Salt Lake Transit News Thread

[Makid]

UTA’s big choice: increase bus frequency or cover more areas

https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics...oice-increase/

The Utah Transit Authority Board faces a big question that could refocus its bus service for years, and create a new set of winners and losers among taxpayers.

Should it increase bus frequency in busy, densely populated areas to increase ridership, or should it spend its money instead to cover more geographic areas — including in sparsely populated neighborhoods?

The board has a self-imposed deadline to decide by the end of the month how to balance those competing interests. No matter what, that seems bound to upset some and please others.

The board recently heard reports about what the public and local officials want: they generally prefer increasing frequency in busy areas by cutting back on geographic coverage.

In Salt Lake, Utah and Tooele counties, the public said it prefers that existing service remain about where it is: with 60% of service targeting increased ridership and 40% providing service in expanded coverage areas. Stakeholder groups, however, prefer making it a 70-30 split toward more frequent service in busy areas.

If new service is added in those three counties, both the public and stakeholders prefer using a 70-30 split with such new money toward increasing ridership.

Opinions are a bit different in Davis, Weber and Box Elder counties — where the current service split now is 40% for ridership and 60% for coverage. Both the public and stakeholders there prefer changing that to a 50-50 split.

For any new service added with additional money, the public would like to see it also follow a 50-50 split — but stakeholders want the divide to be 60-40 for more frequency in densely populated areas.

The board aims to set final mixes for future bus service soon, probably at its next meeting on July 31. That would allow it to keep on schedule for more in-depth planning on how to alter routes to improve overall service.

I would love for SL County to move to a 70/30 split as recommended by the stakeholders and agree that new money should be the same.

I am also happy to see that Utah County wants this as well.

The bigger shock is the change in Weber and Davis Counties towards an even split or even going to a 60/40 split as in SL County and Utah County today.

This shift, if approved would not be implemented until August of 2020. It would realign many routes and roughly quadruple the amount of 15 minute or better frequency bus routes in SL County alone and possibly triple the number of routes in Utah County.

I know there are estimates for what the ridership would be for the increased frequencies but I can't remember off hand what they would be but I think it was a nearly 50% or more overall increase in ridership after the first year and a 20% decrease in vehicle traffic along the routes.

[bob rulz]

Focusing on increasing service would be a great decision. At some point you get diminishing returns by increasing geographic coverage. UTA's geographic coverage is already pretty good, all things considered. What it needs is more density of coverage.

Imagine if every major corridor in Salt Lake County had 15-minute or better service with better late night and weekend service.

[bob rulz]

Seems that UTA is doing well under federal oversight. Encouraging news for restoring public trust in the organization.

https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics...eral-watchdog/

[joscar]

During the UTA board meeting this past Wednesday they approved a contract change with Kiewit Infrastructure West, who will be building the new TRAX station at the airport. Apparently they're having to delay the start of construction on the station by three months, as the airport is that far behind with demolition of the old parking structure and roads. It is going to add $700,000+ to the cost.

They also approved a change in contract with Stantec Architecture regarding the new bus servicing building (aka Depot District Clean Fuels Tech Center). UTA had been saying all along that they would be re-purposing the old Rio Grande Locomotive Maintenance building into the new center, but apparently the $10 million price tag changed their mind. They'll be razing all the Rio Grande buildings west of Salt Lake Central (actually they already started towards the end of July) and just build completely new.

Of course the only thing our wonderful media reported about from the meeting was that Jerry Benson and his wife were getting free lifetime UTA passes. I guess it made for some "great" comments on their websites.

[Hatman]

Did I read that right? The airport is 3 months behind in construction, which will delay the new TRAX station by 3 months, and this delay is going to cost UTA $0.7 million?

...How?

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by Hatman

Did I read that right? The airport is 3 months behind in construction, which will delay the new TRAX station by 3 months, and this delay is going to cost UTA $0.7 million?

...How?

Just because the airport is 3 months behind on one section of the project, doesn't mean they're 3 months behind on the entire project and could still complete the entire project on time.

Also, FYI:
Understanding the real cost of delays on construction projects

[i-215]

Originally Posted by joscar

Of course the only thing our wonderful media reported about from the meeting was that Jerry Benson and his wife were getting free lifetime UTA passes. I guess it made for some "great" comments on their websites.

Former SLC media person.

As soon as people stopped subscribing to the Des News and SL Trib during the past recession, we were in trouble. Des News had a major layoff (like 80% of the staff) back in 2010. Trib had a similar end-of-the-world-sized layoff a year or two ago.

Salt Lake City is (effectively) a ZERO NEWSPAPER town.

(repeat)

Salt Lake City is (effectively) a ZERO NEWSPAPER town!

And since local TV stations have had tiny news staffing for the past 20 years, they basically read the newspapers and covered it on TV after the fact. Which means, it's quite likely, there were NO members of the SLC news media actually at the UTA meeting.

That's the horrible clickbait reality we now live in.

