No Surcharge Until June

Image via WikipediaWell it looks like the riders of the UTA are getting a reprieve from the fuel surcharge that the UTA proposed putting into effect on December 1. It turns out that the agreements for some of the special passes that UTA has would not allow them to put on a fuel charge.

But rest assured the UTA does plane to put the fuel charge in effect in June when the existing agreements end and new agreements can be worked out.

At the UTA board meeting on Wednesday 10 advocates for the poor protested the surcharge but that had little bearing on the decision by the UTA.

It was interesting that one of the board members pointed out that the surcharge will not be charged on paratransit service. This is despite the fact that paratransit service is the mostly costly of all bus services and truly is not a transit service but instead a taxi service.

Also some have complained that the surcharge will also be on TRAX despite the fact that TRAX does not use electricity.

It looks like 2006 still will not be a good year for the riders of the UTA. January 1st brings in the already approved fare increase (wasn't the fare increase to offset higher fuel prices?), then in April they will cut bus routes which they haven't announced what will be cut, then in June the fuel surcharge takes effect.

Its just enough to make choice customers make a choice back to their cars.

UTA Changes in April

Image via WikipediaIt sure would be nice to know what the UTA has in mind for riders when they cut bus service in April. While I cannot say exactly what is going to happen here is some of the things I believe will be on the table:

-Route 7: Discontinued-it runs along the same route as the 11 for much of the way. Of course one of the problems with this pair is that as I have mentioned before, the buses run a few minutes away from each other instead of providing coordinated service. So if the 7 goes, it can be laid directly on the incompetence of the UTA planners.

-Routes 5 and 13: One of these routes might end up on the chopping block due to duplication on parts of their routes. The truth is the whole eastside bus service needs to be reorganized by it most likely will be reorganized in a customer unfriendly way since the consultants usually just look at numbers and don't look at reasons behind the numbers.

-Routes 35 and 36: Truth be told these routes need some reorganization. They meander throughout the West Valley are but only run ever hour which is not enough service to build a customer base. The only problem is that there needs to be some new service out there primarily more north-south routes travel on streets such as 4000 West, 4800 West, 5600 West and so on.
-Routes 24, 33, and 222: These routes may see some cuts too although the 33 is already hourly and none of them run on Saturdays anymore so there is not a lot left to cut.

One of the big problems with the system is that there should have been major revamping when TRAX was started and when the University Line opened. However what was done instead was to cut the routes at the nearest TRAX station instead of a comprehensive revamp of the system. A perfect example of the poor cuts was the 33. The bus is so far away from TRAX at 1300 East and 6600 South when he starts heading there, people on the bus at that time would be in downtown if they bus headed directly there by the time they catch a TRAX train.

It is too bad that what cuts are proposed will go back to the fact that the planners have failed in their job. Why should UTA's customers be hurt because of poor planning?

UTA Bus Service Changes

Image by pbo31 via FlickrNot only is UTA going to give you two fare increases in the next couple of months, it also plans to give you another present in April: Bus Cuts.

While not planning to implement its mysterious bus changes yet because of issues downtown, it does plan to cut some routes in the spring shake up.

So far UTA has not said what routes it plans to cut, only that notices will be posted on the buses system and TRAX. Most of the time they never publish any of the proposed changes on the website or where the meetings to talk about the cuts will be. Last year when they discontinued the 12 line, there never was any notice published in the news section of their website.

To top off it all off, not only are they raising fares and cutting service, the fuel surcharge that every one will pay will not go in effect on Paratransit Service despite the fact that it is the most costly UTA service that is more taxi service than transit service.

Once again this clearly shows that UTA doesn't have a clue and doesn't truly care about attracting choice customers to the transit system.

Fuel Surcharge A Bad Idea

Image via Wikipedia Well it looks like UTA is going to implement a fuel surcharge to cover the cost of fuel that is escalating and despite prices for gasoline going down recently, the price of diesel is actually going up.

However, while the UTA is incurring additional the cost, the fuel surcharge is the wrong way to about collecting revenue. What UTA plans to do is charge an additional quarter to all riders. That means that even pass holders will have to fork out a quarter every time they ride even after they go to the trouble of buying a pass.

The UTA needs to be making the system easy to ride in order to encourage the choice customers to switch from driving to taking the bus or TRAX. If the choice customers find it too hard to use the system they will go back to driving their cars. The fuel charge will drive many of this choice customers back to their cars.

