Mid-Jordan TRAX Reaches Milestone

The Utah Transit Authority recently announced that the Mid-Jordan TRAX line is now approximatly 40% complete. This milestone will be reached this weekend as freight trains start using the new TRAX line for deliveries to local businesses. While the trains are using the new line, UTA will be cutting out the old freight line and realigning it to be parallel with the new TRAX line. Once the Mid-Jordan line is finished in late 2011, two lines will be used by TRAX during the day and by the freight trains at night.

When completed, the project will interline with the Sandy/Salt Lake TRAX Line with direct service to the Salt Lake Central Station in downtown Salt Lake City, where it will connect with UTA’s FrontRunner commuter rail system and bus service.

Daybreak's New Ride

Utah Transit Authority has put in an order for 77 new Siemens S70 train cars for TRAX. These modern looking train cars represent the largest order that Siemens has contracted in the United States so far. While testing of the S70s will start at the end of the year, they will be in place in time for the opening of the Mid-Jordan TRAX line. So when the Daybreak North and South stations finally open, expect to see these trains loading the passengers.

The big advantage of these trains is that they will actually be able to achieve their top speed of 65 miles per hour as many of the stations along the Mid-Jordan TRAX line are far enough apart to allow the speed. Not to mention that the S70s can accelerate much faster than the current TRAX trains being used.

Other positive features of the S70 include:

• Easier to board as the train is on platform level wich eliminates the need for ramps and steps and allows commuters who are disabled to board with ease.
  
• More room - Wider Aisles and larger spaces allow for wheelchair access and room to fit your bike.
• A variety of seating arrangements including open space, bench seating and regular seating.

In the end all of these features translate into a faster commute in a train with large windows and plenty of space. Commuting in this S70 to and from work while surfing the internet on the train wi-fi could definitely appeal to many commuters who endure freeway traffic each day.

Mid Jordan TRAX Now Funded

The Federal Transit Administration has announced that it will spend $428.3 million to build the Mid-Jordan TRAX extension that leads to Daybreak. This promise represents 80% of the funding needed to pay for the TRAX extension and will allow it to open by December 2011. UTA has already completed 25% of this line with much of the construction in Daybreak already being finished.

The remaining 20% of the line's cost is provided by a Salt Lake County referendum in 2006 that increased the sales tax a quarter of a cent per dollar. According to UTA, twenty-eight light-rail cars will travel along the 10.6-mile track between 6 a.m. and midnight when the Mid-Jordan line is complete. Trains will arrive at stations every 12 minutes during rush hours and every 15 minutes at remaining times. According to a UTA study the 10.6-mile line is expected to carry 9,500 passengers a day and reduce the number of miles traveled by car by 65,000 daily by the year 2030.

While nothing is actually guaranteed until it is built, this move essentially closes the funding gap that existed earlier and ensures funding for a massive project during a time when government budgets are deep in the red. Daybreak residents will benefit tremendously from this project as will Kennecott Land.

East / West Mobility - The 114th South Corridor

If you live in in the Southwestern portion of Salt Lake County (South Jordan, Herriman, Riverton) and commute, then you probably already know how difficult it can be to drive eastward toward I-15 in the mornings and back again after work. This East - West mobility issue has been a problem for decades. While different roads have been widened to help alleviate traffic, it has always been too little to late.

For Daybreak residents, this new corridor will provide a straight line connecting the community to the largest transportation artery in Utah. This aspect of the plan definitely gets a thumbs up from me. However, to accomplish this, we will be displacing long-time residents of South Jordan. That is the price of progress, but I consider it a costly one. While many may argue that building another road is not the answer, I would have to disagree. This simply provides another option and relieves the congestion on 106th and 123rd. This road will accomodate the current population with TRAX and the Mountain View Corridor addressing future population growth.

Construction could begin as early as late November 2008 with a completion date of fall 2010. Construction will widen the road from four lanes to five, add bike lanes and sidewalks as well as a bridge over Union Pacific and Utah Transit Authority tracks near the Jordan River. The road will connect to I-15 using the usual interchange seen on 106th and 123rd.

Two Creeks in Herriman, Utah: A Disaster in Density

In an earlier post I mentioned housing density and how it impacts the surrounding community. The main point of the article was to show that density in and of itself is not a bad thing. However, if a dense development is not properly planned and located, it will almost certainly have a detrimental effect on the community.

When writing that article, I was not aware of the aspirations of a developer to build a high-density rental development in Herriman. Considering the proximity to Daybreak, this development will almost certainly affect those residents of Founders Park Village. Daybreak as a whole will be affected by this new development as the new high school for the area will be located adjacent to the development.

