As anyone who drives in Salt Lake City with any regularity knows, Bangerter Highway (SR-154) is constantly under construction. There’s enough going on with it that I figured it needed its own thread.
First, some background: it was built in the 1980-1990s, but for whatever reason they didn’t want to build it as a freeway to begin with. So they built it as an expressway with at-grade intersections at major cross streets. Then when those intersections got very busy and dangerous, they turned a bunch of them into CFIs.
Then a few years ago, they finally decided to start converting the at-grade intersections into interchanges. The first to be completed was 7800 South (SR-48), in 2012. In 2015 Redwood Road/SR-68 was completed as well. The following year, a new interchange was built at 600 West, and the existing 200 West intersection was converted to RIRO-only.
The latest set of projects involves four new interchanges:
-5400 South (http://www.udot.utah.gov/bangerter5400south/)
-7000 South (http://www.udot.utah.gov/bangerter7000south/)
-9000 South (http://www.udot.utah.gov/bangerter9000south/)
-11400 South (http://www.udot.utah.gov/bangerter11400south/)
The 7000 South interchange is complete for the most part, and the other three are planned to be done by this fall.
Environmental studies are also being carried out for interchanges at:
-6200 South (http://www.udot.utah.gov/bangerter6200south/)
-10400 South (http://www.udot.utah.gov/bangerter10400south/)
As it turns out, there’s now a plan to upgrade all of the intersections between SR-201 and I-15:
(https://static.wixstatic.com/media/b5224d_8f64a180321e4b0e9235e3518b2dad16~mv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_854,h_1650,al_c,q_85/b5224d_8f64a180321e4b0e9235e3518b2dad16~mv2.jpg)
Unfortunately, it appears UDOT has no plans as of yet to upgrade Bangerter north of Parkway Blvd, nor is there a plan to upgrade the junctions with SR-201 and I-15 into full system interchanges.
Honestly, I don't think the people planning Bangerter expected such a large boom in population to the west, even though it was arguably starting during the build. Traffic demands are now such that I think Bangerter should be a full freeway from the airport to I-15, as well as being as efficient as possible in getting the MVC done and maybe studying an east-west freeway somewhere between 7800 South and 11400 South. The latter should take away a lot of demand on surface streets from Sandy to the Jordans and futher westward...
I still don't understand how there can be enough water to support the western growth towards the desert. :D
Quote from: Rothman on June 05, 2018, 09:28:07 AM
I still don't understand how there can be enough water to support the western growth towards the desert. :D
Utah isn't running out of water, per se. We're just running out of
cheap water.
The Wasatch Front is a highland prairie (not a desert), and it's a semi-arid climate, not an arid one. Combined with significantly lower summertime temperatures, and I think the typical Vegas-like comparison water advocates make is not really a fair one. That being said, it would be nice to see developers install smaller front lawns, and use native drought-tolerant grasses. There's no point planting Kentucky Bluegrass in this state, yet everybody seems to like to.
Quote from: i-215 on June 06, 2018, 04:42:07 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 05, 2018, 09:28:07 AM
I still don't understand how there can be enough water to support the western growth towards the desert. :D
Utah isn't running out of water, per se. We're just running out of cheap water.
The Wasatch Front is a highland prairie (not a desert), and it's a semi-arid climate, not an arid one. Combined with significantly lower summertime temperatures, and I think the typical Vegas-like comparison water advocates make is not really a fair one. That being said, it would be nice to see developers install smaller front lawns, and use native drought-tolerant grasses. There's no point planting Kentucky Bluegrass in this state, yet everybody seems to like to.
Salt Lake City gets 16 inches of rain a year on average, and most definitions of "desert" require less than 10 inches. It's worth noting that according to the Koppen climate classification system (the most common system that climatologists use, according to Wikipedia), Salt Lake City actually has too much rain to be classified as even semi-arid. They put Salt Lake in the hot-summer humid continental climate zone, which is the same zone as Chicago. That goes for the entire Wasatch Front, as well as the Cache and Tooele valleys.
The "west desert" refers to anything west of Tooele. Those areas get significantly less rain and are much more semi-arid to arid, although the urban area isn't going to expand in that direction any time soon.
