Source
r/SaltLakeCity•
halioscar

Crazy idea to improve public transit...

Is there a way to open the non-service hours of the current bus and TRAX systems to the private sector so that they can operate their own vehicles and share the cost of the infrastructure? Why haven't there been competing bus lines? Why does the entirety of Salt Lake City's public transit rest in one private company's interest?

It's obvious to me that UTA is all about crunching numbers and stretching pennies, but not so much interested in improving service downtown. Do we really have to put up with this monopoly and suffer? Anyone with a relevant expertise to explain this to me?

Posted Jan 15, 2015, 10:26 PM UTC

2540
ryumast3rCottonwood Heights•

Why not just support UTA as an actual public service instead of a semi-private organization? Screw earning a total profit on it, pay a few pennies more in taxes and add late-night services.

21
radmarshallbCapitol Hill•

This is the right answer. There's no way UTA can make costs by running more extensive services, so we have to recognize that it serves a public need and pay for it.

10
lechino3000•

I'll pay my share of pennies. No problem.

2
inco•

I am going to go ahead and say that UTA is actually pretty good and that the people that think otherwise just haven't used other systems. Not to say that UTA couldn't do without some improvements, but many people's criticism of it is a bit off.

Having multiple companies in charge of public transit is a pain. The schedules don't line up, the transit cards are different so no you can't use one for the other. The exception is when another company comes into the mix with a card that can be used for all of them. (adding onto the cost)

UTA is clean, has modern vehicles, has great signage, among other things. Sure I'd like to see the price come down but overall I think UTA is doing pretty damned good. There are good reasons why UTA has won awards for it's transit systems. http://www.rideuta.com/news/2014/06/system-of-the-year/

Please go to another city that uses your crazy idea and see how much of a pain it actually is.

Having one company instead of multiple has it's inherent efficiencies.

16
The_Crass-Beagle_Act•

I've lived in Washington DC, Paris, Berlin, and a small city in northern France. Of all of those cities, Salt Lake's system is probably my least favorite overall in my opinion. Salt Lake's system is certainly impressive for a metro area of its size, and it really does excel in certain areas, but that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement in other areas. In particular, I'd love to see increased hours of operation as many others in this thread have voiced. I'd also love to see increased route frequency during peak hours.

I think that when most people complain about UTA, they aren't being ungrateful, ignorant, or whiny. Most of us are happy with any form of functional mass transit outside of the major metro areas, but that doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't make suggestions and demands for its improvement. There's no sense in throwing up our hands and saying that it's good enough just because it's better than what many cities have.

11
insomnic•

Those places are all very densely populated areas in which public transport has evolved without the "car culture" (or in DC replaced it by necessity) in a very distinct way. Those locations also have long established setups that have had business and residential function build up around them. I can see why you'd find UTA lacking compared to those setups so I don't think that's necessarily an equitable comparison.

That said - you are right that the only way it can get better is by people asking for more from it. At the same time, it will have to be paid for by someone (fare price increases or taxes or something). I think a lot of improvement issues that come up have a "chicken or the egg" situation; people not wanting to use the rail until it's better but not wanting to pay for it because they don't use it yet but will when it's better but it can't get better unless someone pays for the upgrades...

I think, in general, UTA has done very well especially compared to other light rail in the US that has tried to get off the ground as a new system. I think UTA could use some improvements as well. I think it's likely a more complicated issue than many people seem to grasp.

2
The_Crass-Beagle_Act•

I realize that there are big differences in the nature of these systems do to size and population density (except for the city in northern France, which was a metro area about the size of Ogden, but I digress). I simply cited these examples as other cities whose transit systems I've used extensively that I found generally less of a pain than Salt Lake.

I think the problem is that UTA has gone too corporate, despite being a semi-public company. It's run by executives that make more money than the transit commissioner of Los Angeles, and it throws its resources at expanding expensive infrastructure like TRAX and Frontrunner in order to receive more government funding at the neglect of the less romantic but much more necessary basic bus service. TRAX and Frontrunner are good, and it's nice to see those systems grow, but when I have to wait 30 minutes to stand on an overcrowded bus during rush hour, it sends a basic signal that the bus system isn't as prioritized or optimized as it could be.

Why not implement a limited trial run of evening bus service? If people actually don't ride it, they can get rid of it, and if people do ride it, it's a win for everyone. Why not try moving overcrowded bus routes like mine to a 15 or even 20 minute frequency at 8:30 AM and see if it reduces crowding or even attracts a bigger ridership?

