AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules to ensure post quality. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Anybody heard of the new UT-176?  (Read 5946 times)

authenticroadgeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 71
  • It's time for the roadgeeks to bring down bronies!

  • Age: 18
  • Location: Utah
  • Last Login: December 17, 2016, 07:57:46 PM
Anybody heard of the new UT-176?
« on: April 08, 2016, 11:26:03 PM »

UDOT is building a new "Vineyard Connector" road off of UT-52 (aka Orem 800 North) designated UT-176. So far they have a new bridge over railroads, but that's really all there is right now. It does certainly act as a 'Connector' to some of 'Vineyard' though! Here's a pic of the overpass:
« Last Edit: April 08, 2016, 11:40:34 PM by andy3175 »
Logged
That's the signature spirit!

andy3175

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1425
  • Location: San Diego, California, USA
  • Last Login: August 04, 2021, 11:35:18 PM
    • AARoads
Re: Anybody heard of the new UT-176?
« Reply #1 on: April 08, 2016, 11:40:27 PM »

Not me, this is the first I've heard of it. Do you have a link to a map that shows the road, even if it is not signed?
Logged
Regards,
Andy

www.aaroads.com

Rover_0

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 921
  • Why not?

  • Age: -65
  • Location: Utah
  • Last Login: Today at 08:49:56 PM
Re: Anybody heard of the new UT-176?
« Reply #2 on: April 09, 2016, 12:58:32 AM »

It's news to me, but isn't it supposed to essentially be a continuation of SR-52? If I'm seeing the right roads and maps, why not just send the 52 designation along the Vineyard Connector?
Logged
Fixing erroneous shields, one at a time...

authenticroadgeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 71
  • It's time for the roadgeeks to bring down bronies!

  • Age: 18
  • Location: Utah
  • Last Login: December 17, 2016, 07:57:46 PM
Re: Anybody heard of the new UT-176?
« Reply #3 on: April 09, 2016, 03:13:31 PM »

It's news to me, but isn't it supposed to essentially be a continuation of SR-52? If I'm seeing the right roads and maps, why not just send the 52 designation along the Vineyard Connector?
I don't know either. I think they should try to be conservative with their state route numbers because what if they end up running out of numbers one day? What if they decide a certain number would have been better for a certain road?
(Kind of off-topic but I also think they should take off the 1600 North designation between UT-114 and I-15 because it's just useless)
Not me, this is the first I've heard of it. Do you have a link to a map that shows the road, even if it is not signed?

This is as close as I can really get right now. You may think it's telling you it's an extension of UT-52 but when I physically went down there it was signed as UT-176.
Logged
That's the signature spirit!

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 19508
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: Today at 09:11:02 PM
Re: Anybody heard of the new UT-176?
« Reply #4 on: April 09, 2016, 03:26:29 PM »

I think they should try to be conservative with their state route numbers because what if they end up running out of numbers one day? What if they decide a certain number would have been better for a certain road?

Wow, I just looked and saw how many numbered state routes there are in Utah.  I had no idea it was so many...
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. Dick
If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

triplemultiplex

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2608
  • "You read it; you can't unread it!"

  • Location: inside the beltline
  • Last Login: Today at 06:11:32 PM
Re: Anybody heard of the new UT-176?
« Reply #5 on: April 09, 2016, 03:29:35 PM »

It's news to me, but isn't it supposed to essentially be a continuation of SR-52? If I'm seeing the right roads and maps, why not just send the 52 designation along the Vineyard Connector?

Because then UDOT would have to renumber the mile markers? :-D

Seems odd for it to be a state highway in the first place.  The road isn't going to be able to go anywhere with the lake right there.  Must have been a way to get the state to pay for a road into the old steel mill to catalyze redevelopment.
Logged
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

Rover_0

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 921
  • Why not?

  • Age: -65
  • Location: Utah
  • Last Login: Today at 08:49:56 PM
Re: Anybody heard of the new UT-176?
« Reply #6 on: April 09, 2016, 06:06:13 PM »

It's news to me, but isn't it supposed to essentially be a continuation of SR-52? If I'm seeing the right roads and maps, why not just send the 52 designation along the Vineyard Connector?

