Reader comments
Group proposes bridge over Utah Lake

186 comments | Read story

Page:
1
2
3
4
Next >

dmac | 6:36 p.m. Sept. 16, 2009

What a great idea! The public gets the corridor it desperately needs, the state doesn't pay for it and they make money. Where is the down side?

lost in DC | 6:43 p.m. Sept. 16, 2009

better not try to build it - SUWA will sue to stop construction because it will endanger some toxic fungus or something.

Provo | 6:58 p.m. Sept. 16, 2009

They should have it connect onto Center Street in Provo I think. But this has been an idea talked about for years and I hope that it will come through eventually because it's a need and people would be willing to pay it. Just think of the Oakland-Bay Bridge.

Comments continue below

To Provo | 7:59 p.m. Sept. 16, 2009

Your comparison to the Bay Bridge in Oakland is flawed - out there at least there's a population on both sides to support it.

I'd rather see the money spent to clean up the shoreline and dredge the lake. It's ugly enough without a bridge - that would only make it worse.

Provo | 8:44 p.m. Sept. 16, 2009

I said eventaully. Yes i know that there is a need for population before it will happen. But as long as it's in the sight and will be built when needed, then that's all I ask.

Don't let this happen | 9:02 p.m. Sept. 16, 2009

If there is any way to stop this idea before it starts, please do it. This is an awful proposal. Utah Lake simply does not need or deserve a stupid bridge across it.

Irchr | 9:07 p.m. Sept. 16, 2009

I would hope that there would be some interesting architectural element included in the bridge. The lake demands it. To just put a cement ribbon across the lake would be a travisty, but to put a really great design out there would be the only way to go. How about a few really high pillars and some "cable sails"??? to enhance the view and the elements and not to ruin them. charge a $ more and make it an experience to ride on it. Then I will vote for it.

Please, no. | 9:52 p.m. Sept. 16, 2009

Please, make the lake more beautiful and not uglier. Plese encourage growth upward within the present infrastructure, not more spread out. Please don't deface the natural beauty of this valley, not more man-made travesties. Please don't harm the lake any more than we have already done in the past. There must be another way. Please, please, no bridge.

Scooter | 9:59 p.m. Sept. 16, 2009

dmac has it right on. Should be done. Get the government out of the way and let the private sector do it.

veedub | 10:10 p.m. Sept. 16, 2009

I think it's a great idea. We need something to relieve the congestion on the north end of Utah Lake.

Anonymous | 10:13 p.m. Sept. 16, 2009

I'd rather see a tunnel under point of the mountain - connecting Alpine and Draper and then bring I 215 down to it.

Anonymous | 10:33 p.m. Sept. 16, 2009

This is a great idea! They should put bike lanes across the bridge though.

Wasteful Spending | 10:42 p.m. Sept. 16, 2009

Wait till we actually need it.

not anonymous | 10:47 p.m. Sept. 16, 2009

make the lake more beautiful? are you kidding me? that is a fruitless enterprise, it will always be hideous! know why?! it's shallow, the dirt spreads to the top every time the wind picks up.. I think it would help beautify the lake immensely just by having waterfront property, more homes on the west side of the lake equals less stink, dust and it will generally look better in all aspects. why not make it easier for people to live on the west side and work on the east side. drive lehi main and tell me this is a bad idea. ANYONE in saratoga should openly accept the idea. has anyone been over there recently? what are you fighting to protect? spiders sagebrush and dirt.. ooo wow

Anonymous | 10:52 p.m. Sept. 16, 2009

yes wait until it is actually needed, everything is already stressed from the commuters going through lehi. why wait? anticipate the problem and be ready for it.. how is it wasteful when it is privately funded?