4
Michael_MDF•

I've lived in many parts of the US with mass transit, and I must say that short of the cost (Which I find to be too high), it's very nice.

Clean, on time, and with reasonable stops and locations for everything, it's a solid system for anyone who has to rely on it.

3
lechino3000•

It needs improvement.

1
Michael_MDF•

That can be said about a great and many things, but the current system is far from terrible.

Could you cite some examples of what you as a rider feels, needs changed?

1
lechino3000•

Sure, I take classes at the U. I tend to study there until 10pm. A few times for whatever reason I had no transportation, so I took UTA. I had to leave campus before 8pm if I wanted to catch the last bus that takes me downtown. I chose to take trax so I could stay longer but the problem now was that I had to also leave by 9pm in order to catch the connecting bus to take me home. In the end, I spent two hours on a trip that usually takes me half. Another problem is work. I wanted to ride trax and the bus so I could save money. The problem also is that I also get off work late at night and there was no way for me to catch the last bus to take me home. In the end I decided to keep using my car even though I don't like to pollute. The other problem (for those of us who are low income), riding UTA is very expensive. I don't care how UTA compares to other systems in the country. I only care that UTA has room for improvement and I am willing to pay a few cents more on taxes so they can change for the better.

1
irondeepbicycleGreater Avenues•

This is the correct answer. UTA's ridership is consistently on par with metro areas twice the size of SLC. Bitch about UTA all you want, but you can't look at this chart and say those numbers aren't impressive.

2
1weechSalt Lake City•

Or even more impressive, this chart. FrontRunner is up there with Miami and Seattle's commuter rails after only 7 years.

1
lordxiOgden•

Lived in MA for 17 years, UTA is a shit system if you're not in SLC proper OR its night time/the weekend. That half assed award is also bullshit from a bullshit organisation.

2
xn--seorblanco-u9a•

I think that risks splintering and totally privatizing the service. When UTA decides to expand to late night service the other operators will cry bloody murder that their most profitable operating times have been usurped. We can see from the existing taxi services how popular they are and how cosy effective they are. If there were that much demand for profitable private services then it would be filled.

Profit isn't going to be a better motive to expand late night services if UTA already considers them infeasible. Public transit is better served as a single-operator integrated system, even if it's run by a private contractor.

There's also more likely to be unprofitable services run even if they serve the public good by a single large operator because their primary goal is public service rather than profits.

There are many successful co-ops (nonprofit) in various industries so they can work where there is the desire, but don't forget your government is essentially a large co-op of which we're all members.

Anyway, interesting idea. Upvoted it for the discussion :-)

3
ruinddDowntown•

I don't see how this would save any money. There's a lot more involved in mass transit than needing a bus driver. You gotta remember that mass transit only makes sense when it's moving a lot of people. When it's only needed by a handful of people, it's no longer efficient and alternatives to buses/trains is more efficient.

What service is UTA not providing downtown?

3
splintersadvice•

They do not provide services downtown at any late hours. And they don't run the airport line to (at least) downtown 24 hours. They should at least have the airport line run every hour to downtown. The airport always has planes coming in.

8
JekyllhydeEast Liberty Park•

This is my frustration. Even if not 24 hrs, have the line run early enough t get on the 6am flights and late enough to get home on the midnight arrivals. Sundays and holidays would be nice too.

6
Michael_MDF•

For the time being, if you're going to the airport a lot during those hours, have you considered the Express Shuttle service? They have a frequent riders discount option which offers free rides.

1
JekyllhydeEast Liberty Park•

Yes, they are awesome. I use express shuttle a lot.

2
Detached09West Valley City•

The airport always has planes coming in.

Is this actually true? A quick Google gets me hours for standard business but not arrivals and departures.

I ask, because Las Vegas' McCarran Int'l (you know, the city known for being 24h) actually does close for like 4 hours every morning. I'd imagine Salt Lake does as well.

3
insomnic•

No. The only flights that come in before or after a certain time are ones that have had delays or conflicts. It is rare to find a "red-eye" anymore.

1
ryumast3rCottonwood Heights•

I don't know of a good place to look it up, but I just looked over the flights departing/arriving tonight and it seems that they stop departing around 2am (1:30am was the last flight tonight), and stop arriving around 1am (12:30 was the last one arriving).

Then they start up again at like 5:30am for both arriving and departing (I think arriving starts closer to 6am, but meh).

1
Diegodangers•

well, it doesn't. but it does have employees that go clock in after the last flight has left and the first flight goes out. we'd love to use the train to get to work, but it sucks to go one way and not have a way back out.

