Salt Lake Transit News Thread

[Orlando]

The other problem of the S-Line is they weren't bold enough to put the streetcar on the street. It should have been built along 2100 south. Instead they went with the cheaper solution, which was to put it on existing rail lines. But, those rail lines are not very visible, and were intentionally built to be in the back alley/industrial lane behind all of the commercial and residential buildings. I think all of the new apartments being built along it now is very encouraging, and I think the S-Line has been the catalyst for it. The street cars were partially responsible for being a development catalyst in the Pearl District in Portland. Though, the good planning and development was going on before the street car was finished. It certainly does help now, though. It's always full whenever I rode it, and surprisingly it wasn't a bunch of hipsters riding it, but a lot of retirees used. Many of them purchased condos in the Pearl District, and would use the street car to downtown, or to other cute shopping & eatery areas like NW 21st and 23rd Streets in the Alphabet District. The street car also connected directly to the multiple light rail lines which connected to the airport, and other important areas of the metro.

[bob rulz]

I do think that the S-Line trail was an exceptional reuse of that old rail bed. Every time I've been on the S-line or the trail I've seen at least some people using the trail.

The apartments along the line should be encouraging for ridership in the long-term but it will never reach its full potential until it's fully double-tracked. I'm also still hoping that the expansion northward happens.

[Hatman]

New fare structure for UTA began yesterday. No change to ticket prices, just monthly passes - rounding to nice whole numbers.

[Hatman]

The train to Tooele may actually be a real thing, not just one of my fantasy projects:

A train to Tooele? UTA seeks feedback on ways to improve transit between Salt Lake, Tooele counties
https://www.ksl.com/article/50059821...ooele-counties

Here is direct link to the UTA website designed for public feedback:
https://s.surveyanyplace.com/tooelevalley
Everything is still very preliminary, so there isn't much to say about the train route, except that the comment section on KSL seems pretty split between pro-train and anti-UTA in general.

This is one circumstance where I support a new train line. The railroad ROW is there, Tooele Valley has as much developable area as the entire north half of Utah Valley (so there will one day be a population large enough to justify the train, if there isn't already), and - most importantly - there is already bus service between Tooele and Salt Lake City. Granted, it's not great bus service. I honestly wouldn't be sad of the Express Bus proposals win this round. At least this gets people talking about the train, so that the next time, there will be more public support.

That said, I have 2 critiques and 1 suggestion:

1. Please don't use FrontRunner rolling stock. I know it would be efficient to just buy more of what UTA already has, but this line does not justify an entire FrontRunner train yet. Get Stadler to build some more diesel FLIRT trainsets, like they built (here in SLC) for the TexRail project in Fort Worth, Texas. Smaller trains means greater acceleration, lesser pollution, and higher frequencies (since they can't carry as many people - they have to run more frequently!).
2. Include more stops. A stop at the airport would be nice, even though it would not be direct. You would need to have a shuttle bus go between the rail stop and the terminal on a newly constructed road. I show in my Google Map (below) an Automated People Mover going between the airport station and the airport terminal, but that is far in the future. Another stop could be at the International Center, west of the airport. This would require following the SLG&W RR alignment, not the UP RR, and would require a pedestrian bridge over I-80. But, by doing this, you can satisfy all the people asking for TRAX to be extended to the International Center, which just isn't ever going to happen.

Suggestion:
Put the terminus of the new line in an underground platform by the Rio Grande depot? I've included the links for that proposal below in my signature line...

[Makid]

I have thought a train to Tooele or further would be a good idea for years now.

I think that this is something that the State should step up to help fund. It could be used as an economic incentive to help spur growth within the Inland Port.

I think that the State should use eminent domain to create a new ROW for the line.

It could start at Rio Grande or the Central Station (underground at either location). Turn west and run under I-80 with a station adjacent to the Rocky Mountain Power project. Bring the line above ground just west of 215 near the existing UP Right of Way.

Save space for an airport station in the future. Have a stop near I-80 and 5600 W, could be near the RC Willey center. This would also act as a transfer point for the 5600 W. BRT and future Trax line. This would allow for better transit access to the International Center and Inland Port.

Save space around 80th West for another station on the north side of I-80. The rail would follow near I-80 and be elevated through to a Lake Point station. This would allow direct transfers with a new bus service that services Tooele (no bus would go along I-80).