Had a farmer friend from Wyoming that called Eastern farmers lazy because they could rely upon rain. I told him planting where it doesn't rain just sounded stupid.
QuoteSalt Lake City actually has too much rain to be classified as even semi-arid. They put Salt Lake in the hot-summer humid continental climate zone, which is the same zone as Chicago.
That's interesting. I didn't know that.
That being said, I'd take an 86 degree day in SLC over one in Chicago! Holy cow that city gets muggy in the summertime.
From the UDOT Blog: (https://blog.udot.utah.gov/2018/11/udot-completes-major-construction-on-four-bangerter-highway-interchanges/)
QuoteThe Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) announced today that major construction is now complete on four new interchanges along Bangerter Highway, and a project to build the next three interchanges at 6200 South, 10400 South, and 12600 South, will begin in 2020.
All lanes and ramps have now opened at the interchanges on Bangerter Highway at 5400 South, 7000 South, 9000 South, and 11400 South. Occasional short-term lane closures are expected during non-commute hours for the next several weeks as crews work to complete landscaping, striping, and other small details at the new interchanges.
The project to build these four interchanges is part of an ongoing effort to improve traffic on Bangerter Highway and meet the growing transportation needs of western Salt Lake County. UDOT has now replaced stoplights on Bangerter Highway with freeway-style interchanges, including on- and off-ramps, at seven locations (interchanges at 600 West, Redwood Road, and 7800 South were completed prior to this project).
To continue this effort, UDOT today announced that work to build new interchanges at 6200 South, 10400 South, and 12600 South will start in 2020. Previously, the interchanges at 10400 South and 12600 South were scheduled for construction beginning in 2022, but funds were transferred from other projects to complete these interchanges sooner.
In 2019, crews will relocate a section of the Jordan Aqueduct near 6200 South from under Bangerter Highway to west of the highway, prior to the start of major construction on the interchange itself. A similar relocation was completed near 5400 South in 2016.
During construction of the four interchanges, UDOT crews:
Worked nearly 290,000 man-hours
Placed 16 miles of concrete safety barrier and 10 miles of drainage pipe
Excavated or placed 2.2 million tons of dirt
Built seven new bridges and a new pedestrian overpass
Reduced planned full closures of Bangerter Highway by 75 percent (the project had planned to use up to 24 full closures, but only needed six)
This also means four new numbered exits from Bangerter: 11400 South is Exit 8, 9000 South is Exit 11, and 7000 South is Exit 14. I haven't been able to find confirmation for 5400 South, but I'm placing my bet on 16.
I'm sure if I lived in salt lake I wouldn't be saying this, but...
NOO!! NOT 4100!!! It's likr the only full CFI in existence!!!!
I'm gonna have to find some time to drive all of these. I like the 114th South interchange the most, just looks so clean and compact, with unique, separate mast arms for the SPUI (which I've seen all the time in Las Vegas but never in SLC).
Agreed on the 114th South interchange. I finally drove this today, and observed all the new exit numbers and such. Bangerter is really starting to feel like a freeway, especially since they've started to install the center mileage distance signs (or whatever they're called). To my knowledge, these are the first in the state not on I-15 or I-215. I thought the "signal" label was kinda cool:
(https://i.imgur.com/hsiZMrk.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/TDuvkME.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/oeYetVf.jpg)
In addition, the segment from 2700 West to I-15 now has signage on the mainline explicitly calling it a freeway:
(https://i.imgur.com/1dHagUJ.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/3zAeOur.jpg)
Quote from: MCRoads on November 28, 2018, 09:04:50 PM
I'm sure if I lived in salt lake I wouldn't be saying this, but...
NOO!! NOT 4100!!! It's likr the only full CFI in existence!!!!
The good news for you is that the 4100 South interchange is quite low on the priority list, and I'd bet it sticks around in its current form for at least 10 more years.
Quote from: US 89 on December 17, 2018, 08:30:58 PM
Bangerter is really starting to feel like a freeway, especially since they've started to install the center mileage distance signs (or whatever they're called). To my knowledge, these are the first in the state not on I-15 or I-215.
