TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND APPENDIX B

PROCESS Predicting where future transportation the model. Some of the most useful model facilities will be needed is a large outputs to aid in project selection include: undertaking. Changes in land use patterns, political leadership, anticipated ● Origin-Destination flows funding, or a wide range of other factors ● Directional link vehicle volumes can change the dynamics of an area ● Vehicular travel times and speeds and require further study. The development of the Metropolitan ● Transit ridership numbers Transportation Plan occurs over a four- ● AM Travel Peak: 6-8:59 AM year period with an update occurring ● Midday: 9 AM – 2:59 PM every four years. This level of work, as well ● PM Travel Peak: 3-5:59 PM as the frequency of updates, allows Metropolitan Planning Organization ● Evening/Off-peak: 6 PM – 5:59 AM (MPO) staff and decision makers to keep up on emerging trends and course MODEL COVERAGE changes. The process is collaborative. The Until the year 2000, separate travel models MPO works with the county and municipal were maintained for the three urbanized staffs as well as the various transportation areas (Ogden, Salt Lake and Provo). In agencies staffs to produce the plan. The the year 2000, the three urban area following is an overview of the modeling models were combined into one model. process of how projects are developed The coverage has expanded over the and placed in the transportation plan. years to the point that the majority of all of the developable area of , Salt Lake, Davis, and Weber counties is TRAVEL MODEL OVERVIEW covered by the model, with the exception The MPO model process is an integrated of the canyons and the mountains to the land-use, transportation, and air quality east of the urbanized areas. In these model co-developed with the Wasatch cases the population in the areas that are Front Regional Council and is designed to outside of the travel model coverage is perform a wide range of analyses. The relatively small and is separated from the model includes several advanced urban area by some distance. The eastern features that place it on the cutting edge and southwestern portions of Utah County of improved modeling methods required represent a significant percentage of the to satisfy the requirements of the last area, but its mountainous character and federal transportation bill (MAP-21, limited access make it unlikely that it will Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st need to be incorporated into the Century) and the federal Clean Air Act. In modeled area in the near future. addition, several features recommended by the Travel Model Improvement System-wide transportation planning Program of the US Department of models are typically based on a four-step Transportation, the Federal Highway modeling process: trip generation, trip Administration, the Federal Transit distribution, mode split, and trip Administration and the Environmental assignment. The travel model incorporates Protection Agency are incorporated into these steps and adds an auto ownership model that is sensitive to urban design

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 1 TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND variables. The model has a feedback loop The travel model is a zonal-based between trip distribution and traffic forecasting tool, modeling travel between assignment. This process ensures aggregate Transportation Analysis Zones consistency between travel congestion (TAZs). The TAZ Structure map shows an and times that influence trip distribution example of the TAZ structure. TAZs cover patterns and are also an outcome of trip the entire model region and don’t TRAVEL MODEL PROCESS assignment. Travel time, or more generally speaking accessibility, is calculated based overlap. There are 2,263 TAZs in the on outputs from the assignment model, modeled region. Land-use and but also is an important determinant of socioeconomic data are summarized trip distribution and mode split. Therefore it within this spatial framework and travel is is customary to iterate these three models estimated between the TAZs. The TAZ in order to reach a convergent solution. Structure Map shows the region TAZ and highway links structure. TAZ STRUCTURE Base highway and transit networks are created and input into the travel model. The highway network includes all facilities functionally designated as collector or above and some smaller facilities deemed necessary to allow for better model flow. There are approximately 35,000 road links or connections in the network. The transit network is created with local, express, Bus Rapid Transit, Light Rail, and Commuter Rail lines coded in.

AND SE ODEL L U M The land use model identifies future land use (i.e. housing and jobs forecasted county-wide by Governor’s Office of Management and Budget) based on accessibility, availability of land (through physical constraints and zoning), and location of existing land uses. This model uses the municipal adopted land uses with the adopted centers identified in Wasatch Choice for 2040 as a land use indicator. Growth is assigned countywide using these adopted parameters.