This is UTOPIA | 11:04 p.m. Sept. 16, 2009

It's amazing what can happen when government gets out of the way and let's private industry step forward!!! Think of how much money the state will make from this fabulous idea! Five gazillion at least! Why I bet they'll make even more than those cities who signed up for UTOPIA because they were told they'd make lots of money to pad their budgets! Oops, I guess those cities are getting ready to pay up from their dwindling sales taxes because it hasn't quite worked out as planned. A $600 million bridge across a lake? No risk there, right? And what is Sumison doing being involved here? I thought this was private industry? Oh, maybe it's "private industry" just like charter school finance, landfill tipping fees, and nuclear power plant construction is in Utah, right? Give me a break!

Guard the state's credit rating, there's no way this thing works on its own.

PS- the key economic difference between this bridge and the Bay Bridge: one is free, the other will cost $2-3 bucks (for starters- in a few years it will cost WAY more than that).

PUMPS | 11:47 p.m. Sept. 16, 2009

Pumps in the desert.

A Bridge Over Stinky Green Waters.

Yikes!

It won't be $600 million | 12:15 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

It will be delayed by enviromental lawsuits and likely cost $2 billion or more. This is normally how things like this go. They end up costing 3x or more than what we think they should cost.

Go! Go! Go! | 1:01 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

Excellent idea!

Can you imagine what would happen if the interstate system or Glenn Canyon Dam were to be proposed in this day and age? Not a chance in H-E-double toothpicks either project would happen.

This is FANTASTIC idea. It would make the eyesore property across the lake so much more appealing and relieve a great burden from I-15 congestion. Air pollution in Utah Valley could drop dramatically. Private industry is the only solution in matters like this. Leave the Corps of Engineers out of it. Don't let the state get their fat, lazy hands on it. Don't tell Bob Redford about it (he doesn't read the Deseret News anyway). Let's do it! Go! Go! Go!

Surprises Me | 1:17 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

I can't imagine such a bridge would pay for itself.

Is there that many people who would want to cross it?

Pave Yellowstone | 1:26 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

Just drain the lake.

Capt CJ | 1:55 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

I am not fond of a bridge. why not consider a high speed air foil - hover craft ferry. parking and bus- light rail service on one or both sides. This ferry could run year around even if the Lake froze.

Su | 2:37 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

Well if this huge development occurs we can right off our nice pleasant community for high crime & sprawl... city planners never learn... remember LA, Phoenix suburbs, plus more. Services can NEVER keep up. Try living in Mesa AZ if you need the police in a hurry. It won't happen. There's just too much crime & not enough police. whats wrong with every one... Lets protect out way of life..

Dreamer | 3:00 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

Who needs or wants the bridge? I say take the money and let private enterprise extend the rail line down to the BYU campus. That would get more use, the investors would make more money and the taxpayers would not have to pay for it.

No! No! No! | 3:01 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

(Staunch Conservative here)...If people want to live on the other side away from the congestion of metro Utah County, let them enjoy the drive around the lake. There isn't enough land on the other side to build enough houses around Pelican Point to generate enough traffic to pay for the bridge. The whole nostalgia for living on the other side is to enjoy the peace and quiet away from the hustle and bustle of the east side.

Use the 600 million to dredge up all the dead bodies in the lake or better yet to dye the lake blue. Maybe then we could start eating the fish without glowing in the dark!

Like Greta Garbo | 4:26 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

Saratoga Springs says: I just vant to be left alone.

Smart citizen | 4:27 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

This is a no brainer. 2$ to save 30 minutes and save even more money in gas.

rightascension | 4:38 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

This is a great idea -- though they should consider a structure that would be less disruptive to the lake itself -- a floating bridge. Refer to the Interstate 90 floating bridge in suburban Seattle over Lake Washington.

Spiral Jetty? | 4:39 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

Hey, the Great Salt Lake has one. Why not Utah Lake? Then you'd have all of these eccentric out of state rich liberal artist types raving about it!! After all, there should be no Utah body of water that isn't descrated by the hand of man!