To make it a double whammy, not only are they going to start charging this fuel surcharge in December, then the following month they are going to increase regular fares by 10 cents. How what a Christmas and New Years presents the riders of the UTA are going to get this year.

Once again, the people in charge of the UTA are not thinking out of the box. They are doing nothing to encourage increase bus ridership to offset the increase fuel prices. UTA needs to start thinking out of the box and stop this dumb programs that only hurt ridership not increase it.

All That Glitters....

Image via Wikipedia On my recent trip to Las Vegas, in addition to riding the Monorail I also had the opportunity to try out the other great transit experiment, MAX which runs from Downtown to North Las Vegas. This is a Bus Rapid Transit service that has been highly touted and used as an example of a light rail "like" system but of course for less money.

The line uses dedicated traffic lanes for part of its journey along with million dollar buses that use Hybrid technology. The system also has Proof of Payment fare collection, and makes limited stops.

I will not discuss ridership numbers on my trip since it occurred on a Saturday, but in Las Vegas that should not play a role in the numbers. The first thing you notice is that the buses are slightly quieter than a normal bus but in no way is comparable to electrified operation of light rail. In addition you still get the road noise and other problems associated with rubber tire technology.

The buses are equipped with an optical sensor system so that when the bus approaches a stop the system takes over the steering and steers the bus to a perfect stop. Great concept that just doesn't work in reality. Because of the drifting sands of the area the optical sensor system has never worked and would not work in area that gets snow (ie: Utah) either.

Unlike the monorail this system is run the CAT the local bus system and does use normal cat fares, transfers, and bus buses. They have been touting the great ridership increase but in reality less than a thousand new riders are on board on a regular basis.

When it comes down to it, MAX is nothing but a glorified bus and many local residents I talked to see it as nothing but a glorified bus. It is not attracting the choice riders that Light Rail does but does serve a purpose of getting people along the corridor faster. However, the Limited bus that used to serve the area did the same thing at less cost.

Much like the monorail, the MAX system is all glitter and no gold.

A Good Idea from Vegas....

Image via Wikipedia While I do not see a good transit ideas coming out of Vegas, there is one project they are doing that UTA should look at and implement.

The service is called Silver Star service. The concept behind Silver Star is that it runs from Senior Citizen housing and other senior citizen buildings to major shopping destinations in the area. The routes only run a couple of times per week, they run primarily from 9:00am or so to about 4:00pm so they are not out at rush hour, and they use small cutaway vans since they go into the parking lots of major stores and small apartment complexes.

While these services primarily target senior citizens, anyone can ride the buses and they are equipped with wheelchair lifts.

The service has been successful and has grown from one route to 11 in only a few years.

This service is an excellent idea and should be tried here in Utah. There are many seniors in housing that are fearful of riding regular transit especially with walking to it. Both Las Vegas and Utah have many bad drivers and being a pedestrian in either area is dangerous. This will allow seniors to ride the bus and not have to worry about crossing dangerous streets.

Like in Vegas, the buses could run a couple of days per week on each route, and serve and many locations as possible within an hour time frame before being back at the origination point. Most of Salt Lake city could be covered in a couple of routes then find the best places to put a couple of routes in the suburbs.

UTA needs to be looking at innovative transit ideas like Silver Star. It serves the population that needs transit the most and is very useful for others. It serves a market that is waiting for good transit service.

Impressions of the Las Vegas Monorail

Image via Wikipedia If you lived in Salt Lake City before the first TRAX line opened in '99 you may remember that there was a big campaign by the monorail folks to saying that a monorail should be built instead of light rail. What was interesting about the campaign is that it was run by some group that had offices in Seattle, Salt Lake City, and one other city and called the Wilmore Group. What was interesting about the whole thing was there was no website for the company and if you wanted to contact their Salt Lake office you could only get a recording or send a fax. Well Salt Lake went for Light Rail and it has been successful.

However the monorail folks did have two successes although one of them is in financial trouble now before turning a lick of dirt. Las Vegas now has a monorail operating and Seattle approved funding for theirs but there is many issues now.

The Las Vegas Monorail opened last year only to be closed for some time because of a drive train falling from one of the trains (that can hurt!) and reopened right before the first of the year.

