News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

Utah

Started by andy3175, May 20, 2017, 04:32:34 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

epzik8

The UTA/UVX construction in Provo and Orem sucks! I'm been stuck in traffic from it on University Avenue (U.S. 189) in both directions in downtown Provo and eastbound on University Parkway (UT-265) from I-15 to State Street (U.S. 89).
From the land of red, white, yellow and black.
____________________________

My clinched highways: http://tm.teresco.org/user/?u=epzik8
My clinched counties: http://mob-rule.com/user-gifs/USA/epzik8.gif


nexus73

Quote from: epzik8 on September 30, 2018, 06:23:19 PM
The UTA/UVX construction in Provo and Orem sucks! I'm been stuck in traffic from it on University Avenue (U.S. 189) in both directions in downtown Provo and eastbound on University Parkway (UT-265) from I-15 to State Street (U.S. 89).

Is this the light rail project?

Rick
US 101 is THE backbone of the Pacific coast from Bandon OR to Willits CA.  Industry, tourism and local traffic would be gone or severely crippled without it being in functioning condition in BOTH states.

US 89

Quote from: nexus73 on September 30, 2018, 08:10:59 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on September 30, 2018, 06:23:19 PM
The UTA/UVX construction in Provo and Orem sucks! I'm been stuck in traffic from it on University Avenue (U.S. 189) in both directions in downtown Provo and eastbound on University Parkway (UT-265) from I-15 to State Street (U.S. 89).

Is this the light rail project?

Rick

This is a bus rapid transit (BRT) project. Basically a lamer, cheaper alternative to light rail. I'm shocked this is still going on -- I swear construction for this started two years ago.

Here's the project website on the UTA website. I suppose I'm just spoiled by the information level that the UDOT website has, but there is very little to be found on this project. I guess that's UTA for you...

nexus73

Quote from: US 89 on September 30, 2018, 08:50:13 PM
Quote from: nexus73 on September 30, 2018, 08:10:59 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on September 30, 2018, 06:23:19 PM
The UTA/UVX construction in Provo and Orem sucks! I'm been stuck in traffic from it on University Avenue (U.S. 189) in both directions in downtown Provo and eastbound on University Parkway (UT-265) from I-15 to State Street (U.S. 89).

Is this the light rail project?

Rick

This is a bus rapid transit (BRT) project. Basically a lamer, cheaper alternative to light rail. I'm shocked this is still going on -- I swear construction for this started two years ago.

Here's the project website on the UTA website. I suppose I'm just spoiled by the information level that the UDOT website has, but there is very little to be found on this project. I guess that's UTA for you...

Eugene/Springfield got this kind of setup too.  It sure took a long time to build!  How much of University Parkway was used?  Is it still a 4-lane facility? 

Rick
US 101 is THE backbone of the Pacific coast from Bandon OR to Willits CA.  Industry, tourism and local traffic would be gone or severely crippled without it being in functioning condition in BOTH states.

US 89

#79
Quote from: nexus73 on October 01, 2018, 09:58:56 AM
Quote from: US 89 on September 30, 2018, 08:50:13 PM
Quote from: nexus73 on September 30, 2018, 08:10:59 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on September 30, 2018, 06:23:19 PM
The UTA/UVX construction in Provo and Orem sucks! I'm been stuck in traffic from it on University Avenue (U.S. 189) in both directions in downtown Provo and eastbound on University Parkway (UT-265) from I-15 to State Street (U.S. 89).

Is this the light rail project?

Rick

This is a bus rapid transit (BRT) project. Basically a lamer, cheaper alternative to light rail. I'm shocked this is still going on -- I swear construction for this started two years ago.

Here's the project website on the UTA website. I suppose I'm just spoiled by the information level that the UDOT website has, but there is very little to be found on this project. I guess that's UTA for you...

Eugene/Springfield got this kind of setup too.  It sure took a long time to build!  How much of University Parkway was used?  Is it still a 4-lane facility? 

Rick

Epzik8 could tell you better, but it looks like it’s even a 6-lane facility now, if the picture on this Herald Extra article is any indication. As for the routing, it has exclusive lanes in the middle of University Parkway from 400 West in Orem (by Utah Valley University) all the way to University Ave in Provo (US 189).

Here’s a map of the routing from Wikipedia:



Depending on weather and other factors, I may be down in that area this weekend; if that happens I might have to check this out in person.




Unrelated: the agenda for the October Utah Transportation Commission meeting includes the addition of a new SR-231 to the state highway system. Stay tuned...

Kniwt

When I-15 was widened between Exit 4 and Exit 5, some of the signage was replaced. And one of the new signs incorrectly labels Bluff Street as SR 8 instead of SR 18. I'm surprised I didn't notice this until now!