2
Ceedub260•

It's frustrating when I have to leave a jazz game or a bees game early so I can catch the last train.

3
insomnic•

A lot of people forget the "mass transit" portion of it.

2
archibaldsghost•

UTA is actually the progeny of several failed privately held transit lines. They failed because they couldn't compete with one another and the car. SLC tore up all the trolly lines that were still embedded in its roads in the 70s because, sadly, the contemporary government felt they weren't needed. Wikipedia has a decent-enough history of UTA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Transit_Authority#History

Does UTA have enough ridership to split up and become several private companies again? I doubt it.

3
autowikibot•

#####

######

#### Section 1. History of article Utah Transit Authority:

The Utah Transit Authority traces its roots to 1953 when several bus companies united to form the organization. Ironically, among the constitutive companies of the UTA was National City Lines, which bought out and decommissioned the trolleys from the Utah Light and Traction Company in the 1940s. The Traction company operated electric trolleys in Salt Lake City neighborhoods like the Avenues.

Bus service in the 1950s became unpopular with low gas prices and subsidized construction of highways like Interstate 15. By 1960 bus ridership was only about one third the level of war-time Salt Lake, and the average age of riders was 14.

In 1969, the Utah State Legislature passed the Utah Public Transit District Act, which allows individual communities to address transportation needs by forming local transit districts. The UTA was subsequently founded in March 1970 when the cities of Sandy, Salt Lake City, and Murray voted to form a transit district. Service was extended to Weber and Davis counties in 1973 and to Utah County in 1985. Today, the UTA's service area is over 1,400 square miles (3,600 km^2) and covers seven counties: Box Elder, Davis, Salt Lake, Summit, Tooele, Utah, and Weber.

^Interesting: ^Utah ^Transit ^Authority ^Police ^Department ^| ^Sandy ^Expo ^(UTA ^station) ^| ^Fairmont ^(UTA ^station) ^| ^Sugarmont ^(UTA ^station)

^Parent ^commenter ^can [^toggle ^NSFW](/message/compose?to=autowikibot&subject=AutoWikibot NSFW toggle&message=%2Btoggle-nsfw+cnqwlyk) ^or [^delete](/message/compose?to=autowikibot&subject=AutoWikibot Deletion&message=%2Bdelete+cnqwlyk)^. ^Will ^also ^delete ^on ^comment ^score ^of ^-1 ^or ^less. ^| ^(FAQs) ^| ^Mods ^| ^Magic ^Words

2
JoshGreat•

I think allowing another company to use the infrastructure late at night is a great idea. Increases service, and tax-payers get more bang for their buck.

2
olds•

The short answer is that public transit in SLC (or anywhere in Utah) isn't viable as a standalone enterprise. It requires huge subsidies from sales tax revenues and other places to make it remotely affordable to us commoners. Cutting late-night service is a no-brainer for a UTA because late night ridership is a minuscule portion of their overall ridership and the costs of adding on a few hours to their service schedule likely outweigh any possible revenue benefit.

There's basically no way a private enterprise could make any money running their own bus network late at night in Salt Lake City. There simply aren't enough people that need/want to ride public transit at that hour to make it profitable.

1
Michael_MDF•

Perhaps...

UTA could work with local Taxi services for specific hours of operation from businesses and schools so that those with a monthly pass or whatever can get a discount on the travel cost since the buses and trax may not be running.

Of course, without seeing the demographics in how many people need these off-hour transit options (which I can't imagine is a huge amount given the normal business hours around the valley) it's hard to really conceptualize a real need for it.

1
CEMASTER•

How much do DUIs cost? Without late night service, they are forcing people to drive.

1
Psidoc•

What about taxis, Uber, or Lyft?

1
Angry_Server_Owner•

It would be cool if they could partner with Über or Lyft to make something like this happen

0
TheGarp•

Kinda hard to partner with something operating illegally

0
veruus•

You sound like one of those "hate the poor" libertarian types. Why do you hate the poor, Libertarian man? Only 1%-ers would be able to afford private buses. Why should robber baron profiteers benefit from the City's largess in providing paved roads and rails for it's fine citizens? Shame on you, cis-Capitalist Pig shitlord! Shame!

-4
halioscarOP•

This is my favorite reply. Can't really tell if you're being satirical or honestly enraged by the thought of an expansion of service. In that case, I have never been cursed so thoroughly, thank you!

2
veruus•

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law

itisamystery.gif

;)

2