Salt Lake Transit News Thread

[Hatman]

Originally Posted by Makid

I agree that it might be best to know the ridership on a per station basis. This would be nice to know just to see if TODs do affect ridership at the various stations as they are built.

I know that UTA does track this information but I haven't seen anywhere that they publish this.

I do know what you mean about ridership on a per capita basis compared to the base city and understand the Amtrak ridership numbers issue. I am just curious to see if we might be pulling in more riders per capita than others.

It's a shame they don't publish the ridership at each station - as of course they ought to know it. I wonder if there are legal reasons to keep that information private...? (We really need a UTA insider to join this forum!)

As for the Amtrak issue, it may not be so big as I thought. If we're talking about funding and subsidy per rider, it is best to separate which organization is paying for each passenger's ride. And as no one could every use Amtrak to commute to Salt Lake City (terrible schedule hours), I think it is somewhat fare that I didn't include Amtrak's ridership in my analysis. Thus, the chart above also has information about public subsidy per rider, if you're willing to interpolate that far into the numbers...

[Makid]

Hatman,

Thank you for compiling the per capita numbers. Even though there are a lot of people that commute to SLC, it is somewhat proportional to those that commute to the other cities. As SLC is gaining both Residential and Commercial buildings, the numbers will be fun to watch.

Regarding station boardings, UTA has put out some numbers for boarding for Trax (at least downtown) and for some of the bus routes before.

I think that Trax and Frontrunner station boardings should be included in UTA's quarterly reports. Bus boardings may be more difficult until UTA moves to the fare card program for all transit methods.

Once we have that, UTA should then publish the top 10, 25 and 50 boarding and departure locations across the entire service area.

These numbers would be great as they could show areas that need more transit service and areas that are okay with lower. Basically a High and Low frequency area map and High frequency areas should be focused on for having no less than 15 but ideally 7 minutes or less frequencies (bus/rail) and the Low frequency areas should be between focused to be no less than 30 minutes but no greater than 15 minutes in service (bus/rail)

If this type of information was public, I think it would go a long way to building the public's trust for UTA operations. It would also work to help create higher density development while also helping to reduce parking requirements.

[Old&New]

... but there are only two stops in SLC proper... seems to me we'd need to include the population from Ogden down to Provo...

[Hatman]

The population of every service area might be hard to calculate, but I could give metro area populations a try. Maybe I will. Next time I get a break...

[Hatman]

Well, that was easier than I thought. I just looked up populations by Metro Areas and then by Combined Statistical Areas, then threw those populations into the existing table - and I got these:

Again, my lazy-man's analysis would not stand up to any professional scrutiny, but it gives an accurate overall picture of where we stand compared to other commuter rail systems. What I think is remarkable is that in both cases SLC is ranked higher than Washington DC, even though they have the advantage of including Baltimore in their ridership and we have the disadvantage of including Park City in our population (Park City is not in UTA's service area).

So what this means is that FrontRunner attracts a disproportionate amount of ridership when compared to most other commuter rail systems. You might even want to label it as a 'Regional Rail' system, because it operates so frequently. I mean, our metro area is ranked #75 in population and our combined statistical area is ranked #24 in population, and yet our commuter rail system ranks within at least the top 10 in terms of ridership per capita in all three ways I've counted.

Also, it's important to remember how many cities are not even on this list, because they don't have their own commuter rail systems. I'm talking about places like Huston, Atlanta, and Detroit, all of which are much larger cities than Salt Lake and never got around to building a commuter rail system.

We are truly spoiled here in Utah, commuter rail-wise.

[justiny]

Very spoiled indeed. Living here in the DC area for so long, as well as traveling all around the country, the Wasatch Front has one of the nation's best commuter rail systems... Yet my friends and family in SLC still refuse to believe me. I have no idea why.

[jubguy3]

Originally Posted by justiny

Very spoiled indeed. Living here in the DC area for so long, as well as traveling all around the country, the Wasatch Front has one of the nation's best commuter rail systems... Yet my friends and family in SLC still refuse to believe me. I have no idea why.

Because the actual agency that runs it is horrible. Its trendy to hate UTA, ask the tribune.

[Hatman]

Just looking back over UTA TRAX art (don't ask why). I found one for the University Line in 2001.

They knew exactly what they were building, even back then:

[CountyLemonade]

Originally Posted by jubguy3

Because the actual agency that runs it is horrible.

Eh, it isn't horrible. The issue around executive compensation is very real, to be sure, but for the most part UTA does an okay job as a transit agency. And its planning practices are pretty progressive. Remember, UTA was the agency that so pushed this city to adopt light rail. Buying the TRAX ROW far in advance is an example of how visionary UTA can be, despite its faults.

I think most of the reason UTA gets such a bad rep is because how mediocre their non-rail services are. But that's not UTA's fault. The legislature is the one that can allow counties to vote on measures to boost service levels. Of course, we've seen how startlingly unwilling they are (specifically the state senate) to do anything at all about it.

[justiny]

I remember in the late 1980's, I believe a vast majority of the valley was strongly opposed to light rail... I even remember the anti-light rail campaign signs that were everywhere leading up to Election Day. Now every city along the Wasatch Front wants TOD's. It really is impressive to see how far UTA has come in the past 25 years.

[i-215]

Originally Posted by CountyLemonade

Eh, it isn't horrible. The issue around executive compensation is very real, to be sure, but for the most part UTA does an okay job as a transit agency.