Reported to UDOT; we'll see whether they do anything about it. (I could imagine them rationalizing that it's really "TO" SR 8, but that would be a big stretch.)

roadfro

Quote from: Kniwt on October 01, 2018, 02:22:17 PM
When I-15 was widened between Exit 4 and Exit 5, some of the signage was replaced. And one of the new signs incorrectly labels Bluff Street as SR 8 instead of SR 18. I'm surprised I didn't notice this until now!



Reported to UDOT; we'll see whether they do anything about it. (I could imagine them rationalizing that it's really "TO" SR 8, but that would be a big stretch.)
SR error and APL error... It always amazes me that a simple APL layout can get messed up like this.
Roadfro - AARoads Pacific Southwest moderator since 2010, Nevada roadgeek since 1983.

nexus73

Quote from: US 89 on October 01, 2018, 01:54:45 PM
Quote from: nexus73 on October 01, 2018, 09:58:56 AM
Quote from: US 89 on September 30, 2018, 08:50:13 PM
Quote from: nexus73 on September 30, 2018, 08:10:59 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on September 30, 2018, 06:23:19 PM
The UTA/UVX construction in Provo and Orem sucks! I'm been stuck in traffic from it on University Avenue (U.S. 189) in both directions in downtown Provo and eastbound on University Parkway (UT-265) from I-15 to State Street (U.S. 89).

Is this the light rail project?

Rick

This is a bus rapid transit (BRT) project. Basically a lamer, cheaper alternative to light rail. I'm shocked this is still going on -- I swear construction for this started two years ago.

Here's the project website on the UTA website. I suppose I'm just spoiled by the information level that the UDOT website has, but there is very little to be found on this project. I guess that's UTA for you...

Eugene/Springfield got this kind of setup too.  It sure took a long time to build!  How much of University Parkway was used?  Is it still a 4-lane facility? 

Rick

Epzik8 could tell you better, but it looks like it's even a 6-lane facility now, if the picture on this Herald Extra article is any indication. As for the routing, it has exclusive lanes in the middle of University Parkway from 400 West in Orem (by Utah Valley University) all the way to University Ave in Provo (US 189).

Here's a map of the routing from Wikipedia:



Depending on weather and other factors, I may be down in that area this weekend; if that happens I might have to check this out in person.




Unrelated: the agenda for the October Utah Transportation Commission meeting includes the addition of a new SR-231 to the state highway system. Stay tuned...

Thanks for the info!  University Parkway has been upgraded significantly since I lived there over 20 years ago.  Seeing the photo you linked to was a real "wow" moment!

Rick
US 101 is THE backbone of the Pacific coast from Bandon OR to Willits CA.  Industry, tourism and local traffic would be gone or severely crippled without it being in functioning condition in BOTH states.

epzik8

My favorite odd route in Utah is UT-319, a stub connecting U.S. 40/189 to Jordanelle State Park in between Heber City and Park City.
From the land of red, white, yellow and black.
____________________________

My clinched highways: http://tm.teresco.org/user/?u=epzik8
My clinched counties: http://mob-rule.com/user-gifs/USA/epzik8.gif

Rover_0

Quote from: Kniwt on October 01, 2018, 02:22:17 PM
When I-15 was widened between Exit 4 and Exit 5, some of the signage was replaced. And one of the new signs incorrectly labels Bluff Street as SR 8 instead of SR 18. I'm surprised I didn't notice this until now!



Reported to UDOT; we'll see whether they do anything about it. (I could imagine them rationalizing that it's really "TO" SR 8, but that would be a big stretch.)

Of course, it's funny to think of some routes  that come about from sign errors. Extending SR-8 south along Sunset Blve down Bluff St to I-15 wouldn't be a terrible idea, though I don't think that it would be as good an idea to route it down St. George Blvd and replace SR-34 (with the overlay on SR-18 between Sunset and St. George Blvds.)
Fixing erroneous shields, one at a time...

US 89

Quote from: Rover_0 on October 05, 2018, 01:53:20 AM
Quote from: Kniwt on October 01, 2018, 02:22:17 PM
When I-15 was widened between Exit 4 and Exit 5, some of the signage was replaced. And one of the new signs incorrectly labels Bluff Street as SR 8 instead of SR 18. I'm surprised I didn't notice this until now!



Reported to UDOT; we'll see whether they do anything about it. (I could imagine them rationalizing that it's really "TO" SR 8, but that would be a big stretch.)

Of course, it's funny to think of some routes  that come about from sign errors. Extending SR-8 south along Sunset Blve down Bluff St to I-15 wouldn't be a terrible idea, though I don't think that it would be as good an idea to route it down St. George Blvd and replace SR-34 (with the overlay on SR-18 between Sunset and St. George Blvds.)