Because then UDOT would have to renumber the mile markers? :-D

Seems odd for it to be a state highway in the first place.  The road isn't going to be able to go anywhere with the lake right there.  Must have been a way to get the state to pay for a road into the old steel mill to catalyze redevelopment.

Yea, that's pretty much it. Didn't stop them from renumbering SR-209's mile markers when they extended 209 out to Copperton though.*

*As SR-48 was truncated to Bangerter Highway (SR-154) due to UDOT transferring SR-48 between 9000 S and Bangerter Highway (SR-154) was turned back to the city of West Jordan.
Logged
Fixing erroneous shields, one at a time...

SD Mapman

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1038
  • The best pace is a pace, and today is a good day.

  • Location: Running somewhere in Lawrence County
  • Last Login: August 01, 2021, 09:49:58 AM
Re: Anybody heard of the new UT-176?
« Reply #7 on: April 10, 2016, 12:00:35 AM »

Yessir, this is UT 176.

https://maps.udot.utah.gov/highway/f?p=184:4 Per Utah's official route log.
Logged
The traveler sees what he sees, the tourist sees what he has come to see. - G.K. Chesterton

Rover_0

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 921
  • Why not?

  • Age: -65
  • Location: Utah
  • Last Login: Today at 08:49:56 PM
Re: Anybody heard of the new UT-176?
« Reply #8 on: April 10, 2016, 03:03:31 AM »

Myth confirmed--there are some UT-176 shields in the field:







And a look at the current end of construction, 1 mile in:






This does surprise me, as there's been no mention of UT-176 in the legislative session amendments. Usually, route signage comes after the route is written into law and mileposts are posted.
Logged
Fixing erroneous shields, one at a time...

authenticroadgeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 71
  • It's time for the roadgeeks to bring down bronies!

  • Age: 18
  • Location: Utah
  • Last Login: December 17, 2016, 07:57:46 PM
Re: Anybody heard of the new UT-176?
« Reply #9 on: April 10, 2016, 12:50:36 PM »

The road isn't going to be able to go anywhere with the lake right there.  Must have been a way to get the state to pay for a road into the old steel mill to catalyze redevelopment.
I'm thinking they bring the road more "over" the lake. By that I mean they curve the road so it goes around the lake. Then I can most definitely see some potential for this road. They could also make a bridge over the lake but that's just absurd. I'm still thinking about where exactly they would take it that hasn't already been covered by state routes :awesomeface:
Logged
That's the signature spirit!

SD Mapman

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1038
  • The best pace is a pace, and today is a good day.

  • Location: Running somewhere in Lawrence County
  • Last Login: August 01, 2021, 09:49:58 AM
Re: Anybody heard of the new UT-176?
« Reply #10 on: April 10, 2016, 01:46:54 PM »

The road isn't going to be able to go anywhere with the lake right there.  Must have been a way to get the state to pay for a road into the old steel mill to catalyze redevelopment.
I'm thinking they bring the road more "over" the lake. By that I mean they curve the road so it goes around the lake. Then I can most definitely see some potential for this road. They could also make a bridge over the lake but that's just absurd. I'm still thinking about where exactly they would take it that hasn't already been covered by state routes :awesomeface:
Here's a map of the area: http://www.genevautah.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/map3.pdf

Apparently they're making a whole new town there. (The Vineyard Connector (176) is the center black line that curves to the north)
Logged
The traveler sees what he sees, the tourist sees what he has come to see. - G.K. Chesterton

US 89

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4037
  • 189 to Evanston!

  • Location: Salt Lake City/Atlanta
  • Last Login: Today at 08:30:11 PM
    • Utah Highways
Re: Anybody heard of the new UT-176?
« Reply #11 on: April 26, 2020, 01:25:53 AM »

Major bump because it was just brought up in a transportation commission meeting:

Quote from: Vineyard Mayor
Vineyard Connector; Main St to 1600 North, Phase II - $15 million

The Vineyard Connector is an essential regional connection from Orem to Lehi west of I-15. It is expected to help relieve congestion on I-15. The Vineyard Connector will increase regional connectivity and throughput for growth, higher education and economic centers in Saratoga Springs, Eagle Mountain, Lehi, American Fork, Pleasant Grove, Lindon, and Vineyard.

