Salt Lake Transit News Thread

[Hatman]

If some of you have nothing to do on October 4th and need a free lunch, here's a fun seminar to listen to:

THE HIDDEN COST OF FREE PARKING

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/the-hidden-costs-of-free-parking-lunch-seminar-tickets-47119672208

[Makid]

Commission focuses in on Point of the Mountain traffic as it plans for 2050
https://www.ksl.com/article/46393120/com...he-mountain-traffic-as-it-plans-for-2050

SALT LAKE CITY — Those advising the future of the Point of the Mountain signaled that transportation remains the key issue residents want to be addressed. But as the project continues through a funding stage, those in charge of the project are still trying to figure out what the final plan will be.

Multiple groups, including members from Envision Utah, Wasatch Front Regional Council and the Utah Transit Authority testified in front of the Point of the Mountain Development Commission at the Utah State Capitol Tuesday about various planned transportation projects for the southern Salt Lake County and northern Utah County over the upcoming decades during a meeting.

Ari Bruening, president and chief operating officer for Envision Utah, reminded the committee of the outcome of a study of the looming project released earlier this year. It found residents believed transportation was the most important issue ahead of an educated workforce, amenities and affordability.

The image in the linked story is too large to link here and I didn't have time to host it elsewhere.

But they have been looking at a mixture of D and E.

Laura Hanson, UTA director of planning, said UTA is on the verge of ending a two-year study into the future of FrontRunner services. Under the preferred scenario, UTA would switch from diesel to electric trains, have free fares, add in double-track railway to increase the amount of trains and increase speeds up to 90 mph to make the commute shorter.

Without these changes, Hanson said UTA officials project a daily FrontRunner ridership in 2050 to be 28,000 people; with the changes, the projected ridership increases to 107,000, she said.

However, that comes at an estimated $3 billion cost — though Hanson said some of the cost could be cut with federal grants.

Something about the numbers seem a bit low for 2050. FrontRunner is around 18,000 currently. Estimates are nearly the same for double tracking and free fares doubling the current ridership. No estimate has been done regarding electrification of the line nor of speeds greater than 79mph.

Just running with the doubling and doubling of current numbers, we would have 36,000 from Double Tracking leading to 15 minute service and then 72,000 from Free Fares if everything was done today.

Electrification for faster starts and stops meaning faster travel times would probably get ridership up to 75,000. 90MPH max speeds between stations meaning even faster travel might get us to between 80,000 and 85,000 riders today, as those speeds would easily compete against I-15 traffic.

I know my numbers above are extrapolations on the estimates that UTA and the WFRC have gotten from previous studies but for all accounts, UTA estimates have been low in all cases excluding the S-Line. That estimate was flawed due to the recession happening after the study was completed. The UTA estimates are one reason why they are able to get as much Federal Funding as they do, because they are realistic in their estimates for both costs and ridership levels.

Because of their previous estimates being at or lower than actual ridership levels, I find it odd that after extrapolating the numbers that UTA is only estimating an increase of between 22,000 to 27,000 riders in say 30 years for FrontRunner. With the population growth rate, FrontRunner ridership increasing at nearly 4% annually, I just don't see it.

Even with Trax extending into Utah County, I can't see that many people shifting to cause that huge of a drop.

One final note: The numbers I used are based on FrontRunner length as of today and does not counting any extensions to Brigham City and Payson or beyond even though they may be in the 2050 plan.

[Hatman]

the projected ridership increases to 107,000

Excuse me, I think I just fell out of my chair. Maybe I need to put my glasses on. I couldn't possibly have read that right...

the projected ridership increases to 107,000

I honestly cannot believe that this is a real planning document that will guide future decisions. This is just too good to be true. The only thing they left out is frequency, though I think I could do the math and figure that out...

(107,000 is just short of 6 multiples of 18,000, so assuming that the electric trains hold just as much capacity as the current trains, we could be looking at six times as many trains per hour - meaning a train every 5 minutes during peak times. That's very acceptable. )

As for people who will say that it won't ever happen because it costs $3B, remember that all new transit projects are now under UDOT funding and there is precedent for UDOT spending that much on expansion projects in a single stroke. For example:

Completion of Record $3 Billion, 3-Year UDOT Program
http://utahcdmag.com/2013/03/completion-of-record-3-billion-3-year-udot-program/

Other freeway projects have cost much more. Like the I-15 core project, which cost $1.6 billion and reconstructed like... 20 miles of freeway? That's a pretty high cost-per-mile. UDOT will get a lot more value in spending twice that much to go four times as far (FrontRunner is currently 80-ish miles long).

