Salt Lake Transit News Thread

[Paniolo Man]

Here's some photos from this evening. (6/06)

[i-215]

Forgive my ignorance. What will this project improve?

Did the S-curve have problems? (I never rode that line beyond 7th East).
Thank you for the pictures.

[Hatman]

Originally Posted by Utahn

Hatman, I don't disagree with you at all, and I think the North Carolina route is a fantastic model for Utah to emulate, but it does appear that UTA is already thinking along the lines of Amtrak of using UTA tracks. Statement from head of Utah from Executive Director of UTA from the recent KSL article below. How much compensation would UTA receive as a "host railroad?" Would that compensation be part of UTA's calculus considering funding for the partial doubletrack upgrade is mostly in the bag?





https://www.ksl.com/article/50646604...oise-las-vegas

I can't fault UTA for seeking funding by whatever means possible. The current "double track" project will result in only about 50% of the line actually having 2 tracks, and the arrangement of those tracks would be extremely specific to UTA operations. More money would need to be invested to create actual double track sections (as opposed to the longer sidings approach UTA is forced to take) in order to play host to Amtrak, and that wouldn't be a bad outcome for UTA.

Amtrak trains would probably still have to slow down for every UTA station on the line, and UTA would likely have to cancel 1 Frontrunner trip to make room for the Amtrak trip, which would not be ideal.
The one place UTA has a real advantage over the UP tracks is at Ogden, where they have that amazing flyover structure above the freight yards and interlocking. That alone could save Amtrak a massive amount of time, and I would definitely not be opposed to Amtrak sharing that bridge with UTA, especially if it were completed to its intended double track configuration.
It will be an interesting topic to follow, at least.

[Hatman]

Originally Posted by i-215

Forgive my ignorance. What will this project improve?

Did the S-curve have problems? (I never rode that line beyond 7th East).
Thank you for the pictures.

Tracks on grades get worn out more quickly than flat tracks. Tracks on curves get worn out faster than straight tracks. This is just regular replacement of the steel rails, and since they are encased in concrete, the entire track structure needs to be replaced with them.

As cool as the S-curves are for railfans like me, I hope that in the far distant future they can be replaced with a straight line tunnel up to the University, so that the tracks don't need to be completely ripped out every 10 years.

And I agree, thank you for the pictures!

[Paniolo Man]

Not the typical subject matter but these are in Utah, so relevant to an extent.

Green River:




Helper:

[RC14]

Officials want your opinion on the proposed changes to Bangerter Highway

UDOT is looking to make improvements between 4100 South in West Valley City and California Avenue in Salt Lake City, as this section is the last to be converted into a freeway, to reduce congestion in the area

https://www.abc4.com/news/wasatch-fr...erter-highway/

[Paniolo Man]

UDOT has posted an update to the POM study. I poked through the hundreds of pages of materials and pulled out these interesting bits:

The proposed alignment for all modes has been refined and largely consolidated.


LRT costs twice as much as BRT initially, once built operation costs are similar to BRT. Ridership on LRT would be considerably greater. DMU would cost more, function worse, and carry fewer people than LRT.


Operating as an extension of the Blue Line was removed from consideration. A non-revenue connection along the existing ROW from Draper to The Point would eliminate the need for a dedicated maintenance facility, and would be studied if LRT is selected. They also throw some shade at the idea of a second Frontrunner Station in Draper.


Cost and design considerations by mode.


More detailed breakdown of maintenance operations.


All said, this study is taking a massively different direction from UTA's study. I am hopeful that they will select LRT as the alternative in December when they wrap things up. DMU seems to be DOA as a mode here, it costs more and carries fewer people. UDOT has really broken things down way more than UTA did in their study, they even have conceptual plans for all three modes.

UTA's study ranked the capacity of BRT and LRT as being roughly the same, this study shows that it would be dramatically different.

Consider these two selections from UTA's 2021 study:




Their cost findings are radically different compared to UDOT's. I believe that UDOT is leaning towards LRT based on the new findings regarding ridership over the long term and operating cost.

[RC14]

Thank you for taking the time to summarize this.

Why was simply extending the Blue line removed from consideration?

[Paniolo Man]

Originally Posted by RC14

Thank you for taking the time to summarize this.

Why was simply extending the Blue line removed from consideration?

They stated that public opposition and "operational challenges" were why it was removed from the list. The latter probably pertaining to operating such a long LRT line. The Blue Line is already very long for a light rail line, having a long line that serves two distinctly different destinations proves difficult for scheduling and reliability.

