Salt Lake Transit News Thread

[ucsbgaucho]

Originally Posted by Hatman

After being friendly with a lot of TRAX supervisors and planners, I've got a pretty good idea of why the Black/Yellow/Airport-University line isn't running yet. LINK

As for Salt Lake Central, I totally agree that it is a very disappointing place to hang out at. And it's even harder to get to than North Temple. But what I like about it is potential - it's like a blank slate. UTA and Salt Lake City used to have grand plans for a new station building there, something that would be fitting for the name of 'Salt Lake Central'. I think that one day that will happen. I'm hoping for something like the Anaheim ARTIC:





Can you imagine how cool that would be, to get off a train into Salt Lake City, go up an escalator from the platform, and then into a great big space like that - except instead of palm trees and endless grey sky out the enormous windows, you see the Wasatch Mountains?

NOTE: This Anaheim station was justified with a projected traffic of 10,000 passengers per day. Also, for how impressive the facilities are, the station itself has only 2 tracks. FrontRunner already carries 16,000+ passengers per day, and that is expected to double one UTA adds a second track and electric trainsets. At that point FrontRunner will be carrying at least 3x more than then number Anaheim officials felt justified a fancy new station. Also, Salt Lake Central will have at least 6 tracks (2 for FrontRunner, 2 for Amtrak, and 2 for TRAX). So it isn't unreasonable to think we can build one too. /NOTE

And with respect to where it fits in with the system, Salt Lake Central is at the end of a branch line now, kind of off on its own. Not because there is no space around it, but because nothing is built in that space. If you add two more lines from Salt Lake Central - 4th south to the University Line, and another down to at least 7th south, then SLC becomes the center of a web of lines branching into downtown. North Temple may always undercut it for the travelers from the north, but it will always be the main station for traffic from the south.

So yes, it is depressing now, but there is a lot of potential.

The Anaheim station was also built with anticipation of the high speed rail project in CA using it as a major stop, as well as the end of a proposed MAGLEV train to Vegas. It's also walking distance to both Angels stadium and the arena where the Ducks NHL team plays. Lots of Metro service there as well as Amtrak Surfliner, the 2nd most traveled Amtrak line in the US. So there's a few other factors that justified that station. I used to take Amtrak and Metro to Angels games, they had a podunk little stop on the outskirts of the parking lot of Angels stadium, so this is a HUGE upgrade in facilities. Cost $185 million to construct.

[ucsbgaucho]

Originally Posted by San Diego-Honolulu

Double decker freeways might be coming to the Salt Lake City area on the 15. When I lived in San Antonio a few years ago, double decker freeways were everywhere and it allowed the freeways to essentially have four or fives lanes per direction depending on where you were driving in the San Antonio area. There is more of a "drive first" culture in the Salt Lake City area but more people seriously need to use mass transit in the metro area. When I was there not too long ago we were driving on the 15 and some parts were terrible with traffic, and some of it had to do with the reckless and crazy Utah drivers too. Like I've said before, the Salt Lake City area is slowly becoming more like the Los Angeles area, but obviously on a smaller scale.

It

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/8...aker-says.html

What they've done in San Diego, where I grew up, is create 4 "adjustable" Fastrak/carpool lanes down the middle of the freeway (2 in each direction). The center median can be moved to allow more traffic in one direction (3x1, 4x0) if needed. So technically during rush hour you can add one or two lanes in one direction in the am, and the other direction in the pm. This could be a long-term solution vs just creating more lanes in both directions that may or may not be needed depending on time of day. Add lanes and make those lanes able to handle cars in both directions as needed.


Here's an image of the "train" that moves the center dividers

[Hatman]

Originally Posted by ucsbgaucho

The Anaheim station was also built with anticipation of the high speed rail project in CA using it as a major stop, as well as the end of a proposed MAGLEV train to Vegas. It's also walking distance to both Angels stadium and the arena where the Ducks NHL team plays. Lots of Metro service there as well as Amtrak Surfliner, the 2nd most traveled Amtrak line in the US. So there's a few other factors that justified that station. I used to take Amtrak and Metro to Angels games, they had a podunk little stop on the outskirts of the parking lot of Angels stadium, so this is a HUGE upgrade in facilities. Cost $185 million to construct.

Right, there's always more than ridership that justifies a large station building, but I maintain there are more similarities than differences between the two stations. SLC is right now the little podunk platform within walking distance of the Jazz arena and downtown. That last part is crucial, since most of the ARTIC's financial troubles come from it being located far from any urban density - it is surrounded by parking lots.

