Salt Lake Transit News Thread

[Hatman]

Makid,

Thanks for all the info!

I admit I've been hearing rumors for years that UTA wanted to extend the Airport line all the way through the International Center and out to Tooele, but I just don't see how that is feasible. For one thing, it is generally frowned upon for freight and LRT to share ROW anymore, like they do in San Diego. See Denver, how they needed to build a LRT/Commuter rail hybrid system that effectively splits their rail transit network awkwardly in half at their Union Station - and all because the new lines that follow existing freight lines were not allowed to be LRT.
Secondly, by my measurements, the line to Tooele would extend for more than 30 miles. The Blue Line is about 20 miles and takes an hour to get into downtown from Draper. Of course, there would be fewer stops on the line to Tooele, but travel times are still going to be prohibitively long by LRT.

The BRT proposal is fine as a short-term solution, but it isn't sufficient for the long term. Fun Fact: Tooele valley has roughly the same amount of developable land as all of northern Utah County (Lehi to Provo). Even if Tooele gets filled up with suburban sprawl, there is still the potential to have at least half a million people living there. If housing becomes denser, it isn't far fetched to envision a future of more than 1 million people living there.

Another Fun Fact: There is only 1 road connecting Tooele to Salt Lake City, and that is Interstate 80. This single road can get congested and block traffic, or it can even be closed completely due to poor weather (ice near the lake or strong winds blowing over semi trailers, etc). It is a pretty fragile situation to be in. What's worse, is that there is only a very narrow strip of land between Kennecott property and the Great Salt Lake on which to build new roads. A frontage road would be good, but not nearly enough for a fully built-out Tooele Valley. And we need Tooele! With housing prices rising so fast, the only solution is to build new housing, which requires new land. Tooele Valley can be an important safety valve for keeping housing costs manageable. However, to do this the only option for making Tooele a viable place to live will be a high-speed, high capacity rail line.

I have an alignment for such a service drawn out in the Google Map in my signature line - be sure to turn on the tab marked 'New TRAX Lines!' to see it.
My line begins at the Rio Grande depot, which we designed to have platform space for an east-west commuter rail line. From the Rio Grande Depot the line would turn sharply to the west and follow the active Union Pacific line out past the airport, where the first stop on the line would connect to an Automatic People Mover. This APM would travel the remaining 2 miles up to the 'welcome center', where the elevated TRAX station was planned to go. This airport connection would be an amazing feature if the line were to extend to Park City in the far future... imagine getting from the airport to Park City in one straight shot!
From the airport, the Tooele Commuter Rail line would pass by the International Center (connections via sky bridge across I-80, similar to the Orem UVU bridge), Lakepoint, Stansbury Park, then Tooele Main Street, before leaving the UP tracks to travel cross-country towards Grantsville. This new alignment would skirt the edge of the military depot, and would be a relatively simple ROW to acquire. The idea of using Grantsville as an Inland Port 'overflow' is, I think, a good one, but a freight alignment would probably need to be built separately from the alignment I have proposed in my map.

All of this is to say I think a line to Tooele is 1) in the state's interest, 2) extremely feasible, and 3) the only logical choice based on the limited connectivity of the area. I'm sure you and I and most everyone else on this thread knows this, but I thought I would go over some talking points, just to make sure our case is as strong as it possibly can be.

And to end, it is super cool that the Rio Grande Plan has sparked so much conversation! A big thank you to everyone on this sub and elsewhere who helped in the original conversations, and in spreading the plan so far!

[Hatman]

Originally Posted by Paniolo Man

My understanding is there are three options, the two most feasible are explored by this report written by two USU engineering students.

Haha, I think I know one of those two students! Engineering/planning really is a small world.

I am in awe of the ability to program an AI to find the best route through mountains, cities, and wetlands, ect. Aside from the obvious typo in the first line, it is an impressive paper to have been written by students.

I believe that #2 is the best option and land should be acquired sooner rather than later.

100%.

Going over those 'hills' was also the choice made by an electrified interurban rail line, the Utah Idaho Central, about 100 years ago:

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/vi...256751671&z=11

Following that alignment exactly would be infeasible, since it is too twisty, but it is impressive how much of it is still intact.

Sorry if this has been a bit long, This is something I've read up a lot on.

Nah, long posts TIGHT!

[SLCdude]

Originally Posted by tygr

We're a week in with UTA's "free-fare February." Is there any way to see if it's had any impacts? Increased ridership? Other than maybe just riding it and saying "Yeah, the bus/rail car has been fuller than usual."

I don't get to ride UTA enough to gauge any changes.

