Deseret News | Easing congestion: FrontRunner South progresses as crews unveil rail addition

Reader comments
Easing congestion: FrontRunner South progresses as crews unveil rail addition

SammyD | 12:08 a.m. July 7, 2009

It will be so good to see the empty buses drop off their passengers to ride the train.

North a faiilure | 6:07 a.m. July 7, 2009

So, Frontrunner North is already a failure but we are building a second train line to another town with less than 200,000 people. I guess we will be happy to have it in 50 years if the population continues to grow.

Anonymous | 6:59 a.m. July 7, 2009

This is awesome! This is planning and investing in the future. The small town roots of Utah is, unfortunately, in the past. My hometown of 5,000 now has 28,000+. The reality is, it is time for Utah to grow up, and the leadership that follows through on these projects is helping it happen.

Comments continue below

MarkS | 7:48 a.m. July 7, 2009

re: North a failure. Can't say whether it will be a success, but please note that Utah County has an estimated population over 500,000. The line isn't just for people who live in Provo, which is in a dead heat with West Valley for being the second largest city in Utah.

GM | 7:48 a.m. July 7, 2009

I read an article the other day that stated that in the early part of the 20th century, cities had more mass transit lines. Then GM bought most of the Mass Transit Lines and closed them because they wanted to sell their cars and make money.

I am glad that the Mass transit is coming back.

It is to bad we are bailing out GM.

Cheaper to drive... | 8:26 a.m. July 7, 2009

My wife and I rode the front runner from Pleasant View to Salt Lake City and back again. It costs more than to drive, pay for the parking and have a nice lunch. I don't see how it is saving anyone money, I can't even afford to ride it for work on a daily basis. No wonder people prefer to drive over riding mass transit. Unlike the other mass transit systems in the U.S. that are designed to serve the lower and middle class citizens, Front Runner is only for the rich who can afford the high ticket prices. Unless UTA charges less...it will eventually fail.

Why | 8:49 a.m. July 7, 2009

is it taking so long?

In 1870, using materials left over from the Union Pacific, volunteer labor, and primitive equipment, Brigham Young constructed the Utah Central Railroad from Ogden to Salt Lake City in less than a year. That's 38 miles of track, or about the same distance from Salt Lake to American Fork.

One would think that with modern equipment and techniques they could get it done in less than 6 years. Heck, the reconstruction of I-15 took less than 5 years, and that was a much bigger project.

Blind to the facts? | 8:59 a.m. July 7, 2009

The comment about GM removing public transit is true. GM was found guilty of creating a monopoly for removing all the public trains and moving people to buses, which people hated so they all started to drive (helped by other companies like Firestone). For this the government fined them a whopping $1,000.
Salt Lake used to have a fantastic rail system and now we are having to rebuild it. I don't hear GM offering to help defray he costs.
Public transit is the future of transportation. It's a good thing that UTA's leadership isn't as myoptic as many of the posters here.

Agree | 9:01 a.m. July 7, 2009

I agree with cheaper to drive. The train is expensive for a family to use. One person may save money rather than driving but a family of 4 that would need to pay $50 in fares for a round trip will still save money driving. Maybe CEO and manager bonus money could be used to reduce fares.

not cheaper to drive... | 9:01 a.m. July 7, 2009

All considered, the $162 for an all access UTA pass (which includes Front Runner, Trax, and busses) is a bargain--especially if you consider how far most Front Runner riders commute. F.R. riders chose to buy houses way out there (there are affordable options in Salt Lake), so I feel that taxpayers should only have to subsidize their commute so much (millions each year as it is). I think that most families can live with one car and UTA passes...

seems a little high | 10:10 a.m. July 7, 2009

I am a big fan of mass transit living in New York, but I have to say $162.00 does seem a little much. I only pay a little over half that for my monthly pass here in New York, granted I do not have access to the long island railroad or NJ railroad for that but it still seems a little high.

wallofvoodoo | 10:46 a.m. July 7, 2009

Frontrunner passes are in the realm of luxury for me rather than my car being the luxury. I think UTA envisioned the people riding the train, at is those who can get their employers chipping in for part or all of a pass, not those of us who are casual riders. They do have good family deals & group deals, & all things considered $162 isn't a bad deal(just not a great deal) but I can get an SUV from my house to a paid parking lot in downtown, pay for the parking & drive back for cheaper. & I can get 7 people in my SUV. Even when gas was $4+ per gallon this was true. Hopefully the price will come down & I can afford to ride the FrontRunner more often.