The Seattle folks used the Las Vegas monorail as a example of a transit system that could be built and run without support from the taxpayers and used this example in getting voter approval for the Seattle proposal. Of course this does not take into account that Las Vegas is unique and that the casinos payed for portions of the line and that the financing package just wouldn't work in most cases, but has been used to bash light rail lines.

This past Thursday I had my first ride on the Las Vegas Monorail. I drove down to the Sahara Resort and board the train at the end of the line. The fare is $3.00 or you can buy and all day pass for just $10.00 (twice the cost of a all day pass for CAT that allows you to ride their entire system!)

There was a train sitting in the station but it was not taking passengers. In a few minutes a train showed up. I boarded the train and a few minutes later we where on our way. Here are a few observations of the trip:

1. Most of the ridership rides from the MGM stop to the Harrah's stop which is the last one on the strip. Few people rode beyond to the Hilton and the Sahara but that changes when there is a convention in town.

2. The monorail does not have smooth ride. While there has been some criticism of Light Rail because it bounces some, it is much smother than the ride on the monorail. It sways back and forth severely and will give some people motion sickness.

3. Wynn has a shuttle from the Convention Center station to The Wynn Resort and it is actually buses. So people who can afford the Wynn will ride buses!! However the bus station is across the street from the escalator to the monorail.

4. There is very little coordination from CAT to the monorail but since this is a separate system and has nothing to do with CAT there is obvious reasons why. However if it does get extended to Downtown there will need to be better coordination between CAT and the monorail.

5. One of the reasons monorailist use to justify a monorail line is speed, but don't look for it in the Vegas monorail. It automated message brags when it hits 50mph! (TRAX can go up to 55mph and some other systems can go 65mph).

6. It doesn't take much of a load before it is SRO. There is not much seating available on the monorail, plus it has fixed consists which means it can add cars easily like light rail, so even small loads overwhelm the cars.

While monorail may have a purpose, it is designed mainly to be a feeder in dense urban areas. If you look at many Pacific Rim countries they have monorails that feed into other transit systems that handle the main commuting.

What monorail is not the greatest thing since sliced bread that many make it out to be.

UTA to Cut Service and Increase Fares???

Today the UTA board is meeting to discuss the possibilities of raising fares and decreasing service due to the increase in fuel prices and increased ridership.

Huh??

OK, they are getting more riders, which should be increasing revenues, and since they are not increasing service by that much, why is it that they have to increase fares?

Instead fares will be raised and bus service cut for the people who could least afford to have the cuts made. Meanwhile Rep. John Dougall says that it is great because people should pay more of the cost and taxpayers less which is the same stuff that comes out of many right wingers but ignores that taxes going to roads especially local roads.

If UTA is going to raise fares it should do so on the most expensive routes to run the commuter runs. Routes from Utah and Weber counties that run to Salt Lake in the morning and back in the evening are some of the most expensive the UTA has. This is because there is a big capital expense in the luxury commuter buses on those routes that spend 75% of their day sitting and not earning money. Because these routes use special buses and are all expresses, rates should be raised on them so that it balances out for the distance traveled and the express service.

Here is a radical concept of the UTA which comes from the business world. On the local routes how but lowering fares? That's right do something that might bring even more people to the buses and increase revenues that way. Or even do what some other cities have done and charge more for traveling during peak periods and give a discounted fare for traveling during off peak periods when more people are needed on transit.

These are some pretty radical ideas that will probably not make it. The way the philosophy works at transit agencies (unfortunately UTA is no different from most) is that they can't lower fares because they will loose money. What they are saying basically is that no one new will be attracted to riding the buses so they will loose money. So in other words, people prefer to ride rail not the buses which is common knowledge.

Of course one the problems making this situation truer on UTA is the fact that bus service is not good outside the immediate downtown area. Some buses make there last trips at 5pm (11 Inbound) while nightride starts too early at 7:00PM. If UTA is going to improve bus ridership it needs to look at some of these situations.

Next year UTA is going to ask for a tax increase to speed up construction of TRAX lines. While I support this because TRAX does attract choice riders, it makes it hard for UTA to justify increase taxes when it is cutting bus service and increasing fares. Part of the last increase was supposed to increase bus service but the only real increases has been limited Sunday service.

If UTA is going to cut service and raise fares, UTA needs to make changes from within. There needs to be more focus on customers at UTA to increase ridership and revenue.