I think this has a real shot at happening. Perhaps not immediately, but soon. This is very exciting stuff!

[Hatman]

I was able to get one of the pictures to show on this site. Here are the funding levels and results that Makid was referencing.

[Makid]

Hatman, thank you for hosting the image.

There are a few things that will help get the Double Tracking and Electrifying projects underway sooner rather than later and the 107,000 ridership estimate is easily the icing that would push State funding to the forefront.

1st is the current capacity issues. Testing has been happening with adding an additional passenger car but not all stations are long enough to support it meaning that at some stations, passengers would need to be prepared to exit through another car.

2nd is the rising construction costs over time. The $3 Billion estimate is most likely based on 2018 costs and not 2025 or later meaning the longer we wait, the more it will cost.

3rd is relative transit to highway capacity costs. As Hatman stated, it cost $1.6 Billion for 20 miles of I-15 reconstruction in Utah County. This would be roughly $3 Billion for over 90 miles of rail to completely double track FrontRunner, upgraded stations, complete electrification of the line, and entirely new train sets capable of 90+ MPH.

4th is related to all 3. It is the best bang for the overall transportation dollar. Using this site to get a general idea of capacity of highway traffic per hour (I have always used a higher count to be generous), they use 1,900 per hour per lane and I have heard 2,200 is where congestion starts. The extra ridership is the equivalent of gaining nearly 2 lanes in each direction of I-15 for 24 hours at peak capacity.

Think what the costs would be to add 4 lanes to I-15 (2 in each direction) the same length as FrontRunner to be Double Tracked.

I think in the case of I-15, after the Lehi section is completed in Utah County, it will have reached peak capacity for expansion and FrontRunner will be next and I think some funding will start very soon.

[Liberty Wellsian]

So I'm starting to think that SLC is undersaturated with scooters. People are riding these things everywhere not just downtown. Is this the last mile solution we have been looking for?

[Always Sunny in SLC]

Originally Posted by Liberty Wellsian

So I'm starting to think that SLC is undersaturated with scooters. People are riding these things everywhere not just downtown. Is this the last mile solution we have been looking for?

They are undersaturated or misallocated because there are many times where I can't use them because there are simply none to be found. The problem is if you were to double or triple the amount on the roads I think you will see a backlash unless people use them more responsibly. They need to be on the road not on the sidewalk.

As far as the last mile solution, I think this is very exciting for urban areas, but less urban areas and suburban areas this is not nearly as appealing. I think the last mile solution will be multi modal. Urban areas: scooters, bikes (electric too), skateboards, Uber, autonomous vehicles, etc. and in suburban areas: mostly autonomous vehicles when they arrive.

[Hatman]

I've noticed the scooters all over the valley as well. I haven't ridden one myself (I prefer my bike) but I think they are totally awesome and a very welcome addition to the city. I've seen more kids and college students out and about through the town since the scooters have available than ever before. Even though they're not my preferred mode of transport, last-mile or otherwise, clearly they are a preferred mode for many people and they are adding a wonderful vibrancy and walkability to the valley. I hope they stick around.

Here's an update on the S-Line siding extension project. While a small and somewhat boring project, it still is exciting to see new rail construction in the valley after 5 years of nothing.
Here is the 300 East crossing yesterday morning, freshly reopened with a new second track:


And here it is under construction Friday afternoon:

[Hatman]

Sounds like the UVX route is doing well:

UTA finds a way to fill buses — offer free fare and frequent service
https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2018/09/25/uta-finds-way-fill-buses/

The service started Aug. 13, but many of its stations are still under construction. Also, eventually half of its 10.5-mile route will have exclusive traffic lanes for buses — not shared with other vehicles. Most of those are also still being completed. And the route has yet to use priority control at traffic signals to speed it along.

Even with all that, by the time Brigham Young University and Utah Valley University started fall classes, UVX had a daily average ridership of 9,213 trips, according to data obtained by The Salt Lake Tribune through an open-records request.

That is five time higher than the average 1,863 daily trips carried during the past year in the same area together by bus routes 830 and 838.

Mary De La Mare-Schaefer, regional manager for UTA, said construction on the route should be finished by the end of the year. She said UTA began service early as BYU and UVU were starting classes because “to get students in the habit of using transit, you have to start when they start.”