[Utahn]

I can't speak to our local media's efforts to cover UTA (although Lee Davidson at the Trib does do a lot of coverage of UTA), but I do have some insider knowledge here. I have the opportunity to bring a lot of international delegations to meetings at both the Des News and the SL Trib with editorial board members, the editor, and journalists on staff. By all accounts, the Des News is thriving, profits are back up, new staff are coming on board (many being recruited nationally), with substantial investment at the beginning of the decade, the Des News was able to focus its resources and tech on a successful digital format. I know they plan to drop the print edition of the paper within the next 24 months and feel adequately prepared for that transition. Given, I think the Des News is repositioning itself towards more national and regional coverage, so there certainly is a gap in that local coverage.

I'm pretty optimistic about the Huntsman's families plans to revive the SL Trib as well. The foundation and nonprofit idea are innovative, and they are ahead of the game nationally. I think both papers play an important role in our community, particularly the Trib. I'd like to see them both succeed.

Originally Posted by i-215

Former SLC media person.

As soon as people stopped subscribing to the Des News and SL Trib during the past recession, we were in trouble. Des News had a major layoff (like 80% of the staff) back in 2010. Trib had a similar end-of-the-world-sized layoff a year or two ago.

Salt Lake City is (effectively) a ZERO NEWSPAPER town.

(repeat)

Salt Lake City is (effectively) a ZERO NEWSPAPER town!

And since local TV stations have had tiny news staffing for the past 20 years, they basically read the newspapers and covered it on TV after the fact. Which means, it's quite likely, there were NO members of the SLC news media actually at the UTA meeting.

That's the horrible clickbait reality we now live in.

[Makid]

Mixed into the article is a small blurb regarding how the Green Line is doing to/from the airport:

https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics...t-are-turning/

However, UTA spokesman Carl Arky says its data shows TRAX is carrying more people to and from the airport. In July, it averaged 1,814 daily boardings at the airport — up from 1,335 in January. “It is an upward trend for the past couple years, not the downward trend the airport director suggested.”

I like that it is nearing 2,000 passengers that are using the airport Trax station each day. That should increase with the new airport as the station, while not inside, will be a lot closer for all passengers than it is today.

[ajiuO]

I think we should consider narrowing most of the streets downtown in order to add protected bike lanes.. much like third S. and second W... The scooters and bikes have become very popular downtown. I think it would be nice to get them off of the sidewalks and give them a protected place to ride, and our streets are way overly wide.

500s, 600s, 400s, 300w, 700e should remain as is to handle a majority of the main traffic.

I think north temple should be slightly narrower and that they should continue exposing city creek all the way down to 400w. The should also put an island between 300w and 400w with trees, redo the island between 200w & 300w with trees, and also add islands with tress between state and 200w

State street should also get islands with trees. With maybe 2 lanes of traffic on each side... make it more similar to main... or maybe even have bus stops in the middle of the street on islands.

I would like to see the thinner islands with trees continued further down third west.

And I think it’s about time to start considering the second S. Street car. And perhaps a traxs line that goes from the airport to the University.

Just my 2 cents

[jtrent77]

Originally Posted by ajiuO

I think north temple should be slightly narrower and that they should continue exposing city creek all the way down to 400w.

Technically city creek isn't exposed at all; it's an artificial river that was created. City creek is still completely underground

[bob rulz]

Life on State was able to get a portion of State Street between 600 South and 900 South funded for redesigns. It's too small of a portion imo, but hopefully it's just the beginning.

The city council recently received money from the county to further study transit and pedestrian improvements on 200 South.

https://www.slc.gov/council/agendas/

Check the city council work session for September 3 "meeting materials" file. The information for both of these are in there.

[Makid]

UTA opts for more frequent bus service over expanding coverage

https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics...more-frequent/

The Utah Transit Authority board says current revenues won’t allow it to boost bus frequency and simultaneously cover more geographic areas. So, it chose Wednesday to lean heavily toward running popular routes more often, saying that will best build up ridership and serve the most people.

For much of the past year, UTA conducted online polls and held workshops with local leaders asking how to balance more frequent service versus expanded area coverage.

In Salt Lake, Utah and Tooele counties, about 60% of current bus service is designed mostly to increase ridership and 40% aims for expanded area coverage. UTA found that both the public and officials would like any added service to have a 70-30 split toward more frequent service.

In Davis, Weber and Box Elder counties, the split is now 40% for higher ridership and 60% for area coverage. Residents and officials there favored a 50-50 split for any new service.

The board on Wednesday directed agency planners to follow, for now, roughly a 70-30 split for increased ridership — and perhaps 75-25 in Salt Lake County — when adding new service from recent tax hikes, but to develop at least three scenarios each for consideration in UTA’s northern, central and southern regions.

The board plans to choose a preferred approach next year for each area but may use the other scenarios to lobby counties to raise local transit taxes or perhaps the state to offer more resources.

Hopefully they can get the possible route maps out soon so that people can prepare for more frequent service.

I also like the thought of the possibility of ending the winding routes through neighborhoods. Doing this will speed up the corresponding routes.

[Always Sunny in SLC]

Originally Posted by ajiuO

I think we should consider narrowing most of the streets downtown in order to add protected bike lanes.. much like third S. and second W... The scooters and bikes have become very popular downtown. I think it would be nice to get them off of the sidewalks and give them a protected place to ride, and our streets are way overly wide.