When Will Changes Come to Bus Lines?

Last year UTA did a study of all the bus routes in Salt Lake County and they where planning to do massive changes in the bus system over this year. However, UTA has put off many of those changes but still plans to do most of the changes in the next year.

However, few people know exactly what these changes will be. UTA has not released the details of the plan or what kind of changes will take place.

The problem with most of these plans is that they are made up by consultants that never rode the bus system and don't have a clue about the who what where and why people ride the bus. Orange County, California reorganized their bus system a few years ago on the advice from a consultant yet after only six months they started returning to the old system because of the negative effects it had on thier system.

I am not putting down all consultants (after all I am breaking into the business myself), but when the consultants only go by the "numbers" and do not find out the information on riding habits, the changes will not help out the UTA's customers: the riders on the buses and TRAX.

I am not saying that there is not the need for changes in the bus system, on the contrary there does need to be changes. Currently the bus system is in the immediate Salt Lake area is largely based on old streetcar lines that buses replaced 70 years ago! The times have changed and its time for the bus system to change. However, the system needs to change in order to make riding the system easier for the customers of the UTA.

UTA needs to work with its customers to make a better transit system that will not only work for existing riders, but also be more attractive to choice riders.

Will Utah County Ever Gets it Act Together???

Well there is always news on the transit front coming out of Utah County but usually its it pretty nutty or just plane dark ages thinking. I actually thought there might be some hope when Utah County decided to pull out of the Mountainland Association of Goverments which had a very rural planning attitude and decided to start its own association, however the more things change in Utah County the more they stay the same.

Utah County is working on a vote to increase the sales tax to support transit just like Salt Lake, Davis and Weber counties did a few years ago. Part of the measure will fund the construction of the commuter rail line from the Utah County border to Provo and Payson. However, some politicians don't want the transit agency to get the funds until it is ready to build the system so it wants to put the money into freeways.

However there is still some politicians down there that still have the no body rides transit attitude and wants no money at all invested in commuter rail. This attitude is so backward because even before the rapid rise in gasoline prices ridership on Utah County bus routes especially the commuter routes have been going through the roof. This despite the system is not that good and still could use a lot of improvement.

Of course the main newspaper the Deseret News which is now has a board headed by a developer by the name of Ivory is not helping matters only producing negative articles. There have been several anti-commuter rail editorials in the paper one being written by and Economics instructor at BYU. Unfortunately I don't see any changes at the Deseret News until Ivory is gone from their board. Of course the best course of action is to hit the newspaper with as many well written letters to the editor as possible telling the truth about rail.

Hopefully some changes will come in Utah County as gas prices continue to be high and I-15 becomes more of a bottleneck. Transit will work in Utah County as it has proven with the rise in ridership.

Don't Hem in TRAX at Daybreak

Planning continues on the West Jordan branch of TRAX which will travel from the Fashion Place West station to the new community of Daybreak.

If you look at the UTA maps on the Environmental Impact Statement is shows nothing but empty land in the area. However by the time TRAX makes it to Daybreak there will be a town village taking shape. Looking the the models that are present in the Daybreak Welcome Center, it shows the line ending in the center of the commercial area but having no way to be extended.

However it makes no sense at all to hem in TRAX so that it cannot be extended in any direction. Kennecott Lands has lands for many miles to the west and eventually plans to develop it. An extension of the TRAX line as this development seems natural but will not be able to happen under the present plans.

Daybreak is an outstanding concept, a beautiful community (that I hope to be living at in a couple of years) and showing that even in conservative Utah a forward thinking community can be built. Lets make sure that the TRAX line is built with the same future in mind.

Chance for Redevelopment

It was only a few years ago that you could not rent a spot at the Family Center at Fort Union for any price. It was the premier spot in that part of the county. All the stores where full and there wasn't a spot to be had. Have things changed in the last couple of years. The former Joannne's spot has been empty for more than a year (now being filled for the second time by a Halloween Store) as has several other spots in the center. To top it all off the Mervyn's store which is one of the largest in the mall is closing which will leave a large open hole.

Some of the blame for this can be directed at the owner of the shopping center who seems to be doing little to change the slide. There also has not been any upgrades to the center which is starting to look very dated.

To top it all off, the center is not pedestrian friendly. Even if you park your car with a short walk to the store you intend on using you take your life into your own hands as there are very few sidewalks and cars travel substantially above a safe operating speed.

