HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #7841  
Old Posted Jun 6, 2018, 3:32 PM
Hatman's Avatar
Hatman Hatman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 1,430
The S-Line and TRAX will not require PTC. They are under the FTA (Federal Transit Administration) while FrontRunner is under the FRA (Federal Railroad Administration), and PTC is an FRA requirement. TRAX would definitely benefit from PTC, though. If you've ridden TRAX through Central Pointe station for a while, you'll remember that southbound Red and Blue lines used to depart the station very quickly. Now, ever since a Green Line trail derailed on that switch, UTA has lowered the speed limit for all trains, not just the Green Line. Having PTC on TRAX would remove little inefficiencies like by removing human error from the equation.
It would also mean that all the lineside signals could go away. Never again would a TRAX train need to sit and wait at a block point because the line ahead was occupied - trains would literally be able to drive up behind each other, like cars in a traffic jam, which would seriously improve how quickly TRAX could recover from a delayed train.
PTC only increased FrontRunner's schedule because it wasn't double-tracked. On fully double-tracked systems, PTC is much better. It is a step toward completely automated trains, as the function of PTC is to wirelessly connect all the trains in a system to better coordinate their positions.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7842  
Old Posted Jun 6, 2018, 4:29 PM
Makid Makid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,004
Hatman,

Thanks for the info. I thought it was the FTA for some reason rather than FRA. I would love the PTC on Trax to help with recovery. If it also helps with automation, they could do testing at night along the black line. UTA could maybe be a leader in the U.S. for rail automation to help lower costs.

Regarding the black line, didn't UTA mention when they were awarded the grant money for operation a few years ago, that if they didn't get a local match, that operations wouldn't start until 2019? I am just curious if this is still true and if this means that sometime next year (probably August) North Temple and 4th South will have 7 minute service.

It would tie in nicely with the start of the SLC Transit Master Plan next August. Also, the Black Line is the 1 line that has the ability to run 24/7 for its entire length.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7843  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2018, 7:44 PM
Hatman's Avatar
Hatman Hatman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 1,430
I was lucky enough to participate in an engineering tour of Park City's new Electric Express route between Park City and Kimball Junction. It did not disappoint.

This route is the most heavily utilized fully-electric bus route in the United States, by a long shot. Buses leave every 15 minutes from transit centers on both ends of the line and only make two intermediate stops - one at the Canyons Resort, and one on Main Street in Park City. At Kimball Junction you can connect to UTA, via the Park City SLC Connect route, which runs more frequently than it used to but is still put to absolute shame by the Park City electric buses.

The electric buses are from Proterra, which is the bus featured in this video I linked to before:
Video Link


Here is the bus in person:



While the front of the bus kneels, the back does not. It is a pretty tall step, and seems to be screaming for a BRT-style platform.

These buses can make two full round trips on a single charge. When they do need a charge, they pull under an overhead charger, which is a pretty massive piece of infrastructure:



The bus driver pulls forward until a wireless connection is established between the bus and the charger. The bus enters a sort of 'autopilot' mode and pulls forward on its own until the bus and the cables lowered from the charger lock in place. The charge rate is something ridiculous, like 400 kilowatts (a Tesla Supercharger does only 120), so it doesn't take long to charge from a complete flat battery. However, in order to keep station stops to about 5 minutes on each end, the buses charge whenever they can and 'top off' the battery, ensuring it is always full.

At both Kimball Junction and Park City the bus stops at transit centers that have very impressive amenities, like bathrooms, waiting rooms, wifi, and pianos. Here is the inside of the brand-new Kimball Junction transit center:



The interior of the bus does not look very different than a regular bus except that it has a back window, which really helps the bus feel less closed in and claustrophobic. The driver's console looks like this:


I honestly don't know what the farebox with the dollar in it is for, because - and did I ever mention this before? - The entire Park City bus system is free to use!

The the loudest thing on the bus is wind noise, as the bus itself is very quiet when it moves. It isn't silent, as there is still lots of air conditioning and motor hum, but compared to the diesel buses it was night and day. We were able to talk to each other without shouting, and the acceleration from stops and traffic lights felt just like TRAX.

I was totally in love, guys. It was a dream come true.

But now onto the best part - Finances!