TRAVEL MODEL COMPONENTS At the start of a full model run, the auto- ownership model estimates household auto-ownership levels, then the trip generation model uses land-use data and auto ownership to calculate trip ends at the Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) level. These trip ends are then paired into

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 2 TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND

TRAVEL MODEL PROCESS

origins and destinations in the distribution each of the trip purposes. Trip model. In the mode split model, a mode generation estimates the number of travel is selected for each trip. Vehicle of trips to and from each TAZ. Trip trips are assigned to the highway network distribution completes the trip by in the assignment model. describing which trip origins are linked with which trip destinations. The travel time feedback loop in the The result of this is a person trip model is accomplished prior to mode matrix for each trip type. Trip choice by converting person trips to distribution links trip-ends of the vehicle trips based on observed data. same type based primarily on the spatial separation of different land The model is comprised of several steps uses and observed sensitivities to with each step programmed or scripted trip length. One output of trip separately. These steps include, but are distribution is the person trip table not limited to the following: for home to work that can be compared to the “Journey-to-  Auto Ownership: estimates the Work” data provided by the likelihood of each household in the Bureau of the Census. region having 0, 1, 2, 3+

automobiles. Auto ownership is a  Vehicle Assignment: locates the function of the characteristics of a “best” routes between each household and where it is located. origin/destination pair and assigns Auto ownership and availability is a vehicle trips to the highway strong predictor of trip making and network. Important outputs of this mode choice behavior. module include number of vehicles

on each roadway segment by  Trip Generation: calculates the time period. Several other pieces number of person trips generated of data can be extracted, within each TAZ. The trip including operating speeds, travel generation model parameters are times, Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), developed from travel surveys Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT), and collected in 1993 and 2001. The Volume over Capacity (V/C) on number of trips to and from a roadway links. In addition, one place is a function of the amount can configure the vehicle and types of land-use activity assignment to save all the vehicle within the zone. trips that use a single link in either

direction (select link analysis) or all  Trip Distribution: pairs the origins the vehicle trips that originate or and destinations for each zone for

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 3 TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND

are destined for a zone (select  Model Output: is summarized zone analysis). automatically by the model, including regional statistics (e.g.  Travel Time Feedback: finds the VMT, VHT, transit shares and trip best available travel path via each lengths), corridor and segment of the travel modes explicitly performance statistics (e.g. delay, modeled. Several modes are volume, and ridership), district and explicitly modeled, including auto, county-level trip flows, MOVES transit modes (local bus, bus rapid emissions model inputs (EPA air transit, light rail, commuter rail), quality model), and calibration and non-motorized modes. Skims statistics. are reasonable approximations of the travel time and cost between MODEL CALIBRATION all pairs of TAZs, and skims are The model is calibrated to reasonably described for each travel mode. represent 2011 “base year” travel The path-finding algorithms are conditions and patterns, a process in calibrated based on observed which model output is checked or travel paths and observed "validated" against real-world data. Trip relationships between volumes and rates, transit ridership, and highway congested speeds. volumes are examples of types of model outputs that are validated. When the  Mode Choice: calculates which model results do not match the base-year mode each person trip is likely to values within an acceptable tolerance, take based on availability and parameters are adjusted until the model is mode-specific parameters (e.g. acceptable. For future forecast years, the time, cost, transit frequency). model output is checked to validate Mode split provides a breakdown model results, allowing model sensitivities of person trips by mode, both for to be assessed. UDOT traffic count data is captive riders (people without used to further calibrate individual automobiles) and for the total corridors. population. The mode split model is developed based on observed data on mode preferences and LAND USE MODELING what those preferences imply Each municipality and the county about sensitivities to mode develop their land use plans as a part of attributes. the general plan process. In developing future land use development patterns for  Final Assignment: uses the trip table the traffic model, MPO staff use each from mode split and assigns the municipal plan and the county land use person trips using transit to the plan as a first step in creating a future appropriate transit route. It also countywide development pattern to use gives the final number of vehicles in the traffic model. Many land use plans on each roadway segment by only plan for the next 10 years leaving a time period. This provides a means gap between their planning horizon and of viewing roadway volumes and the needs of the 2040 transportation plan. transit ridership graphically and MPO staff met with each municipality and understanding the relative the county to review their plans and to effectiveness of different segments gain additional insight of where future of the road and transit networks. growth could occur. Also, any major