Mass Transit is the future | 10:47 a.m. July 7, 2009

Growth will continue and we need the infrastructure to support it. Better to build that out now, while it's cheaper, than in 30 years when we're beyond capacity on the roads. By having a balance of mass transit and roads we can effectively manage the growth. I'd hate to see the Wasatch Front mired in gridlock, as the LA area is, before we take action on mass transit.

UTA's agreement with UP in 1993 to purchase the right of way was a heck of a deal for the state and well timed in future planning.

What a joke! | 11:00 a.m. July 7, 2009

As we all know, this will do nothing for congestion.

It's merely a useless, but extremely expensive sop to the tree huggers and Utah Envisioners.

If someone really wanted to clear up congestion, they could run a bypass around Lehi so Saratoga, Eagle Mountain, and Tooele County residents don't have a 20-minute slog through the ugliest downtown in Utah County.

O2bRich | 11:55 a.m. July 7, 2009

Re: Why | 8:49 a.m. July 7, 2009
The railroad built in 1870 is a poor comparison to the FrontRunner. Land acquisition alone is astronomical now compared to back then. Demolition, relocation expenses, and so on and so forth. No comparison. I have used mass transit in SLC, Los Angeles and Denver and it was less expensive than driving and not a significantly larger investment in time for my daily commute. We didn't own a 2nd car until we moved to where mass transit wasn't available. I would still be using mass transit if it were available where I live now.

Skeptic | 12:17 p.m. July 7, 2009

For you who think the FR north is such a great investment, the latest ridership numbers are out. In May there were 87,646 trips on the train. At $15M per year in operating costs, that means UTA was able to carry a person too and from downtown Salt Lake for only about $28.50. Include the capital costs and the you are up to only about $110 per trip. That is a really smart investment!!!

FR South will have as much impact on congestion as the $50K that UTA just spent on Segway scooters! Whoever wrote the headline for this article must be getting paid by UTA.

Justin | 12:18 p.m. July 7, 2009

If you compare the cost of a parking and a ticket on Front Runner with the cost of gas, Front Runner will be more expensive. However, the comparison is not that simple. If a family with one automobile was deciding whether to purchase another car or make do with one car and a pass on Front Runner, the comparison would much more likely make the Front Runner option less expensive. Besides gas you would have to factor in savings for insurance, depreciation, interest, maintenance, and repairs. In addition, there are public benefits to mass transit. How do you account for all of these factors? Often, we simply chose to support our predetermined conclusion with only those factors which support our decision. Try to keep an open mind. Front Runner is not for everyone but it is an important part of the overall transportation plan for the Wasatch Front area.

UTA | 12:31 p.m. July 7, 2009

is the biggest racket in our state and it's unbelievable to me that the citizens of our state don't have the guts to put an end to it. They continually get more money to spend on transit that isn't effective and only serves to keep the UTA folks in a job. They get annual pay increases despite lying about ridership numbers. What will it take for the gov't here in Utah to stand up to this ridiculous waste of taxpayer money. To make matters worse the news media here takes every press release UTA sends out and makes it into a big news story. Get real people, LOSE the UTA!!!

Compare Prices | 12:33 p.m. July 7, 2009

Ok, when you are comparing prices of the UTA pass vs. driving your car, you can't forget all the other costs of running a car besides gas:

The up-front cost of buying it, insurance, registration, oil changes, tires, and maintenence. Then add to that the stress of driving it in bad traffic, risk of accidents, and those days where it takes 2-3 hours to get to work because of multiple car wrecks durring a morning commute blizzard.

Instead, you can be sleeping, relaxing, or working online in comfort during that commute while saving money and helping the environment.

Of course a personal cost-benefit analysis is in order, but don't forget ALL of the costs, including those that aren't monetary. The front runner along with trax is a great tool for our local community and economy.

re: What a joke! | 1:54 p.m. July 7, 2009

Ummm... I think you need to re-read "How to win friends and influence people". You're just not getting the concepts.

Congestion | 4:05 p.m. July 7, 2009

I remember last year when the north side of Front Runner opened and all the pro-mass transit folks squinted and strained and desperately tried to see a material reduction in congestion on I-15 or any other commute route. Even with gas prices at all time highs, the effect of Front Runner on congestion was, at best, very minimal.