Who would have thought it? Free and frequent buses actually do get used. I think that by opening the BRT route before the BRT sections of it were complete, UTA has proven to themselves that with no fares, higher frequency, and perhaps a bit of descent branding people will ride the bus at rates many multiples of what is currently occurring.
I hope we don't need to wait until 200 miles of BRT are built in order to spread these benefits system-wide. This single 10-mile route has taken a decade and a half of planning and construction, so if they really do want to build 200 miles of bus-exclusive lanes then it will take then roughly until 2318 to finish that project. The 'bus-plus' of simply applying the principles of good transit (free, frequent, obvious stations with the obvious convenience features, etc) ought to become UTA's top priority now (besides the $3 billion FrontRunner project, of course!).

[Makid]

Originally Posted by Hatman

Sounds like the UVX route is doing well:

UTA finds a way to fill buses — offer free fare and frequent service
https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2018/09/25/uta-finds-way-fill-buses/



Who would have thought it? Free and frequent buses actually do get used. I think that by opening the BRT route before the BRT sections of it were complete, UTA has proven to themselves that with no fares, higher frequency, and perhaps a bit of descent branding people will ride the bus at rates many multiples of what is currently occurring.
I hope we don't need to wait until 200 miles of BRT are built in order to spread these benefits system-wide. This single 10-mile route has taken a decade and a half of planning and construction, so if they really do want to build 200 miles of bus-exclusive lanes then it will take then roughly until 2318 to finish that project. The 'bus-plus' of simply applying the principles of good transit (free, frequent, obvious stations with the obvious convenience features, etc) ought to become UTA's top priority now (besides the $3 billion FrontRunner project, of course!).

I do hope that we see progress this next Legislative Session for funds to possibly go towards double tracking and electrifying FrontRunner. I would also expect that some funds may also go to an extension of the Trax Blue Line into Utah County, this may come with an automatic sales tax increase or 2 for Utah County though.

In the mean time to help boost ridership, I would think it might be good for UTA to use some of their funds from the 40/40/20 split starting in July of next year to begin further exploration and planning for Free Fares in SL County.

They are currently buying additional CNG and Electric buses to replace the existing Diesel fleet as well as for the Salt Lake City Transit Master Plan that will begin starting in August of next year. They are also hiring additional drivers for these new routes and backups for existing routes.

For routes to expand the Free Fares on, how about the following:

217 - Redwood Road
35M - Max BRT (15 minute frequency)
209 - 9th East (15 minute frequency)
54 - 5400 South (15 minute frequency)
S-Line - Soon to be at 15 minute frequency

I think these routes would be great to do testing on for Free Fares in SL County. There should already be baseline ridership numbers for these routes. The only route that isn't currently at or soon to be at a 15 minute frequency is 217 - Redwood Road.

3500 South does need to have the BRT lanes redone to allow for parallel lanes. The stations can be on opposite sides of the intersections since they can't widen the road to allow for center stations. Adding a 2nd full dedicated lane as opposed to the current partial second lane that is there in places now would allow for increased frequencies. The increased frequencies with the fare removed should be enough for UDoT to agree to reduce the lanes from 3 to 2 for each direction between 40th West and I-215.

I think the additional riders on the routes would push for the same Free Fare treatment on additional routes. UTA could make the case at that point that it isn't able to expand the Free Fare routes without additional funds which could come from a portion of the City section of the 40/40/20 Sales Tax for within SL, Weber, and Davis Counties.

I don't think UTA should go Fare Free though until FrontRunner is both double tracked and electrified only because it is near max capacity currently and while adding additional cars could help, many stations can't handle the longer trains and that would confuse many riders without additional staff on each train to direct people between the cars when needed.

I think Trax might become very crowded at times requiring higher frequencies in the morning and evening peak times with Free Fares. With an upgraded FrontRunner, some could swap over from Trax to FrontRunner at the Murray Station if crowding is heavy.

Numbers time...

Just doubling the existing average daily ridership for Trax and Bus would put both around 130K+ daily. With a fully upgraded FrontRunner UTA could be well over 200K in daily ridership in just Trax and FrontRunner and would be close to 340K in average daily ridership between Bus, Trax and FrontRunner.

Add in the other projects in the coming years - Trax extensions, BRT lines and more, plus the growth rate and hopefully we start to see more projects happen that have less required parking and more walkable neighborhoods and TODs happen with all the improved transit options.

[Always Sunny in SLC]

What about UTA putting screens at the BRT stops and future "bus +" bus stops that track the system live like the U. does? I like how it moves in real time to know when a bus is close to approaching so you could time your walk and not be standing there waiting.

[Hatman]

That's a neat idea. It was confirmed to me that the black monolithic structures on the UVX station platforms are screens, so perhaps that's coming sooner than we think. Initially it will probably be just the text of when the next bus is arriving, but at least they have the hardware in place already so that the software can be updated later.

