Grande station (a good location for the intermodal hub) and the Union Pacific depot (the best location). You can see the railroad tracks running down the middle of the streets on 400 West (for the UP depot) and 500 West (Rio Grande). You can also see how the freeway exits at 500 and 600 South do not immediately tie-in with traffic at 500 West like they currently do, but continue on elevated viaducts over the streets for two additional blocks, finally dropping to grade level at 300 West. This is done in order to go over the railroad tracks at 4th and 5th west, because nothing would be worse than to have the main freeway entrance to your downtown blocked by a slow moving or stopped train.



People hated the viaducts, as they should. Elevated freeway viaducts in downtown are just bad for urban growth. But to get rid of them, the train tracks they were built to cross over also had to go. So when the time came to rebuild the freeway in preparation for the Olympics, both the tracks and the viaducts were removed. With the old rail yards gone, the land they had sat on became valuable continuous space. In the real estate speculation that led up to the Olympics, the Gateway was given a very rushed approval and opened in 2001, without much thought to the potential of the site on future rail infrastructure. That pretty well closed off any thought of ever using either depot for trains ever again, because there would be no feasible way to run railroad tracks through the Gateway 'district', full of pedestrians and residents.

I'm all in favor of hosting the Olympics again, but it's worth noting that not all the effects of the Olympics were good. Rather than allowing urban growth to happen 'naturally' and at a pace where cohesive transportation plans could be formed in order to protect ROW and old stations, the impending Olympics rushed the process of urban development to the point where future planning and rail infrastructure were forced out of the way.

Mind you, they weren't forced very far. the Intermodal Center is only a block farther west than the Rio Grande depot, and once urban development has grown up around it, the new Intermodal Hub won't seem so isolated. UTA has plans for a nice building there to house waiting passengers for FrontRunner, Trax, and Amtrak, including office space and retail. Things will work out in the end, but certainly won't be as ideal as they could have been.

There are many things to blame: Why did SLC leaders in the 1870's - 1890's insist on having railroad tracks run down the streets instead of in their own ROW? Why were there two depots run by private companies instead of one Union Depot shared by both companies and held at least in part by the city, as other large cities of the day did? (If the city had had more say in the depots, Union Pacific would not have been able to sell their building to the Gateway Developers). Why did leaders allow for such rushed planning and development before the Olympics if it was already in a [nebulous] master plan for commuter rail to be constructed less than a decade later?
It's important to discuss these questions so that bad choices are not repeated in the future.

[Liberty Wellsian]

Originally Posted by Hatman

So I did.

But the point remains, no matter where the rail line would share a ROW/alignment with I-215, it would make more sense simply to treat the tracks as lanes in the center, rather than an entirely new structure.



Oh what could have been. The reason this stopped happening (Amtrak called at that station until 1999, the same year TRAX opened and only 9 years before FrontRunner) was because of the Olympics and the Gateway.

A fun experiment is to use Google Earth to look back at the layout of downtown transportation infrastructure in 1997. The tracks are still in place to serve both the Rio Grande station (a good location for the intermodal hub) and the Union Pacific depot (the best location). You can see the railroad tracks running down the middle of the streets on 400 West (for the UP depot) and 500 West (Rio Grande). You can also see how the freeway exits at 500 and 600 South do not immediately tie-in with traffic at 500 West like they currently do, but continue on elevated viaducts over the streets for two additional blocks, finally dropping to grade level at 300 West. This is done in order to go over the railroad tracks at 4th and 5th west, because nothing would be worse than to have the main freeway entrance to your downtown blocked by a slow moving or stopped train.



People hated the viaducts, as they should. Elevated freeway viaducts in downtown are just bad for urban growth. But to get rid of them, the train tracks they were built to cross over also had to go. So when the time came to rebuild the freeway in preparation for the Olympics, both the tracks and the viaducts were removed. With the old rail yards gone, the land they had sat on became valuable continuous space. In the real estate speculation that led up to the Olympics, the Gateway was given a very rushed approval and opened in 2001, without much thought to the potential of the site on future rail infrastructure. That pretty well closed off any thought of ever using either depot for trains ever again, because there would be no feasible way to run railroad tracks through the Gateway 'district', full of pedestrians and residents.

I'm all in favor of hosting the Olympics again, but it's worth noting that not all the effects of the Olympics were good. Rather than allowing urban growth to happen 'naturally' and at a pace where cohesive transportation plans could be formed in order to protect ROW and old stations, the impending Olympics rushed the process of urban development to the point where future planning and rail infrastructure were forced out of the way.

Mind you, they weren't forced very far. the Intermodal Center is only a block farther west than the Rio Grande depot, and once urban development has grown up around it, the new Intermodal Hub won't seem so isolated. UTA has plans for a nice building there to house waiting passengers for FrontRunner, Trax, and Amtrak, including office space and retail. Things will work out in the end, but certainly won't be as ideal as they could have been.

There are many things to blame: Why did SLC leaders in the 1870's - 1890's insist on having railroad tracks run down the streets instead of in their own ROW? Why were there two depots run by private companies instead of one Union Depot shared by both companies and held at least in part by the city, as other large cities of the day did? (If the city had had more say in the depots, Union Pacific would not have been able to sell their building to the Gateway Developers). Why did leaders allow for such rushed planning and development before the Olympics if it was already in a [nebulous] master plan for commuter rail to be constructed less than a decade later?
It's important to discuss these questions so that bad choices are not repeated in the future.

The Intermodal Hub may not always feel as isolated as it does now but it will always be on the edge of the city with nothing but freeway and freight behind it. Moving the station a block and a half east doesn't sound like a lot but in SLC it kinda is. It could be a hub that is surrounded by urbanism, provides a rich experience, and takes advantage of a historic building that is a proper gateway(pun intended) to our city. Or we could build an easy sterile station on the edge of things. The costs of the ideal may be high but perhaps the costs of the good enough are just as high.

[Comrade]

I miss the viaducts. I thought they were always very cool looking.