A few months later, however, the Legacy Parkway opened. It is just a tiny little road with two lanes each direction and a low speed limit of 55 mph. But NOBODY could deny the massive effect its opening had on congestion. Suddenly the commute between SL and Davis counties was again tolerable.

Trains are not the solution.

Properly designed and sited roads are the solution.

Mass transit is 18 and early 19th century.

Personal transit in the current and future.

Zadruga Guy | 4:05 p.m. July 7, 2009

I also think that people who believe that driving is less expensive than riding the train are likely not considering all of the pertinent factors.

While on the train, I can work, via the free wi-fi and electrical power that UTA provides for my laptop. I can't do that in a car.

To expensive, not convenient | 4:28 p.m. July 7, 2009

The problem is that front runner stops are not close enough to enough home to prevent many from owning a car. If you have to maintain the car anyway, the cost of driving it to SLC is cheaper than paying $180 for a rail pass and driving to the train stop park and ride.

The other problem is that the front runner station is too far from a lot of things. You have to switch to trax or a bus and then it ends up taking 1.5 hours to get to work door-to-door. Busses are much more efficient and flexible if you ask me.

Jordan T. | 4:50 p.m. July 7, 2009

The problem with UTA's Front Runner is that Salt Lake and the Wasatch Front lacks urban density to really make mass transit work.

With fewer than 400,000 people living in Utah and Davis, Weber Counties, it doesn't seem to make very much sense.

Why didn't they think of running trains underground in downtown Salt Lake like what they have done in other major cities?

Now who wants to have to transfer to TRAX or bus to get to where they need to go?

re; jordan T | 6:29 p.m. July 7, 2009

jordan T. utah county has over 500,000 and expected to reach 1,000,000 by 2050 so i can see why UTA is planning for the future.

Sj Bobkins | 8:24 p.m. July 7, 2009

The "utah" mentality towards capital spending strikes again. No government transit authority has ever, nor ever will make money. Subways, above ground light rail, buses, etc will never make money and must be subsidized by the tax-payers. The reason such projects are build is to make your community a nicer place to live, more accessible, with cleaner air. To say you can't help the rush hour slow driving with trains is a crazy remark, if the people weren't commuting on the trains they would be on the roads, which don't make money either, just like parks, zoos, community centers , etc. I have never seen a community go through such pains to build a $25 mil soccer stadium. In Maricopa Cty (Phoenix) a $600 mil hockey arena was built, a $1.4 bil football stadium, and a $500 mil baseball stadium, all by the taxpayers. Now their built, the tax is gone and we have great facilities. In Utah the universities provide the arenas, the sports facilities because the public is too cheap to add something nice to the place they live. Now don't get me started about the horrible Hogle zoo, and airport.

Conservative mass transit fan | 9:01 p.m. July 7, 2009

For a decade in Boston I rode commuter rail daily, with a pass costing about the same as a monthy FrontRunner pass.

Results?

(1) It saved money over the long run, especially in sparing my car wear and tear.

(2) It saved time: not that I got to work faster, but that I could work or read in comfort on the train. That time would have been wasted in the car. (This was by far the biggest advantage: I looked forward to my time in the train every day.)

(3) It saved us from having to buy a second car.

(4) It meant I did not have to worry about missing work if the car broke down.

(5) During blizards and rainstorms, I rode safely and flew by the traffic jams.

I'm a strong fiscal conservative. Mass transit is one of the few really worthy uses of tax money. Everyone knows they do not turn a profit: neither do roads, garbage collection, or public schools, but all of those are worth subsidizing because of their benefit to the community. There are many other government programs which demonstrably fail--its those programs that should be cut, not mass transit.

Keith | 12:09 a.m. July 8, 2009

I agree with those who say this is nothing but an additional quasi-goverment expensive joke.I watch the Northern rail go by almost every day, mostly empty.The Wasatch front would have been much better putting this railroad money into a better bus system. You still can't get anywhere quickly on Sunday or late at night.

to: Conserv Mass Transit Fan | 10:51 a.m. July 8, 2009

You lived in Boston. There is no point in comparing Eastern commutes to Western commutes. It is the same as comparing Apples to Eggplants.

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.