[Always Sunny in SLC]

It might be more useful to have into integrated into their website and their app so people can use it from their smartphone.

[tygr]

UVX has some kinks to work out with their bus spacing.

I jumped on at the north end of BYU's campus and went down to JDawgs on the south end for lunch. We waited quite awhile for our bus while two others went the other direction. Then, just a minute or two after I got off at my stop, another bus going the same direction came by. While eating, I saw one pull up to the South Campus station, load/unload and pull away. Not 15 seconds later, another bus came by and did the same thing, except no one was there to pickup.

Their frequency might be 6 minutes, but that seems to be an average, not equal spacing.

This is not the first time I've seen this, several weeks ago I stood at the same North Campus station and waited 15 minutes for buses that should have been every 6 minutes and saw four buses head the other direction.

[bob rulz]

Originally Posted by Makid

The only route that isn't currently at or soon to be at a 15 minute frequency is 217 - Redwood Road.

217 IS a 15-minute route.

[Makid]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

217 IS a 15-minute route.

When I checked online, it looked like it was only a 30 minute route. I am happy that it is 15 minutes.

Having all of the routes be 15 minutes would be ideal as it would put them all on equal levels for frequency so they can all show how the Free Fares impact ridership on the various routes.

[Always Sunny in SLC]

I would love between federal, state and local monies they would experiment with citywide free fare. I would make SLC proper free for at least 3 years and see what happens.

[Hatman]

Originally Posted by tygr

UVX has some kinks to work out with their bus spacing.

[...]

Their frequency might be 6 minutes, but that seems to be an average, not equal spacing.

This is not the first time I've seen this, several weeks ago I stood at the same North Campus station and waited 15 minutes for buses that should have been every 6 minutes and saw four buses head the other direction.

I don't mean to sound like a broken record, but this 'bus bunching' issue, at least on the UVX route, has the hardware in place to solve this issue. This is where the traffic signal priority will come into play. Individual traffic lights will be able to communicate with the buses and will be aware if the bus is 'on time' or if it is 'late'. For the late buses, that bus will be given priority, meaning the traffic light will stay green long enough for the late bus to go through without stopping.

This system is physically built into every new traffic light along the route, but it won't be turned on until sometime early next year. Which is OK, since the buses aren't even using their bus-only lanes yet and that will also go a long way towards achieving a more equal spacing.

There is already an example of this working. A few of the traffic lights on Redwood Road are also equipped with the proper 'bus-to-infrastructure' radio transponders, and also give the late buses a little help in catching up to their schedule. Rumors have it that this technology is going to be mandatory for all new UDOT signals and UTA buses, but don't quote me on that.

[Makid]

Originally Posted by Hatman

I don't mean to sound like a broken record, but this 'bus bunching' issue, at least on the UVX route, has the hardware in place to solve this issue. This is where the traffic signal priority will come into play. Individual traffic lights will be able to communicate with the buses and will be aware if the bus is 'on time' or if it is 'late'. For the late buses, that bus will be given priority, meaning the traffic light will stay green long enough for the late bus to go through without stopping.

This system is physically built into every new traffic light along the route, but it won't be turned on until sometime early next year. Which is OK, since the buses aren't even using their bus-only lanes yet and that will also go a long way towards achieving a more equal spacing.

There is already an example of this working. A few of the traffic lights on Redwood Road are also equipped with the proper 'bus-to-infrastructure' radio transponders, and also give the late buses a little help in catching up to their schedule. Rumors have it that this technology is going to be mandatory for all new UDOT signals and UTA buses, but don't quote me on that.

For the bolded portion above, even though I did quote you here, I have heard this from other sources as well.

The equipment is in place on the 35M route, a few lights on Redwood Road, a few on 5400 South and some on 9th East as well for buses. It is my understanding that it is in place for all current center running Trax Lines and will be included when the S-Line runs in traffic at intersections.

UTA and UDoT are working to upgrade all current 15 minute frequency bus routes to include the technology. Hopefully UTA is also to work with SLC on the upgrades for the new 15 minute frequency bus routes there as well.

[Liberty Wellsian]

Originally Posted by Always Sunny in SLC

I would love between federal, state and local monies they would experiment with citywide free fare. I would make SLC proper free for at least 3 years and see what happens.

It would need to be Salt Lake county.

I live and work in SLC. My commute is under 5 mins by car. Free transit still can't compete. Now if I had to get on the freeway everyday then yeah but under your scenario that 200K people coming into SLC everyday(the ones most likely to take advantage) will still have to pay.

Car
Bike
Uber
Transit

That's my travel hierarchy within SLC proper and it has little to do with money.