Timj | 4:45 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

Remind me why people built houses so far away from where they want to work?
Hey, I have a novel idea. Why don't we build business near where people live and cut down commute times? Then we would have no need for this bridge, and both the commuters and the environmentalists will be happy.

Mike Richards | 5:31 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

If private enterprise is going to fund the project, build the project, maintain the project and staff the project, why should the State of Utah share in the profits?

Let the project be taxed just like any other business. No more. No less.

This is not a joint-venture. It should not be treated like one.

Alpine Observer | 5:35 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

Bridge, no. Ferry, yes.

The model for this proposal is the Balboa Island ferry in Newport Beach, California. That ferry generates an outsize share of commuter traffic because it is fun and people wait to use it for the sake of experience, as well as for the slight short-cut it offers.

The job of ferry pilot is highly sought after - it does not require extremely high wages to attract workers who are well-trained and safe.

Water transport of heavy things (eg automobiles) is outrageously cheap - compare ton-mile rates to trucks and trains and you will see for yourself. Plus, a fleet of 3 or 4 ferry boats is much cheaper than a bridge and the footprint on the environment is much, much smaller.

The group that has raised $600,000,000 could buy some real estate on the west side of the lake and attract a movie enterprise, ice cream vendor, restauranteurs, etc. and make the ferry landing a destination, as well as a commuter option for getting around Utah Lake.

Just think about it - Geneva gone, a lake becoming more visible and beautiful as a feature of the valley, and boats of all kinds...

Scott | 6:01 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

I doubt this will ever pay for itself and I believe the State (taxpayers) will get sucked in to bail them out.

Suprises Me To | 6:08 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

I'm sure it will be an LLC that builds the bridge and when there is a a BIG problem, the principles will walk away and leave all of us taxpayers with the bill!

Will Never Happen | 6:21 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

Environmentalists will KILL it. Take that to the bank.

A Better Idea | 6:21 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

A better idea would be to figure out a way to make Utah lake have better water quality and make it a fresh-water lake, stocked with fish, and pleasant to recreate on. Engineers could come up with ways to ensure proper water flow in and out of the lake...That would be a great economic engine for the region and the State...far more than building a huge, ugly concrete bridge scarring the landscape for decades to come, for those few people on Saratoga who commute every day to Provo area.

Anonymous | 6:32 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

I've got to see the pilings needed to go through all that mud. Maybe this genius is going to use pontoons.

Way too costly | 6:40 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

This proposal is insanity. There is PLENTY of room along the North side of the lake for roads. Also, there is Pioneer Crossing being built and Vineyard Connector in the works too (which will connect 800 North Orem to the new Pioneer Crossing road from I-15 at AF main to Redwood Road - check UDOT's website). Both these projects will help relieve traffic congestion on Lehi Main. I drive Lehi Main everyday as I live in the Ranches of EM and work in Orem.

I am against a bridge across Utah Lake as there are better options, two of which are already being worked on. Who would be responsible for the bridge if it isn't profitable and the company goes bankrupt? What would happen to the endangered June Sucker that only lives in Utah Lake? Wouldn't a large bridge in the middle of the lake look totally out of place? How long would it take for the company to recoup $600 million?? Even at $3 per vehicle, it would take 200 million cars to drive over it before they break even. I hope this never comes to fruition.

Julio | 6:46 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

Obama will win again in 2012. Your state will then no longer exist. It will be given back to the Mexicans. Your pathetic little projects are meaningless. You will all be living in a third world country by then. But, keep dreaming.

Anonymous | 6:49 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

Dear Wasteful Spending: It's private money, not taxpayer money. Who cares if they want to waste their own money? Plus, I don't think it's a waste anyway.

Yes! Yes! Yes! | 7:09 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

This is a great idea! It could be functional as well as beautiful. Just take a look at some of the wonderful Freeway art work that some of UDOT's contractors have put on a lot of the new bridges in Utah. They're fabulous. A real work of art could be created and help commuters at the same time.