Instead of letting the shopping center to continue its slow decline, how about making it a shining example of a mixed used pedestrian friendly environment. Here are some ideas:

1. Move some stores so they face Fort Union Blvd making the center friendly to pedestrians.

2. With a major apartment complex across the street, how about building a pedestrian bridge from the complex to the shopping center.

3. Some goes for the Union Plaza shopping complex. It is more trouble than it is worth to cross the street into the shopping center but with pedestrian bridges it would be easy but also would require more restaurants in the center (3 have closed-could it be the fact that the place is too hard to get into?).

4. Move Chili's and Bank One so that you rebuild the main entrance to the center to make it safer not only for pedestrians but also for cars but currently it is very dangerous.

5. In the rebuilding build a back alley for trucks so that they do not have to use the crowded drives as they have to do now.

6. The current location of Mervyn's would make a great area for a mixed use development that would curve around and head toward 1300 East. It could include offices or apartments and designed to create more foot traffic.

These changes would also make it easier for people riding transit to access the center. Currently people who arrive or depart on the westbound 85 have to cross very busy Fort Union Blvd, but the pedestrian footbridges for the apartments could be used by bus riders as well.

With new developments going in to the south, the owner of the Family Center needs to wake up and realize that if changes are not made the Family Center will be left in the dust. Instead, turn into a state of the art center, friendly to both people in cars and pedestrians: in other words turn it into a winner.

UTA should look to Portland and their buses

Image via WikipediaOne of the weaknesses of the UTA system is the buses. They cost more to operate than light rail and do not attract the number of choice riders that TRAX light rail does. So what can UTA do to improve its bus system and make it attract more choice riders?

UTA needs to look at what Portland is doing on its busiest routes. Since we are stuck with the Low Floor buses that are inferior to the high floors, UTA like Tri-Met in Portland needs to take advantage of them.

What Portland did was go route by route and assign the low floor buses to their busiest routes that will take advantage of the faster loading and unloading. In addition they reduced the number of bus stops (but still keeping them close together), and adjusted the sidewalks and curves to make getting in and out of the low floors as seamless as can be.

This gives the best invest for the dollar short of building streetcar or light rail systems. It speeds up the buses and is more attractive to choice riders.

Among the routes that would be perfect opportunities for this kind of investment is the 8, 9, 22, 30, 31, 39, 40, 70, 603, 612, and the 830 (probably this route will be served more by this than the BRT scheme).

Expansion of TRAX is very important, but still is maintaining and increasing ridership on the bus routes.

Opportunity Lost: The 1300 South Wal-Mart

Image via WikipediaWal-Mart gets criticized at every turn from closing small businesses to being the cause of sprawl to how much it pays its employees. When Wal-Mart built its new store at 1300 South and 300 West in an area with a high degree of transit dependence it had the opportunity to show a new face and truly show it cares about the community.

Instead Wal-Mart snubbed its nose at the transit dependent in the area and showed its true hatred toward transit. Instead of building a store with access from the street since the store is only a half block from a TRAX station and on two bus lines, it builds a normal store with a two story parking lot as its only access. In addition it made access from the street so dangerous that many will not take there lives into their own hands to use it. To walk into the building from 300 west you have to walk along the parking lot with cars speeding through to their parking spots.

This store just is a slap in the face to many of the residents of the area who are transit dependent. However this is no real surprise when it comes to Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart is a large donor to such anti-transit groups as the Heartland Institute that has Highway Lobbyist Wendell Cox and is also supported by an array of highway institutions.

Of course blame also has to be leveled at the city of Salt Lake that let the poorly designed store be built in the first place. Like most cities all they saw was dollar signs in their eyes and couldn't give a rip about how well it was designed. There needs to be changes across the board to improve transit and to improve buildings to allow easy access for transit riders.

Bus Assignments Need Work

Many years ago I had a close family friend who drove for the Southern California Rapid Transit District. It was not uncommon for the RTD to put a 30-foot bus on a route that should have nothing but a 40-foot bus and would have 40-foot buses on a route that should have only 30 foot buses.

The problem at the time was that the RTD had such a diverse fleet, many different types of buses, from many different sources so it was difficult for them to insure the right bus was on the right line. Of course this was in the days before they high tech computers of today.