The corridor was cleared with a State Environmental Study in 2007. The current cost to construct the entire corridor is estimated to be $271 million. We are proposing to build Phase II of the Vineyard Connector from Main Street to 1600 North in Vineyard for an estimated cost of $15 million. This project will include the following elements:
❏ Improved at-grade rail crossing at 1600 N
❏ One lane in each direction of travel
❏ Curb, gutter and associated drainage features
❏ Right-of-way has already been purchased by UDOT to Boat Harbor (UDOT will need some property from Vineyard Properties LLC, Anderson Geneva, LLC and Martin Snow to make the connection into 1600 North at the improved at-grade rail crossing at 1600 N)
❏ Box culverts for pedestrian crossings

Currently, 800 North is the only regional connection into the metrocenter in Vineyard. Vineyard is currently investing in the new 1600 North corridor from the proposed Vineyard Connector to Geneva Road. The right-of-way for the new 1600 North road was recently dedicated to Vineyard and is now under construction. Vineyard expects to have this roadway built by June 2020. Phase II of the Vineyard Connector will connect the existing 800 North corridor and the newly constructed 1600 North corridor together providing alternative access into the downtown area while improving regional mobility.

Within the downtown area, UTA and UDOT are building a new station for the FrontRunner train offering multimodal transportation options to the central part of Utah Valley including residents from Provo, Orem, Lindon and Vineyard. Phase II of the Vineyard Connector will provide alternative access into the metrocenter of Vineyard including the regional FrontRunner station. Access to the downtown area of Vineyard will be provided with three connections from the Vineyard Connector and a pedestrian underpass.

Vineyard’s metrocenter is currently under construction, this is a true transit oriented development that is compact, mixed-use, walkable, and livable. This is a unique destination that has no height restrictions, a progressing Utah Valley University campus, existing and future commercial districts, retail, class A office/ business areas and approximately 7,000 new residential units resulting in approximately 21,000 new residents with direct access to the Vineyard Connector.

The new FrontRunner Station will be located in the heart of Vineyard’s downtown, and is expected to be completed as soon as December 2021. The new FrontRunner Station will provide connections to regional and international airports, Utah Valley Xpress and a future bus rapid transit system or light rail system, as well as direct access to Utah lake and regional trail networks. This downtown area is being built on a rapid timeline with the assistance of a Redevelopment Agency established in 2010 by the Utah Legislature that covers roughly 70% of Vineyard (2055 acres of the 2799.3 acres in Vineyard). http://www.utahcounty.gov/Dept/ClerkAud/Docs/NovRpt/2018/2018NovRptVineyard.pdf

In cooperation with UDOT Region Three, Vineyard developed a smaller project to accomplish the immediate goals and provide an additional regional connection. We ask for support from the Transportation Commission to fund $15 million during this Statewide Transportation Improvement Program for Phase II of the Vineyard Connector from Main Street to 1600 North in Vineyard to further address regional mobility within central Utah County.

As a second option to the Transportation Commission immediately funding this project, Vineyard is interested in entering into a participation agreement that would outline a way for UDOT to reimburse Vineyard at a future date. This agreement would allow Vineyard to help fund the project immediately and receive reimbursement at a point in the future from UDOT. MAG has identified the need for the full Vineyard Connector by 2030. Thank you for your consideration.

So essentially, it looks like the Vineyard Connector is going to get extended again within the next couple years, and it seems likely that SR 176 will be extended with it. Interestingly this was just a public comment - no resolution or money allocation or anything was attached to this. I'd imagine something to that effect will pop up within the next couple months or so.

As for the long-range plan for the Vineyard Connector: it will run along the east shore of the lake, ultimately extending northwest to Pioneer Crossing.

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.