The line would then extend to the North West of Grantsville. This would be the terminus for this phase.

The idea is that the ROW should be wide enough to support 4 track sets. 2 for the Tooele - future Park City line, and 2 for a future HSR line.

Overall, it could be an easier sell to get the State to assist with some of the funding as it could be an economic driver for the Inland Port and the Tooele valley, particularly around Grantsville, which has already submitted to have an area designated as a satellite location for the Inland Port.

It would be nearly impossible for Tooele to find any bit of their portion of the cost of the train, they are maxed currently with their funding for the limited bus service of today (which I adjust in my plan as it would provide them with better local bus service).

The new ROW is needed mainly because the UP mainline has been busier lately and will get busier as the Inland Port grows. This will reduce the ability to share the tracks. Additionally, by putting the new ROW along I-80 will reduce the ability to expand the highway over time, which would encourage more transit usage between the 2 valleys.

This would be the most costly option but probably the biggest spur to both transit ridership and economic growth.

Sadly though, I don't think a train will happen in any form between the Tooele and Salt Lake valleys in the next 40 years. HSR should happen but it wouldn't and shouldn't have a stop in the Tooele valley.

[RC14]

^
I have, for a long time, imagined an elevated rail ROW above I-80. I don't know if that would be cheaper or more expensive than building below I-80? Except, I think I pictured something more like a metro rail line, like Chicago's El trains, than commuter rail.

We could also completely rebuild I-80 between SLC and Tooele county and simply run the commuter rail tracks in the median?

[Atlas]

These are the kind of conversations that would be much more interesting if Huntsman was in charge.

Maybe I'm wrong but it doesn't seem like there's much interest or will in the legislature or among the common folk for things like FrontRunner double tracking, trains to Tooele, TRAX/streetcar expansions downtown, or revamping SL Central/Rio Grande. It seems like the only transit expansions that are going to happen anytime soon are a couple new BRT routes, the TRAX expansion to Draper/Lehi, and maybe something going up Little Cottonwood Canyon.

Maybe getting the Olympics again will kickstart things.

[RC14]

I'm not that pessimistic. I could see a Tooele Frontrunner line becoming a reality. Tooele valley will only continue to grow. It could be as large as Salt Lake County at some point and there is only one way to travel between SL and Tooele counties and that is I-80. This is obviously unsustainable. I think it would be easy to make a case for a Tooele county rail line.

However, I don't think a Tooele Frontrunner line will ever be what it needs to be without Hatman's Rio Grande plan. It would be a shame if we spent all that money to bring passengers into SLC only to drop them off at the edge of town.

[i-215]

We should build a Frontrunner line to Tooele.

2020: "But nobody lives there. Wait until it grows."

[sprawls]

2040: "Why? It's all suburban sprawl. It's not like it has an urban core the station can serve. Maybe if we could go back 20 years..."

[Makid]

Originally Posted by i-215

We should build a Frontrunner line to Tooele.

2020: "But nobody lives there. Wait until it grows."

[sprawls]

2040: "Why? It's all suburban sprawl. It's not like it has an urban core the station can serve. Maybe if we could go back 20 years..."

This is the biggest problem with fixed transit. Too many people push back against the idea because there either isn't the built environment or the density is just to low.

I like to use the thought that good transit induces good development and bad transit induces bad development.

A train to Tooele and Grantsville will have a larger impact in shaping the environments around the stations before development fills in the area, than having to rezone and wait for redevelopment.

This concept is one reason I like the idea of pushing the Trax Red Line down into Utah County, especially around Saratoga Springs and western Lehi. There is still a decent amount of vacant land that could be zoned and developed as higher density.

The downside is that fixed transit is expensive, but the costs can and should be weighed against doing nothing.

The induced density from good transit reduces sprawl. This reduces air pollution. We also see reduced water consumption and more active lifestyles. Then there is the cost of adding the line later, costs will be greater, infrastructure will need to be redone, zoning changed, and the wait for redevelopment around the stations.

All we need to do is look at the last 20 or so years of Fixed Transit along the Wasatch Front to see what is better.