Here's some preliminary ridership data (only up to Feb 4 so far):

https://rideuta.maps.arcgis.com/apps...099f4168e9c922

The ridership numbers for February should be posted to the ridership dashboard after March 10:

https://rideuta.maps.arcgis.com/apps...83343f481c2e99

[Paniolo Man]

Originally Posted by SLCdude

Here's some preliminary ridership data (only up to Feb 4 so far)

I have taken a few days so far this month to ride as many UTA modes as possible. My question is how are they counting riders? If I get on the Frontrunner and ride to my destination, how do they know I was there?

On that note, the funnest activity was riding the Frontrunner Ogden to Provo and trying to get back to Ogden without using the Frontrunner, Lots of buses.

[SLCdude]

Originally Posted by Paniolo Man

I have taken a few days so far this month to ride as many UTA modes as possible. My question is how are they counting riders? If I get on the Frontrunner and ride to my destination, how do they know I was there?

On that note, the funnest activity was riding the Frontrunner Ogden to Provo and trying to get back to Ogden without using the Frontrunner, Lots of buses.

Same! I'm trying to bump those numbers up by riding transit instead of biking.

I'm almost certain all buses and trains are equipped with automatic people counters at each door, which is where the ridership numbers come from, so you should be counted boarding and exiting.

FrontRunner seems to have the highest jump in ridership, especially on the two Saturdays so far in February.

[Atlas]

Any chance we see FrontRunner service on Sundays anytime soon? For it to be a consistent option as transit to the airport from Ogden/Provo, I think that needs to happen.

[Makid]

Originally Posted by Atlas

Any chance we see FrontRunner service on Sundays anytime soon? For it to be a consistent option as transit to the airport from Ogden/Provo, I think that needs to happen.

Only thing I have heard is that there isn't enough potential ridership to justify a Sunday schedule. The service is evaluated as part of each change day evaluation of routes (3 times each year).

I think we won't see FrontRunner run on Sundays until the line is double tracked, at least selectively enough to allow for 15 minute frequencies (Mon-Fri). This should push the ridership values high enough to warrant service.

[Paniolo Man]

Some updates on the 650 South Station.

[Makid]

https://www.ksl.com/article/50350184...-fare-february
UTA weekday ridership jumps 20% during first half of Free Fare February

SALT LAKE CITY — "Free Fare February" appears to have already had a positive effect on public transit ridership.

The average weekday ridership from the first half of this month is 101,427 — up almost 20% compared to "over comparable periods of time" in January, according to new ridership information released by the Utah Transit Authority on Wednesday. Ridership on Saturdays is up 34%, while Sunday ridership is up 27%.

While data from previous years shows ridership typically increases between January and February, the jump so far is much larger than the previous five years. The average ridership increase between the two months for the years 2017-2021 is about 4.5%.

The FrontRunner commuter rail service from Ogden to Provo has received the largest overall rise among services so far this month. Its weekday ridership is up 33%, and a whopping 163% during the first two Saturdays of February.

But all other modes of public transportation have seen increases. UTA's microtransit programs in Salt Lake City and southern Salt Lake County have also increased 33% during the weekdays and 43% on the first two Saturdays.

Meanwhile, fixed-route bus services are up 22% on weekdays, 29% on Saturdays and 31% on Sundays. TRAX ridership is up 16% on weekdays, as well as 18% on Saturdays and 23% on Sundays. UVX in Utah County has experienced the slightest increase among the different services. It's up 4% on weekdays and 6% on Saturdays.

From Fox 13:

The "Free Fare February" initiative cost about 1.2-1.3 million dollars and was paid for by a combination of contributions and taxpayer dollars.

I know that February is the shortest month of the year, but if we use the cost for February to extrapolate the cost for a full year, we are looking at close to $20 Million to provide free fares each year.

I think the $50 Million from UTA would cover not just the fares but also keep the current staffing and ticketing/card systems, maintenance, and so forth in place all regarding fare collection. It also comes across that this is currently costing UTA roughly $30 Million a year. This extra cost is also not currently covered by fares and has never been. With this removal, that is $30 Million annually that could be used to either pay down debt or go to increases in service, system upgrades, or even increases in driver/worker wages.

[UtahBison]

Originally Posted by Makid

I know that February is the shortest month of the year, but if we use the cost for February to extrapolate the cost for a full year, we are looking at close to $20 Million to provide free fares each year.

I think the $50 Million from UTA would cover not just the fares but also keep the current staffing and ticketing/card systems, maintenance, and so forth in place all regarding fare collection. It also comes across that this is currently costing UTA roughly $30 Million a year. This extra cost is also not currently covered by fares and has never been. With this removal, that is $30 Million annually that could be used to either pay down debt or go to increases in service, system upgrades, or even increases in driver/worker wages.

