Salt Lake Transit News Thread - Page 53

scottharding · #**1041** Posted **Dec 29, 2008, 9:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by arkhitektor

UTA TRAX Operator Told To Stop Singing On The Train

This story is a few weeks old, but I was on one of this guy's trains and it was very bizzare and unprofessional. Nobody on the train could figure out what the heck was going on or why there was a man singing over the PA. It makes much more sense now.

I was on this guys train once as well, and it was weird. I thought the guy had accidently left the PA on and was singing to himself!
This is hilarious.

MetroFanatic · #**1042** Posted **Dec 30, 2008, 12:12 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by scottharding

I was on this guys train once as well, and it was weird. I thought the guy had accidently left the PA on and was singing to himself!
This is hilarious.

With my schedule for school I found myself on this guy's train every Tuesday and Thursday. It wasn't much of a problem for me and I was even reading textbooks in prep for finals. After they told him to stop he started reading a poem about how the "Grinches" complained and then told the riders to tell UTA to let him sing (if they so desired).

UTPlanner · #**1043** Posted **Dec 30, 2008, 3:37 PM**

Ha ha! Wow thanks for sharing that story. If I had been on that train I would have gone insane. Listening to some guy singing over the PA? Wow! I can hardly understand them when they announce the next stop.

Perhaps he should just stand at the TRAX stop on his lunchbreak and sing there. Can't stop him then, right?

i-215 · #**1044** Posted **Dec 30, 2008, 4:37 PM**

I also found it interesting the reporter was actually able to interview the driver WHILE HE WAS ON THE JOB! I've tried for years to interview employees at companies, but most say they aren't allowed to talk to the media and tell me to call their P.R. person.

I wonder if the driver is now in hot water at work for going on the news himself, or if UTA is a chill organization and said, "Sure, you can go on the news and gripe. That's cool."

For some reason, I think it's the first.

MetroFanatic · #**1045** Posted **Dec 31, 2008, 6:03 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by UTPlanner

Ha ha! Wow thanks for sharing that story. If I had been on that train I would have gone insane. Listening to some guy singing over the PA? Wow! I can hardly understand them when they announce the next stop.

Perhaps he should just stand at the TRAX stop on his lunchbreak and sing there. Can't stop him then, right?

From Gallivan to 10000 he sang 3 songs that were quite understandable. If you had headphones on you wouldn't have even be able to hear him.

electricron · #**1046** Posted **Dec 31, 2008, 3:03 PM**

If the driver continues to sing publically, will UTA have to pay royalties-fees on the songs?

arkhitektor · #**1047** Posted **Dec 31, 2008, 8:46 PM**

I rode the MAX Rapid Bus today for the first time.

This is what every bus route should be like.

Wait at a decent looking bus shelter, board withouth waiting to pay the driver.
I'm not sure if it was by accident or by design, but we hit almost every light on green.

Having a TRAX/BRT route map posted at the station makes it feel like more than just a bus:

The inside is a lot nicer than any of UTA's other busses as well:

Makid · #**1048** Posted **Dec 31, 2008, 8:49 PM**

The Green light part is as planned. There is a device on the bus that is used to extend the green light a few seconds.

i-215 · #**1049** Posted **Dec 31, 2008, 11:51 PM**

That wasn't working the first day. I missed the press conference, so I did my radio story on the whole "green light" aspect. By the fifth red light (which only made us to 900 West) I gave up following it.

I think I had a line in the story like "It's a special bus that one day will get all-green lights ... although that doesn't seem to be the case today."

ski_steve · #**1050** Posted **Jan 7, 2009, 7:41 PM**

Planners want reversible lanes on Foothill Boulevard, but city wants light rail

By Brandon Loomis
The Salt Lake Tribune

Regional transportation planners want to remake Foothill Drive to help carpools and express buses speed students and workers to and from the University of Utah.

It's not enough for some Salt Lake City Council members, who heard the plan Tuesday but said they want light rail -- and not just up Foothill, but all the way to Park City.

Martin and others said the plan focuses too much on moving cars through. Switching to light rail could help reshape land uses, leading to denser housing and new development east of the road, they said.

"What a wasted opportunity," Councilman Luke Garrott said of the Wasatch Front study. He agreed that the plan would cement the current landscape and promote cars instead of using light rail to reshape a major gateway to the city.

"We need a train to Park City, bad," Garrott said.

The Foothill Boulevard corridor currently handles about 46,000 daily car trips, which is down a few thousand from the days of Interstate 15 reconstruction in the late 1990s, according to Wasatch Front. Equipping it with reversible lanes and new buses to handle future growth would cost the Utah Department of Transportation and UTA about $15 million, the regional council estimates.

Wasatch Front's plan is just a recommendation, and would require cooperation from the Utah Department of Transportation, the Utah Transit Authority, the city and the university.

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_11388972?source=rss

delts145 · #**1051** Posted **Jan 7, 2009, 8:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevena07

Planners want reversible lanes on Foothill Boulevard, but city wants light rail

By Brandon Loomis
The Salt Lake Tribune

It's not enough for some Salt Lake City Council members, who heard the plan Tuesday but said they want light rail -- and not just up Foothill, but all the way to Park City.