There's definately some problems on the admin level. It bothers me that they brought in David Burton to fix things. He hadn't been on board for more than 30 seconds when he said:

Does UTA need to be fixed? "Of course not. UTA is fixed." The audit "is dead, (has) died, and gone to Heaven." What the CRAP, David?

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by i-215

There's definately some problems on the admin level. It bothers me that they brought in David Burton to fix things. He hadn't been on board for more than 30 seconds when he said:

Does UTA need to be fixed? "Of course not. UTA is fixed." The audit "is dead, (has) died, and gone to Heaven." What the CRAP, David?

In news reports, UTA said that most of the issues brought up in the audit had been fixed by UTA before the audit was even released, i.e., they knew what their problems were and were working to correct them at the time of the audit.

[TransitAngst]

UTA is exceptional in commuter/regional rail service. I am not certain the level of service they are providing is a good thing. I don't regularly ride anymore, but the trains were pretty empty during the off peak times. And one thing that really bothered me about the UTA audit was that FR is subsidized more than the other services (95% vs 85%). If the tribune got that right, which is not a for sure thing.

So the new Salt Lake Central garage will be on the other side of the tracks? Won't that cause problems for pull ins and outs with UP sometimes blocking 200 S?

[Hatman]

I'm curious as to how current those tribune numbers you quoted are. Before the line to Provo opened I wouldn't have argued with them at all, but now that the south line is open, and ridership is still rising, 95% subsidy makes me wonder.

Frontrunner operations are pretty inflexible - the trains will all have 4 cars all day long, peak times or off-peak - meaning that operating costs are always the same. The only thing, then, that can cause any variance in the subsidy-per-rider is the number of riders on the train. So before the south line opened, and ridership was about 5,000 riders per week day, the subsidy per rider would be significant compared to now, when they carry 16,000 per weekday (average).
(The added commet car only adds 7% to the operating costs, according to UTA supervisors - who may or may not be reliable.)

I also wonder what happens if UP blocks the crossing next to the new garage. Will all UTA shut down? I hope they have a plan for it.

And Welcome, TransitAngst! It's always good to find someone new to talk transit with!

[jubguy3]

There's thing called the University Boulevard Bridge...

[Hatman]

There is such a thing as the bridge on 4th south, but that adds an extra five minutes to getting from the future garage location to SLC station - without traffic. If all the cars are backed up by the train, that blocks left-turning buses leaving the garage, and it also blocks buses from getting close to the SLC station bus entrance on 2nd south.
It is a rare thing for UP to block that crossing, but not unheard of. Grant's tower (the name of the railroad junction between 1st and 2nd south) is much less congested than it used to be, but it is still a division junction surrounded by the Salt Lake North yard, Roper yard, and the Salt Lake Intermodal Container terminal - so some infrequent congestion must be anticipated. Which is why it may seem like a small problem, but I still hope UTA has a plan for it, because we all know that sooner or later it will happen.

[i-215]

Anyone know anything about this? On WFRC's TIP (the official map of transportation projects funded over the next five years) it shows somewhere to the tune of $100+ million dollars tossed at a project called "Draper TRAX Extension (south)" with a description of carrying LRT to the county line:



For such a top-tier budget item, I can't find anything to validate if it's real or just a typo.

[Makid]

Originally Posted by i-215

Anyone know anything about this? On WFRC's TIP (the official map of transportation projects funded over the next five years) it shows somewhere to the tune of $100+ million dollars tossed at a project called "Draper TRAX Extension (south)" with a description of carrying LRT to the county line:



For such a top-tier budget item, I can't find anything to validate if it's real or just a typo.

That is the northern part of the Orem TRAX extension. MAG and WFRC have been studying this for a while and MAG would like to bring it up in the next few years, if they can get funding (Tax increases and grants). This is a smaller project for SL County but it would be a major increase for Northern Utah County.

I can't remember ridership estimates but I do know that one stop is supposed to be basically right outside the door from Adobe, The line would stop somewhere near the Orem Frontrunner station. MAG didn't have any really defined route for the line once it got to Lehi the last time I looked at it.

Long range plan is that this TRAX extension would eventually replace the Provo/Orem BRT line that is currently seeking funding. Leading to a single TRAX line from SLC to Provo.

[Hatman]

I am happy to hear that WFRC is prepared to spend money on that segment. On its own it is pretty useless, but as Makid said it is meant to connect into Utah County. UTA owns all the right-of-way into American Fork, past the old Geneva Steel plant, right up to Lakoda Junction (where the Orem FR station is). I believe the first goal is to get TRAX as far as Lehi, then work on an American Fork extension, then a Lindon extension, and then an Orem extension (and by then, replace the BRT line for a Provo section too!).
Fun Fact: the section pictured above already has all the engineering work done for it. It was lumped in with the Draper extension, which is why it is called the Draper Phase II line, instead of the 'County Line Extension' or something like that. It saves on expenses and ensures that the project will be able to be completed, even though it offers very little benefit to Salt Lake County residents (though they would be the ones paying for it until the county line). I was looking through the UTA website to try and find some of the plan sheets, but their website has changed so much since the old Frontlines 2015 days...
But I have seen them with my own eyes.
I think the 5 year timeline is a tad optimistic, though. I think MAG will be too preoccupied with the BRT project for the next few years. This county line project won't even be discussed until Utah County is ready to build their own section from the county line down to Lehi. I give it 10 years before it opens.

[LeVaJe]

On the WFRC Draft 2015-2040 Transportation Plan it is Unfunded, meaning they do not anticipate it before 2040, but it also says they would prefer it in Phase 3 (2035-2040).
On the MAG 2011-2040 MPO Transportation Plan it is Phase 3 (2031-2040).