[Makid]

Originally Posted by Paniolo Man

They stated that public opposition and "operational challenges" were why it was removed from the list. The latter probably pertaining to operating such a long LRT line. The Blue Line is already very long for a light rail line, having a long line that serves two distinctly different destinations proves difficult for scheduling and reliability.

From what I have been told via UTA insiders, the main reason LRT was dropped from the PoM and they pushed BRT was public push for better bus service. UTA thought that by pushing BRT, they would be utilizing public sentiment that was pushing bus over rail.

This sentiment was pushed in the EIS and this is why UDoT states in their study the public opposition to a Blue line extension.

The issue is that the public at large supports a blue line extension to Lehi. The public at large doesn't really support the PoM redevelopment using public funds.

I do see a couple of things that would be beneficial with LRT selection. First is the new maintenance facility. Second is the connection to the Blue Line, even if not revenue generating (for now).

With a Blue line extension into Utah County, going past Lehi would necessitate another maintenance/layover facility. This appears to be built into the UDoT cost estimate.

Once this approach is built, there would be a public outcry for connecting it to the existing LRT network. This would push the Blue line extension forward to revenue generating.

After the LRT lines are connected, I can see 2 scenarios for future LRT expansion in Utah County. Blue line extension to American Fork (end of current UTA ROW) and a PoM line extension running west to Saratoga Springs/Eagle Mountain.

Both extensions are in the MAG future/unfunded transit plans and could be moved forward with a public vote to increase sales taxes in Utah County equal to Davis/Weber Counties.

[Atlas]

Originally Posted by Makid

The public at large doesn't really support the PoM redevelopment using public funds.

I don't support using public funds to enable a glorified office park, particularly with the current market conditions and outlook.

The Blue Line extension, on the other hand, is long overdue and would be well-used. That, plus a new maintenance facility if it's needed, should be priority over this strange idea of connecting the Draper and Lehi FR stations.

[fidel_cashflo]

Originally Posted by Makid

This sentiment was pushed in the EIS and this is why UDoT states in their study the public opposition to a Blue line extension.

This may be part of it, but I think local Draper NIMBYism deserves a lot more credit for this. They were ferocious in opposition to the Draper Town Center extension for years. And the right of way right after the town center station does rub up against the backyards of some very expensive single family homes.

Overall though, I'm pleased with the results of the study and it does help alleviate some of my skepticism about UDOT taking over transit planning.

[msbutah]

I saw an ad for this in the Daybreak Residents Facebook group, by an employee. Stadler Rail is offering a public open house event on 6/24 you can enroll to attend. They specifically mentioned "VR experience, train walk through, a facility tour, snacks, and possibly a chance to drive a train on the test track" in their post. You can enroll here:
https://www.visitsaltlake.com/event/...6zh9GBNNzUSj_o

[Paniolo Man]

Spotted the crash-damaged S70 being moved today. It is being sent to Siemens for frame repairs.

[Paniolo Man]

[bob rulz]

Insane that UTA studies think BRT and LRT would have similar ridership.

[Wasatch Wasteland]

Deleted

[Transit4Utah]

Very last minute, but UDOT is hosting a public meeting tonight to review the proposed interchanges on bangeter Highway. It would be really beneficial to have multiple people push to maintain an additional 28’ of ROW at the 3500 s interchange to future proof for a future green line TRAX extension west. Working on creating a quick exhibit to help illustrate the point.

See link below to leave your comments:
https://udot.utah.gov/bangerter4100tocalifornia/#/

[i-215]

Good note. Done.

I mentioned how the 2050 WFRC RTP says there will be "15 minute" transit service in phase one.

[Paniolo Man]

Coaster train fleet downsizing after transportation funding fizzles

San Diego Tribune
June 18 2023

I brought this topic up back in February. NCTD in San Diego is selling 5 of their 1995 BiLevel cars to UTA to fill gaps while UTA's fleet is overhauled.

The news here is that NCTD is also looking to offload 2 SC-44 Charger locomotives. UDOT and UTA should take notice, this might be a good opportunity to snag a couple locomotives for a discount for Frontrunner Forward. UDOT claims to need 10 additional Trainsets for the project, UTA already has a locomotive surplus, if they bought these 2 almost new Chargers and 3 new Chargers they should have a sufficient fleet. They could also elect to replace their existing fleet with more charger locomotives.