The new development will be called Two Creeks. Miller Timbergate Associates LLC appeared before the Herriman City government to gain approval for the first two phases of the project: Timbergate and Farmgate. These two phases will be dense. At around 20 units per acre, this will truly be the densest development around. Even Daybreak following the concept of new urbanism cannot claim densities as high as this development. Even if densities get higher in Daybreak in the future, they will be integrated into the community with a transect style of planning. Two Creeks is located near homes that are not even close to the planned density of nearby developments. Imagine your home next to multiple 4 story, 32 unit complexes. The Two Creeks plan suggests that the developer wants to develop his land his way without regard to the surrounding community in a piecemeal fashion that really doesn't fit.

The estimated population of the two approved projects is 1,696 people. With this many people, traffic is a real concern. However, this development will be located next to the proposed path of the Mountain View Corridor. By doing this, much of the traffic from the development will likely be dissipated. Not a bad idea right? Most local governments are in cooperation through Envision Utah to put higher densities next to the transit corridors. One problem with this plan is that it assumes that the Mountain View Corridor will be built and that when it is built that it will not be a toll road. If it is a toll road, I cannot imagine many of the residents of Two Creeks utilizing the road. TRAX is nearby, but these residents will be made to cross not only 118th South, but also the Mountain View Corridor to access it. Unless significant infrastructure is put in place to make this crossing safe, you will see additional problems. It will just be easier for them to hop in a car and drive. The location of this development, on the fringe of Salt Lake County, should also be a consideration as the price of gas would prevent the necessary long commute for many of these residents. Most of which are calculated to not have substantial financial means.

The traffic problem will only be exacerbated by the fact that the new area high school will be located literally within feet of the development. I wonder if all of the sports facilities that come along with the high school will be perceived as amenities for Two Creeks. Also, with the concentration of a lower socio-economic population you will have dual working parents and transient families. With many of the parents gone, I can imagine quite a few students hanging out in Two Creeks without supervision after school.

The single worst part of this development is that it will concentrate thousands of citizens of a lower socio-economic class. As stated in an earlier post about density this can cause a multitude of problems. Crime and social disruption will increase in this area with such a large concentration. This cluster will enable all of the myths that are associated with a higher-density development to have an opportunity to come true.

I have it from a good source that these units are meant for government Section 8 housing. The Section 8 program allows those who qualify to pay rents that are adjusted to their income. 30% of their income goes to rent. For example, if a low-income family made 1500 dollars per month they would spend about 450 dollars for rent each month. The government covers the rest. This program can truly help those in need, but the idea is to spread those who are on the program over a wide geographic area not concentrate them. We already have Section 8 families in our community, but they are dispersed.

So why is this happening and why now? With the housing market being in doubt there are many people waiting out the market in hopes to buy when the market starts to go up again. Other people cannot afford a mortgage as the new lending criteria prevents them from qualifying. So what do these people do? They rent. With Utah’s strong economy, there are more people moving to the valley in search of jobs and many will opt to rent for a variety of reasons. All of this combined has pushed monthly rents up 10% in the last year alone. The rental market is starting to look really attractive to a lot of investors. I would not be surprised to see a lot of developments pop up in various communities that are high density and haven’t been integrated properly. That is why people need to be more involved at the local government level about what happens in their community. I believe the Sunstone residents (just to the west of Daybreak) would agree with me as they seem to have attended the relevant meetings and have even appealed the approval of Two Creeks. Hopefully this mess will be stopped before it is too late.

The Future of New Urbanism in Utah

I received an e-mail from a reader not too long ago about my stance on New Urbanism. He insisted that New Urbanism did not have any place in the Utah suburbs. He further suggested that the movement was just a planning fad that would end with only a couple developments in the Salt Lake Valley carrying the banner of New Urbanism. In response, I have decided to post a picture of New Urban developments in the Salt Lake Valley. They are located throughout the valley in all four quadrants branching out from the city center of Salt Lake. While a couple already exist, the majority of these developments are either in the planning or construction phases. As you can see, New Urbanism is not a trend that will go away any time soon and considering the movement has been gaining momentum since the 80s, I do not think it is short term.

In looking at where development is occurring in Utah, the fringes of the community are still popular, but there is a growing trend that is the result of the energy crises. This trend uses transit as a lifeline to the surrounding communities. Numerous TODs (Transportation Oriented Developments) have started already and many more are planned. Any empty space near a proposed TRAX station has become prime real estate for these communities.