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 4 General Land Use

TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND proposed developments are GENERAL LANE USE MAP also designed in the future countywide generalized land use plan. Goals of the Wasatch Choices 2040 plan are also incorporated into future development patterns. The finalized land use plan for the transportation plan is used to develop the socioeconomic data set needed to run the travel model. This data includes population, households, and employment.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC GROWTH TRENDS Growth by Wasatch Front County The governor's Office of Management 1,600,000 and Budget forecasts Utah County’s total population to increase 85 percent, from 1,400,000 551,891 in 2013 (Census estimate) to 1,200,000 1,019,828 in 2040, or a 2.5 percent annual average rate of change. Total 1,000,000 employment follows a similar trend growing 94 percent, from 254,494 in 2010 800,000 to 493,181 in 2040, or a 2.2 percent annual 600,000 average rate of change. The growth in Utah County is forecasted to be more 400,000 robust than the other counties along the Wasatch Front. When compared to the 200,000 region's total population for Weber, Davis, 0 Salt Lake, and Utah counties, Utah 2010 2020 2030 2040 County’s region-wide share increases from SL Co. Pop-45.9% SL Co. Emp-43.5% 25 percent in 2010 to 31 percent in 2040 Utah Co. Pop-96.4% Utah Co. Emp-93.8% and the regional percentage of total Davis Co. Pop-38.6% Weber Co. Pop-50.4% employment increases from 20 percent in Davis Co. Emp-31.3% Weber Co. Emp-52.3% 2010 to 24 percent in 2034.

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 5 TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND

SOCIO-ECONOMIC DISTRIBUTION though its predominance is less as more The distribution of household population jobs locate along the I-15 freeway to the density in 2015 is centered in the Orem/ north and other parts of the county Provo area. In the last decade, the become more suburban and urban. highest growth area has been in Lehi, Eagle Mountain, and Saratoga Springs, Population by Area straddling the I-15 Freeway. This is mainly 1,000,000 attributed to the and 286k 800,000 West Provo/Orem Metro areas converging 157k 600,000 North together. Growth has also accrued in the 106k southern area of Utah County, but 400,000 117k 284k Central 217k South densities still remain at rural values with the 200,000 293k historic cores mainly expanding. The far 139k western and southwest portions of the 0 2014 2040 county have experienced no growth and have little to no population. By 2040, residential densities will continue to Pop. Percentage of County increase outside the Provo/Orem core 100% 18.2% resulting in more urban densities between 28.1% 80% West northern and central portions of the 20.3% 15.4% county. The Orem/Provo area retains its 60% North Central core status as the population and 40% 37.5% 27.8% employment center, but northward along South 20% the I-15 freeway and into Salt Lake 24.0% 28.7% County, similar densities occur. The 0% 2014 2040 northwestern county area is more suburban, but is emerging into self- sustaining community with some urban Employment by Area characteristics. The southern area 500,000 continues to have growth ringing out from the historic cores and becomes less rural, 400,000 85k West 300,000 68k North but densities remain low. Some growth is 22k Central projected to occur in the southwest area 200,000 45k 189k of the county, but the far western area South 158k has little growth. 100,000 83k 0 36k The distribution of total employment in 2014 2040 Utah County in 2015 has Provo/Orem as the main employment center for the county. The northeastern area of the Emp. Percentage of County 100% county, especially along the I-15 freeway 8.4% 20.0% and State Street have moderate densities 17.3% 80% West of employment, while the southern area 16.0% has rural employment characteristics with 60% North Central the historic cores having the majority of 40% 60.3% 44.4% the agricultural jobs. The western and South 20% southwestern areas have very low to no 13.9% 19.6% employment. Provo/Orem continues as 0% 2014 2040 the employment center through 2040,

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 6 TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND

2014 POPULATION DENSITY 2040 POPULATION DENSITY

2014 EMPLOYMENT 2040 EMPLOYMENT

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 7 TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND

TRIP GENERATION By 2040 as most of the developed areas One of the key components of trip of Utah County become more suburban and urban with jobs to household ratios generation in the travel demand model is on the increase. The most dramatic the relative placement of the population change occurs in the northwestern part of or households and the employment. the county as this area transitions into a Typically, there should be a balance of more suburban area like the present day the jobs to households reflective of the northeastern area. The northeast area type and intensity of land uses planned for becomes more balanced, but still is not an area. To measure this, a ratio of the equal to the Provo/Orem area. The south jobs (total employment) to households is area also becomes more suburban. used. Rural areas tend to have a very low jobs/households ratio and more urbanized areas a higher ratio. COMMUTER CHARACTERISTICS Future transportation problems will occur In 2015, the Provo/Orem area attracts the as a result of high travel demands most work and non-work trips from all throughout the area. Most of the current other areas of the county to the other jobs and a majority of the expected future areas in the county, reflective of a core employment growth will occur in the urbanized area, with more than 2.5 jobs Provo / Orem area and along the north for every household. An interesting county I-15 corridor. development has occurred over the last decade throughout the remainder of the Although it is expected that some future county, the jobs to household ratio has employment opportunities will be dropped in all areas, with the disbursed throughout the County, the northwestern area dropping significantly, Provo / Orem area will continue to be the due to the high residential growth that has hub of employment activity. The linear occurred, commercial development has configuration of urban development, lagged behind this residential growth (not leads to heavy usage of I-15. Even with shown on chart). The northeast county the just completed I-15 CORE construction has 1.4 jobs per household and south with additional lane capacity, I-15 by 2034 county has 0.9 with the west county at will experience congestion. about 0.8. Though there are jobs in these areas, there are not enough to support The number of workers commuting from localized work trips. These areas produce Utah County to Salt Lake County has the majority of work trips to other places in always been larger than the reverse the region. commute. This trend is changing. In the Census 1990, 10.6 percent of all Utah Jobs per Household by Area County workers were employed outside of 7 Utah County. According to Census 2000 6 that percentage raised to 14.6 percent West 5 0.81 1.06 and in 2010 raised to 17.4 percent. The North 4 1.44 1.50 amount of work trips from Salt Lake 3 Central County south to Utah County have 2 2.51 2.23 South increased by 36.1 percent since the 2000

1 Census, whereas work trips from Utah 0.95 1.00 0 County going north to Salt Lake County 2014 2040 grew by 59.8 percent. Though increasing numbers of commuters are traveling south

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 8 TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND to Utah County, the total trips into Salt two universities. The Wasatch Front travel Lake County, is still low. In 2010, there model gives us three different modes of were 40k one-way commuter trips at the travel for future years; Drive alone, Point of the Mountain each work day. Carpool, and Transit as shown on the Mode Split for 2040 table below. The majority of these inter-county commutes exceed 40 miles per trip. They Work Trips by Mode in Utah County contribute to a large portion of the regions annual vehicle travel and thus air 80% quality problems. Further, these long trips 2013 are costly to travelers and contribute to 60% congestion. As the north end of Utah 2040 County and the south end of Salt 40% Workers Live in Utah Co. and Work In... Outside 20% WF-3k, Outside 1.5% Davis-1k, Utah-2k, 0.5% 0.9% Salt Lake- 0% 29k, 14.0% Drive Alone Car Pool Transit Walk/Bike Other Weber- 548, 0.3%

Utah Co.- 172k, LEVEL-OF-SERVICE 82.6% Over the years the Transportation Research Board of the National Academy of Science has devised a qualitative method of describing the ease, comfort, and Lake County continue to develop, these convenience that a driver of a vehicle longer trips will slowly diminish. In 2010, experiences along a street or highway. This 17.4 percent of all Utah County method of description is called Level-of- employees work outside the county. Our Service (LOS). The LOS D is a goal for the highest demand on commuter facilities is transportation plan balancing convenience for residents that live and work in Utah and cost. A Level-of-Service D was County. adopted by elected officials as a policy for planning, which follows the UDOT Guidelines. The national standard is to plan for a LOS C. WORK TRIPS MODE SPLIT The 2013 Census American Community Survey data (5 year data) summarize the work trip mode split as listed on the table below. Work trips by automobile, by either drive alone or car pool, account for the vast majority of all work trips at 85.4 percent. Walking/biking is

5.8 percent due to the high amount of college students that attend the valley's

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 9 TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND

HIGHWAY AND TRANSIT MODEL NETWORK are proposed and the model is then run again for Phase 1 2015-2024, with In developing a plan for a balanced the new projects added to gauge transportation system, attention was given their performance. Phase 2 and Phase to connecting regional freeway and 3 follows the same process. arterial facilities, both internal to the county and across the county line. Minor arterials Once the three phases of the plan are and collectors were also evaluated in the modeled and a draft listing of projects is system for connectivity to other facilities as created, MPO staff review the data and well as to major commercial, retail, and projects with each municipality, the employment centers. Local bus routes, bus county, and the Utah Department of rapid transit lines, and light and commuter Transportation gaining input on needed rail lines were integrated with the changes. Numerous meetings were held transportation system at intermodal hubs, to "fine tune" the project list. One major mainly around rail stations. Park and ride theme in the plan for this update was the facilities were designed to match the need for additional large highway transit modes accessing them. Where facilities by 2040. transit and highway projects crossed the county line, coordination was made with

Mountainland’s sister agency ensuring they were consistent with other regional transportation needs.

2011 BASE YEAR TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL OUTPUTS HIGHWAYS Lehi To identify needed highway projects for the plan, regional roads that are classified or proposed as minor or Eagle principal arterials, expressways, and Mountain freeways are analyzed. In developing these projects, three sources are reviewed. They include projects on the current transportation plan, city master Provo transportation plans, and transportation studies. Projects from these sources are reviewed by MPO staff to create a draft highway network to be modeled. In running the model, the first 10 year phase of the plan, or Phase 1, is run using the socioeconomic data for 2024 Spanish (population, employment, households) Fork compared with 2011, or The Base Year Payson model network. This shows what traffic congestion will be in 2024 if no improvements are made to the highway network. It also allows staff to visualize where needed highway projects should be planned. Projects

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 10 TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND

2024 NO NEW 2024 ALL PROJECTS BUILT PROJECTS BUILT Lehi Lehi

Eagle Eagle Mountain Mountain

Provo Provo

Eagle Mountain

Spanish Spanish Fork Fork

Payson Payson

2034 NO NEW 2034 ALL PROJECTS BUILT

PROJECTS BUILT Lehi Lehi

Eagle Eagle Lehi

Eagle Mountain Mountain Mountain

Provo

Spanish Fork Payson

Provo Provo

Spanish Spanish Fork Fork

Payson Payson

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 11 TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND

2040 NO NEW 2040 ALL PROJECTS BUILT PROJECTS BUILT Lehi Lehi

Eagle Eagle Mountain Mountain

Provo Provo

Spanish Spanish Fork Fork

Payson Payson

CHOKE POINT/BOTTLENECK AREAS Utah County has five choke point, or bottleneck areas, where geography Choke Point Areas restricts transportation corridors. Most 450 387 notable are the Point of the Mountain, the 400 Lindon area and the Springville area. 350 331 East/west travel through Lehi and the 300 237 Cedar Pass area of Eagle Mountain also 250 231 207 act as chokepoints. These areas are, or Trips 200 170 will be, the most congested areas in the 150 133 131 county. Traffic growth in these areas is 100 quite high with the Point of the Mountain 39 46 gaining the most trips from 170k trips per 50 day today to 387k trips in 2040, more than 0 Point Cedar Lehi Lindon Springville doubling. Pass

2014 2040

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 12 TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND

TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL OUTPUTS - facilities. A simple analogy was then drawn, Utah County is proposed to raise FREEWAYS AND EXPRESSWAYS to 1.1 million in population in 2040, the By 2040, it becomes quite apparent same population as current day Salt Lake that new arterial roads cannot be the County. Our planned major highway only solution to our growth. The I-15 facilities with this level of urbanization freeway at 12 lanes is heavily cannot handle the traffic. A grid system of congested in the PM peak period and major facilities is needed. Not a small task has reached its capacity. Many major because of the geographic realities of the arterials in the north county are county (, Lake Mountain, Point experiencing high congestion levels. of the Mountain). Other metropolitan Two prominent bottleneck areas in the areas near 1 million today include Buffalo, county, Lindon and Springville, cannot NY, Richmond, VA, Raleigh, NC, and function without reliever corridors. An Oklahoma City, OK. Their major highway expansion of major highway facilities systems were also reviewed to further in the county is needed. demonstrate the need to expand freeway and expressway facilities in the region. An exercise was done illustrating the current day highway system in Salt Lake County and comparing it to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Ideal Highway Spacing guidelines allowing decision makers to view current conditions in the Salt Lake Valley, something most can relate to because of knowledge of the area. The conclusion was that other than the southwest area of Salt Lake County, the highway network was close to optional.