500s, 600s, 400s, 300w, 700e should remain as is to handle a majority of the main traffic.

I think north temple should be slightly narrower and that they should continue exposing city creek all the way down to 400w. The should also put an island between 300w and 400w with trees, redo the island between 200w & 300w with trees, and also add islands with tress between state and 200w

State street should also get islands with trees. With maybe 2 lanes of traffic on each side... make it more similar to main... or maybe even have bus stops in the middle of the street on islands.

I would like to see the thinner islands with trees continued further down third west.

And I think it’s about time to start considering the second S. Street car. And perhaps a traxs line that goes from the airport to the University.

Just my 2 cents

Yes! There are few things that could transform the city more fundamentally than this! I was converted to the idea 3-4 years ago and continue to believe the change would make SLC one of the most livable cities of you had universal protected bike lanes, light priority for bikes, more widespread distribution of GREENbike with pedal assist and great facilities.

[Hatman]

An overhead electric bus charger has been installed at Salt Lake Central Station. This device looks similar to the overhead chargers in Park City, but a much more compact design. I haven't heard if UTA is actually buying battery-electric buses or just testing them, but this infrastructure is permanent, which is a very good sign.

[Hatman]

Also this:



The old Denver Rio Grande and Western Rail Road shop buildings are being slowly dismantled. The idea was originally to restore the buildings as a maintenance depot for UTA buses, but structural problems sent the costs too high. Instead UTA is salvaging the old bricks, which will be used on the exterior of the new structure that will be built on the same site.
It's always sad to lose historic buildings, but I'm not so torn up about this one. The buildings were utilitarian from the very beginning and were not designed to be long lasting. It is amazing they lasted this long.

[ThePusherMan]

There was a lot of hub bub about these on the main thread a couple of weeks back. It's nice to know that they will be saving some of the brick to be reused.

[Hatman]

Yeah, saving the bricks is the least they can do, especially after promising to renovate the buildings and then failing to tell people before doing otherwise. That doesn't look good, UTA.

Here are some people who feel much more strongly about it than I do:
• Video Link

In case the video doesn't play:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgFjrzQWIYk

The DRG&W stuff starts at 7:53

[Hatman]

UVX marks one year of service, August boardings near 10,000 a day
https://www.heraldextra.com/news/loc...7310e3ab4.html

The first year results are staggering, according to Mary De La Mare-Schaefer, area manager.

The first year numbers doubled what they anticipated for their first two years, De La Mare-Schaefer said.

In August of 2018, UVX’s average weekday boardings were 5,866. For August of 2019, the average weekday boardings were 9,288.

“Looking at the first two weeks that Utah Valley University was in school this year (Aug. 29-31) the average weekday boardings were 12,101,” De La Mare- Schaefer said.

When Brigham Young University started school, the average weekday boardings increased to 14,598.

UTA’s projection was 11,000 boardings on weekdays two years out, according to De La Mare-Schaefer.

“Our highest ridership to date was on Aug. 29 when the U of U played BYU. We hit just over 16,000 that day,” De La Mare-Schaefer said.

This is amazing.

I took another ride on UVX last month and was surprised to see they had installed the tap on/tap off card readers around all the stations. The bus is still free to ride for the next two years, so I wonder why they would install those now.
It will be very interesting to see if ridership drops when fares start being charged. A lot of justification from the anti-BRT crowd was that the huge spike in ridership of UVX compared to the old route 830 is that the buses are free, not that they are faster.

(Side note: the free vs fast argument is really odd, since it still acknowledges that transit can be made popular just by removing the fare. Of course we should remove the fare, but we can also make transit fast!)

It won't be a perfect comparison since UVU and now BYU give their students transit passes - essentially making it 'free' for the students - so ridership will still be affected by free riders.
Hopefully we will never get to run this experiment because in 2 years UTA will have gone free for everyone forever, but that sounds like mostly wishful thinking at this point.

[Makid]

Just a note:

With the discussions happening regarding tax reform in the State, I have heard that there is increased discussions happening between legislators about changing how transit operations are funded. Expansions are now able to receive State funds on top of local funds if the projects are deemed to be beneficial to more than a single County (think double tracking/electrifying FrontRunner or the extension of the Trax Blue line).

Legislators are now looking at ways to provide free transit along the Wasatch Front. There are a few options they are looking at but they want the funding to be able to grow with the growth of transit.

This discussion was minor until UTA decided they would move bus service towards being more ridership driven and less coverage driven. With the focus on providing faster service along higher ridership routes and through high density areas, the impact of free transit will be magnified compared to a coverage based model.

I know it may sound cynical but I see the increased talk about free transit in the Legislature because it means that the Legislators future high density projects along the high frequency transit routes would need less parking. This reduction in parking costs can be used to increase the number of units which overall means a higher profit margin for them and their Developer friends.

Overall, it would be great but it seems that once talk shifted more towards how they and their friends could personally benefit that the Legislators started to seriously look at providing free transit.