Park City did not buy the whole bus - only the bus shell, which is everything except the battery packs. Apparently the buses have eight packs, each capable of 100 kwh. The battery packs are leased directly from Proterra at a monthly rate. This is super important because it solves the purchasing paradigm problem, which is that an electric bus is much more expensive to buy but much cheaper to run. Many transit agencies aren't able to change their budgets around very much, either by law or by bureaucracy; they are stuck with a lower purchasing budget and a large operating budget.
So along comes Proterra, who are offering to sell you a bus shell cheaper than what a brand-new diesel bus will cost, because the shell doesn't have an engine. Then, you will lease the battery pack as part of your operating costs - and by the way, your operating costs will be less too, since the cost of electricity plus the cost of the battery lease is still (*slightly*) cheaper than the cost of buying diesel fuel. For the six buses used on the Electric Express route, the park city folks estimated they would usually spend $20,000 a month in fuel costs. They wouldn't tell me what they were paying for the lease+electricity costs, but they did assure me it was less.
Then there is the cost of maintenance, which is insanely cheap compared to a diesel bus since there aren't as many moving parts. Brakes don't need to be changed as much because an electric bus uses its motor to brake, which harvests kinetic energy into electric-potential energy. The bus driver I spoke with said if he leaves Park City with a full charge he can get nearly to the end of the route at Kimball Junction without loosing a single mile of range because of the dynamic braking.

It was also mentioned that replacing parts is really easy to do. Swiching out an engine is a process that takes a week in the garage - but switching an electric motor can be done in an afternoon. The time savings alone save many hundreds of dollars in wages and mean that fewer buses are needed in a fleet because the 'down-time' of the buses will be far less.

So all of this put together means that we're already there guys - electric buses are cheaper than diesel buses, from purchasing to operating and maintaining!

There is only one concern left with switching to electric buses, and that is the large overhead chargers. Right now Park City has two of the chargers, and each of them costs a half million dollars each. They realized that this is unsustainable, so their next order of buses is for buses with a longer range.

Their current fleet of short-range buses consists of 6 buses, 4 of which are in service during of-peaks and five during the peaks, with one bus on standby. In a typical 18-hour day each bus travels 320 miles. The new buses park city has ordered will be able to travel 250 miles on a charge, meaning that they will be able to travel for most of the day without needing to be 'topped off'. The two standby buses will be able to rotate into and out of service as needed. All charging will be done at the maintenance garage using conventional high-voltage cables, not super-expensive overhead chargers. Rocky Mountain Power is eager to install these conventional chargers, and will pay 75% of the installation costs. Apparently this is a general offer - if your office would like to install electric vehicle charging stations, Rocky Mountain Power will pay a fair chunk of the installation costs, since they know full well that you will be paying them for the electricity coming out of the chargers.

My last piece of info comes from the UTA folks who were invited to the event as well - They said that they've got some Proterra buses on order too, and that they will study them for future full-fleet adoption. The last electric buses they tried on the Provo-Orem BRT route - the New Flyer and BYD models - didn't have strong enough motors to handle a full load going up University Parkway or 900 East in Provo, so they are skeptical that the Proterra buses will be any different. The Park City folks really let them have it, saying if an electric bus could go up Park City hills it could do anything in the valleys. It was a joy to listen to that exchange.

Anyway, it sounds like the electric revolution is happening quickly here in Utah. UTA is an above-average transit agency in their progressive planning, but Park City is absolutely amazing. It is astounding what can happen when a small community of millionaires prices out the lower classes and creates a transit system. They really are leading the way in a lot of areas, and I think they are dragging UTA along behind them at a reasonable rate. Let's hope that UTA loves their electric buses as much as Park City loves theirs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7844  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2018, 8:59 PM
asies1981 asies1981 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 1,173
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7845  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2018, 10:59 AM
delts145's Avatar
delts145 delts145 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Downtown Los Angeles
Posts: 19,386
^^^
^^^
Fantastic news Hatman!! Thanks for the great info. Very excited to see the future of these buses develop for the Wasatch.

Salt Lake County one step closer to bringing failed Prop 1 transportation tax back from the dead


Katie McKellar, The Deseret News - https://www.deseretnews.com/article/...-the-dead.html

SALT LAKE CITY — Salt Lake County is another step closer to bringing back the once-failed $58 million sales tax hike for transportation projects back from the grave.

Salt Lake City on Tuesday joined a growing group of municipalities that have passed resolutions in support — bumping the county closer to its needed threshold to pass the tax hike, which would raise taxes by roughly one penny for every $4 spent to pay for transit and road upgrades...