With the need of expansion of major highway facilities demonstrated, MPO staff began to model various freeway scenarios to address two goals; congestion relief in the bottleneck areas of Lehi, Lindon, Cedar Pass, and Springville, and corridor preservation in the Cedar and Goshen Valleys for a west side corridor. West side corridors through Cedar Pass connecting the Mountain View Freeway in Saratoga Springs to Santaquin were first modeled. A parallel The same ITE grid was then overlaid in freeway to I-15 from Payson through Lehi Utah County with the planned 2040 was modeled. Widening I-15 with a larger highway system (I-15 Freeway and express lane system has been modeled Mountain View Freeway in Lehi as the only (basically a freeway within a freeway). A large facilities) showing the lack of bridge over Utah Lake have been geographic coverage of larger highway reviewed and would get heavily used. All

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 13 TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND will require future studies to fine-tune and the county. Of course with the make realistic proposals. environmental impacts that could occur to the wetlands and other historical elements surrounding the lake, any COUNTYWIDE VISION CORRIDORS proposal would need further environmental study. Modeling a west side corridor through

Cedar Pass, the Cedar Valley to M ODELED VISION FREEWAY CORRIDORS Santaquin corridor alone did not address the goal of congestion relief in Lehi,

Lindon, or Springville. MPO staff with the direction of the MPO Technical Advisory

Committee next modeled additional freeway scenarios that would better create the grid network proposed by the

ITE highway spacing guidelines. The continuation of the Mountain View

Freeway south through Saratoga Springs and crossing Utah Lake to I-15 in Provo was modeled as well as a freeway from

Payson to Provo as suggested in the Provo to Nebo Transportation Study and a freeway from Provo to Lehi via Vineyard

Connector and Crossing. All these corridors would have major obstacles to work through from environmental issues to home and business impacts. The overall impact to the transportation network was quite noticeable with these corridors.

Congestion relief in all of the bottleneck areas is achieved with all the modeled freeways in the urban area carrying freeway levels of traffic by 2040. TRANSIT PROJECT SELECTION A Utah Lake crossing bridge has been Transit projects are selected by assessing proposed by a private developer in the which areas or markets are viable for past. The proposal is to start near Pelican investments in transit coupled with an Point in Saratoga Springs and cross the analysis of what transit technology is most lake meeting at Orem 800 North. The MPO appropriate in the environment that it is modeled this proposal as well as a expected to perform. The measure of connection to Provo 2000 North (FWY to appropriateness is found in the study FWY interchange at I-15 with no process and incorporates public input. eastbound connection into Provo/Orem). Population and employment densities are The Orem 800 North connection modeled the most important factors in determining 10,000 less trips per day over the Provo transit need. Higher development 2000 North connection. The reason for densities allow more housing and modeling an alternate location was due commercial activities to take place and to concerns that connecting a major concentrate more trips into a smaller facility at Orem 800 North places more area. A concentration of trips traveling to traffic in the highest traffic volume area in or from the same point makes transit

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 14 TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND operations viable. If in the study process, It is expected that as population and it is determined that sufficient transit employment grow, more areas of the market potential exists in a certain area or county will have densities to support corridor, then a matrix of transit options internal, circulating transit routes. Potential are explored. Those options, if regionally increases in local transit could come in significant, are modeled using the the form of new east/west routes that regional travel demand model to predict would connect to commuter rail and light its effectiveness. rail stations and bus rapid transit alignments, tighter grid patterns with more Plans or selections are determined with frequency in Provo and Orem, additional the following goals: north county routes, a more frequent south county route, more frequent service ● Ridership: Increase ridership at a along State Street and on local circulating rate greater than population routes, and more frequent service on the growth. /TRAX Express bus.