Also, a new SLC doesn't need to be nearly so big, and it doesn't need to significantly change the tracks of platforms the trains already use. Here is a quick idea:

Red is the station building. I tried to draw the parabolic arches like Anaheim, but I'm an engineer not an artist. I've pointed the building southeast to focus on the cottonwood areas.
Red is also the pedestrian bridges over the tracks and bus area. The first bridge connects the FrontRunner sland platform to the main building, and then extends to the new Amtrak platform in Blue (the current one is just in an awkward place...) The second bridge is to the greyhound/intercity bus loading area (in Black), which will be where the current bus terminal is (no need for duplicate waiting and ticketing areas - they can use the new building as well). Local buses, TRAX and the FrontRunner side platform (southbound) will be directly accessible without the need for a bridge. Yellow is the future extension of TRAX down 4th South and beyond. Green is space that can be sold to a developer, preferably one who is willing to pay a premium and/or help fund the station. Perhaps a hotel? It would be great for Amtrak passengers, who arrive or depart at 3:00 AM, if the train is on time...
This design is on a much smaller scale than the ARTIC, but it could work just fine (the station building itself is the same size, but the bridges are shorter, and the rail and bus facilities are more compact).

And it isn't as though SLC is shy about doing large projects. The main library building would cost over $120 million in current dollars ($84 million in 1998). Why spend that much on a fancy library, rather than a merely adequate one? Because it was meant as an incentive, to entice people to come downtown and live in Salt Lake City, and for businesses to relocate here as well. The ARTIC was build fancier than strictly necessary for the same reasons - to entice the large projects of HSR and Maglev to serve their city (neither project is fully funded and decisions are still yet to be made). I do not see how it would be inconsistent for SLC to spend a similar amount on a fancy train station in order to entice people and business into the downtown area.

But perhaps this will fall into the Black Line territory, a thing that is obviously good and needed but isn't being done because nobody can agree on who will pay for it.

[Ver2go]

As someone who lives in Anaheim but might be relocating to SLC soon, I would recommend SLC use the Anaheim Transit Center as a model for what NOT to do. I'm very pro transit and travel through ARTIC on occasion. Yet my opinion is that it's a colossal waste of money. An upgrade was needed, but it went way beyond what was realistic for the region. The large operating deficit from the transit center has basically killed any additional public transit projects in the area (including a street car to Disney). It has also pitted taxpayers against the resort district.

UTA already has enough friction with locals. So the last thing needed is a white elephant project to further distance the skeptics that already question the value of investing in public transit.

A revamped central station for SLC should be a priority, but on more modest scale than ARTIC. I feel that more frequent bus service, a direct TRAX line from the airport to the university, and a completed TRAX loop downtown should be bigger priorities.

Here in Anaheim, I'd gladly trade the mostly empty ARTIC center for a bus that actually runs every 15 minutes.

[ucsbgaucho]

Originally Posted by Ver2go

As someone who lives in Anaheim but might be relocating to SLC soon, I would recommend SLC use the Anaheim Transit Center as a model for what NOT to do. I'm very pro transit and travel through ARTIC on occasion. Yet my opinion is that it's a colossal waste of money. An upgrade was needed, but it went way beyond what was realistic for the region. The large operating deficit from the transit center has basically killed any additional public transit projects in the area (including a street car to Disney). It has also pitted taxpayers against the resort district.

UTA already has enough friction with locals. So the last thing needed is a white elephant project to further distance the skeptics that already question the value of investing in public transit.

A revamped central station for SLC should be a priority, but on more modest scale than ARTIC. I feel that more frequent bus service, a direct TRAX line from the airport to the university, and a completed TRAX loop downtown should be bigger priorities.

Here in Anaheim, I'd gladly trade the mostly empty ARTIC center for a bus that actually runs every 15 minutes.

It's a double-edged sword. I came here from the Temecula area, where an added lane on I-15 is badly needed. My biggest problem down there was the govts always doing just the bare minimum of what's needed at the time, not planning for the future. So you add one lane now, and 10 years later you gotta add another. It's a drip-drip of public money. In that regard, I'd much rather they think a little farther ahead and add 2 lanes instead of one, for instance. But then again, when politicians are spending other people's money it doesn't matter to them. The problem with ARTIC is that it was built with planning in mind for future projects that "most likely" won't come to fruition. the HSR project won't be fully developed, if ever, for decades, especially in SoCal. Same probably with this MAGLEV to Vegas. Freeway traffic is more predictable because it's been a constant for so long. But I'm sure they spent way more on the ARTIC station than they needed to for actual train/bus service, a lot of the budget was probably spent on aesthetics that have nothing to do with it's functionality.

