HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Mountain West

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1421  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2009, 10:10 PM
WASDEN's Avatar
WASDEN WASDEN is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Kailua HI
Posts: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by delts145 View Post
Draper/Bluffdale battle over FrontRunner stop isn't over yet

http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705287387,00.html

...UTA officials want a stop somewhere between Thanksgiving Point and Sandy. They're considering four sites — 12800 South, 13500 South, 14000 South and 14600 South...On Wednesday, Bluffdale Mayor Claudia Anderson asked the UTA Board of Directors to consider a site at 14600 South, just west of the Union Pacific tracks, on land the UTA already owns...But if the train's brakes screech to a halt in Draper, it will speed past a future 14,000-resdent development in Bluffdale. But Draper, too, has a site that stands out for UTA officials. The site near 13500 South will be designated as transit development...




I think the key to this Frontrunner stop is proximity to Bangerter Highway, which is the quickest and most direct shot to the growing communities near Herriman. Of the 4 options:

12800: Too close to the South Towne stop to really justify it's existence IMO. Also not great access to Bangerter.
13500: Pretty good existing access to Bangeter. Some backtracking required once you get off on 200 West.
14000: Not sure exactly where this one would be located, since Bangeter itself runs at pretty much at 14000 S. at this location. Would having a Frontrunner station right at Bangerter justify an aditional traffic light there? Not sure...
14600: Seems kind of difficult to access from Bangerter, tons of nearby development potential though.

Of the 4 station proposals the only one I really hate is 12800 S. Regardless of which one is chosen, I predict this will be a busy/popular station for commuters. Each city would no doubt benefit from having this station in their boarders.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1422  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2009, 4:03 AM
arkhitektor arkhitektor is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Clearfield, UT
Posts: 1,740
I thought that Bluffdale officials were so opposed to having a stop in their city that they actually passed something banning UTA from building there. I am remembering wrong or has something changed?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1423  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2009, 4:25 AM
Urban_logic's Avatar
Urban_logic Urban_logic is offline
I'm an Urbanizer, baby!
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Goias, Brazil ~ starting summer 09'
Posts: 355
Quote:
Originally Posted by WASDEN View Post
http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705287387,00.html

...UTA officials want a stop somewhere between Thanksgiving Point and Sandy. They're considering four sites — 12800 South, 13500 South, 14000 South and 14600 South...On Wednesday, Bluffdale Mayor Claudia Anderson asked the UTA Board of Directors to consider a site at 14600 South, just west of the Union Pacific tracks, on land the UTA already owns...But if the train's brakes screech to a halt in Draper, it will speed past a future 14,000-resdent development in Bluffdale. But Draper, too, has a site that stands out for UTA officials. The site near 13500 South will be designated as transit development...




I think the key to this Frontrunner stop is proximity to Bangerter Highway, which is the quickest and most direct shot to the growing communities near Herriman. Of the 4 options:

12800: Too close to the South Towne stop to really justify it's existence IMO. Also not great access to Bangerter.
13500: Pretty good existing access to Bangeter. Some backtracking required once you get off on 200 West.
14000: Not sure exactly where this one would be located, since Bangeter itself runs at pretty much at 14000 S. at this location. Would having a Frontrunner station right at Bangerter justify an aditional traffic light there? Not sure...
14600: Seems kind of difficult to access from Bangerter, tons of nearby development potential though.

