PROVO — Although Grandview Hill residents are glad the Utah Department of Transportation is no longer contemplating a major road through their neighborhood, they're still upset it was even brought up again.

Call it mass deja vu, but most residents thought that dispute had been settled seven years ago.

"We thought we had this all over and done with," said Grandview North neighborhood activist Ted Tronson. "It's a shame we had to revisit this."

Until recently, UDOT favored an alternative for the I-15 Utah County Corridor that utilized a system of frontage roads, including a major one that would have cut through Grandview Hill, said Merrell Jolley, UDOT project manager for the I-15 project. But within the last week, UDOT changed its plan because of the frontage road system's potential impacts on wetlands. UDOT is now favoring a plan that won't direct freeway-bound traffic through Grandview Hill.

While Grandview residents are happy with this latest development, some are less than satisfied with city officials who — in their eyes — didn't live up to past promises. "I'm relieved the wetlands came through for us because our elected officials surely didn't," said longtime resident Jacque Brown.

The dispute goes back to 2001 when UDOT was exploring all of its options to improve I-15. One of the options proposed placing an additional Provo interchange at 1740 North.

The thought of freeway traffic cutting through Grandview Hill riled a lot of neighbors, who feared the spike in traffic would endanger their children, Tronson said.

The ensuing ruckus prompted a resolution declaring the City Council's intent to oppose a freeway interchange, as well as a letter written by Mayor Lewis Billings to Grandview residents, stating, "(W)e are now prepared to formally end any further discussions or consideration of an additional interchange at 1740 North and/or 2000 North, now or in the future."

That's why many residents were surprised to see a major roadway running through their neighborhood on 1740 North in the A and B alternatives of UDOT's Environmental Impact Statement for I-15 Utah County Corridor. And they were especially surprised to see Provo backing option A.

Residents claimed city officials were just paying "lip service" in 2001, but the mayor said his word is good. "We did end any discussion on a single-point (freeway) interchange," he said. "I think we kept the faith with that neighborhood."

Jolley explained that 1740 North wouldn't have connected directly to the freeway, according to alternatives A and B of the EIS. Rather, the road would connect to northbound and southbound frontage roads that eventually connect to I-15 by University Parkway and 800 North respectively. He surmised the distinction was negligible to upset neighbors.