Tuesday, August 14, 2012


The first of several public hearings about the big day is tomorrow.  I meant to have these up earlier.  They're not awesome, but hopefully they can tide everyone over until the actual system maps come out.

I could not get my scanner to keep the pages straight.  What you're looking at is the best I could do tonight.

Also, I know these were made on the super cheesy, and therefore almost certainly have errors.  If you would . . . tactfully . . . let me know, I will endeavor to rectify them.  But no promises.


  1. So. I went to the public hearing last night. It was exceedingly neat to speak to the actual planners at the UTA and whatnot.
    — The 830 will be fifteen minutes from 6 am to 6 pm. So, not to worry there.
    — The 209 most likely won't have thirty-minute night service. The planners were all puzzled as to why it said so on the website.
    — I suggested that the new 550 be moved from 300 West to West Temple so as to better serve the central business district. The planner liked that idea.
    — They are looking at extending the 201 up either 118th South or 123rd South once the Draper extension of the Blue Line opens. The city of Draper really would prefer 118th South; apparently, they are really keen on making 123rd South bike friendly. I don't know about this; there are so many businesses along that three-block stretch of 123rd South east of I-15.
    — There is apparently a good amount of demand for a bidirectional 534. Ooooh. . .
    — I briefly talked to the Utah County planner present. He glumly predicted the 830 to be slammed, to the extent that they'd have to put two buses on the same run at certain times. I suggested an 830X, a la the current 2X.
    — There is basically no hope of the 223 even having sixty-minute service. I use the 223 sometimes. I would use it even more if its service was actually practical.

  2. 1. I love it when the planners like my ideas.
    2. I don't know how bike-friendly 12300 South can be, with that freeway interchange right there . . . I think 123rd is a better choice for the buses, and it really wouldn't be too hard to organize things so that the buses and bikes don't get in each other's way. Not any harder than making 123rd bike-friendly, anyway.
    3. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Someone should put the 223 out of its misery.
    4. You are the second person I've ever heard of ever taking the 223.

  3. Whoa. Whoa there. The 223 is a good route. It's modest—okay, emaciated—but it deserves to live. I take it Tuesdays and Thursdays from the U (the 12:20 departure) and it sees anywhere between nine and twelve people get on. I'd imagine there to be a similar amount of passengers for the 2:20 and the 4:20 departures as well.

    I wonder constantly what contributed to the decline of this route. It was never popular, I suppose, but before 2007 you had the much-higher-in-frequency 14 and 52 run roughly where the 223 does today. I can't imagine that ridership was as low as it is today back then.

    Speaking of the 223: I was waiting at the U for an inbound 228 today at around 11:50, when—out of the blue—an unscheduled 223 rolled up. The header in front alternated between "223 To Cottonwood Corp" and "Training Bus." Isn't that wild? They just up and ran a fully active, unscheduled bus along the entirety of the 223's route. Once the driver opened the doors to the bus he announced "Route 223! To Cottonwood Corporate Center! Training Bus!" over the external speaker of the bus. So, I don't know. I thought that was rather mystifying. Can't imagine there were any passengers along the route that got to the stop more than thirty-five minutes early that happened to get picked up by this phantom 223.

  4. Okay, okay, I'll let the 223 live. My thoughts on the decline of the 223 are partly that it just tries to cover too much territory, and therefore takes forever to get where it's going. Some of the routing that got canceled in the Sugar House and East Millcreek areas during the redesign got taken up, sort of, by the 223, but the 223 didn't come as close/didn't run as often/didn't go as many places/took to long to get where it was going, so people either switched to other nearby buses, like the 21 in Sugar House, or stopped taking the bus altogether. I think there is hope for the area the 223 serves, but it will either have to be streamlined or split back up into more than one route before we see viable service there again. I posit that, among all the other changes going on with rail lines opening in the Salt Lake Valley, UTA just hasn't had time, or the resources, to scout out a better solution.

    Sounds like UTA is trying to give new driver trainees more real-world experience (while warning potential passengers that it is a trainee driving)--sounds reasonable, I guess. They might not pick up anyone on a rogue 223 trip, but I bet on a route like the 205, where buses often catch up to each other during rush hour, you could see some people at stops no matter when you drove it. I'll have to keep my eyes peeled for training buses . . .

  5. That's quite a good summary of the situation, I think. Demographics of the area, of course, have much to do with it as well. I don't think there's another route that goes through a neighborhood like lower Holladay.

    P.S. Fifteen passengers got on the 12:20 outbound 223 yesterday. New record right there. And a whopping twelve took the 3:25 inbound. Okay, so maybe ten of those twelve were taking it to the football game (myself included). But that's something I thought I'd never see nonetheless.

    P.P.S. Have you noticed anything peculiar about bus 10002? If not, I'll let you figure it out for yourself.