| OCR Text |
Show Wasatch Front Council Looks M 1 995 Trrawel By MARK D. MICKELSEN BOUNTIFUL The year is 1995. RUSH HOUR traffic along Interstate -15 moves at a "turtle's pace." Bus fares to and from Salt Lake cost coummuters just under two dollars. To the west, along the Salt Lake, Davis and Weber County business busi-ness districts, strange-looking trolley cars carry thousands home from work. The scenario sounds a bit futuristic. But planners at the Wasatch Front Regional Council headquarters believe the ideas are not all that far-fetched. AS A matter of fact, the council is on the threshold of a 24-month study on long-range transportation alternatives for the future. Among other things, they'll be looking at increased bus service, expanded highway systems and the feasibility of a light rail transit system, capable of transporting tens of thousands of people. The goal of the study is to determine what transit systems will be like and which forms will be most compatible with growth patterns along the Wasatch Front, according to WFRC Program Director Mick Crandall. PRIOR TO 1981, Mr. Crandall said, WFRC officials offi-cials determined that long-range transit planning should accommodate not only heavy traffic corridors, corri-dors, but a congested string of business districts stretching from South Salt Lake to Davis County. A preliminary analysis of the problem shows two potential "plans of action" for future growth: "To maintain the present course and expand the regular bus system as funding allows." Or, to establish a light rail transit system to be used in the central business district areas. THE STUDY also states that both major highway and transit system development are necessary to relieve growing transit congestion problems. The study says that "while the light rail transit (LRT) alternative would draw the most passengers, it would also cost the most," not only in terms of construction and operation, but in terms of cost per passenger. Of the four alternatives including light rail transit, tran-sit, expanded bus service, mixed express buses and a 700 East (Salt Lake City busway the light rail transit tran-sit mode has a greater potential "to relieve traffic congestion," the study says. THIS IS due to the fact that the LRT would be able to carry a higher volume of passengers on a right-of-way which would not interfere with traffic capacity along the highways. Light rail costs, the study continues, "are highly dependent upon the right-of-way that is acquired." If an existing right-of-way, such as the Union Pacific tracks, can be used, the cost will be lower than if the counties have to purchase a new right-of-way. IN TERMS of yearly costs, mixed express bus service could be expected to cost the state $112.3 million; a 700 East busway, $1 13.4 million; light rail transit $121 million, and regular bus service $117.2 million. In 1995, planners estimate that commuters will pay SI. 73 for regular bus service, $1.71 for light rail transit, tran-sit, $1.62 for the 700 East busway, and $1.61 per ride for mixed express bus service. MR. CRANDALL said supporters of the mixed express bus concept believe that transit alternative is most suitable to the way Salt Lake City is developing. develop-ing. But, he added, light rail transit represents the way people would really like to see the area develop. He said WFRC officials recently asked numerous local leaders about their reaction to light rail transit and found that a "pretty decent" group of them support the idea. MR. CRANDALL said a total of $100-$ 150 million dollars would be needed to install and operate a light rail system and to acquire the right-of-way. Other cities have installed light rail systems in the middle of highway medians, while some have used abandoned railroad right-of-ways, he said. "YOU HAVE to justify the system based on the (Salt Lake City) north-south corridor," Mr. Crandall said, "and then you can add onto that system." He noted that although officials have talked about the idea of a rail system reaching from Salt Lake to Ogden, there is no guarantee that the system would go further than the Salt Lake-Davis County line. IN ADDITION to the proposed alternatives, Mr. Crandall said the WFRC is emphasizing the need for additional highways. "Finished interstate is number one," he said, "and we're convinced that is going to happen." However, he pointed out that even if all the highways high-ways are completed, there will still be a need to change "transit habits," or suffer through a lot of traffic problems. "YOU HAVE tc continue to expand the existing transit system," he said, noting that compatibility between the new and old is of major concern to everyone in the transit business. The WFRC is not advocating the idea that more money should be spent on traffic, Mr. Crandall said, "but there is a problem that needs to be addressed." |