Of the 4 station proposals the only one I really hate is 12800 S. Regardless of which one is chosen, I predict this will be a busy/popular station for commuters. Each city would no doubt benefit from having this station in their boarders.
I think I like the 135th South one because it has a site actually designated as TOD. The 14,000 resident development can easy access the station with a pretty short commute. Like you said, it would have great Bangetter access. I support the 135th South Station - I think it makes the most sense from a transit perspective.
__________________
Urbanize, or get left behind!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1424  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2009, 6:27 AM
DMTower's Avatar
DMTower DMTower is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 786
I think they should build it in Draper. Screw the ingrates in Bluffdale who turned them down initially. Draper has always wanted it and have worked hard to get it. They are progressive and they should get it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1425  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2009, 7:07 AM
anyiliang's Avatar
anyiliang anyiliang is offline
加油
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: 台灣
Posts: 560
I also think they should build it in Draper. It will be more convenient for more people. Who even says that the 14,000 people that live in that development will use it. My guess it would only be around 400 people. So why build something that is convenient for a minority of people.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1426  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2009, 8:21 AM
WASDEN's Avatar
WASDEN WASDEN is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Kailua HI
Posts: 391
Quote:
Originally Posted by arkhitektor View Post
I thought that Bluffdale officials were so opposed to having a stop in their city that they actually passed something banning UTA from building there. I am remembering wrong or has something changed?
This is what it said in the article:
"Bluffdale City Council members, however, are not all on board. Last year, they voted 3-2 against a quasi-separate issue that directly disallowed such a stop to be built. That vote, though, has since been trumped by state lawmakers who assured UTA could choose where to build a stop — no matter a council's vote."

Quote:
Originally Posted by DMTower View Post
I think they should build it in Draper. Screw the ingrates in Bluffdale who turned them down initially. Draper has always wanted it and have worked hard to get it. They are progressive and they should get it.
You do have a point. Although I think the station location should be based solely on how it best serves commuters- regardless of how much courting Draper does, or how backwards the current Bluffdale city council is.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1427  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2009, 1:19 PM
MetroFanatic MetroFanatic is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 298
BOLDNESS TO GET YOUR ATTENTION AND ANNOY THAT ONE GUY!

Anyway, I was driving along Old Bingham Highway today, and there is now track ballast and rail ties all the way to 9000 South (starting from where it turns to daybreak), with rail laid to 4800 South.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1428  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2009, 7:02 PM
SLC Projects's Avatar
SLC Projects SLC Projects is offline
Bring out the cranes...
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 6,108
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMTower View Post
I think they should build it in Draper. Screw the ingrates in Bluffdale who turned them down initially. Draper has always wanted it and have worked hard to get it. They are progressive and they should get it.

Agree. It makes more sense to have it in Draper.

Also I have notice this past week or so that it looks like crews are working on the Airport Trax line on North Temple right where the 1-215 overpass is. Crews have it down to only one lane both ways.
__________________
1. "Wells Fargo Building" 24-stories 422 FT 1998
2. "LDS Church Office Building" 28-stories 420 FT 1973
3. "111 South Main" 24-stories 387 FT 2016
4. "99 West" 30-stories 375 FT 2011
5. "Key Bank Tower" 27-stories 351 FT 1976
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1429  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2009, 6:57 PM
Future Mayor's Avatar
Future Mayor Future Mayor is offline
Vote for me in 2019!
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 4,803
I like the idea of the 135th or 140th stations.

I think the 135th S location has the most potential of these two, for a very nicely designed TOD. The problem with the 135th station is that the access from Bangeter, while close, has some serious issues. If you have ever been through that intersection that leads to IKEA you know that some serious traffic backs up there, and the retail that is at that intersection is to close to the road and to Bangeter to accommodate them without tearing them down.

The issue with 140th as mentioned prior is that it would require a new Bangeter light, and we 100% auto oriented.

As mentioned 128th is just to close to the South Town stop and 146th is just to developed already.

Here is a map of those locations.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1430  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2009, 5:24 AM
WASDEN's Avatar
WASDEN WASDEN is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Kailua HI
Posts: 391
Since UTA is planning on the original Draper alignment for TRAX (pictured in RED), 14600 South might not be a bad idea for a Frontrunner stop if a TRAX extension could be implemented (pictured in WHITE). Regardless of which stop is chosen, I think its imperative to connect Frontrunner to TRAX somewhere in the South valley for a seamless/comprehensive transit system. I realise there is quite the difference in elevation from the 14600 TRAX stop to the 14600 Frontrunner stop, so engineering it might be unrealistic. But it looks good on paper .