...If councils for cities, towns and metro townships representing 67 percent of Salt Lake County's population adopt resolutions supporting the tax, the increase will automatically go into effect under the county ordinance, which gives cities a deadline of June 22 to signal support.

In addition to Salt Lake City, several municipalities across the county have already passed resolutions of support, including Millcreek, Midvale, South Salt Lake, South Jordan, Taylorsville, Murray, Holladay, Alta, Emigration, Kearns, Magna and White City. The Cottonwood Heights City Council also passed a resolution late Tuesday night.

That means, so far, cities representing about 56 percent of the county's population have passed resolutions. Only 11 percent remains in order to enact the tax.

All eyes are on the county's second largest city, West Valley, which makes up nearly 12 percent of the county's population of roughly 1.1 million...



Laura Seitz, Deseret News - People exit and board TRAX trains in Salt Lake City on Tuesday, June 12, 2018. The Salt Lake City Council is discussing a resolution
to support the revival of Proposition 1 in Salt Lake County to pay for transportation projects.


.

Last edited by delts145; Jun 13, 2018 at 11:14 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7846  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2018, 4:14 PM
Makid Makid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,004
At this point, I would be shocked if the tax increase wasn't passed. Even if the rest of the Cities didn't pass the increase, there is enough support at this point, the County Council should pass it.

They have stated that the majority of the funds (approximately 80%), 100% of the funds for the first 9 months go to the County, will go to pay down current UTA debt. The remaining would be spent on some road projects throughout the County and some additional bus service.

After the 9 months are over, the 40/40/20 split happens for City/UTA/County. Cities and the County can use their funds for roads or transit. UTA has to use the funds as directed by the County/Cities/WFRC for service and projects based on the transit priority lists.

The list of finalized 2015-2040 Transit / Highway projects for WFRC can be found here: http://wfrc.org/VisionPlans/Regional...dLinks2018.pdf

Transit projects start on page 134.

For SL County only - pg 136.

There are multiple projects on the list that are listed as needed in Phase 1 that are shown as either phase 3 or unfunded. Some modes were change down to potentially save money from the 2011-2040 list as well.

Outside of the projects on the list, I know that SL County wants to improve bus service on multiple lines to 15 minute frequencies. The list also doesn't list some of the projects that some Cities have on their lists such as Sandy and South Jordan with their desire for a Shuttle between the Trax and Front Runner station.

Additionally, the list doesn't include the State's desire for the new Trax lines through the Prison redevelopment area.

Also, with Davis County having Passed the Prop 1 increase, there is a good chance that the SLC to Farmington BRT line will happen as well. That will only help to increase the change that has been happening on 4th West, north of North Temple with more residential being added.

Lastly, I have been torn as for what SLC should do it gets their share of the 40/40/20 split. They currently don't have any plans for it. By law it has to be used to help with roads or transit.

So here are my top items for using the 40% split of the increase in SLC:

1. Build an enclosed Central Station (RDA + Grants maybe depending on final cost estimates)
2. 4th South Trax extension (main street junction upgrade)/Downtown Loop + Black Line
3. Downtown+Granary Streetcar / Outer Loop
4. Purchase State St. from UDoT to 2100 S. and enhanced transit/pedestrian situation (sidewalks, stations, bikelanes, medians...)
5. Raise/sink FrontRunner/UP rail main line between 5th South and 14th South. Doing this will allow the 9 Line to fully link 9th East to 9th South to 9th West in a solid link. Eventually the E/W line could be grade separated as well
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7847  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2018, 4:58 PM
Orlando's Avatar
Orlando Orlando is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,991
That's incredible that SLC doesn't have any plans for the money. Why wouldn't they? Have they just not been paying enough attention to this?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7848  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2018, 5:05 PM
StevenF's Avatar
StevenF StevenF is offline
The Drifter
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 1,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Makid View Post
At this point, I would be shocked if the tax increase wasn't passed. Even if the rest of the Cities didn't pass the increase, there is enough support at this point, the County Council should pass it.

They have stated that the majority of the funds (approximately 80%), 100% of the funds for the first 9 months go to the County, will go to pay down current UTA debt. The remaining would be spent on some road projects throughout the County and some additional bus service.