Martin and others said the plan focuses too much on moving cars through. Switching to light rail could help reshape land uses, leading to denser housing and new development east of the road, they said.

"What a wasted opportunity," Councilman Luke Garrott said of the Wasatch Front study. He agreed that the plan would cement the current landscape and promote cars instead of using light rail to reshape a major gateway to the city.

"We need a train to Park City, bad," Garrott said.

WooHoo!!!!! Yes...Light rail on Foothill and a train all the way to Park City. Now that's my kind of thinking.

.

Makid · #**1052** Posted **Jan 7, 2009, 8:34 PM**

A train to Park City would be great. Go from the Airport to Park City avoid the traffic. That would be great for skiers.

I think that Trax to Park City should be on the WFRC list. The tourism/skiing aspect would add a lot of value to the line.

cololi · #**1053** Posted **Jan 7, 2009, 10:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by delts145

WooHoo!!!!! Yes...Light rail on Foothill and a train all the way to Park City. Now that's my kind of thinking.

.

How much are your willing to pay for this line? At 40-50 million per mile, a rail line to Kimball Junction would push 1 billion dollars. That figure is an estimat for LRT, not heavy rail that would be required to get up Parleys. That is about $1,000 per resident of SL CO. That also would not include the necessary bridges over interstates, creeks, underpasses, wildlife crossings, etc. Not to mention the design necessary to handle the grades. I like the idea and would support it if it was reasonable cost wise, but I just don't see how this thing would ever pencil out in a cost/reward analysis.

Foothill has a lot of issues. It is very much a suburban type of roadway, I think it is a lot like 5400 South west of Redwood Rd. The biggest issue is that the residents are not likely to support any kind of increased density on either side of the street based on the history of the Foothill Apartments and Wal Mart site. If there is no increase in users between I215 and Sunnyside, there is not point in building any stops, except for perhaps at Foothill Village. You could get some density in small pockets, like around Foothill Village or the Wal mart/Foothill apartments, but it will cost some politicians an election. And where does it go once Foothill turns into I215? All along I215 on the east side it will run into the same type of anti density battle. I would rather see the money spent on projects that actually will have an impact on transportation, promote new, walkable development within existing nodal areas, such as Sugarhouse, 9th and 9th (both east and west sides), State St, etc. and easily be extended beyond SLC boundaries.

scottharding · #**1054** Posted **Jan 8, 2009, 7:55 PM**

Any improvement on foothill would be a good thing.

shakman · #**1055** Posted **Jan 8, 2009, 8:54 PM**

With SLC poised to become a massive hub airport and a rail from the airport to Park City, you guys better start thinking heay rail.

I can see TRAX becoming a bit overwhelmed. It would be nice if there was a "transfer station" in Downtown, therefore giving Downtown more crititcal mass.

Any thoughts?

DMTower · #**1056** Posted **Jan 8, 2009, 9:44 PM**

^^^ I definitely agree that if we send a train clear up to Park City it should probably be a FrontRunner extension rather than Trax

Future Mayor · #**1057** Posted **Jan 8, 2009, 9:47 PM**

It would have to be a Front Runner train. Trax trains are not designed to climb the grades that would be required to get to park city.

WASDEN · #**1058** Posted **Jan 9, 2009, 1:04 AM**

A train to Park City is an awesome idea, although light rail up Foothill is kind of nonsensical IMO. I agree with previous posts that a train to Park City should be more of the commuter rail variety, with possible Eastward extensions to Heber and Westward to Tooele. But the cost of constructing such a line up Parley's Canyon would be BEYOND ASTRONOMICAL! If the City Council thinks they can get light rail up Parley's when they can't even fund a 2 block viaduct rebuild for TRAX up North Temple then THEY ARE ON CRACK!

Since the City Council thinks money is no object, heres what I always imagined should happen with Foothill. Since most of the traffic is heading to the U, Research Park, and the Med Center, why not create a below grade expressway from the 215/I-80 interchange that resurfaces to join street level near Sunnyside? You could rebuild a street level Foothill above this expressway to serve the local neighborhood. There would be plenty of room for sidewalks, trees, streetside parking for businesses near The Village, and a more pedestrian friendly 2 lanes in each direction would fit in better with the East bench than an 8 lane highway. I just don't see the point in pushing all that traffic through those nice neighborhoods when they could be spared and bipassed below ground. Think how much faster the commute would be if you faced no traffic lights in a below grade expressway! A double-decked Foothill would also allow for TRAX at street level, if ridership projections were not as nonsensical as they sound to me.

Chicago's bi-level Michigan Avenue moves traffic below, and sports the 'Magnificent Mile' at street level. Why can't SLC do something similar with congested Foothill?

WASDEN · #**1059** Posted **Jan 9, 2009, 2:56 AM**

Oh, and one other component to my double-decked Foothill idea. The below grade expressway, since it is basicaly a tunnel with no need for left turns, it could easily incorporate reversible lanes. (If you've ever been in a tunnel that has the lighted 'green arrows' above lanes heading in your direction and the 'red Xs' for oncomming traffic you know what I'm talking about).

DMTower · #**1060** Posted **Jan 9, 2009, 3:50 AM**

I think it would be awesome if all urban freeways were like that Wasden. Just think how nice it would be to commute on an underground expressway during the winter!