I don't get people... | 7:12 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

So what is this talk about taking the money to "dredge the lake" or do this or do that. THIS IS PRIVATE MONEY PEOPLE!! Seriously! What you're saying is the equivalent of going into a store to buy some shoes, and the clerk telling you to just leave the money for the shoes and leave with nothing. What revenue does dredging the lake bring to those investors? And for those who say there isn't a lot of room on the west side...Come out to Eagle Mountain and look at all the room. In the 6 years I've lived in Eagle Mountain, my commute from the Ranches to I-15 through has gone from 10 minutes to sometimes 20 or more minutes. I would gladly pay a toll to cut some time off the commute going southbound to Provo/Orem area. Let's get this done now before a real need arises and we have to play catch up. Kudos for thinking ahead.

Chris | 7:25 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

Smart citizen if you wanted to save 30 minutes and gas why on earth do you live there?

Darrel | 7:29 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

Mike,

The reason being is the State owns the land. The private company would only be leasing the land, and part of the lease agreement would stipulate profit sharing.

BH | 7:37 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

Great idea! As long as the private enterprise meets all the environmental concerns, has a plan for cleanup 60 years from now when the bridge is obsolete, etc.

This will give all the residents of Saratoga Springs an option, yet will not be a financial burden on the state of Utah. Let those who use it pay for it.

It seems that a bridge would encourage growth in Saratoga Springs, take a lot of pressure off the already overstressed route, and add a unique characteristic to Utah Lake and the area.

As to those who say, don't ruin the beauty of Utah Lake, I can't help but wonder what beauty they are referring to. Utah Lake has never had any beauty or real recreational use.

Go for it!

john84124 | 7:39 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

A Bridge will NOT reduce pollution!
That money could be used for more Important things than a bridge over a stinky smelly lake that should be drained and use its salt...
Pay to cross it? NO WAY! Id rather go the long way around...
We need low income housing for the poor before we need a needless bridge...
Pollution will only get better if we have much stricter emission control and rid the State of cars that do not comply!
This is just another waste of Money that could be put to better use!
We need to REDUCE the population in Utah not increase it!

Red Smith | 7:40 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

Why not dredge the North end of Utah Lake making it 50 feet deep instead of 10 feet deep, and fill up the south end of Utah Lake. We get more water, more land, a deep blue lake, and will save 400,000 acre-feet of evaporated water loss to the Utah Lake Drainage Basin?

flying high | 7:41 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

I fly over the lake every day since I teach out of the Provo airport. Don't put a bridge over the lake. It would just ruin our lake. If people want to live on the west side they can live with the commute. A ferry is a much better plan.

Justin | 7:48 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

The bridge is a great idea. They should put a landing near the middle of the lake and build a restaurant or scenic area.

There are too many old fuddy duddies who will be nay sayers for anything that could be good.

It would be much more practical to put the bridge farther South, however. 800 no. in Orem is nearly to Lehi, anyway.

At least to to University Parkway or Center Street in Provo, if you are really looking to the future needs.

Solve the Whole Problem --BP | 7:53 a.m. Sept. 17, 2009

I love that private enterprise has come up with this and has found a way to pay for it but we need to look at the whole of Utah lake and solve all the problems that face the lake.
1. Return June Sucker species to health
2. Remove the carp
3. Dredge the lake so boat and wind can't churn up the bottom every time the water is disturbed.
4. Causeway or bridge across the lake
5. Enhance beaches, parks, trails and access for all.
6. Upgrade the Waste Water Treatment plants around the lake to reduce phosphorus which create the alge blooms.
There has to be one project that takes into account all the problems and fixes them all. Not just put a bridge across and say "I really hope the state let's us do it because we will make a lot of money and the state can make some money to remove some carp".
We need to fix the entire lake in one project so the economics makes sense for not only things like this bridge but for thing like the fishery and above. This project is coming, just give it a year or two.

Page:
1
2
3
4
Next >

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.