Many more New Urban projects are starting all over the state. Ogden, Layton, Farmington, Woods Cross, Park City, Heber, Lehi, Orem, Mapleton, Richfield, Cedar City, and St. George all have projects on the drawing board or being constructed. Of course, none of these projects match the scale of Daybreak or the West Bench which has many more communities planned, but this is clearly the new direction in development. This is by no means an exhaustive list. In fact, if anyone would like to inform me of other communities planned or being built in Utah, then please share. This list is merely what I could gather via the internet.

As for whether or not it belongs in Utah, I would like to refer to another comment that I received: "..let the free market reign." In Utah our demand is being pushed by our demographics. People want to start a family and own a place instead of rent. With housing and land prices going through the roof people need affordable choices. These choices need to save the owners money and time. With the option to ride mass transit, lower utility bills, and maintenance-free options, you can stretch your budget much further. New Urbanism will continue in Utah by choice. This choice has already been seen in the marketplace for housing and will continue well into the future.

Traffic In Daybreak

With the increase in the planned density at Daybreak concerns have surfaced about the increase in traffic. The current plans for Daybreak call for over 20,000 homes to be located within the community. All of these residents will have cars. Most of them will have more than one along with more than one member of the family to drive them. If you do the math on these numbers you can easily see the thousands of car trips that will be necessary for each family daily. However, these calculations are based off of the traditional suburban model of traffic. Daybreak follows the principles of New Urbanism and studies have shown that there is a significant difference in the amount of traffic generated by these diametrically opposed planning schemes.

New Urbanism improves transportation choice and reduces traffic speeds. These New Urban design features tend to reduce per capita automobile ownership and use. While most individual features have modest impacts on total travel, their effects are synergistic resulting in significant total reductions in vehicle use. Research has proved that residents that live in well-designed New Urbanist neighborhoods with good walkability, mixed land use, connected streets, and local services tend to drive 20-35% less than residents in automobile dependent areas. Another study has concluded that these residents take 305.5% more walking trips than residents of conventionally designed suburbs. While these benefits have not materialized immediately in Daybreak, most of the research suggests that these benefits will not be realized until developments are "made whole" with the majority of basic needs within a short distance of homes.

In addition to the traffic reducing affects of mixed-use communities, Daybreak offers a variety of traffic calming structural features in its design. The most noticable of these are the two roundabouts that deflect traffic from two fairly high-speed parkways that lead to Daybreak from Bangerter Highway. These arterial roundabouts distribute traffic in a more efficient manner than 4-way intersections and slow traffic down upon their entrance to Daybreak. Recent studies have also proven that roundabouts significantly reduce vehicle crashes compared to intersections.

Another traffic calming feature is the neckdowns that are placed at most intersections in Daybreak. Neckdowns are curb extensions at intersections that reduce the roadway width and tighten the curb radii at the corner. Again this feature slows traffic, but it also decreases the distance that a pedestrian must travel to cross the street and makes the pedestrian more visible. There are other traffic calming measures, but these two are the most effective.

Even with all of these measures, there are still drivers that choose to speed down the street, racing to their destination. This practice has irked quite a few residents in the community including the Daybreak Daily website author Scoop. He decided to do somethign about it and worked with the City of South Jordan to monitor the traffic on a particularly problematic street in Daybreak where drivers tend to speed. The street in question is Kestrel Rise. One of the main problems with this street is that when driving South you drive down hill. This obviously increases speed and many do not slow down until they are only feet away from a stop sign. While these studies gave an average speed of 25 mph, this is simply an average. The traffic monitoring devices registered speeds of up to 50 mph on this street. Of course speeds like this did not happen every day, but speeds of 35 to 40 mph are fairly common depending on the day of the week.

What additional options are there to preven cars from accelerating to 50 mph in an area where kids play? A few design features come to mind. Traffic slowing features such as humps or speed bumps as some people call them. These features actually come in a large variety and are one of the most effective design features in slowing traffic speed. There is a downside to this though. Cost. You would think that making a bump in the road would not be very expensive, but in this case a properly designed bump can cost thousands of dollars. The question that keeps popping up in my mind is this: Isn't a few thousand dollars worth it when a simple design feature can (and probably will someday) save the life of a child? Especially considering this street is adjacent to an elementary school.

I would deem most streets in Daybreak to be safe. This safety is due to the design features that were likely planned from the very beginning. However, no plan is perfect and some adjustments need to be made here and there. While speed humps may not be the answer, planners and the community need to do something about people driving 35 to 50 miles per hour past homes full of children and an elementary school.