Today UTA has a much more standardized fleet than the RTD back in the late 70's early 80's, but seems to have the same trouble with assigning buses even with the advent of computers.

A perfect example of this is route 22. This route is one of the busier routes the UTA has, yet many times it is assigned 35-foot low floor buses. It is bad enough that the low floor buses reduces seating capacity, then you add the fact that you are using a smaller bus often leads to standing room only on the route north of 3300 South. I can see running low floors on this route but they should only have 40-foot buses on this route.

There is no reason why this cannot be done. In fact if you ride the same route every day you will find that often you will ride the same bus number every day. When I road the route 24, I road the same Orion V buses on the regular basis. The other bus I rode was usually assigned bus 9222. So why can't they make sure the routes that need the 40-footers have them?

The situation is gets more ridiculous when there is special events going on. When the American Public Transit Association had there national meeting in Salt Lake, a rodeo was held for bus drivers across the country. Many of the newest Gillig Advantages was pulled from revenue service carrying their customers and used them instead for the rodeo. During this time I rode another very bus route line 37 which runs to Magna. This is another route that runs with standing loads on many runs. Because they wasted buses on the rodeo, they had to assign 35-foot ski buses to this tripper. Not only is the bus smaller but several sets of seats are removed for ski's.

Why? They wanted to show off for APTA and showed how they could care less about their customers that ride with them every day. Why couldn't the rodeo use the ski buses which are sitting anyway? It would make much more sense to use the ski buses on the rodeo and keep the other buses on their regular assignments for their PAYING customers.

The sad thing is that UTA is one of the better transit agencies when treating the customer. However, it is clear that there still needs to be changes at UTA to make it more customer friendly. If it is going to attract the option riders, UTA needs to reinvent is service.

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.

Another Anti-Rail Rant in the Deseret News

Image via WikipediaEver since Ivory has become head of the Deseret News' advisors it seems that the paper has taken a very large turn to the anti-transit side. This is an ironic turn of events but not all that unexpected since Ivory is an anti-transit developer.

The latest rant is from a Economics Professor at BYU. He basically says the same old garbage on how rail transit only attracts bus riders, it is a useless and commuter rail will not work. (sheeze all you have to do is change a few words and he says the same repeated message of the Road Warriors).

He starts of with saying that Commuter Rail will not attract riders only divert riders from buses. In addition he says that rail will not create a big enough share to affect congestion. Of course this is just looking from one point of view. Congestion is relieved: for anyone who rides the trains they do not have to deal with congestion. Also, once again people are more likely to ride trains than they are to ride buses.

He also says that the trains will be slow despite they traveling up to 79mph. Yes, the trains do have to stop but then they pick up more passengers. But speed is not the issue. I much rather be relaxing on the train than dealing with the idiots behind the wheel. You arrive at your destination relaxed and more ready to face the day. You are not upset at all the cars that cut you off, ran over the top of you, went 35 in a 65 and so on. Of course that is taken into account by the them.

Then he begins his attack on TRAX. Once again he gets on the same old bandwagon on how TRAX is only attracting former bus riders and that ridership hasn't gone up. Of course it flies in the face of reality where TRAX parking lots are full, its trains carry many more people than the buses it replaced, and they are many people on TRAX who would never ride the bus. In fact when you look at previous bus ridership compared to the numbers that TRAX is pulling in, it is clear even by conservative measures that TRAX is attracting about 49 to 50% of its riders from cars. You add the fact that there is currently not even a real network of lines open yet and you can clearly see that TRAX is a success.

At a time when we need more and better transit service, it is sad to see that some people still have their heads in the sand and will not see the realities that we are facing today. Of course it doesn't help when one of the major newspapers who has been a supporter of transit seems to be turning to wrong way. Today transit is becoming more important than ever, and we need to improve the system not attack it.

Great Job UTA

Image via WikipediaThe last couple of days I had the opportunity to attend Rail-Volution here in Salt Lake City. Rail-Volution deals with land use and transit systems.

Salt Lake is one of the first smaller major cities to hold a Rail-Volution event that started 10 years ago. UTA provided good information to people attending the conference, passes for the length of the conference, and many of its employees attend the conference.

The only downside to the conference was the head of the UTA John Inglish. On Friday morning he did the morning introductions and introduced the other speakers of the morning session. However, when announcing some of the events, he wasn't sure if the Utah State Fair was running. What is wrong with that picture?

