New Development at Meadowbrook TRAX Station...

Image by LA Wad via Flickr75-Unit Transit-Oriented Condo Project to Rise in South SL

Transit Oriented Development is starting to take off in Utah. Just like other cities it takes a few years of successful service then the development starts coming. Of course as more people look to alternatives from higher gas prices TOD makes even more sense.

This goes along with the complex going up at the Sandy Civic Center TRAX station and the project the Murray North (4400 South) TRAX station.

However, as I have mentioned before, unless the city works toward making the entire area more walkable and pedestrian friendly the projects will only have moderate success.

3 Years Old...

Image via WikipediaToday, this blog turns 3 years old. Now that may not sound like much, but in the blog world I guess that is doing pretty good. Looking through most of the transit rated blogs I read regularly only a couple of them have last longer than this blog.

Just a couple of days ago I look at some of this blogs early posts and it turns out that one of the early ones was talking about how difficult UTA's Trip planner is to use, I guess some things just never change.

When I first started this blog, I primarily focused on UTA and its service. But over time and after learning from some of my fellow bloggers, I started talking about other things that effect transit service including development patterns. I also started doing a lot of reading and research including reading the book Big-Box Swindle: The True Cost of Mega-Retailers and the Fight for America's Independent Businesses which shows why some development happens and how much in subsidies companies such as Wal-Mart, IKEA, and Corabella's get in subsidies that in turn harm small business owners.

The big changes occurred when the bus changes happened last year. There is two things that I disagree with UTA about and they work together and that is the concept of duplication and using marketing matrixes to increase ridership potential. UTA falls into the same trap most other transit services fall into and that is considering duplication a bad thing. Here is a perfect example of duplication: State street before TRAX started. Routes 12, 22, 24, and 25 would all travel down State Street then branch off south of 6200 South. This allows riders to pick up passengers at outlining points then combine to provide frequent service in the main corridor.

When I was going over my proposals for bus service some time ago had a branch of the current 220 (then line 8) branching at Fort Union Blvd and traveling to the Fort Union TRAX station and providing every 30-minute service along Fort Union Blvd. This in connection with an every 30-minute service route 72 would provide alternating every 30-minute service along Fort Union Blvd. Current Transit Mentality thinking is that this is a bad thing because it is duplication. However, it is creating a matrix of additional single trip destinations and actually promote additional ridership.

However, lets look at the more positive things that have happened in the last three years. We had tax votes in Utah County to put on a tax for Front Runner and Salt Lake County to build four new TRAX lines by 2015. In addition, we have seen the first Front Runner started and the extension of TRAX to the Central Station.

However, a lot changed after the bus changes back in August. First of all I did not like all the changes that took place. After all, the bus my wife could ride to work , the 32 was discontinued with no replacement service (the 307 doesn't count because it travels in the wrong direction for her). To make some people happy some service was restored including a bus along 100 South from the U to downtown which is ridiculous since there is already service on South Temple and 200 South which was also restored.

However, some people unhappy with the changes got together and formed the Bus Riders Union basing it on the damaging BRU in Los Angeles but changed the name Transit Riders Union as though they were out to support all transit riders. While I know there is people who really care and want to see good transit service, there is very dangerous elements with the transit riders union including a group of people who actually would nothing more than all transit service be eliminated and the funding transfered to highways.

In addition the BRU in Los Angeles has been disaster. METRO caved into the BRU demands instead of fighting the lawsuit. BRU wanted no standees on the buses. That meant that METRO had to add lots of new buses that greatly increased cost (it is ironic that Curitiba that BRT promoters show off as nirvana only works because buses run at 300% capacity). In the long run buses outside the BRU's "special areas" loss service and they are looking to loose even more service over the next few years because of how much money METRO bled over the addition bus service that it could not afford.

The only person that truly benefited from the BRU was their leader Eric Mann who drives around in his brand new BMW (shouldn't the head of the BRU ride the bus?).

