Deseret News | Reader comments: Garrott opposes TRAX proposal

Reader comments
Garrott opposes TRAX proposal

Stenar | 2:13 a.m. April 30, 2008

Luke Garrott is absolutely right. The 400 West route is an awful compromise that is ridiculous as it makes people backtrack over half a mile and is more expensive to build, not to mention that the 600 West alignment has opportunity for transit-oriented development in that neighborhood.

Anonymous | 7:36 a.m. April 30, 2008

Luke- join the dark side.

From Poplar Grove | 7:52 a.m. April 30, 2008

I am not sure that I would say that Garrott came into this late as much as I would say that he must have been asleep for the last decade. He could have addressed this while he was campaigning for office, Nancy Saxton did. We are not in the world of academia anymore. The other part that I believe is important to report is the fact that this decision was also made 11 years ago. The Gateway Master Plan, The Railroad Consolidation Plan, The Westside Master Plan all state that the light rail would move down 400 W. UTA and the City also agreed to this alignment. This also went through the community councils, public hearings, Transportation Advisory Board, Planning Commission and City Council, 11 years ago -WHO IS RUSHING INTO THIS?

Comments continue below

Big Daddy | 8:11 a.m. April 30, 2008

Garrot is not only behind the curve, but also under a rock! The 400 West alignment is part of a classic Transit Oriented Development ("TOD") with TRAX connecting from North Temple to 400 West and connecting to the existing line at The Gateway with the Energy Solutions Arena. The 600 West alignment disturbs a residential neighborhood. If it were to be a TOD, one would have to create a destination retail center or event center....Oh wait...we have one at 400 West (ESA and Gateway Retail). How silly and short sighted can some people be!!! I guess they're the ones who wouldn't mind having rail lines right in front of their house with a 34 foot high viaduct!

Stenar | 11:59 a.m. April 30, 2008

There is no residential neighborhood on 600 West. There is a tiny handful of houses that are entirely surrounded by industrial bldgs. and railroad tracks. Those houses look like they should be condemned. Tear the houses down, put TRAX on 600 West and build a really nice transit-oriented development around it.

westsider | 12:30 p.m. April 30, 2008

Stenar-
Have you been on 600 W and North Temple??? There are people's HOMES and an apartment complex as well as new condos going in. A lot more residential than you seem to realize is already in place.

Tammi Diaz | 12:33 p.m. April 30, 2008

UTA needs to slow down get FINANCES in order. Voters Voted for a Improvement in the TRANSIT SYSTEM
not the DESTRUCTION of the BUS SYSTEM. UTA does follow their MISSION STATEMENT. For Airport Light Rail Line needs to go down 600 West.

SLC'er | 1:14 p.m. April 30, 2008

I hope they wait until we can hear from all sides. I don't think a trax line/trax stop is 'boxing people in,' rather, its a great opportunity to have a transit oriented community. I for one am trying to find a place to live that is close to a trax stop.

involved1 | 1:26 p.m. April 30, 2008

there has been opportunity for both sides to sound off for 2 years. People who are supposedly supporting TRAX on 600 W have failed to show up to Planning Commission meetings, Transportation Advisory Board meetings and City Council meetings. There has been 2 years of open discussions and open houses, it's time to put this baby to bed.

Stenar | 2:46 p.m. April 30, 2008

I've driven through that area many times and I just got home from driving along 600 West again to see it up close and personal one more time.

There are 8 dilapidated houses on the east side of the street and two high-density housing projects on the west side of the street. 8 houses do not constitute a neighborhood when they are surrounded by a viaduct, railroad tracks, a large swath of empty land and a massive parking lot.

Putting TRAX on 600 West, tearing down the 8 houses and replacing them with high-density housing would be a more suitable use for this area.

Shelly | 3:05 p.m. April 30, 2008

Stenar - You are correct there are homes on the east side of 600 West and you may say "tear them down" those are peoples' homes. To you they may look dilapidated and not worth much but families live there! How would you like to walk out your front door and see a huge viaduct all because a few people think that is the best way to provide transportation.
On another note if you would have looked on the West side of 600 West you would see that there is an apartment complex that houses over 200 families as well as condo's being built directly south of the apartment complex.
Building the viaduct along 600 west would be truely detrimental to the west side neighborhoods. Think of community and their best needs!

Garrott is right | 3:10 p.m. April 30, 2008

I completely agree with Luke Garrott. We have an incredible opportunity to extend TRAX service throughout that area to serve the neighborhood. Opponents need to understand all the facts. If the line goes up 400 west, it's going to put 8 trains per hour in the intersection of 400 west and south temple. If that happens, expect MAJOR traffic problems, and trains will have to be diverted away from the HUB. What's the point of the HUB if the trains can't reach it? Everyone will transfer from Rrontrunner at North Temple, and the HUB will become a glorified bus station, which could potentially bring that crime and blight the residents are afraid of..

TRAX Bridge | 5:35 p.m. April 30, 2008

A TRAX Bridge on 600 West would be a VAST improvement to what the few residents currently have to look at.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.