I almost wonder if there's something behind this error, because the current SR-8/18 intersection is getting realigned to make Sunset and Bluff southbound the through road (in other words, continuing south through the intersection on Bluff will now require a left turn).  Maybe UDOT is considering truncating 18 to that intersection and extending 8 south along Bluff to I-15. Not that I'd support that, but it's a possibility.

Combining 8 and 34 with an overlap on 18 also has the added benefit of giving a single number to the state-maintained parts of old US 91 in that area. Unfortunately, given UDOT's treatment of existing state route concurrencies, I don't see it happening.

As for the APL, I'm not sure there's a better solution than what UDOT did here. If you put a curved arrow on the far right of the Exit 6 APL, you run into the potential for confusion with Exit 5, which is immediately before Exit 6.

US 89

Also, update regarding the proposed SR-231:

It's actually a pretty lame route, but I agree that it needs to be state maintained. It's going to be in Fairview, on the one block of Main Street between 300 and 400 North, serving as a connector between US-89 and SR-31. Here's the resolution with a map. If this passes the commission as proposed (which is likely), SR-231 is going to be 455 feet long, which would tie the unsigned SR-304 for the shortest state route in Utah.

I wonder why UDOT couldn't just designate this block as a short additional stub of 31. I don't think any examples of such exist today, but there is precedent for that. And in addition, I wonder if UDOT will just sign 231 as "TO East 31"  or "TO South 89"  depending on direction.

Also, the number choice here is quite interesting. "231"  is obviously based on 31, which is very unusual for Utah.

roadfro

Quote from: Kniwt on October 01, 2018, 02:22:17 PM
When I-15 was widened between Exit 4 and Exit 5, some of the signage was replaced. And one of the new signs incorrectly labels Bluff Street as SR 8 instead of SR 18. I'm surprised I didn't notice this until now!



Reported to UDOT; we'll see whether they do anything about it. (I could imagine them rationalizing that it's really "TO" SR 8, but that would be a big stretch.)

Quote from: US 89 on October 05, 2018, 09:25:20 AM
As for the APL, I'm not sure there's a better solution than what UDOT did here. If you put a curved arrow on the far right of the Exit 6 APL, you run into the potential for confusion with Exit 5, which is immediately before Exit 6.

You cannot have a straight arrow to the right of a curved arrow, as that's a serious error that could lead to something more serious than confusion. In this case, both signs include distances to the respective exits, which should remove any potential confusion between the interchanges.
Roadfro - AARoads Pacific Southwest moderator since 2010, Nevada roadgeek since 1983.

andy3175

Quote from: Rover_0 on October 05, 2018, 01:53:20 AM
Quote from: Kniwt on October 01, 2018, 02:22:17 PM
When I-15 was widened between Exit 4 and Exit 5, some of the signage was replaced. And one of the new signs incorrectly labels Bluff Street as SR 8 instead of SR 18. I'm surprised I didn't notice this until now!



Reported to UDOT; we'll see whether they do anything about it. (I could imagine them rationalizing that it's really "TO" SR 8, but that would be a big stretch.)

Of course, it's funny to think of some routes  that come about from sign errors. Extending SR-8 south along Sunset Blve down Bluff St to I-15 wouldn't be a terrible idea, though I don't think that it would be as good an idea to route it down St. George Blvd and replace SR-34 (with the overlay on SR-18 between Sunset and St. George Blvds.)

Both this sign and its predecessor fail to mention Business Loop 15, which follows SR 18 north along Bluff Street. Hopefully that can be reinstated as well, since the business route is still signed in St. George.
Regards,
Andy

www.aaroads.com

US 89

Quote from: US 89 on October 06, 2018, 02:41:00 AM
Also, update regarding the proposed SR-231:

It's actually a pretty lame route, but I agree that it needs to be state maintained. It's going to be in Fairview, on the one block of Main Street between 300 and 400 North, serving as a connector between US-89 and SR-31. Here's the resolution with a map. If this passes the commission as proposed (which is likely), SR-231 is going to be 455 feet long, which would tie the unsigned SR-304 for the shortest state route in Utah.

I wonder why UDOT couldn't just designate this block as a short additional stub of 31. I don't think any examples of such exist today, but there is precedent for that. And in addition, I wonder if UDOT will just sign 231 as "TO East 31"  or "TO South 89"  depending on direction.

Also, the number choice here is quite interesting. "231"  is obviously based on 31, which is very unusual for Utah.

The transportation commission approved this just this morning. Depending on exactly how this thing is referenced, we probably have a new winner for the shortest state highway in Utah. It remains to be seen whether this will actually be fully signed.