While UTA is not perfect, UTA actually provided better service than any system serving a similar sized city. What UTA faces that many other transit systems its size do not is covering the amount of miles it covers. It has to service all the way from Brigham City to Payson, Grantsville to the ski areas to the east, in areas with very low density.

The final issue with the UTA service is the unfunded federal mandate called paratransit. It is considered taboo even to bring this subject up but I will continue to do it. I am not saying the service is not needed but we must face facts. We actually have one of the lower cost paratransit system's in the nation but it still cost between $25 and $35 per rider. Since this was implemented it has taken 25% of the transit funding away from the buses. We need long term solutions to help provide this service.

So where do we go from here?

By 2015 we should have three new TRAX lines plus the extension of the current North-South line down to Draper done.

On the Federal side, while I am not hopefully that anything will ever pass, we need more fairness in the tax right offs for developers. Currently everything is skewed toward new developments and against rebuilding. In addition everything is skewed toward the big businesses against smaller independent businesses. We also need to put an end to the 70 years of pro-highway social engineering that has taken place since FDR.

On the local side, hopefully the rise in gas prices is making people wake up that good transit service is needed and that all the sprawl will eventually catch up with us. Instead of trying to destroy transit service in Salt Lake by having UDOT take it over and put the funding in highways, we need to focus on building livable communities that encourage transit service which will increase bus ridership and make help make the service less costly.

We have seen a lot of progress in 3 years, but there is much to be done. The problems that face us will not be solved by getting rid of one person or a group of people at UTA. What is going to solve the problems is people working together to make our communities better and more livable. It will not happen overnight, but think about what we can accomplish in a generation.

Salt Lake Tribune Editorial

Image via WikipediaHere is an editorial that just appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune. I am sure that it will ruffle a few feathers.

The urban West: Where the federal government can help

I am sure this editorial will get more than a few comments from those who want government out of their lives but won't face the facts that they only got the mortgage on their house because of the government.

UTA going to smart cards

Front Runner Inaugural Train at Farmington
Originally uploaded by jmdspk

Article from today's Tribune about UTA going to smart cards.

Need a ride? Show some plastic

It will be interesting to see how these will play out. The benefit is that they can keep track better of passenger boardings.

Bill Tibbets and his gang of yellow shirts, or are they orange? are pushing for the UTA to lower fares in the city. Of course they don't look at the other side of the coin to see if this will produce enough revenue to pay for itself but that is another story.

Of course if UTA does lower fares just in the city of Salt Lake, shouldn't the city be the one to pay for it?

That also brings to question the whole proposal by the yellow shirts. Lets say UTA actually did lower fares just in the city of Salt Lake. Why should someone traveling the same distance pay more because they live in Murray?

Of course the people who make these proposals never look beyond the basics to look at the other side of the coin or the unintended consequences of what they propose.

Salt Lake City Anti-Small Business?

Image via WikipediaA recent comment about the pedicabs got those wheels turning again. The question is, despite the existing of a couple of organizations to promote local business including Vest Pocket and Buy Local First Utah, is Salt Lake City anti-small business?

Lets take a look at the Smith's at 900 East and 2100 South in Sugarhouse. As regular readers of this blog know, I often hold this as example of giving into the blackmail of a big business and not sticking to plans and the neighborhood. The question is, if that had been a small grocery store would have Salt Lake City given in or would they have stood their ground? If they would have stood their ground that means that they would have discriminated against the smaller business.

We also have the example of Wal-Mart at 300 West and 1300 South which in is a community with a high percentage of non-car owners. The store is designed for people to drive in and out of and pedestrians (especially those coming from TRAX) have to risk their lives to reach the store as the driveways are high speed routes for drivers and pedestrians have to use them to reach the store.

Another example of this is the food carts that have populated the downtown area. It seems like some bigger businesses (for example the Taco Time at 8th south and State) don't like the competition from the smaller carts and have been pushing for regulations against them including ones that have recently passed.