● Quality: Provide transit service that

is fast, frequent, and reliable by incorporating modern BUS RAPID TRANSIT technologies, infrastructure Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is a new concept improvements, and passenger gaining attention and implementation amenities to enhance transit nationally. The concept behind BRT is to system operations and rider provide bus service in similar operation of comfort. light rail at less cost. BRT operates much like light rail with buses in designated bus ● Productivity: Increase transit lanes to avoid congestion and having ridership per unit of service by traffic signal preemption to speed running evaluating and modifying service times. areas with greater potential and

minimize service with lesser

potential for ridership. PROVO-OREM BUS RAPID TRANSIT LINE ● Efficiency: Reduce the cost per passenger by maximizing ridership The Provo‐Orem Bus Rapid Transit Project is and minimizing operating costs. needed because of growing population, employment, student enrollment, and ● Access: Maximize access to the travel demand in the study area; transit system according to the insufficient transit capacity to serve intensity of development through growing demand; poor transit reliability appropriate local, express, and due to congested roadways; and lack of regional services complemented connectivity across I‐15 and from I‐15 to by park and ride lots, transit Orem and Provo. The travel demand centers, and intermodal facilities. needs of residents and commuters in the study area are expected to be greater than the capacity of the existing transportation system in 2040. The needs XPANDING RANSIT ARKET E T M result from the following problems: Utah County population and employment while concentrated in Orem and Provo is • Increasing travel demand and experiencing significant growth insufficient roadway capacity particularly in the north part of the county. • Insufficient transit capacity

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 15 TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND

• Poor transit reliability and travel residents to Commuter Rail. It would time connect Eagle Mountain town center • Lack of high‐quality alternatives to through Saratoga Springs and proceed auto travel along Pioneer Crossing to the commuter rail station at American Fork. • Lack of connectivity across I‐15 and from I‐15 to Orem and Provo

AMERICAN FORK TO PROVO BUS RAPID

BUS RAPID TRANSIT TRANSIT LINE The American Fork to Provo Bus Rapid Transit Line uses the State Street corridor connecting the American Fork Commuter Rail Station to the Provo – Orem BRT, proceeding along Provo 500 West ending at the Provo Intermodal Center again linking to Commuter Rail.

PROVO TO SPANISH FORK BUS RAPID

TRANSIT LINE

The south county will be served by the

Provo to Spanish Fork Bus Rapid Transit

Line. The line would initiate either at the

Provo Intermodal Center or the south end

of the Provo-Orem BRT Line and connect

south using the State ST corridor to run

through Springville and Spanish Fork

eventually terminating at the Spanish Fork

proposed future commuter rail station.

The Provo-Orem Bus Rapid Transit project has been the subject of an Environmental Assessment in preparation for receiving a SPANISH FORK TO PAYSON BUS RAPID clearance or Record of Decision to move TRANSIT LINE this project toward construction. It is The Spanish Fork to Payson Bus Rapid expected that the Federal Transit Transit Line will have to possible routings. Administration will very soon issue an This line will connect at the commuter rail environmental clearance for the project. station in Spanish Fork and traverse Once funding is secured this project could through Salem and into Payson ending at begin final design and construction as the Payson Commuter Rail Station. It will early as summer of 2015. act as a collector and distributor of commuter rail riders. AMERICAN FORK TO EAGLE MOUNTAIN BUS RAPID TRANSIT LINE The American Fork to Eagle Mountain Bus EXPANDED BUS SERVICE Rapid Transit Line is designed to provide The transportation plan assumes some efficient access from Eagle Mountain, drastic increases in the bus service that Saratoga Springs and western Lehi would be enhanced through increased