Overall I have to give UTA a big thumbs up in its leadership with Rail-Volution.

Goodbye to the Classics

Image via WikipediaUTA is in the process of pulling from service the 1990 MCI Classics that have served many miles for the UTA and being replaced by the new 30-foot Optima Opus buses.

The Design of the Classic is based of the GM New Look buses that first started production in 1959. Production in the United States was stopped in 1977 and replaced by the RTS series which UTA never used except during the Olympics. However the New Look continued to be produced in Canada and was updated in 1984 and became the classic. UTA purchased these buses in 1984 and 1990. In 1987 GM sold its bus division to MCI which at the time was part of Greyhound but the buses remained the same.

The problem with the newer buses is that they are not built to the same standards as the previous buses. The new Optima's and the Gillig's that UTA purchased over the last few years are not the same quality as the Classics or the New Looks that proceeded them. While the motors are essentially the same it is in the passenger cabin that you can really notice the differences in the buses.

If you where to ride on of the few remaining Classics that are left in service, while you will notice a couple of rattles here in there, it would not be major. Meanwhile even when the Gillig Advantage's where just a couple of years old they had major rattles and are not a passenger friendly bus to ride on.

Sadly there are several reasons why this happens.

1. Lowest bidder-may not always be the best bidder.

2. Fed's 12 Year Policy-Buses only have to last that long even though many of them are falling apart before that.

3. Policy Makers don't ride the buses-This is probably the biggest reason why the quality of today's buses is poor compared to older vehicles. For the most part the big wigs and especially the board members of UTA DON'T RIDE THE BUS. Unless it is for some public relations reason they are not on the buses. They do not ride the bus and see the condition of the buses so it doesn't even enter their minds that the customer compartment of the bus is poor. All they look at is the mechanical performance-that's all.

Do you think those big wigs would allow their personal cars to rattle like the buses that their customers have to ride in? Of course the answer is no, they would be screaming bloody murder to the dealer and the manufacturer. They should also not permit it on the buses their customers have to ride in either.

The board of directors and the top corporate people of transit agencies in general, not just the UTA need to demand better products from the manufacturers. It is their responsibility to their customers to do so.

Will UTA ever learn how to coordinate schedules?

When UTA came out with its most recent schedule changes, I got really excited because they announced that they would have route 3 serve LDS Hospital and provide coordinated schedules with routes 1 and 2 which also service the hospital. Since I first started riding UTA I felt this should be done and finally it has.

However after looking at the schedules I am trying to figure out what UTA means by coordinated schedules.

I will take a look at the off peak schedules since they run at a set pattern. All three routes run every 30-minutes. Well logic assumes that if they run every 30-minutes then there should be a bus by every 10-minutes. Instead lets take a look at one late morning block of buses and I will use the LDS hospital outbound timepoint as an example since this is the primary point of coordination. Lets look at the 11:00AM to noon and look at the times: Route 2 11:10, Route 1 11:15, Route 3 11:25, Route 2 11:40, Route 1 11:45, Route 3 11:55.

This is coordination UTA style. The previous 3 ran at 10:55 then you have 15-minutes until the 2 comes along, then you have a route one in 5 minutes, a route 3 in 10 minutes and once again a 15 minute wait. I even gave UTA the benefit of the doubt and checked inbound schedules leaving the University Hospital and once again the schedules are not coordinated.

This isn't the only example of UTA's ability not to coordinate schedules. Routes 7 and 11 both travel 1300 east from the University of Utah to Stratford road which is just north of 2700 South. Both routes run every 30 minutes but instead of providing coordinated every 15-minutes service along this stretch of road that takes almost 15-minutes to travel down. Instead on the outbound runs route 11 runs just 4 minutes behind route 7 and five minutes behind running inbound.

Another example is routes 21 and 32. While this only covers one run in the morning it not shows the lack of ability of the UTA planners to properly schedule buses but also gives the anti-transit people something to howl about. Route 21 and 32 run from 6200 South and Highland Drive all the way to downtown along Van Winkle, 700 East, and 200 South. Every morning at about 7:30am there is a 21 and 32 running neck and neck along the same route. Both are limited service from 4500 South to Downtown so this is an incredible waste resources.

This type of poorly coordinated service makes transit harder to use. UTA needs to make the bus system easy to use like TRAX currently is. UTA still has a long way to go.