Wow, that is quite the jump! I am excited to see what the rest of the month is like.

Do we know if this free fare February was set up just to alleviate air quality, or is it also being looked at as a test to see what getting rid of fares would do to ridership? I personally am all for getting rid of fares. A lot more people would use it if they didn't have to pay.

[Makid]

Originally Posted by UtahBison

Do we know if this free fare February was set up just to alleviate air quality, or is it also being looked at as a test to see what getting rid of fares would do to ridership? I personally am all for getting rid of fares. A lot more people would use it if they didn't have to pay.

It is a bit of both. The primary goal is to get more people on transit as the side effect is better air quality.

There is a bill in the legislature that would make it transit free across the state. There was a push last year to expand on the 7 days of free UTA and there is a decent chance of free fares coming this year or next year depending on how the current bill is received.

[Atlas]

In other good news, it looks like the preferred alternative for UTA's South Valley Transit Study is a FrontRunner extension to Payson. They noted that it had strong interest from the community.

[Always Sunny in SLC]

Originally Posted by Atlas

In other good news, it looks like the preferred alternative for UTA's South Valley Transit Study is a FrontRunner extension to Payson. They noted that it had strong interest from the community.

They should just have you switch to BRT at Provo since that clearly is a brilliant idea UTA had for TRAX in Draper.

[Paniolo Man]

Originally Posted by Always Sunny in SLC

They should just have you switch to BRT at Provo since that clearly is a brilliant idea UTA had for TRAX in Draper.

In their study that was alternative #2. Currently Frontrunner is the preferred mode.

[Paniolo Man]

Some electric bus info from today's UTA board meeting.







Interesting that they will actually be reducing the total number of hybrid buses. Still happy for more electric buses.

[Paniolo Man]

Definitely transportation related...

Got a few pics of Stadler today, really hoping they reconsider and have them do the canyon project. Anyways here's their building and a grainy picture of some Stadler KISS destined for California.



Side question. Anybody know the exact reason UTA keeps around 5 1999 Gillig Low floor at the Central Garage? They aren't on the active roster and I certainly don't see them around. Are they for parts/training? Or are they reserve buses? One was powered up when I went by the garage today.

[Atlas]

The bill that puts UDOT in charge of building transit projects, with UTA in charge of operations, passed on Friday. Hopefully this leads to better master planning, more funding, and ultimately more rail transit expansion sooner than later!

[Paniolo Man]

Originally Posted by Atlas

The bill that puts UDOT in charge of building transit projects, with UTA in charge of operations, passed on Friday. Hopefully this leads to better master planning, more funding, and ultimately more rail transit expansion sooner than later!

Any idea what happens to UTA's current plans? Will they continue with Frontrunner Forward?

[Makid]

Originally Posted by Paniolo Man

Any idea what happens to UTA's current plans? Will they continue with Frontrunner Forward?

Current plans will continue. FrontRunner double tracking is being paid for by the State. The bill that was passed to fund the double tracking this year did modify the bill from last year in that last years bill would have bonded for the project where this year it is paid for up front. No bonds means no debt for the State or UTA.

Projects such as the Taylorsville BRT and Ogden BRT will still happen as they would have, this is the same with regards to the SLC Transit Master Plan. The only currently planned projects that may shift are the SLC - South Davis transit connection and the Prison Redevelopment transit line.

Future projects that may change are the Eagle Mountain transit link, State Street transit, Tooele Transit, and 5600 West transit. It is possible that each of these will be constructed as rail rather than BRT and a later shift to rail.

[Atlas]

Originally Posted by Makid

Current plans will continue. FrontRunner double tracking is being paid for by the State. The bill that was passed to fund the double tracking this year did modify the bill from last year in that last years bill would have bonded for the project where this year it is paid for up front. No bonds means no debt for the State or UTA.

Projects such as the Taylorsville BRT and Ogden BRT will still happen as they would have, this is the same with regards to the SLC Transit Master Plan. The only currently planned projects that may shift are the SLC - South Davis transit connection and the Prison Redevelopment transit line.

Future projects that may change are the Eagle Mountain transit link, State Street transit, Tooele Transit, and 5600 West transit. It is possible that each of these will be constructed as rail rather than BRT and a later shift to rail.

If all of this is true, it sounds like a very positive change to me. I'm especially interested to see if they change the transit plan for the PoM. That site needs better access to TRAX and FrontRunner if it's going to be anything more than a fancy office park with some housing thrown in.

Hopefully, the Rio Grande Plan has caught enough attention to get some future consideration. I think we've brought the idea to light at an almost-ideal moment in time, tbh.