After the 9 months are over, the 40/40/20 split happens for City/UTA/County. Cities and the County can use their funds for roads or transit. UTA has to use the funds as directed by the County/Cities/WFRC for service and projects based on the transit priority lists.

The list of finalized 2015-2040 Transit / Highway projects for WFRC can be found here: http://wfrc.org/VisionPlans/Regional...dLinks2018.pdf

Transit projects start on page 134.

For SL County only - pg 136.

There are multiple projects on the list that are listed as needed in Phase 1 that are shown as either phase 3 or unfunded. Some modes were change down to potentially save money from the 2011-2040 list as well.

Outside of the projects on the list, I know that SL County wants to improve bus service on multiple lines to 15 minute frequencies. The list also doesn't list some of the projects that some Cities have on their lists such as Sandy and South Jordan with their desire for a Shuttle between the Trax and Front Runner station.

Additionally, the list doesn't include the State's desire for the new Trax lines through the Prison redevelopment area.

Also, with Davis County having Passed the Prop 1 increase, there is a good chance that the SLC to Farmington BRT line will happen as well. That will only help to increase the change that has been happening on 4th West, north of North Temple with more residential being added.

Lastly, I have been torn as for what SLC should do it gets their share of the 40/40/20 split. They currently don't have any plans for it. By law it has to be used to help with roads or transit.

So here are my top items for using the 40% split of the increase in SLC:

1. Build an enclosed Central Station (RDA + Grants maybe depending on final cost estimates)
2. 4th South Trax extension (main street junction upgrade)/Downtown Loop + Black Line
3. Downtown+Granary Streetcar / Outer Loop
4. Purchase State St. from UDoT to 2100 S. and enhanced transit/pedestrian situation (sidewalks, stations, bikelanes, medians...)
5. Raise/sink FrontRunner/UP rail main line between 5th South and 14th South. Doing this will allow the 9 Line to fully link 9th East to 9th South to 9th West in a solid link. Eventually the E/W line could be grade separated as well
Makid, I like your ideas and optimism, but for some reason, I think the current mayor of SLC wouldn't do anything to make any of that happen. She seems to be worrying about her own personal agenda right now than what Salt Lake City really needs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7849  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2018, 7:14 PM
airhero airhero is offline
Engineer
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: West Jordan, UT
Posts: 923
Quote:
Originally Posted by Makid View Post
Additionally, the list doesn't include the State's desire for the new Trax lines through the Prison redevelopment area.
I found a new, updated interactive map online the other day with all transit and highway projects until 2040 along the Wasatch Front (including Utah County). It wasn't the 2015-2040 one that has been out for a while (which doesn't include UC). All the linear and point projects were in red with nothing to distinguish the projects by phase or whether they were highway or transit, until you clicked on the segment to see what it was.

I noticed a few things the 2015-2040 map doesn't have, such as TRAX through the prison site. It also had the Sugar House streetcar extending south to 3900 South along Highland Drive, I believe, and north to 400 S (I think it was running along 900 East most of the way). Also the downtown streetcar was there, but was different from the 2015-2040 plan, since it was running on South Temple for part of the way.

I've been searching high and low for this map ever since but it's nowhere to be found. Unless one of you has seen it and can point me to it, I think someone may have made a preliminary interactive map of the upcoming 2019-2040 plan temporarily live. Perhaps by accident, perhaps as a test.

Last edited by airhero; Jun 13, 2018 at 7:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7850  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2018, 7:28 PM
Makid Makid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orlando View Post
That's incredible that SLC doesn't have any plans for the money. Why wouldn't they? Have they just not been paying enough attention to this?
Salt Lake only did plans for the sales tax they imposed earlier this year. They used the funds to help push the Transit Master Plan forward. The goal is that by the end of 2020 they will be able to have Phase 2 funded from the previously approved sales tax.

They didn't expect any other funding to happen. The Transit Master Plan was originally planned to be funded by the Proposition 1 tax (voted and approved by the city last night). This additional funding, is really above and beyond what was expected and not really planned for.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StevenF View Post
Makid, I like your ideas and optimism, but for some reason, I think the current mayor of SLC wouldn't do anything to make any of that happen. She seems to be worrying about her own personal agenda right now than what Salt Lake City really needs.
While she does have her own agenda, she can't use the funds for anything other than roads or transit. She also can't use them without the City Council's approval. The Council had the the various Streetcar lines/extension put back into the Transit Master Plan.