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1431  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2009, 5:28 AM
i-215's Avatar
i-215 i-215 is offline
Traffic Engineer (EIT)
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: SLC/SoCal
Posts: 3,097
I like 140th, but they'd have to put off-ramps and an overpass there to access the station. It's too close to Redwood and the Frontage Road for another signal.
__________________
Life is nicer at 70 miles per hour
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1432  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2009, 5:54 AM
ski_steve ski_steve is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 448
Scientists: Don't make ancient site a rail hub



Tomorrow's commuter trains and a railside development could rob Utahns of a full understanding of their state's ancient past if the Legislature allows construction on the site of a buried village in Draper, archaeologists say.

It's a site where a preliminary dig in 2007 found tantalizing evidence that archaic American Indians up to 3,000 years ago were farming and cooking corn -- hundreds of years before modern scientists previously believed farming had reached the Great Basin.

UTA attorney Bruce Jones said the state land near 13500 South has two key advantages: It would put a park-and-ride lot closer to Bangerter Highway and it would move the development away from homeowners who worry about the bustle.

The UTA attorney said there would be time to excavate and catalog the site before FrontRunner is completed between Salt Lake City and Provo in the next three years.


http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_11821743?source=rss
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1433  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2009, 6:33 AM
ski_steve ski_steve is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 448
Tax hike would help Salt Lake City pay for TRAX, Davis streetcars


Legislators moved forward Monday with a bill that would boost sales taxes in Salt Lake City to help fund transit improvements.

Sen. Greg Bell, R-Fruit Heights, said the sales-tax boost -- 7 cents on every $10 purchase -- would help rebuild the North Temple viaduct and launch a streetcar system into Davis County.

The Utah Transit Authority and city are looking to rebuild the North Temple viaduct and shorten it by a block, so it dumps traffic onto 400 West instead of 300 West. That way, TRAX trains running to the airport wouldn't have to snake around to head west to the airport, and streetcars running to and from Centerville could drop off at a transfer station there.

The viaduct rebuild is estimated at $65 million. UTA has $25 million budgeted for the project, and federal stimulus money could cover a portion.

The streetcar line would extend from North Temple north to Centerville. Both the tax and the project have the support of the Davis County Chamber of Commerce, the Utah League of Cities and Towns and the Davis Council of Governments.

Salt Lake City is second in the nation in terms of the difference between its daytime and nighttime populations.


http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_11819102?source=rss
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1434  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2009, 6:33 AM
Urban_logic's Avatar
Urban_logic Urban_logic is offline
I'm an Urbanizer, baby!
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Goias, Brazil ~ starting summer 09'
Posts: 355
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMTower View Post
I think they should build it in Draper. Screw the ingrates in Bluffdale who turned them down initially. Draper has always wanted it and have worked hard to get it. They are progressive and they should get it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anyiliang View Post
I also think they should build it in Draper. It will be more convenient for more people. Who even says that the 14,000 people that live in that development will use it. My guess it would only be around 400 people. So why build something that is convenient for a minority of people.
So is 135th in Draper, then? Sorry, I'm not the best with that area as far as city bounderies go
__________________
Urbanize, or get left behind!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1435  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2009, 6:36 PM
Orlando's Avatar
Orlando Orlando is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevena07 View Post
The streetcar line would extend from North Temple north to Centerville. ..