Renting In Daybreak

In an earlier post I talked about how apartments are an integral part of new urban communities. In my opinion if they are integrated properly into a community they can bring diversity and allow people that could not otherwise afford to buy a home a chance to live in Daybreak. How do Daybreak residents feel about apartments being built? According to a Daybreak Daily website poll most Daybreak residents do not like the idea. In fact, 62.5% of the 115 respondents indicated that they were not happy with the decision to build apartments in Daybreak. (May 13) They are not alone. Most owners of single-family homes or condos in the United States do not want to live near rental housing. They see them as high-crime areas that put extraordinary burdens on local schools and civil services. However this has been proven completely false. Numerous studies conducted by Harvard, NYU, and numerous government entities prove that these claims are false. Per unit crime in apartments is almost equal to that of single family homes. As for property values, "Between 1987 and 1995, single-family houses located within 300 feet of apartment communities appreciated at roughly the same rate as those not near an apartment property, 3.12 percent compared to 3.19 percent."

On the other hand I feel that there is something to be said about the habits that tend to be exhibited by renters. People frequently moving in and out result in noise and create an environment of impermanence and of a transitory lifestyle. Property managers report a higher incidence of rule violations by tenants. Examples include noise disturbances, illegal parking and overburdening of the Association recreational facilities. These rules are broken because many tenants are ignorant of these community restrictions. Rental occupancies tend to be shorter than owner occupancies and do not facilitate long-term relationships among neighbors. Resident owners are more likely to carefully maintain exclusive use common areas than are tenants. However, most of these negative attributes apply to homes and condos that are rented out. These are properties that are integrated into the community with the purpose of being owner occupied. The condos and homes in Daybreak that are being leased are more likely to exhibit these problems. With the proper planning the negative impacts can be minimized.

From what I understand Kennecott intends to build many apartments in or within close proximity to the village center. This is good planning, but the devil is in the details. How exactly will they integrate it with the predominant architecture in Daybreak? Exactly how close will these apartments be to single family homes? I would not want to walk out of my front door and stare at a massive facade of a 5 story concrete apartment building. Kennecott Land seems to have a penchant for surprising stake holders by withholding details until the last minute. I would urge them to be a little more forthcoming with residents. Especially those on Topcrest.

Many aspects of the community hinge on the successful integration of higher density housing. Take TRAX for example. You cannot justify having a line run into daybreak without a certain amount of residents in the immediate area of the stations. This calls for density. To truly be a walkable community a development must have a higher density for all essentials to be in close proximity to all homes in a community. From a business standpoint, it makes sense to build these apartments now. It is good timing that they are ready to build the village center and apartments right when the market for rental properties has become much more attractive and commercial entities are still expanding. In all practicality I feel that these apartments can be a great addition to the community if they are done properly. I just hope the planners use the successful attributes of other new urban communities.

Mountain View Corridor

The proposed Mountain View corridor has been in the news a lot lately. This new highway will contain up to eight lanes that run North and South along the East side of the Oquirrh Mountains. For those who would like to drive North from Daybreak in the future, this highway will definitely beat taking bangerter. However, the Mountain View Corridor will bring with it all of the things that we hate about I-15. Pollution, noise, and dust come to mind immediately. It will bring these unwanted side effects directly in to Daybreak as the corridor passes directly through the town center. There is always a price to having such a convenience nearby. In short, the region and county needs this transportation corridor and running it near Daybreak makes sense. With the growth that is expected in the next 30 years the region would suffocate in traffic unless this highway is built. The good news is that the pollution aspect of vehicles will have greatly diminished by then. As you have seen in the news cars have become more efficient and suitable alternatives are being speedily researched in the midst of escalating oil prices. In fact the government predicts that the more stringent federal regulation of emissions will drive vehicle emissions down even though the number of vehicles on the road will have increased and estimated three fold.

So why so close to Daybreak? If you look at the map of the proposed route, they could build the road around Daybreak, but why would they run it through a future subdivision of Kennecott? It would have the same effect and it would cost more. Looking at the West Bench plan Kennecott has compensated for this by having the corridor pass through the more urban section of Daybreak - the town center. So the highway wont necessarily be in your backyard.

What about the noise and the dust? The solution to those problems will essentially be the same barriers that you see along the existing freeways. If Kennecott is smart, and I think they are, they will plant lots of trees and other such vegetation to act as natural noise absorption barriers with the added benefit that they filter the air. Local governments and UTA have been working together to bring Trax and other mass transit options to the west side as well. Considering that Kennecott made a massive contribution to the environmental impact study that was conducted for the jordan light rail line, I feel that they have also promoted mass transit in Daybreak as well as the West bench. Kennecott seems likely to continue this encouragement in the future as they tend to follow new urbanism principles.

Another feature of this new highway that raised my eyebrows was the consideration of a toll for use of the road. This would essentially make those who use the road pay for its maintenance and construction. Not a bad idea, but why should residents of the west side have to pay a toll for their North-South mobility while the rest of the county does not? I will address this and other issues in later posts.