Kniwt

Quote from: Kniwt on October 01, 2018, 02:22:17 PM
When I-15 was widened between Exit 4 and Exit 5, some of the signage was replaced. And one of the new signs incorrectly labels Bluff Street as SR 8 instead of SR 18. I'm surprised I didn't notice this until now!

UDOT replies:
"The replacement route decal has been ordered, and will be installed on the existing sign shortly after receipt. The route will be identified correctly as 18. Thank you for bringing this to our attention."

JKRhodes

Quote from: Kniwt on October 01, 2018, 02:22:17 PM
When I-15 was widened between Exit 4 and Exit 5, some of the signage was replaced. And one of the new signs incorrectly labels Bluff Street as SR 8 instead of SR 18. I'm surprised I didn't notice this until now!



Reported to UDOT; we'll see whether they do anything about it. (I could imagine them rationalizing that it's really "TO" SR 8, but that would be a big stretch.)

I saw this about a month ago while I was driving through the area. Aside from the route number issue which has been discussed, I'm not a fan of the "exit only" lane being marked with a straight arrow, especially with the way the arrows over the adjacent lane are displayed.

epzik8

I've got some photos from the Wasatch Front coming really soon.
From the land of red, white, yellow and black.
____________________________

My clinched highways: http://tm.teresco.org/user/?u=epzik8
My clinched counties: http://mob-rule.com/user-gifs/USA/epzik8.gif

Kniwt

Quote from: Kniwt on October 01, 2018, 02:22:17 PM
When I-15 was widened between Exit 4 and Exit 5, some of the signage was replaced. And one of the new signs incorrectly labels Bluff Street as SR 8 instead of SR 18. I'm surprised I didn't notice this until now!

Fixed with a sticker:

roadfro

Quote from: Kniwt on November 06, 2018, 11:48:32 PM
Quote from: Kniwt on October 01, 2018, 02:22:17 PM
When I-15 was widened between Exit 4 and Exit 5, some of the signage was replaced. And one of the new signs incorrectly labels Bluff Street as SR 8 instead of SR 18. I'm surprised I didn't notice this until now!

Fixed with a sticker:


Now they need a big sticker for the incorrect arrow  :pan:
Roadfro - AARoads Pacific Southwest moderator since 2010, Nevada roadgeek since 1983.

Kniwt

In St. George, the UT 18 Bluff Street project is nearing completion, and a "Utah classic" BGS has been replaced. The specs on that "WEST" just aren't right. Also, the sign now gives less information than its predecessor.

The new sign:


The old sign (from the AARoads gallery):


US 89

^^Classic example of UDOT "progress". I wouldn't have objected to keeping Santa Clara as a control city for SR-8, but I guess just Sunset Blvd is fine. I'll miss that "3-left turn lanes" sign though; I don't think there are any others like it.




Unrelated: the new SR-231 is now officially referenced, and it is the new shortest state highway in Utah -- by 0.001 miles. The previous winner was SR-304 in Hyrum State Park at 0.086 miles; SR-231 is 0.085 miles.

i-215

Quote from: US 89 on November 19, 2018, 10:16:07 AM
^^I'll miss that "3-left turn lanes" sign though; I don't think there are any others like it.

Grammatically, shouldn't it be "3 left-turn lanes"?

Not that it matters now.

MNHighwayMan

#98
Quote from: i-215 on January 11, 2019, 12:18:15 AM
Grammatically, shouldn't it be "3 left-turn lanes"?

Yes, that is correct.

Kniwt

The ban on trucks along Legacy Parkway (UT 67) is due to expire January 1 of next year, as is the ban on expanding the freeway beyond four lanes. Those prospects have upset a lot of area residents (although the agreement -- and its expiration date -- are well documented), and The Salt Lake Tribune reports on a meeting attended by about 250 people.

https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2019/01/17/standing-room-only-crowd/

Quote... Controversy over Legacy threatens to end a 15-year truce among many adversaries. Its special rules were implemented as a limited-time compromise to allow building the freeway after lawsuits by environmental groups had halted it by arguing early plans did not adequately protect Great Salt Lake wetlands and wildlife.

Many residents now especially worry that the new inland port being planned west of Salt Lake City International Airport could turn Legacy into a busy freeway full of big rigs at all hours, increasing noise and air pollution in their neighborhoods.

... Sen. Todd Weiler, R-Woods Cross, said he plans to introduce legislation to extend the truck ban for 2.5 years. He doubts he can pass a permanent ban because of the need to handle extra traffic from the inland port. Even with just pushing a temporary ban, "I can't tell you with a lot of certainty that I can get it done."




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.