Another sham hearing on the way, involves Route 35.

UTA again is setting up a sham hearing to say, 'oh yes, we took public input', but the facts of the case indicate that they are going to do what they propose, forget what anyone says contrary to it.

The plan is to make Route 35, which runs from Millcreek TRAX on 3300 South to 35th South and then all the way out to Magna, about 9200 West or so, a 'Bus Rapid Transit' route, which would mean there would only be stops about every 2/3 mile or so, about that distance apart.

You can't do much about the I-215 interchange over 3500 South, that's just messy anyway. but it's eveyrthing else I have already noticed.

They have set up these battleship-gray shelters at about every light from 9th West out, these will be the only stops you can pick up a 35 anywhere after April Change Day 2008. That despite any honest input from the riders. That means that the disabled, and many others, will find the route unusable for everyday use, despite the fact that the BRT route will still run every 15 minutes. Also, the 33 is not included in this plan, so the sense of discrimination and inequality will be there as well, a very large number of residents and shoppers and business owners depend on traffic from this route.

Often the buses are so heavily used, that they can often run just late enough that they run early. Observed this yesterday at 56th West. Got off there after observing activity on a run, and went across to see what I could get at the 7-Eleven, and about five minutes later, as I walked out of the 7-Eleven, I saw another westbound bus.

It may well be that the first one was late due to having to pick up a disabled rider, but that only drives home the point that those people rely on this route heavily. If the wheelchair or scooter that some use is battery-powered, they do not have enough juice sometimes to even get to or from the bus stop if it's far enough away, rendering the bus unusable, thus making the BRT line already noncompliant with ADA accessibility rules.

So unless there is a corresponding route that parallels on 35th South the BRT line, it may not be implementable under the ADA and the ISO 9001.2000 standard, because it will be a nonconforming route.

The solution, if they are so intent on putting the BRT limited service route in?

1. Rename the route 'R35'. The 'R' would signify it is a bus rapid transit route. That would separate it from the '35' required as shown below in 2.

2. Create an exactly parallel route, although it might only run every 30 minutes or so apart, and just number that one '35' as it is now.

That is required in order to avoid many problems, some possibly legal, and the dissatisfaction of users will definitely necessitate the above unless both 1 and 2 are implemented together.

The hearing is set for February 7th, I'm not sure where, although that is mentioned on a large announcement posted on some, but not all Route 35 buses.

Holding more effective public hearings and getting better comment.

ISO 9001 assumes a lot of things not written into the standard, and the matter of public hearings is no exception to the rule. After discovering a problem which I am trying to get more information on the cause of, in relating to a time change that affected all runs on a route, I came up with this solution on the public hearings problem, including the lack of holding public hearings in some cases, that will make everyone happier, including UTA itself.

1. Preparing for the hearing.

Diseminate as much information about proposals as possible, via fliers on buses, mailings to homes along the affected route (within 1/2 mile is the standard, since that is how far most people will walk to get to a route). This process must begin the month after a change day. For example, a change day occurs in August, so the process must begin about the first of September for the December change day.

Get media outlets to air commercials advertising the change day proposal hearings, this should all take place in the first month following a change day in preparation for the hearings about changes for the next change day. Disseminate press releases about the changes to media outlets as well and contact reporters to run stories about the proposed changes.

This must be done for all changes that substantially affect a route, even if the proposal is to shift the start times from one time to another especially if the new start times for a route are significantly earlier than before, like more than five minutes earlier. Also this must be done for any routing changes besides temporary detouring that is going to last for an extended period like the recent 811 detour was.

2. Scheduling the hearings.

For the commercials, a date and time must be in the commercial, flyer, or newspaper ad notice (putting anything in the public notices area alone is inadequate, advertising space must be purchased). That date must occur in the first week of the second month after a change day, for example, October is the second month following the August change day. This must be held in a location convenient to all residents in the division the route is in that is to be changed. Fliers are to be mailed and distributed in the manner described above.

The flier must include the proposal, and must include a very brief but understandable reason for the change.

Information on changes in divisions other than the division where the change is proposed must also be made available to all divisions to all riders, that way if a change might adversely affect riders that might use a route affected by a proposed change can give comments about the change, either for or against.

The hearing must follow this format:

6pm. Begin hearing, meet with public, show maps and give more detailed info in response to inquiries and questions. This will set the stage for later parts of the hearing. This should be in the back of the venue, so that latecomers can see and then comment in the hearing process later in the evening as they arrive.

7pm. At the front of the room, the lead planner for the division discusses the proposal and reasons that UTA feels the route needs to be changed in the fashion they propose it to the entire audience present, including sharing some of the feedback from discussions with in the first hour. This must includes both comments for and against the issue, and this to inform those present so comments later at the microphone can be more direct in relation to the issues involved. This ensures a dialogue between the public who uses UTA and the managers who have to juggle everything on the system to make it work for all.

By 730pm, that phase should be completed and the public should then be invited to ask more questions, and managers should be prepared to give responses to the public. If a manager feels slighted and discovers the plan they had envisioned for the next change day was wrong, he should not feel guilty for saying 'We were wrong, we'll see what we can do to fix the planned change so it works for you'. Everyone makes mistakes, and we should all learn from them, and they can even offer possible alternatives be it on the fly if necessary, which will help perfect the process and ensure that any eventual changes implemented serve the public interest once they are.

The public input portion of the hearing should go until 830pm, after which a summation and discussion of the ideas should be presented to the entire audience present.

In addition to this, a web comment portal needs to be established, like how the FCC does it, where a person can E-File comments, and read the comments of everyone else, regarding a change day. If mutliple routes are to be affected by changes, the comment website should be structured to allow one to comment on a specific proposal for a specific route. This comment portal URL on the Internet should be opened at the time the fliers are mailed out and placed on buses, and the webpage should be noted on the fliers and mailings, as well as the advertising and news stories. Mailed comments should be scanned, and phone comment transcriptions/summaries should be posted to the site also.

3. Internal planning.

After the hearings are done, planners should take written comments until end of the third week in the second month following a change day, after which they should issue another flyer indicating what they wish to do. They can then on the fourth week in the second month following a change day submit it to the UTA Board of Directors, who can then approve the plan. That will allow everyone to be in the know throughout the process, and once the board approves the modified plans, will allow drivers to bid on work for the upcoming period beginning at the next change day.

By the third week in the third month following the change day, or rather the third week in the month preceeding the next change day, notices should be mailed out to affected areas, news media needs to be contacted, and fliers need to be handed out on buses and TRAX indicating the changes that were made and the effective date.

4. Implementation. On the week before a change is to go into effect, fliers must be posted on buses and placed in schedule holders yet again, so that people can see the changes that passed, and how they will affect them. Concise reasons for the change again should be included in the description of the change, and the use of 'in house' jargon should be avoided. Terms such as 'runtime', 'headways', etc., are confusing to those unfamiliar with transit system jargon, and explaining everything in plainer terms will help. This rule of thumb should also be followed in all eariler phases of this process.

5. Your comments about this idea.

Your comments are now invited on this idea. UTA employees and planners are welcome to comment. UTA personnel, if desired, may post anonymously if you feel like you do not want your name or position known.

'Connection Protection' as defined by UTA now works better.

In talking to UTA about another matter, I have found that the connection protection part of their compliance with ISO 9001 does work a great majority of the time.

However, there are issues remaining to be resolved, such as those that involve connections to TRAX from buses. I have heard that riders transferring to TRAX from route 62 have consistently missed their trains because the trains do not wait even if both are exactly on time which can be normal much of the day for route 62.

Last night, November 23rd 2007, was one of those extreme situations where there was no way they could really 'keep the trains running on time' as the expression goes, and that was very literal. Downtown Salt Lake City was jammed with people who came down to see the Christmas lights as the day after Thanksgiving as that is the day they are first turned on. It's a big tradition. This year was more exceptional as the Tabernacle renovation was finished and they were able to light up more of the area than they had been able to do for the last two or three seasons, so that really drew a crowd this time.

As early as 430pm, things had already gotten out of whack, one was late by three minutes at Central Point Station and I immediately knew why, it was almost completely full, all three cars, I don't think I saw a train with four cars but could be wrong.

Well that threw other connections off, and doubless buses and trains were missed due to this, I'm almost sure that in some cases they ran so late they seemed early, much like what happens in Las Vegas with their Strip express buses.

Maybe they need to run every train with four cars throughout the evening for a large event like this, and throughout the Christmas season run as many cars as is found to be needed based on reports from bus drivers and train engineers about passenger loads. One would think and I believe they do take this into account, but the reality is sometimes things don't always get communicated properly, that is what this post is all about, so what can be done to resolve the issues?

Another issue is that Customer Concerns does not seem to have access to arrival/departure data to more immediately resolve customer inquiries as to why they missed a bus at a TRAX station. They maintain two separate sets of books here, and the Customer Concerns agents can only access the record for the buses. That does need to be fixed to maintain a better public perception of UTA's use of ISO 9001 in these matters.

Thanks for the comments!

Thanks for the great comments and additional information.

In regards to Frontrunner, thanks for the information on how the driver might not be able to see the passenger platform, I think now the question is is there going to be a way for them to possibly be able to know that there might be an issue where they might have to wait a short time for it to be resolved?

On 13th West, that seems understandable that there is an issue above and beyond the control of UTA and that it might take some time to resolve. Is that due to the fact that 64th South/62nd South is too narrow in the area between 7th and 13th West where it crosses the Jordan River? It looks that way to me, I think once the cities or the county connect the two together in a way that buses could use that, it will allow the 62 to pick up passengers at Fashion Place West station, and go straght over on 64th and 62nd South, and still interline at the 56th West Wal-Mart.

Another driver, UTA maintenance gets ISO 9001 right.

Yesterday after the incident at the TRAX station, I would eventually catch the 440pm Route 801 back to Utah County, and after what happened, I have to commend the driver and UTA maintenance, and a passing Utah Highway Patrol trooper, for a job well done, not only that, but the UTA employees followed the customer service standard that ISO 9001 implies.

The trip was uneventful after leaving downtown, used the HOV/HOT lane from Downtown on I-15 as usual. The freeway was recently rebuilt in Salt Lake, and a 'stopgap' widening was done south of 106th South until they can begin a huge widening project in 2011. It is possible issues with the stopgap nature of UDOT having to add additional lanes until the big one can begin that may have been one factor in the following incident. Equipment fatigue could be another.

Just after 114th South, the bike rack on the front of the bus came loose, and the bus had to pull to the inside of the freeway, and came to a stop cross-lanes from the 123rd South (U-71/US-89) interchange. They discovered that they needed someone to be sure the rack would be OK until they could get it to the yard for the night crew to fix. So they called into the radio room at UTA just off 33rd South and I-15, a good ten or more miles north of their location.

Obviously this was after 5pm and traffic was thick. So the truck was going to have to deal with that. The driver and the passenger got the bike into the bus. About that time a passing UHP trooper came by and asked what could be done. The driver explained they had radioed it in. He hopped the center divider and did what he could, which despite his good efforts, was not enough.

About five minutes after that, the maintenance truck pulled up. They got it to hold the rest of the trip back. I'm sure that maintenance is looking at it now. They usually do a very good job, and their work using ISO 9001 in their documenting problems that come up is probably what keeps the buses running with few issues.

Here's the possible theories on the 'why it happened' part.

1. Although the bus was a three-year-old model MC 400 D bus, affectionately called 'stripers' by some, there is the possibility of metal fatigue in the rack or in a fastener, usually a bolt or screw, that could have worn through or simply failed. If so, it might point to a minor workmanship issue possibly at the factory. For the record, UTA's vehicle ID number on this was 04010 but it was referred to as '4010' by dispatch.

2. The other issue is the road itself could have contributed to something coming loose. Past 106th South, the road in the HOV lane is uneven, particularly at the end of the segment widened in 1997-2001 on south. Also settling near the 114th South bridge and near the work done for the 123rd South interchange may have made things just uneven enough to jar something loose.

Again thanks to the UTA driver, dispatch, maintenance, and the passing UHP trooper for a job well done. The rider still has his bike thanks to the quick thinking of the driver.

Two driver wrongs don't make an ISO 9001 right.

This is the tale of two drivers who both screwed up, and because of it, left bad feelings between some 30 riders and UTA.

1. Route 811 comes up from Utah County, because they are on regular route now with the construction on US-89 'State Street' completed they can take that straight up to the Sandy Civic Center TRAX station and not have to go around via 700 East (U-71) and 98th South anymore.

The bus arrives some eight minutes early, it was supposed to not be there until 1107am. It got there about 1059 or 11am.

2. A train had just pulled up to the disabled platform, but as riders got to the platform, he pulled away, seemingly oblivious to the fact that riders were depending on him and the ISO 9001 Service Delivery component 'connection protection' procedure, exactly as defined by UTA itself, to ensure they would be able to catch that train, even if the bus was early.

Neither driver was right. The first one ran early, and when he got there early, and the train there left, it caused more damage right there.

TRAX driver gets it right, follows ISO customer care standard in waiting for disabled rider.

ISO 9001 presumes a level of customer care you do not see often these days, anywhere, even if it is not 'written in stone' in the standard. That is why the matter I saw today was truly above and beyond the usual for a UTA employee.

I was just getting off a northbound TRAX train at 78th South just about 1225pm. As I was readying to leave the platform, I saw a man with an old manual walker, with no wheels, trying to make his way up the ramp to get on the train.

Now walkers these days have small wheels, which allow one to move a little more quickly, most of these are now black rather than what this one was, which was the old silver type with no wheels which the user has to pick up to move it a few inches forward at a time.

I immediately turned around and signaled to the driver he had a disabled passenger trying to reach him, and he waited. He got out and once the passenger got to the top of the platform, he helped him get into the train. He then left, it took just over a minute to do this.

Now given the previous track record involving TRAX drivers outright leaving people with walkers, I think a previous complaint did some good. Someone may have retrained the drivers to be more sensitive to disabled riders needs, I've written about the issue before on this blog, and have discussed it with UTA customer concerns people and their ADA coordinator, and it all seems to have worked.

UTA now needs to make this a regular policy and part of the customer care documentation and training for ALL of its TRAX drivers, and do the same for Frontrunner drivers, so that everyone is on the same page to help all passengers who may need it even if it takes an extra minute. By doing so, it will raise the perception among many regarding its ISO 9001 accreditation that it is a good thing, not a bad thing as many have now following the 2007 Salt Lake County redesign fiasco, which they still have to resolve properly, and until then that still will hang over their ISO accreditation like a black cloud.

This caused a minor, but in the end insignificant, backup on 7720 South, but given how fast trains move through the intersecting street anyway (this is nowhere near like the wait for freight trains), this was but a small bother time-wise, and if everyone waiting for the train to go through so the gates would lift up knew the real issue as described here, they would have no problem waiting the extra time they had to today.