Comments about ‘UDOT releases West Davis Corridor road plan’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Sept. 8 2011 4:05 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Johnny Triumph
American Fork, UT

If they all want to sit in traffic on small roads then let 'em!

cjb
Bountiful, UT

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.

jean22
Bountiful, UT

I agree with cjb. The traffic in southern Davis County is SO much better than it was before the Legacy Highway was put in!

Hawkyo
SYRACUSE, UT

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.

FatherOfFour
WEST VALLEY CITY, UT

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?

Ironmomo
Ogden, Utah

Relax...Obama's paying for it.

ouisc
Farmington, UT

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.

toosmartforyou
Farmington, UT

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!!

BusStopRatBag
Layton, UT

"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.

Econ101
Farmington, UT

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 ground?

Lowonoil
Clearfield, UT

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.

Lilljemalm
Gilbert, AZ

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.

JWB
Kaysville, UT

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.

DeltaFoxtrot
West Valley, UT

@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.

Lowonoil
Clearfield, UT

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.

David
Centerville, UT

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.

deserthound
Salt Lake City, UT

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 congestion.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments