If they all want to sit in traffic on small roads then let 'em!
I remember the commute before the front runner train and before legacy became
operational. It was pretty bad, cars on the freeway went at a crawling pace
during the rush hours. Then the front runner started running. There was no
detectable difference on the freeway. It still slowed down at rush hour. Once
Legacy highway was opened however, things improved markedly. There are no more
slowdown unless there is an accident.Opponents said the road wasn't
necessary, but they were wrong.
I agree with cjb. The traffic in southern Davis County is SO much better than
it was before the Legacy Highway was put in!
I think the road is necessary, but I don't agree with forcing people out of
their homes. I laugh at people who try to equate forcing people out to changing
the environment to allow for a roadway. People are more important than animals.
if places were reversed, they wouldn't be able to care about us, so don't try
that argument. I don't see why a responsible alteration of a small portion of
the salty wetlands to provide a road would hurt.
How much is all of this costing? What other spending is Utah cutting to pay for
this, or are they raiing our taxes to pay for this? Are they getting the money
from the federal government?
Relax...Obama's paying for it.
I do get a kick out of the folks who buy/build their homes on 0.33 acres of
property, with seven other homes within spit-shot of their own home, and then
claim they like wide-open spaces out there now that a new road needs to be
built. It's always a risk when you buy small property next to large vacant
land.I sure hope the proposals are kidding with regard to the
"Alternative" routes for A and B. Starting the new highway north of
the end of our current Legacy highway is so silly, it's tough to address. Don't
we already have a big enough bottleneck between Lagoon and the Kaysville exit?
Yeah, let's have our new highway for the future use that same bottleneck.
Once again the enviro folks just don't get it. Busses and light rail don't fit
the model of growth that is occuring. How often do they take a bus to and from
the grocery store?The reason some houses...may...have to be taken
out is that a few towns (Kaysville for one) failed to preserve a right-of-way,
thinking that if homes were built it would force the highway to go further west
towards the lake. Their own local politicians sold them down the river a few
years back!A few birds can adapt; people are more important; just
how do you take mass transit to the emergency room; how long do the same birds
live, anyway??Avoid the obvious bottleneck between Lagoon and
Kaysville---Shepard Lane is not a viable alternative for future needs.If you want "wide, open spaces" move to Wyoming. Get over the
elitist attitude of "I'm here so now let's close the door," please!!
"Meanwhile, Tim Wagner of the Utah chapter of the Sierra Club, said UDOT
should forgo building a new highway and focus more on developing more mass
transit that would reduce traffic and limit pollution in northern Utah."Three years ago I was waving the mass transit flag. I got an Eco Pass
within weeks of FrontRunner launching. UTA made it available through my
employer for something like $93 for April though end of year. I took the train
from Clearfield to SLC 4-5 times a week. Saved money. Got some exercise riding
my bike across downtown. Helped reduce pollution. It was great. I didn't mind
the extra time given all the other positives.The deal they extended
my employer after the first year was cost prohibitive and we opted out. Now an
Eco Pass would cost me $180 monthly. There is no train only option other than
paying about $7 daily. I can drive for way less than that - including gas, wear
and tear, tires, oil changes, etc. I save 30+ minutes each way so from an
exercise perspective it is easily made up.Mass transit at current
pricing is doomed in Davis/Weber.
Slam another freeway where 3 others already meet. You will doom Farmington and
all of northern Utah to a mess until 2040. The road should go west and south of
most existing development and avoid the current bottlenecks. Almost the same
amount of wetland is impacted by either route in Farmington, except you have to
plow between 2 neighborhoods and destroy 10 houses with one of the options.
This option also disturbs 4 times as much wildlife than going out west by the
marshlands - who do the environmentalists really care about the animals or wet
I look at the trajectory of the economy and the resource base of cheaply
producible energy, and I see a future where the supply of low density suburban
auto dependent neighborhoods and high capacity roads far exceeds the supply of
people whose incomes will be adequate to live in the neighborhoods and drive on
the roads.The air of west Davis County used to be filled from dawn to dusk
with the sound of nail guns assembling more suburbia. I don't hear very much of
that anymore. The population and traffic projections touted by the road lobby do
not reflect the future reality so much as the wishful thinking of politically
powerful members of our developerslature.
It's best to build the road now. If you wait, you'll have to tear down more
houses and spend a lot more money. Being ahead of the curve is best. Even
though population growth and development has slowed, it is only for a couple of
years, then it will pick up again. At present, SLC area is one of the few
metros positioned to start growing rapidly again.Be prepared. Build the
road and more rail. Don't become an LA or Phoenix.
For 19 years I have been attending UDOT hearings for them to garner support or
provide information on plans for future projects. With commissioners and
bureaucrats plus lobbyists, you find out real quick they dont necessarily
provide all the information or sources due to their individual interests. This
type of process impacts on the whole planning process for roads. I remember
being at one meeting where the commissioners had plans to alleviate traffic.
The only problem is that the prior planners and officials had already built
overpasses, etc. in several places and at least one was torn down after it was
almost completed to do another process. The north end of that section the
superstructure of that overpass was not wide enough to do what they had planned
after that brand new structure was just completed. It was not wide enough that
was not very forward planning. Away from elected officials and bureaucrats and
engineers, lobbyists and federal regulators, public input is impacted by all the
people in this list. Eminent Domain misuse is a potential as government
interprets the Supreme Courts decision within the past 10 years. 20 years from
now we will still be waiting.
@Lowonoil: A most logical argument. I don't think the next 20 years are going to
see the kind of growth anyone's plans are expecting.
You will not hear in any UDOT presentation or from any other member of the road
lobby that total highway miles driven in this country have been declining
steadily since 2007. Don't believe me? Go to the Federal Highway Administration
website and see for yourself.
Why didn't UDOT or cities restrict building in this area of West Kaysville to
begin with? Why were homes built in this area, only to have home owners lose
their properties several years later?This is unbelievable. I could
understand a 50 year, or 75 year old neighborhood having to be torn down for
growth that was not planned for decades ago. But these neighborhoods are
practically new. I feel that if UDOT proceeds, and homeowners lose
their homes and properties, that the home owners should be justly compensated at
the value of their home when they originally bought it!UDOT is
wanting to pay homeowners what the current value is. Well, the housing market
has dropped 30% in the last few years. Some of these home owners would be upside
down in their homes. They wouldn't even be able to pay off their mortgage with
what UDOT says the owners will be paid. How is that fair?On the one
hand, the owners were never told their homes would be torn down in a just a few
years by UDOT. And on the other hand they are being compensated at 70% value.
This is terrible.
Consider this statement from the article: "Jefferies explained new roads
are necessary to keep up with the estimated 75 percent growth in the area by
2040."Growth doesn't precede roads. It's the opposite. None of
that development would ever happen if the developers and land owners didn't have
assurances that the roads would get built. But UDOT is a marvel at convincing
the public that development just happens and that it's their job to meet the
transportation demand. That's the myth they are so good at perpetuating in order
to meet the agency's sole mission, which is first and foremost to build roads,
usually at all costs.To the good people of West Davis County who
wanted your own piece of country heaven, I hate to break the news to you but
you've been hoodwinked by your elected officials and their friends in the real
estate world. With this new road will come thousands upon thousands of more
homes, strip malls, schools, congestion, longer, slower commutes, and much
dirtier air. In other words, suburbia as far as you can see. It's happened in
Salt Lake and every other major city that thought it could build itself out of