[Hatman]

This is great - I love having local insight! Thanks ver2go and ucsbgaucho.

I knew I would be stepping into controversy by bringing up the ARTIC. It is an impressive facility, but for the traffic it sees daily it is overbuilt. But it is a very impressive and memorable building, and that is what I like about it.

When considering transit, it is important to consider the entire experience. Functionality is most important and should be solved first (getting many routes at a high frequency and building up a ridership base). But beyond that, good transit also must be viewed from a service perspective as well.
For example, When I lived in Provo I took my extended family to Salt Lake City via FrontRunner to see the Christmas lights. It went as well as any train trip could go - minimal waiting, busy but not overcrowding on the trains, no delays, and easy transfers to TRAX. No stress. But later, when I asked them what they thought about taking frontrunner on their own some other time, they said "No way!" They then explained that the train station in Salt Lake City was in a 'scary' place, and that they'd never go there on their own without the large Christmas crowds. They then told me that if I continued to go to that station, it wouldn't be long before I eventually got mugged.
I was willing to dismiss this as typical out-of-town suburban ignorance, but then I remembered that they had lived for 8 years in New York City and had already seen a thing or two. I still think they're paranoid, but I'm not as mean about it.

The point is that I doubt these family members are alone in their assessment of our central station. There are probably many people who would be fine taking the train if it weren't that it dropped you off in a bad part of town. North Temple station is getting fixed with all the development nearby, but SLC is still an empty concrete pad surrounded by dilapidated buildings. The point in spending any money on a station building is so that the station becomes not only a 'safe' place, but a desirable place (a 3rd space). Make it a place people want to pass through, or at least won't mind spending a few minutes waiting around in. Make it busy so that the crowds scare away the dangerous people (drug dealing crowd). Give it a sense of civic importance so that it becomes a source of pride in the community. Make it a city or regional icon so that people care how it is doing, increasing the odds that people will demand it be successful.
We already have high frequency transit at Central Station. FrontRunner is the commuter rail system with the most departures per captia in the entire country, and TRAX runs every 15 minutes all day. Buses are more fluid and will return/increase in frequency as the station regains its importance.
For these reasons I do not have a problem allocating some transit funds to a single station. I don't think transit funds should pay for the whole thing - it needs to be a partnership between Salt Lake City and UTA and the State and whoever else. But something needs to be done, because at this point the lack of investment at Salt Lake Central is becoming just as much an impediment to growth as a lack of further-expanded transit service.

[Liberty Wellsian]

^future home of the Hoberman arch?

[ucsbgaucho]

Kinda on-off topic question... is there any place close to the North Temple station to park for a weekend trip out of town? No official parking lot listed on the rideuta web site for FR/TRAX. I'd like to park there and take TRAX to the airport so I can avoid airport parking. I'd take FR but with no Sunday service I couldn't get home to Layton.

[stayinginformed]

Originally Posted by ucsbgaucho

Kinda on-off topic question... is there any place close to the North Temple station to park for a weekend trip out of town? No official parking lot listed on the rideuta web site for FR/TRAX. I'd like to park there and take TRAX to the airport so I can avoid airport parking. I'd take FR but with no Sunday service I couldn't get home to Layton.

There is a park and ride lot just west of the Jordan River on the north side of North Temple. The land is owned by the state fairpark, but I believe UTA has a park and ride sign there, and you can get on TRAX at the Fairpark stop, a short walk away.

[ucsbgaucho]

Originally Posted by stayinginformed

There is a park and ride lot just west of the Jordan River on the north side of North Temple. The land is owned by the state fairpark, but I believe UTA has a park and ride sign there, and you can get on TRAX at the Fairpark stop, a short walk away.

Found it, unfortunately it's not an overnight lot, day parking only.

[sthbrown4]

Originally Posted by Hatman

The point is that I doubt these family members are alone in their assessment of our central station. There are probably many people who would be fine taking the train if it weren't that it dropped you off in a bad part of town. North Temple station is getting fixed with all the development nearby, but SLC is still an empty concrete pad surrounded by dilapidated buildings. The point in spending any money on a station building is so that the station becomes not only a 'safe' place, but a desirable place (a 3rd space). Make it a place people want to pass through, or at least won't mind spending a few minutes waiting around in. Make it busy so that the crowds scare away the dangerous people (drug dealing crowd). Give it a sense of civic importance so that it becomes a source of pride in the community. Make it a city or regional icon so that people care how it is doing, increasing the odds that people will demand it be successful.

I think most of your concerns will be addressed with the future Station Center Development. It should really transform that area but I do think that there needs to be substantial upgrades to the station itself.

[Hatman]

Originally Posted by ucsbgaucho

Kinda on-off topic question... is there any place close to the North Temple station to park for a weekend trip out of town? No official parking lot listed on the rideuta web site for FR/TRAX. I'd like to park there and take TRAX to the airport so I can avoid airport parking. I'd take FR but with no Sunday service I couldn't get home to Layton.

Ironically, the closest transit parking lot near North Temple station is Salt Lake Central... It's pretty sketchy, but I've parked there overnight before. The sign says 'reserved for Amtrak passengers,' but I doubt anyone will care.

[Hatman]

Originally Posted by sthbrown4

I think most of your concerns will be addressed with the future Station Center Development. It should really transform that area but I do think that there needs to be substantial upgrades to the station itself.

Station Center will certainly help. Without something being built next to the station, we'd get exactly what Anaheim got with the ARTIC - a fancy iconic train station that is within walking distance of places but not really adjacent to anything...
My main gripe with Station Center is that it isn't really a place you'd want to commute to. It seems like more emphasis is put on the residential than the commercial. At best it's like a very small-scale suburban office park plopped into downtown except instead of parking lots they have apparent buildings. That's better than what is there now, for sure - but I've got a feeling that we're settling for less than what the space is worth long term.
Offices, after all, require everyone in them to travel to them every day. Residential units do not. Offices create the demand for other services in the close proximity, such as restaurants - residential units do not create demand for as many restaurants since people can cook their own food in their own apartments. One of the reasons the ARTIC is struggling financially is that the spaces planned for restaurants are vacant, due to the low passenger counts.

I don't know, maybe residential is the way to go. Remember the S-Line, and how as a transit service it is horrible? It's in the news for doing something good. Ridership is up 16% compared to last year, with 1262 rides a day in 2016. Apparently it was only promised to carry 2,000 riders per day by the year 2030, which it almost certainly will do, what with all the apartments being build along its length. Hopefully it won't take that long before UTA/SLC/SSLC decides to double-track it, increase its frequency, and extend it to the plaza, hopefully via alternative 1D:

But the point is the same, that nearby residential growth is driving transit ridership. The virtuous cycle, working even on the worst of Utah's transit infrastructure. So while I would prefer office spaces beside Salt Lake Central, I'll take what I can get.

[Hatman]

THIS article in the Salt Lake Tribune has some detailed information about the TRAX extension to the new airport terminal. Makid was right, there is language in a state law preventing airport funds being used for the extension:

The city had planned to use available airport funds but was disallowed by legislation — still in effect — sponsored by Sen. Curtis Bramble, R-Provo, under pressure from Delta Air Lines.

Zions wrote that if Bramble's language was removed from state law, the airport could fully fund the TRAX extension with a 10 percent increase in parking fees.

Bramble said he would be amenable to that if "the facts warranted it" but that he would want to review ridership numbers.

UTA did not have readily available numbers for the airport portion of the Green Line, which runs east from West Valley into downtown Salt Lake, then west to its last stop at the airport. Through the end of April, rides along the entire line were on pace for about 4.5 million in 2017, slightly down from 4.7 million in 2016, which had dipped from 4.9 million in 2015 and nearly 5 million in 2014.

This is the logical solution. To the legislature of 2018 - and to Sen. Curtis Bramble specifically - get that wording removed. TRAX and transit are an integral part of the airport now, and this effort by Delta Airlines to pinch some pennies is really short-sighted in comparison. This money would even be recuperated by parking fees! What could be more fair than that? Pay for transit with an extra little surcharge on parking in the huge, massive, government-subsidized parking garage!

It's weird how the green line's ridership is dropping though. I wonder what is causing that.

[jubguy3]

Originally Posted by Hatman

THIS article in the Salt Lake Tribune has some detailed information about the TRAX extension to the new airport terminal. Makid was right, there is language in a state law preventing airport funds being used for the extension:


This is the logical solution. To the legislature of 2018 - and to Sen. Curtis Bramble specifically - get that wording removed. TRAX and transit are an integral part of the airport now, and this effort by Delta Airlines to pinch some pennies is really short-sighted in comparison. This money would even be recuperated by parking fees! What could be more fair than that? Pay for transit with an extra little surcharge on parking in the huge, massive, government-subsidized parking garage!

It's weird how the green line's ridership is dropping though. I wonder what is causing that.

I would love to see the airport management take over funding for the project. Somehow they've been able to design and enact the construction of a world class airport entirely without tax money and still maintain the profitability of the airport... it's a shame that the legislation against airport funding for trax projects exists, because I feel like the airport would be able to effectively fund the project, not the crooks at UTA. It's time to dissolve UTA and start over.

[Makid]

I think the ridership on the Green Line decreased due to some bus scheduling and routing.

I do think that we should start to see an increase soon though as the North Temple projects and the projects around Valley Fair / WVC Central station complete and come online.

I also wonder if moving the current buses that run along North Temple into different North/South alignments would help. The Green Line along North Temple has stops too frequent to need a secondary bus route for more than a single stop. A 10th West to Redwood Route/alignment shouldn't happen along North Temple. Move the East/West portion to the South side of I-15. Add 5 minutes to the total route, increase transit coverage and add new riders. If South isn't an option due to possible train delays, go through the Fairpark/RosePark area.

[joscar]

The black line is coming! Albeit only for three weekends.

https://www.rideuta.com/news/2017/06...hrough-June-11

This will include the Friday commutes, and the weekends.

[jubguy3]

Originally Posted by joscar

The black line is coming! Albeit only for three weekends.

https://www.rideuta.com/news/2017/06...hrough-June-11

This will include the Friday commutes, and the weekends.

I wonder if UTA is using the older trains for the black line? That's a really weird routing pattern.

[Hatman]

Thanks for the link. Here is the poster in full:


Thoughts:
1) Man, it is really nice to see the Black Line on a map, all official-like!


2) The routing is pretty odd. Going from the University down to Salt Lake Central almost certainly means they are using the old Classic cars, not S70's on the Black Line. Then, strangely, they would need to use the S70's on the Blue Line, because that now goes out to the airport. Why switch that? Why not keep Classic cars on the Blue line and run it to Salt Lake Central, and have the Black Line use S70's and go out to the airport? I suspect it has something to do with the timing of the routes; the section from Ballpark to Courthouse will be a single-track line on those days, and scheduling trains through that bottle-neck probably causes cascading scheduling conflicts at other junctions - mainly the 4th south junction.
Or it could just be that someone got nostalgic for the old University Line pre-2011, and just wanted to resurrect it for a weekend. Either way, we will all get the chance to take pictures like these again:
http://www.railpictures.net/photo/333576/
http://www.railpictures.net/photo/343466/
http://www.railpictures.net/photo/341605/

3) The rails at 700 South are only 18 years old, and already need to be replaced. The junction at 400 South was installed in 2001, making it 16 yrs old. If those curved (same radii) need to be replaced at a similar age, then we are only 2 years away from UTA being FORCED to rebuild that junction. (We could argue about how much wear and tear each junction has got over the years, but I think it is about similar.) And when UTA rebuilds it, there is a high probability they will upgrade it too, just like they have been upgrading other switches along their line (see the recent upgrading of the crossovers at 700 south as an example). So... perhaps we are only 2 or so years away from the Black Line becoming permanent? Or, at the very least, we are 2 years away from UTA being physically able to run the Black Line at the same time as the other lines?

I think the fact that they chose to use the Black Line moniker for this temporary use is very encouraging. I'd known for a while they had all the announcements recorded and system-routing prepared for the black line, but I'd never heard them before. It will be really interesting to see if it is a pre-recorded announcement or if the operators make the announcements themselves. Either way, I'm going for a joy ride one of these weekends. I'll report back and tell y'all about it.

[Liberty Wellsian]

How about heavy tax breaks for developments that create new jobs/residential doors within 1,000 feet of a Trax/FrontRunner station. The goal would be to create dense urbanized mixed use centers around rail. Beyond 1000 feet is where most of the parking would end up. That's still under 2 blocks walk to the station. These developments would have a market incentive to also provide parking but beyond the 1000 foot tax incentive zone. The tax breaks could be easily justified by the savings to UDOT, let alone what it could do for air quality. Further UTA Park and ride lots adjacent to stations would become more valuable as real estate. They could sell them to help fund transit expansion.