Overall, due to this being more of an unexpected gift of revenue, I tend to think using it for a larger project would be a better use of the funds. Both this and the prison sales tax increase will both grow as the City grows meaning that over time, they will produce more revenue to help provide additional service within the City.

I would like to see other cities look at increasing transit within their city as opposed to relying on a regional approach as has been done outside of Salt Lake City primarily along the Wasatch Front for the most part.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7851  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2018, 7:42 PM
Makid Makid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by airhero View Post
I found a new, updated interactive map online the other day with all transit and highway projects until 2040 along the Wasatch Front (including Utah County). It wasn't the 2015-2040 one that has been out for a while (which doesn't include UC). All the linear and point projects were in red with nothing to distinguish the projects by phase or whether they were highway or transit, until you clicked on the segment to see what it was.

I noticed a few things the 2015-2040 map doesn't have, such as TRAX through the prison site. It also had the Sugar House streetcar extending south to 3900 South along Highland Drive, I believe, and north to 400 S (I think it was running along 900 East most of the way). Also the downtown streetcar was there, but was different from the 2015-2040 plan, since it was running on South Temple for part of the way.

I've been searching high and low for this map ever since but it's nowhere to be found. Unless one of you has seen it and can point me to it, I think someone may have made a preliminary interactive map of the upcoming 2019-2040 plan temporarily live. Perhaps by accident, perhaps as a test.
That would be something to see. It probably was the early 2019-2040 plan. Hopefully it will be found again.

I did find this: http://wfrcgis.maps.arcgis.com/apps/...d14f9a2ea03a79 Just wondering if this might be what you had found.

Last edited by Makid; Jun 13, 2018 at 8:17 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7852  
Old Posted Jun 15, 2018, 9:49 PM
asies1981 asies1981 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 1,173
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7853  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2018, 5:56 AM
ThePusherMan's Avatar
ThePusherMan ThePusherMan is offline
One Thing At A Time
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 412
Why the hell would the Mayor choose to not re-apply for a grant that helped pay for S-Line improvements. That's enough of her. Get her out!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7854  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2018, 10:45 PM
Always Sunny in SLC Always Sunny in SLC is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 509
I am not sure how concerned I should be about this. I guess there are those who want to raise fares by limiting or eliminating cheaper fares. I hope this doesn’t go anywhere. This would be the exact wrong direction.

Sorry I forgot to put the link in.

http://https://www.sltrib.com/news/p...ansit-revenue/

Last edited by Always Sunny in SLC; Jun 17, 2018 at 4:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7855  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2018, 2:42 AM
Makid Makid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Always Sunny in SLC View Post
I am not sure how concerned I should be about this. I guess there are those who want to raise fares by limiting or eliminating cheaper fares. I hope this doesn’t go anywhere. This would be the exact wrong direction.
I wouldn't expect that to go anywhere. There is a push to get more people to use transit and I think most people know that fares are one of the main factors that stop people from using it. Next is availability (frequency of service), followed by Routes (doesn't go where I need to go), and lastly it is the too many transfers crowed (no direct routes).

SLC has actively done work to impact most of these. The have done some work over time on is the no direct routes but they can only work within SLC directly and that is only limited in scope.

SL County, if the sales tax passes, after 9 months wants UTA to use the funds to increase bus routes and frequencies to help increase ridership. The first 9 months, most funds will be used to help reduce current UTA bond debt to help raise ability for additional projects (BRT) within the County.

We should know if the County will be enacting the Sales Tax automatically this next week as cities have until Friday evening to pass a resolution in support or against the sales tax. The County needs city approvals representing approximately 100,000 people. If it doesn't happen, I do think that the County Council will probably just pass the resolution themselves to enact the sales tax. Probably only to avoid being cut out of if if it isn't passed by 2021/2022. At that time it becomes a 50/50 split between city/UTA and can be passed on a City Council level.