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 16 TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND frequencies or headways on existing Orem Intermodal site is located on the routes. This will facilitate an increased Utah Valley University campus west of I-15, number of transit trips and would help and the American Fork Intermodal is reduce vehicle miles traveled and lower adjacent to the Main Street American pollution emissions. As individual choices Fork Interchange on I-15. UTA bus, are given it is hoped that many will Commuter Rail, Bus Rapid Transit, , choose to ride the bus to and from school perhaps local taxi companies, Greyhound and job opportunities, and the entire Bus Lines, and bus tour operators could region then benefits from reduced serve the centers. congestion. Additional park and ride facilities and commuter and light rail Additional intermodal centers would also stations along with the addition of carpool need to be built in Vineyard, Spanish Fork lanes on I-15 will have a significant impact in later years as rail projects progress. The on travel times and would make the proposed plan also includes pedestrian service more appealing to new riders. enhancements through the adjoining neighborhoods, bicycle facilities, mixed New planned bus network enhancements land use, and transit oriented are being developed in partnership with development. It is anticipated that the UTA. The new network uses transit stations locations will serve passengers on express in various parts of the county with a bus buses to and from Salt Lake City, a BRT line network feeding each route from through Provo and Orem, and commuters localized areas providing a high riding the train to Salt Lake City and frequency core route to travel along the I- Ogden. The Provo Intermodal site 15 corridor. The bus system in conjunction obtained a HUD livability grant that will with commuter rail, BRT and eventually help build the station site. Also the city of light rail will to move people quickly Provo has implemented a transit oriented between each of the transit stations and development zone around the site to destinations. The purpose of the improved encourage uses that are consistent with network is to facilitate quicker movements the type of development that is desirable from the south and north parts of the around a significant rail station. county and eliminate the long tedious routes that currently travel the length of the county. For instance, someone living TRAX LIGHT RAIL in the south county could ride a localized Residential growth in south Salt Lake bus to the Payson commuter rail station County and the north part of Utah County and from there catch either commuter rail is proposed to continue to merge or a BRT and quickly be brought to a together becoming one continuous urban central or northern county transit station area. Dense commercial areas are also to possibly transfer to another local route proposed in the area creating better going to their destination. transit opportunities. It is determined that

a 16.5 mile extension of light rail from the

planned TRAX line to Draper south ending INTERMODAL TRANSIT CENTERS at the Orem Intermodal Transit Center Three intermodal centers have been would greatly enhance countywide constructed in Utah County. Those sites mobility and provide high speed transit will likely have to be modified to between central and northern Utah accommodate increased demand in County and between northern Utah and future years. The Provo Intermodal site is southern Salt Lake counties. Because of located at 600 South University Ave, the funding constraints the Light Rail line is

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 17 TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND anticipated to be built incrementally time. UTA is proposing to add sidings in beginning from the County line south to various locations along the line to allow Lehi as a first segment. It is anticipated for greater passing capacity and that light rail would be operational by the frequency. UTA would also like to add an year 2040. Future extension of light rail is efficient technology enhancements shown as a vision project extending called positive train control to help them further south to Orem and Saratoga identify where the train is on the line at Springs, and Eagle Mountain. any given time.

LIGHT RAIL During phase 2 of the plan, FrontRunner commuter rail would expand further south from the existing Provo Station to the southern part of Utah County likely ending in Payson. Stations would likely be added in Springville, Spanish Fork and Payson. A further extension of the line to Santaquin is

shown as a vision project needed beyond the planning horizon year of 2040.

MODELED VISION FREEWAY CORRIDORS COMMUTER RAIL STOPS

FRONTRUNNER COMMUTER RAIL,

UPGRADES, AND POSITIVE TRAIN

CONTROL UTA has extended the FrontRunner Commuter Rail line south, connecting Salt

Lake City to Provo. It became operational December 2012. The line is a total of 44 miles with 22 miles within Utah County. To be more efficient with the operations of Commuter Rail UTA would like to add EXPANDED TRANSIT MAINTENANCE enhancements in the first phase of this plan. FACILITY The expansion in bus service and potential Currently the FrontRunner line is single rail operation will require the addition of tracked and this limits how many trains approximately 60-75 vehicles to the may operate on the line at any given existing fleet and would also necessitate

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 18 TransPlan40 TRAVEL DEMAND the expansion of the UTA maintenance facility on Geneva Road in Orem. The facility would need additional bus stalls for parking, more maintenance and fuel bays and more space in the building for operators and staff. UTA owns land at the existing location that is available to accommodate these additions. Furthermore this project might be done in conjunction with the BRT project in Provo and Orem as this project would bring extra vehicles that would require a modification of the existing facility.

TransPlan40 | Appendix B Page 19