Jackson Flat Reservior/New County Jail Road

[Rover_0]

One topic I've been having with UDOT employees, along with the US-89A/UT-11 thing, is the road south of Kanab that will likely serve Jackson Flat Reservoir and the Kane County Jail (in the vicinity).

One of the criteria that leads to a road in Utah becoming a state route (from the Utah Administrative Code in the legislature, R926-2, Section 7, Part 3b, iii) is that a road "serves a major industrial, commercial, or recreation areas that generate traffic volumes equivalent to a population of 1,000 or more."

I feel as though the recreational-area could be enough to generate such traffic volumes, and can serve as a safety/defense route for the Kane County Jail, as the jail is slated to have state inmates, and is in the area.  I mentioned UT-287, which serves the State Penitentiary near Draper, and UT-137, which is often used by some as a bypass for the Gunnison penitentiary, as US-89 runs right by it.

I think that if this road does become a state route, it could get a freed-up number in the 281-320 range (route numbers that serve state institutions and recreational areas).  However, there are no public plans to make Jackson Flat a state park, and the Kane County Jail itself isn't a state institution, so this route could get a number in the 1-280 range,* and my guess is that it could get something like UT-188.

What are your thoughts?  Do I have a case here?

*I hope it isn't UT-1, UT-2, UT-3, UT-4, or UT-5, unless Page 99 in this document is still correct, then a number in the 1-5 range could get that far southern arterial to the west of US-89A (actually on the UT/AZ state line), should it become a state route, and the road serving Jackson Flat/KC Jail could land a 1-5 number as a precedent, then just extend it west over the road as the road is built.

I also wouldn't count out the possibility of this road getting the UT-11 designation, if UDOT ditches their plan for re-renumbering US-89A.

[CL]

I don't know if UDOT is looking to add any state routes that serve state parks and other such facilities. Not only is the state legislature hesitant to divvy up funds to state roads, the legislature is even more hesitant to send money to state parks! They expect state parks to run like businesses and make a profit, when really it doesn't work that way. Before I rant about our legislature's ineptitude in governance, what benefit would there be for this road to have state jurisdiction, rather than be under county control?