It also stops the County from having eligibility for a future .25% increase for transit only in the future. It would only be possible once all cities in the County passed the 50/50 split increase or the State forced it on the County.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7856  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2018, 3:46 AM
bob rulz bob rulz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sugarhouse, SLC, UT
Posts: 1,466
Given the fact that it will likely be forced upon them anyway, cities would be dumb not to approve it. Don't we only need the approval of West Valley City at this point? I can't imagine they won't pass it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7857  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2018, 4:30 AM
Makid Makid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Always Sunny in SLC View Post
I am not sure how concerned I should be about this. I guess there are those who want to raise fares by limiting or eliminating cheaper fares. I hope this doesn’t go anywhere. This would be the exact wrong direction.
New UTA leaders will scrutinize discount programs as passenger fares make up only 14 percent of transit revenue

https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics...ansit-revenue/

I figured a bringing a link to an article about the fare discussion would be good as well:

Quote:
The Utah Transit Authority figures that about 2 of every 5 passengers on its buses and trains use discount passes supplied through employers or colleges.

Those lucky people save sometimes more than $1,000 a year compared with commuters who pay full fares and receive the same services.

On top of that, the agency says an unknown number of other riders also escape full fares through a variety of discount programs. For example, users of its electronic Farepay cards receive 40 percent off bus fares and 20 percent off TRAX and FrontRunner tickets.

Amid all the discounts and deals, UTA raises only 14 percent of its overall revenue from fares, with the bulk of the rest coming from local sales tax and federal funding.

Because of that, a new law enacted by the Legislature this year to restructure the agency also ordered its leaders to review whether the many discounts are fair and reasonable for all residents.

UTA’s current soon-to-be-disbanded board is in the process of punting the task to a new three-member commission that will assume oversight of the agency by Nov. 1.

The current board has drafted a resolution needed to continue most current discount programs for now and is expected to approve it later this month.

The agency also paused an ongoing study on possible reforms to its fares — which includes looking at replacing the current single charge for a trip of any length to possibly charging additional fares for trips that go beyond one county or zone.

...
With the part above "UTA raises only 14 percent of its overall revenue from fares" this is down from only a few years ago when fares accounted for 19% of revenue.

As they are down to 14%, this actually is good news in many ways for the push in the Prison Redevelopment plan for removing fares from UTA for increasing ridership.

We have talked about it here before, but without needing to worry about fares, there is no need to worry about having ticket machines, fare cards, tap on/off machines, the security for those that collect the funds from these, maintenance on these, even the electricity costs can all be removed. Additionally, this is additional personnel on the trains that just ask for proof of payment that could be reassigned to other tasks or trained as drivers/security to assist with the increased passengers when free fares are rolled out.

It would have been more difficult for the board to come up with a way to cover a 19% loss in fare revenue, a 14% loss is a lot easier to lose. They can also do the loss gradually while also gradually increase ridership. Take the current lowest discounted rate, it can be one of the following:

Better yet is the extra 25 percent off that is offered to nonprofits — or $294 for an annual pass if provided to all employees. Among participants in this discount are the LDS Church and Downtown Provo Inc.

Auditors, attorneys and fiscal analysts working for the Utah Legislature — but not lawmakers themselves — had the best deal of all, just $91 for an annual pass. (That is $1,209 less than a commuter paying full bus or TRAX fare would spend in a year.) This steep discount plan is one of the few being discontinued on June 30.


Let people have the opportunity to buy into either of these options, even on monthly equivalents. More people will buy passes, ridership will go up. Some new riders will ride, depending on the number of new riders, the fare coverage might not drop fast. Maybe they could start it based on the current Sales Tax levels as an incentive. So SL County could get first crack, then Weber and Davis. Utah County would be after Brigham City and Tooele only because Utah County hasn't added the taxes that the others have and is the lowest on the sales tax list.

All people would need to do would be go to a UTA office or a City/County office with a bill with their address, pay the monthly/annual fee, have their picture taken and get a laminated card that would work as their pass. This is similar to the UofU pass and what many of the Companies that are on the 100% list do with UTA for their employees for their transit passes.

Save money overall, get more riders and can be done gradually over time so that UTA can hire and train drivers and get equipment so that it can handle the increase in riders. A win/win/win/win overall (no to lower fares/more riders/less traffic/less pollution).

And it doesn't even cost the State any money. Just slows down some expansion in UTA for a little bit to help cover the loss of fares, unless the State moves a small amount of the Gas Tax to cover the fare loss as it helps to preserve the roads longer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7858  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2018, 8:56 PM
Hatman's Avatar
Hatman Hatman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 1,430
Some pictures of my visit to Provo on Friday. First, the FrontRunner station:



I just love busy train stations. Especially Provo's, where people are getting on and off with bags and greeting/saying farewell to family and friends, etc. It's like a whole cross-section of every level of society, and everyone is traveling together on a train. It fills me with happiness at humanity every time.