Just look at all the redevelopment that has happened along the various transit lines. With the transit lines coming through existing areas, many Cities have been slow to push for changes.

It took UTA being authorized to partner with developers to get the Sandy TOD moving, against the will of Sandy City and its residents. Tom Dolan pushed it as he saw what could happen.

Even today, most of the Cities have larger plans but haven't actually followed through on zoning or they haven't done anything to move forward with their plans.

Take for instance West Valley City. There are multiple stations in areas that are prime for redevelopment, yet they have been slowly working on their new Downtown area plan. While the City helped to push for the alignment of the Green Line, they have yet to rezone the areas around most of the stations in the City.

Murray City, sure it has Fireclay and the surrounding area but in the area with the best transit connectivity outside of Salt Lake City (approx. 5200 South), the City Council is weary about zoning too big because the surrounding roads won't be able to handle the traffic from incoming residents. And this is just in regards to the Transit Station, encompassing Trax and FrontRunner.

Now against these, South Salt Lake has somewhat seen the light. With the S-Line and the development of multiple empty lots and some property redevelopment as well, they did an updated SSL Downtown master plan and actually rezoned the area for it. They also reached out to developers to get insight and partners with their project. SSL has come to realize that density isn't bad, especially around transit.

This is one reason, I think, that the prison redevelopment area and commission have been pushing a Transit First mentality. While it is commendable, they are doing it wrong.

The latest idea is that there should be a BRT line from the Thanksgiving Point FrontRunner station that would run upto and into the prison redevelopment area. It would have its first stop at the Adobe campus and then follow the 'Stubbed' line plan into the area with it ending near the Draper FrontRunner station. This was deemed the best cost and ridership option for the prison redevelopment area.

This plan isolates the development from the larger transit system. Bringing Trax to just the Adobe Campus and having a BRT line between a station near the Pluralsight campus and the Draper FrontRunner station not only incorporates it into the overall transit infrastructure, it will produce better developments because of the connections to to whole system.

As the Trax line extends further South, this increases the connection to additional areas and would boost the overall ridership and transit demands.

This is why doing transit first helps but it cannot be isolated. It must connect to the greater network. Either via an extension or a new line but it must connect in a meaningful and well thought out way, not as an isolated system.

[Makid]

FrontRunner double-tracking could see big infusion of state funding

https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics...ay-next-years/

Legislative leaders believe the state may be flush with cash to spend on one-time construction, transportation projects.
Among items high on the wish list for some are adding a second parallel track to the FrontRunner commuter train, along with road construction and maintenance.

“We have been wanting to bond for some roads and double-track FrontRunner for a couple of years. It’s likely we will try and get it done this year,” House Majority Whip Mike Schultz, R-Hooper, said.

The proposed improvements include “strategic” double-tracking between Ogden and Provo, which would allow trains to run every 15 minutes during peak hours. There are also plans in the works to offer express trains that would have one, or even zero stops before the destination station.

“Those express trains could shave 20 minutes or more off the commute time. It’s the biggest thing we can do to ease congestion along the I-15 corridor,” Schultz said.
These improvements would cost approximately $450 million, with the federal government, Utah Transit Authority and state government each paying a portion, he said.

The Utah Transit Authority issued a statement Monday that double-tracking would help to improve the reliability, frequency and capacity of its FrontRunner trains.

About 70% of the 90-mile FrontRunner system from Provo to Ogden now runs on a single, shared track, so trains may pass each other only at stations and a few sidings. A delay at one station, for example, can cause a ripple effect of delays down the entire line.

FrontRunner trains may now run about every half hour at most. Double-tracking could cut that in half, to allow service every 15 minutes.

“Local funding would also put UTA in the position of competing for existing and future funding opportunities at the federal level,” the agency added. It said it has been “working with legislators on providing information and potential options that would prepare for our future growth and further build upon FrontRunner’s success and importance to the region.”

...

It is nice to see that this is a high priority for the State and getting FrontRunner double tracked enough to move to 15 minute frequencies will have a large impact to the ridership.

I hope that the State offers up enough funds to get the project moving quickly so that we can eventually get all the gaps filled in and have a fully double tracked system that we can then electrify. This would allow the trains to move faster and further reduce the travel times.

Lastly, I do like the idea of the Express trains. This would really help for the morning and evening commutes.

[Atlas]

Maybe I was wrong about the likelihood of double-tracking in the near future...

FrontRunner double-tracking could see big infusion of state funding

[bob rulz]

Excellent news! I'm glad that our state leaders actually understand the importance of transit. Pretty rare for a red state.

[Makid]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

Excellent news! I'm glad that our state leaders actually understand the importance of transit. Pretty rare for a red state.

Bold is mine...

There is something that has been said before and I think it deserves to be said again. While Utah votes Republican and the Governor and Legislature are primarily Republican, many of these same people would be Democrats in other states.

Remember that Utah created and passed the Utah Compact regarding Immigration. The State works to improve environmental issues such as Air Quality. The State has also allowed Counties to increase taxes for transit multiple times. The State has been pushing for higher density and more open space. The State has been pushing for increased and improved transit access and expansion.

Most real Red States would balk at the thought of most of this and some things, like Transit taxes, has been rejected from Red States for decades.

I am okay with the more moderate version of Republicanism that we have in Utah. Especially as it works to improve transit and transit infrastructure.

[Atlas]

I agree that Utah has a better-functioning dialogue between left and right in general. My guess is that it's because the LDS majority doesn't always follow the winds of the twisted, ephemeral national ideologies. They have more traditional principles and a strong hierarchy to promote them. I don't think that traditional Christian principles are inherently in conflict with the idea of using some state power/money for the public good, as long as it's in moderation and any incurred debt is handled responsibly.

[Hatman]

Nah, it's all about feedback loops. American politics has become so radicalized because there is never a hard check on either side's ideologies. Conservatives in Utah are just as conservative on social issues as anywhere else, but in urban development issues, they have had to face the reality of rising property prices and increased congestion. That feedback has altered what would have been ideological opposition to public works.

In other non-political news, the TRAX station at 650 South is moving forward. I should be done in a year:

Salt Lake City moves closer to getting another TRAX station. Here’s where it will be.

... [R]ecognizing the financial potential of thousands of TRAX passengers flowing through the area daily, those developers appear willing to pay up to $1.36 million to make the station happen.

Considering the total cost of the station is $2 million, developers will be paying 2/3 the cost of the new station. Not bad.

https://www.sltrib.com/news/2020/12/...ke-city-moves/



Also, in regards to the article a few posts ago about FrontRunner double-tracking, I have to say I have never seen such a pro-transit comments section before. That gives me immense hope for the future! Much more than the phrase 'strategic double track'. I don't want more passing sidings, I want true double track! If two stations are not connected by two tracks the entire distance, it is not double track. (Except Orem-Provo or Roy-Ogden, since those are end-of-line situations.)
Prove me wrong, UTA! Surprise me!

[Orlando]

Originally Posted by Hatman

Also, in regards to the article a few posts ago about FrontRunner double-tracking, I have to say I have never seen such a pro-transit comments section before. That gives me immense hope for the future! Much more than the phrase 'strategic double track'. I don't want more passing sidings, I want true double track! If two stations are not connected by two tracks the entire distance, it is not double track. (Except Orem-Provo or Roy-Ogden, since those are end-of-line situations.)
Prove me wrong, UTA! Surprise me!

This would be great. When I first rode Front Runner, I was surprised how slow it went. I didn't understand why until later. If it can't be quicker than driving on the freeway the same distance, then I didn't see it as a true advantage. Isn't a good portion of it double tracked, except at certain points which then creates those slow downs?

Also, I've been considering moving out of Seattle, and have looked at other cities to move to, and I'm just surprised how little transit is offered in some pretty well-known cities. Northern Utah is doing much better than those cities in that regard.

[Hatman]

Yeah, FrontRunner has been slowing down for years for various reasons. The only thing that will speed it up again is full double tracking. Electrification will be huge upgrade as well, but double-track must happen first, otherwise the cost of electrification will have been wasted.

When the south line to Provo opened in 2012, FrontRunner was supposed to run the full length of the line in 1 hour and 40 minutes. It is now 2 hours and 5 minutes, or thereabouts. The first big problem was that the Draper station was not meant to be opened in 2012. It was designed as an 'infill' station, like the Vineyard station, where trains were supposed to go flying by without slowing down. But after the decisions had all been made regarding the track layout and the location of sidings - and even the inital schedule was set - the decision was made to fast-track the Draper station on behalf of local development. (How often does development in Draper mess up the larger picture)?

