Comments about ‘Utah Lake bridge decision could come this year’

I'm glad they are moving forward on this. This will let them then concentrate on the more important project, the escalator to Park City.

as long as it's privately funded, I don't have too much trouble with it - they can fund that escalator to Park City privately, too.

it would cut down on air pollution if people on the west side of Utah lake are able to use less gas to get to Provo.

I know first-hand about the serious traffic problems in getting to and from the West side of the lake. However, why is it nobody seemed to think about that before they started building new cities over there? Seems like very poor planning, but I guess that's par for the Valley.

"it would cut down on air pollution if people on the west side of Utah lake are able to use less gas to get to Provo."

You're so right. God forbid they actually live around Provo, if that's where they work. Hey you know what, screw the escalator in Park City. Let's just tear those mountains down, they're getting in the way of people who want to commute from Park City to Salt Lake everyday.

It's called being good stewards of the land. Moving 80 miles away from the business and employment centers, etc. so you can have a better 'view' or whatever it may be, is not being responsible, smart, or a good steward.

I say a resounding NO to this bridge. It will just make more people want to live on the other side, which will just continually increase traffic congestion. Plus, we live in an outdoor mecca, do we really need every natural wonder to have a million fricken cars all over it?

Protect the environment. Provide a wind-powered ferry to transport cars one-at-a-time across the lake.

Just wait until the company that runs this bridge can not finish the project or can't afford to maintain it. Then the state government will be asking for more tax money to make up the difference.

I did the math on it and at $2 a crossing at 1,000 crossings a day it will take 821 years just to pay off the ESTIMATED construction costs- that doesn't include maintenence.

At 10,000 crossings a day it will take 82 years to pay it off. Think this bridge and/or this company, and the $2 price will last 82 years?

Horrible horrible idea just to make some developers rich with an eventual bail-out by the taxpayers, and an eyesore across the lake.

Don't forget that the builders own land on the west side of the lake where they want to build a commercial district as well. If you want to live in a place like this, move to Brooklyn New York!

Please say no to this bridge!

"...a bridge could bring unbridled development or more pollution..."

Huh?

If there is a development plan in place (which there should be), development shouldn't be unbridled. It's called PLANNING.

Driving 7 miles across a bridge is less pollution than driving 25 miles around the lake. I don't understand where more pollution would come from.

It sounds like excuses to me. What is everyone really afraid of?

Why wouldn't competing leases be invited? That's an awfully big project to allow only one company to just walk in and take it.

$600M is too much for a 7 mile bridge. Competition would lower the cost/improve the payback.

Really? 80% of the comments were against the bridge? Is it because of anti-development attitudes? The west side of the lake will be developed eventually whether or not there is a bridge.

There will be less traffic congestion from development in the west (more spread out) than there would be from increased traffic from increased dense housing crammed into the Provo/Orem areas.

I think the bridge is a good idea.

Build the bridge. Development is going to happen. It doesn't make any sense to cripple the west side.

Traffic and pollution concerns ring hollow. I agree there are environmental issues, but that is normal and they can be resolved.

Why in the world should a bridge be built across Utah Lake?. Will the construction costs, pollution, waste, etc. from such an endevor ever be recouperated?

A better use of $600 million would be to build out infrastructure on the west side so citizens would not need to commute all the way to the east side to work, shop, and play.

Long commutes are lame ... the best commute is a very short one. Think global, go local.

I say build the bridge. It will benefit the enviornment and reduce pollution and traffic delays.
I have traveled all over the U.S. and driven on bridges in many, many states.
Bridges can be built with no harm to the water, wildlife and all of the natural resources.
A bond will be required to insure that the bridge is completed once it is started so the government won't have to bail them out.