Some even try to demonize they carts by giving names link with food created diseases. I find this kind of ironic considering I have never had a problem eating food from one of the these carts but have gotten sick after eating from major restaurant chains.

Now instead of trying to regulate these carts out of business, how about supporting the small entrepreneurs and encourage them so long as they pass health regulations? I noticed in Denver the food carts were nicely integrated into the 16th Street Transit Mall.

If anything Salt Lake City should be promoting small business more. It is ironic that cities such as Salt Lake, Sandy and others work so hard to attract big box retailers and other chain stores when it reality they end up cost more than they bring in. According to studies done the cost of police, fire and other city services cost more than what sales tax dollars come in. That doesn't even take into consideration all the hidden cost of big box retailers such as infrastructure cost such as the 80 million that now has to be spent in Springville since people don't notice those kind of things.

The ultimate irony is the fact that small business contribute more to the local economy, actually pay higher wages on average, create more sales tax dollars per square foot of space, do not increase cost of city services, are generally safer, and fit better into the fabric of the community.

Salt Lake City should working harder to help small businesses and build a comprehensive plan that includes transportation, planning and the promotion of small business.

Bill Passes about Airport TRAX Funding...

Light rail in Portland, Oregon
Originally uploaded by Michiel2005

The Deseret News has a copy of the article today talking about how our state Senate is trying to rein in on the city of Salt Lake and tell them how to spend their money.

Isn't it interesting that Bramble the Senator from Provo who got this bill passed did not ban the airport from spending money on highways and parking which is were many of the dollars go to.

Now here is the most telling part of the article:

Lawmakers are trying to keep Delta Air Lines happy, in an effort to keep the company's hub in Salt Lake City. Delta Air Lines officials don't want the airport improvement fund raided for light rail, and "I'm not aware of any other industry that is being asked to put a disproportionate share into light rail" said Rob Jolley, a lobbyist for the airline.

"The banking industry hasn't been asked to do that, the real estate industry hasn't been asked to do that," Jolley said.

Then, he sent a clear warning to lawmakers to keep Delta happy, or else.

Isn't there something wrong that the Delta Airline's lobbyist is basically making threats to the state?

So not only do we have the state dictating to Salt Lake on how to spend its money, but you also have a lobbyist for a major corporation telling the state to force a city to do something or else.

If Bamble had any guts, and not just a puppet for this lobbyist he would be making sure that policy is set for what is best for the community, not the threats of a lobbyist.

TRAX on 400 West not 600 West

OK looms for TRAX route

It looks like the Airport TRAX line will indeed go down 400 West instead of 600 West so the westside can celebrate it's victory over a good transportation idea.

While I do like seeing Boyer lose on this one, having the Airport line made a direct connection to the Intermodal depot is vital to building a good balanced transportation system. While the line will still connect with commuter rail at North Temple, the line will not connect with intercity bus service or Amtrak.

While Amtrak is currently a joke (although I do ride it when it works for me) I hold for the possibility in time we will have a well designed intercity rail service in this country.

Over the next few days, I will be talking about my travels on UTA over the last couple of weeks. I spent one day in Salt Lake County, one in Davis/Weber Counties and journeyed through Utah County yesterday.

My feelings on wraps are well known, and after being stuck on several buses that where wrapped its time to vent again.I think that the UTA Board of Directors should have to ride a wrapped bus for several hours and try to see out the windows.

A perfect example of what is wrong with wraps is while going through Roy on the 626, I was trying to see what businesses where along the line. The problems is, because of the stupid wrap I could not see about half of the signs. Here they are trying to encourage people to ride the bus but wraps are a turn off.

To top it off, I rode when of their new Gillig buses that are based out of the Ogden division and it was wrapped!! Talk about the height of stupidity in wrapping a brand new bus. Most transit systems wrap buses that are due for repainting or the paint already looks bad. The reason for this is very simple, when the wrap is pulled off, it can often remove or damage the paint despite what the manufacturer tries to claim.