So the schedules were all thrown off, and UTA had to add 17 minutes to the schedule in order to keep the line from going into gridlock. They did that in early 2013.

In 2015 (or thereabouts) the schedule was altered again as passengers complained that the trains did not stop at the stations long enough. During peak periods, when the trains are packed to capacity and people need to push past each other in the aisles, it takes longer for passengers to get on and off the trains - so the extra dwell times stretched the schedules again. The correct solution would have been to lengthen trains so that people had seats and the aisles were clear, but UTA had problems adding more cars to the trains (It would have been a 2nd Comet Car (single level), but those cars are mechanically unreliable), so UTA had no choice but to lengthen the dwell times.

The last major thing was the implementation of PTC (Positive Train Control). This is a congressionally-mandated safety system all passenger trains must use starting the end of this year. An onboard computer detects exactly where the train is, how fast it is going, and if it has time to slow down and stop before the next red signal. This is a very good safety system, except for the fact that it is extremely overcautious, and slows the train down much farther ahead of time than a human would. So you will see trains come creeping in to stations at walking speed (especially stations near curves like Layton or Murray) where in the past the trains would come whoosing in like TRAX trains.

The only way to speed this up is to double track the entire line. All the delays of uncoordinated planning, overcrowding, and overzealous safety systems can be resolved by letting trains in both directions run freely down their own tracks at high frequency. I estimate that the current diesel trains could complete the entire run (Ogden to Provo) in an hour and a half if they just had a second track and a higher frequency. Add electric EMU's to the mix and you might get the run time down another 10-15 minutes, which would be nice.
Strategic double tracking, as UTA has described it, is not true double-tracking. It lengthens the sidings at stations, but still relies on single track sections between stations. This approach will allow for higher frequencies, as trains will have more locations to pass each other, but it will significantly impact the run time end-to-end. I would not be surprised to see run times extend to 2 hours and 20 minutes or more if UTA implements a strategic double track, since train will now have to pass twice as many trains as they do currently. Add in Express trains on a strategic double track line and I would not be surprised to see the local trains complete the route in 2.5 hours.

FrontRunner is like a solar eclipse. 90% complete isn't significantly different than 10% - but 100% is amazing. FrontRunner needs to be 100% double-tracked, or else it will continue to be a slower 'alternative' to I-15 rather than the backbone of a true transportation system.

[Makid]

Originally Posted by Orlando

This would be great. When I first rode Front Runner, I was surprised how slow it went. I didn't understand why until later. If it can't be quicker than driving on the freeway the same distance, then I didn't see it as a true advantage. Isn't a good portion of it double tracked, except at certain points which then creates those slow downs?

Also, I've been considering moving out of Seattle, and have looked at other cities to move to, and I'm just surprised how little transit is offered in some pretty well-known cities. Northern Utah is doing much better than those cities in that regard.

The majority of FrontRunner is single track. The only double tracked sections are at the Stations and the sidings to allow for passing trains.

Once the selective double tracking is complete, the last few sections to double track would be the most expensive, around the Point of the Mountain and between 1800 South and 9th South being the most expensive sections.

I would love it if the State and the Wasatch Front Counties could work together to fully fund a complete double tracking and electrification. This would allow the trains to hit a speed of at least 90mph. I think the track is rated for between 90mph and 100mph.

The speed and frequencies allowed by full double tracking and electrification are enough to have an actual impact to traffic on I-15.

My dream situation is that while working on the double tracking, they look at increasing the ROW to allow for a future 3rd track which could support express trains and allow for bypassing multiple stations.

I could see a maximum of 5 stations on the express line:

Ogden - Main Depot
Hill AFB
SLC Central Station (Rio Grande)
Draper/Lehi (pick only 1)
Provo - Center

This would work only once the 3rd track set is in place. Running the express train 3 times each day would be great. Morning, Afternoon, and Evening. This would allow Full and 1/2 time workers and students to use the express options.

[i-215]

I can't imagine Utah is totally unique.

Are there other "red" metros/states which are aggressively chasing mass transit expansion like Utah is?