...also, notice how there are two trains at the platform? I guess with the new PTC-lengthened schedule, UTA doesn't have the time to reliably 'turn the trains around' and so has been forced to have a train sitting idle in Provo all the time during peak hours. That's gotta cost them some money.
Also also, has anyone noticed how UTA has been consistently hacking their own schedule for months by having trains meet at Murray Central rather than at the South Salt Lake siding? They purposefully hold the northbound train at Murray for about 10 minutes, then rush it up to Salt Lake Central and North Temple Station. If the southbound train isn't late (and it shouldn't because of the schedule padding at Salt Lake Central) then the northbound train makes up for wasted time at North Temple, or even Woods Cross. They've been running this schedule for months now, and I wish they would just change their schedules to match. It looks very bad when you print one schedule and do another thing. I'm all for experimentation and innovation - just tell people what you are doing.

(This indicates to me that one of the first segments that needs to be double-tracked will be from Murray to 17th South - or perhaps even as far as Salt Lake Central if UDOT can rebuild the I-15 bridge over 9th south. Once that is done it would be easy to add a second track all the way up to Farmington. On the south end, Orem to American Fork already has all the bridge foundations in place just waiting for a second track, and Lehi to South Jordan is similarly prepared. Once UTA gets the money there are some sections that could be built out very quickly.)

But back to Provo... here are some pictures of the BRT construction. Keep in mind that there are 61 days left before the line is supposed to open on August 18th...



This is the South Town Mall station, which will be a center platform station with exclusive bus lanes. As you can see the road is still all ripped up and it will be quite a challenge to get the concrete bus pads in place, let alone the station canopy and landscaping ready for the opening. Here is a better view:





Here is the 400 South Station on University Avenue:


Now the Center Street Station:



Hopefully this angle will become an iconic view of downtown Provo, much in the same way the City Creek sky bridge over the TRAX station has become default image of downtown Salt Lake City. But for now, work on the platform hasn't even started yet - it's just a hole in the middle of the street.

The Federal Courthouse is looking really cool. It is so much bigger than I was expecting - and to think that it is replacing an empty abandoned lot!



The ultimate reward for having worked so long on parking pockets - a red Tesla Model 3 has taken up a roost in one of them! So cool to see these things in the wild!



The station at the library, at 600 North; the traffic signal to allow pedestrians to cross to the median station hasn't even been installed yet, which is not good:



The station on 700 North is well underway:


The side-station at BYU is also making good progress. The new Engineering building is in the background:



The northbound station at BYU, however, is currently just an empty site:


The MTC and Stadium/Marriot Center stations are all in about the same condition as the BYU southbound station - the structural foundations are in place but the platform surface, the canopy, the lighting, the water systems, everything else needs to be installed still, not to mention getting everything tied into the sidewalks around them:



And to end, a quick reminder that this project is not all about bus lanes and bus stations! Here is a view of the Provo River Trail underneath University Parkway - it has changed from what looked like a sewer ditch into a surprisingly pleasant place to be:


So the state of the project is... not good. There is zero chance that everything will be ready in time for the line to open. And guess what? That is OK! This isn't a rail line that needs months of testing and qualifying before passengers can board - this is a bus line. If UTA needs to skip a few stations at opening, or if they can't run in the bus lanes for some of the distance, that is OK! They'll get it finished soon, don't worry about it. I have a feeling the UTA was pressured into setting this opening date by politics - such as the new BYU student passes being activated in August. This is not going to be a lesson in how to do a snazzy opening ceremony for a new bus system - instead, this is going to be a real-life lesson in how BRT can be infinitely more flexible than light rail, and how BRT can operate in little chunks and pieces and still be effective.

Whatever happens, this August is going to be an exciting time! May this be the beginning of a wonderful revolution in bus transit along the Wasatch Front!

Last edited by Hatman; Jun 19, 2018 at 3:24 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7859  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2018, 10:43 PM
jubguy3's Avatar
jubguy3 jubguy3 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: SL,UT
Posts: 984
Do you know if they publish construction minutes that detail the schedule? They might not be as far behind as it looks. Also your photos aren't displaying in the website.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7860  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2018, 11:51 PM
bob rulz bob rulz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sugarhouse, SLC, UT
Posts: 1,466
I can't see any of the pictures either.
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



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:53 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.