This once again shows that the UTA is often not a good steward of our tax money. In addition the Board of Directors and Management of UTA continue to be too disconnected from their customers.

The Need for a Pedestrian Friendly Environment

Image via WikipediaFor anyone who is attempted to catch a bus in Utah, it is common knowledge that of the most part Utah is not friendly to pedestrians.

Among the issues facing pedestrians in Utah:

-No Sidewalks even in established neighborhoods

-Narrow Sidewalks where sidewalks exist

-No seperation between high speed auto traffic and pedestrians

-Poor Lighting

A running joke we have is that is about how backwards can you be when you have to use flashlights to flag down buses in the 21st Century????

Lack of sidewalks is a big problem. Even in Holladay where I live, when I walk to the bus there is several sections of street with no sidewalks. At least it is a residential street, however it is a through street and despite there being two schools along the road many people travel 40mph along there despite the 25mph speed limit.

It would be even worst if I had to ride the night ride (I don't ride because of this). I would have to walk north along 1300 East for about a 3/4 of a mile to reach the residential street mentioned above plus cross Van Winkle Superspeedway (oh I mean Expressway). With no sidewalks for part of the distance and people often traveling 50+ in that 40mph zone there is no way I will walk from that bus.

Where there is sidewalks along 1300 East and other roads, the sidewalks have been narrowed so far that the cars are passing you way to close and if a car was to loose control only slightly, there is nothing you could do especially at the speeds they are traveling. Add the fact that there is very few places where there is adequate separation between the sidewalks and the road, makes walking in most places even more dangerous.

Another major issue when walking after dark is the lack of lighting. There is very few places where there is adequate light and there are places where the lighting doesn't even work. How long have the lights on State Street north of 8680 South in Sandy not been working? If you add all the problems mentioned above and add the lack of street lighting, it is clear that being a pedestrian in Utah is not safe.

The UTA, the cities, and all those concerned need to work to address these issues. If it isn't safe to walk to the bus people are not going to ride the bus. We need to have safe ways to ride the bus, and pedestrian friendly environments benefit not only bus riders but everyone especially children who have to walk. It is time for change.

New 30-Foot Buses-Where should they be?

The UTA is now recieving its purchase of the Opus 30-foot bus. These buses are designed for routes that do not have large amounts of ridership or for areas with tight turns and such.

So far UTA has assigned the buses to Ogden and to routes 1 and 2 in Salt Lake. They will also be assigned routes 442 (which will now interline with route 2) and route 23. However I have already seen these buses running route 7.

In one way assigning the buses to routes 1 and 2 make sense. They travel through the avenues and they do have some narrow streets and tight turns on these routes. However, in another way it makes no sense to assign these buses to this route. I have ridden these routes several times and almost every time I ride them they have a large load. Because these routes service LDS Hospital they attract a large amount of people traveling to the hospital in both visitors and employees who ride the bus. In fact, I have seen 40-foot buses run with standing loads on these routes so they will probably have to pass people up with the 30-footers. Relief will come somewhat from reroute route 3 and will give riders more options to reach the hospital.

In fact the question needs to be asked, considering the ridership on these routes are the 30-footers being assigned to this route because of the geography or because of NIMBYism. It seems like in the recent round of changes such as to route 40, the UTA is giving into well off NIMBY's and stabbing their regular riders in the back. Hopefully UTA will not become like Metro in Los Angeles that will do anything a whiny NIMBY wants no matter how much damage it does to bus or rail service.

UTA has needed smaller buses for many years but went by the philosophy of not wanted too many different types of buses. However, this train of thought is quickly loosing favor as transit systems realize that they have to have different buses for different purposes.

Hopefully as UTA gets more of the new buses it will start assigning them to routes that truly should be using them such as the 90/94, 24, 33, 14 (although now interlined with the 20 it won't work), 222, 345, 46 and others.