What good would a street car do from North Temple in Salt Lake to centerville in Davis county do when we have Front Runner that covers that portion? Besides street cars are much slower than light rail and commuter rail.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1436  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2009, 6:52 PM
arkhitektor arkhitektor is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Clearfield, UT
Posts: 1,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orlando View Post
What good would a street car do from North Temple in Salt Lake to centerville in Davis county do when we have Front Runner that covers that portion? Besides street cars are much slower than light rail and commuter rail.
It would better serve the local needs of the commuters in S. Davis county. FrontRunner is most useful for people who live in N. Davis or Weber counties. As is it now, Woods Cross is probably the least used of all the FrontRunner stations. If you lived in say Centerville or Bountiful, you've got to drive so far to get to the park-n-ride in Woods Cross that you might as well just drive a few more miles and go all the way to Salt Lake by car. It just isn't nearly as efficient as light rail would be on the east side of the freeway.

From Salt Lake Central, Woods Cross is as far away to the north as 5300 S. is in the other direction. It would be like saying that since Murray will soon be served by FrontRunner that we don't need TRAX from downtown to Murray anymore. Basically, even though there is a geographic overlap, light rail and Commuter Rail serve different people with different needs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1437  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2009, 4:53 AM
cololi cololi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 690
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orlando View Post
What good would a street car do from North Temple in Salt Lake to centerville in Davis county do when we have Front Runner that covers that portion? Besides street cars are much slower than light rail and commuter rail.
This should be LRT, not street car.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1438  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2009, 8:36 PM
WeST's Avatar
WeST WeST is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Murray
Posts: 340
Revisit transit pricing?

Arkhitektor had a great response to my comment about making public transit free or cheap. I didn't consider the numerous companies that are subsidizing the fare through for their employees. I agree completely with him that we should provide aggressive incentives to companies for providing these. The funny thing is, incentives are expenditures from government, but the public doesn't seem to mind them as much as straight out spending more on UTA.

I still don't think this answers the other issue of how to create a culture of mass transit riders. Those incentives are great for commuters as they go to and from work, but what about the people who don't work around a transit hub or in downtown?

I have had numerous conversations with people who were heading to an event downtown where I encouraged them to ride TRAX, but the $5.50 all day pass was seen by them as too pricey. Many think that if it is equivalent in price as driving is, then they prefer the freedom, and security, of their car. I don't necessarily agree with the logic, but I understand it.

Providing CHEAP fares will encourage a different demographic and help create a culture of mass transit riders. I don't think we have that yet.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1439  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2009, 8:55 PM
arkhitektor arkhitektor is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Clearfield, UT
Posts: 1,740
Yeah, there isn't a great mass-transit culture in Utah yet, but that will change over time as people get more and more exposure to public transit and policymakers press to make it a bigger priority.
A lot of people that I know wouldn't consider riding UTA to get anywhere because of a lifetime of preconceived notions about who a transit-user is supposed to be.
As I kid living in Portland, my dad always rode the bus on his commute so for me that was normal. Now, my wife and I ride the train with our daughter whenever we go to SLC or Ogden and she sees me ride it to work, so she'll be less likely to grow up thinking that mass-transit is only for poor people and communists too.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1440  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2009, 12:14 AM
jtrent77 jtrent77 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 551
While I think mass transit should be an equal or cheaper price as compared to driving, I also think that the transit system in Utah has a quite a bit of time to go before it is in a position to be attractive. Let's say something happened tomorrow and everyone decided to take mass transit--the system just isn't capable of handling such a situation--and despite some people's philosophies, it never will be--just accept that I'm sorry.

However, as time goes on and light rail and front runner expand, the possibility of taking mass transit will be open to more and more people. And while there are buses that people could take now...let's be honest, buses are not "sexy" and will likely never recover the negative connotation that they have gotten.

In time, as more and more stations open up, I think a greater and greater percentage of people will learn to appreciate the system, and as they do so they will use it more often--especially as populations increase and traffic gets more congested. As people end up taking the train more to commute only then will they become more interested in taking it for leisure reasons as well. But ultimately it will come down to greater access and greater populations. Those people that think the greater population is just going to switch to mass transit over night because it is "better," well, I think you aren't being realistic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Mountain West
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:47 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.