The 201 freeway has one between Bangerter and 5600 West.
An interesting update on the timeline for future interchange upgrades:
(https://static.wixstatic.com/media/dac925_10481f5dbdd04c69af13223c96f2b38a~mv2_d_2797_3620_s_4_2.jpg)
They're combining some of the interchange upgrades into the same project priority, which makes sense. However, the most interesting part is that it looks like the entire thing from 41st South northward could be done all in one go.
The map above also shows a proposed upgrade at SR-201, and I'd be curious to see what that entails. I'd love to see Bangerter/201 become a full system interchange of some kind, but ROW acquisition is not going to be easy. Honestly the poor planning of Bangerter's interchanges with 201 and I-15 might be one of UDOT's biggest mistakes in the past 30 years.
Looks like it will be time to bring back I-415 for the Bangerter once the freeway improvements are completed.
Rick
What's wrong with keeping it State Highway 154? Does every highway have to be an Interstate? Perhaps State Highway 85, State Highway 67, or the US 89 conversion to full freeway standards between Interstate 15 and Interstate 84 would be better places to place the Interstate 415 designation (personally, I think all three should keep their existing designations)?
Quote from: US 89 on December 17, 2018, 08:30:58 PM
Agreed on the 114th South interchange. I finally drove this today, and observed all the new exit numbers and such. Bangerter is really starting to feel like a freeway, especially since they've started to install the center mileage distance signs (or whatever they're called). To my knowledge, these are the first in the state not on I-15 or I-215. I thought the "signal" label was kinda cool:
From experience, those supplemental signal plaques were handy. I worked in West Valley and lived in Midvale for a short time and often tried different routes home when the freeways were jammed. It was nice to know whether or not I needed to be in the right lane or the left in order to go east off Bangerter.
More construction activity for Utah 154 Bangerter Highway with a closure at 10400 South for interchange construction.
https://kjzz.com/news/local/expect-delays-along-bangerter-highway-once-another-interchange-project-begins-soon
QuoteStarting May 1, 10400 South will not allow east-west traffic at Bangerter Highway, while an overpass is constructed to keep highway traffic moving. That closure will last until November.
Add that to projects along Bangerter at 6200 South and 12600 South, which also aim to bypass street-level traffic lights with freeway-style interchanges. ...
Lisa Miller, Utah Department of Transportation's traveler information manager, said the timing is based on construction season and when lawmakers approve the funding.
"We try not to have any consecutive interchanges under construction all at once," she said, "which is why we've already done 114th South and now we're just moving from that area."
UDOT has a webpage dedicated to construction progress on Utah 154 Bangerter Highway at http://www.udot.utah.gov/bangerter/.
Quote
As one of our valley's largest north-south corridors, Bangerter Highway moves an average of 58,000 vehicles per day. With continued growth on the west side of the Salt Lake Valley, that number is expected to double by 2040 and without major improvements, delays will increase by four times over the next twenty-five years.
The Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) is making major improvements at various intersections along Bangerter Highway to reduce travel times and congestion, connect communities, and improve overall safety along the corridor. Bangerter operated using a series of traffic signals at a majority of its intersections, causing significant congestion in recent years. This congestion also exists for cross traffic moving east-west. To meet the current and future needs of drivers and the nearby communities, UDOT is replacing traditional intersections with grade-separated interchanges. Grade-separated interchanges allow one street to pass over the other. This separation allows Bangerter to free flow and the cross street to flow more efficiently. By removing traffic signals and creating fewer interruptions, traffic will move more freely and at speeds that are more consistent in all directions.
SM-G975U
Community meetings are forthcoming later this month to evaluate 3 more interchange conversions.
Under construction:
6200 S, 10400 S, and 12600 S
Proposed for new interchanges:
4700 S, 9800 S, and 13400 S
Under consideration for improvement:
2700 W, 4100 S, and California Avenue
https://www.fox13now.com/news/local-news/udot-evaluating-freeway-style-interchanges-along-bangerter-highway
Official UDOT webpages on the projects and studies:
https://www.udot.utah.gov/bangerter2700west
https://www.udot.utah.gov/bangerter4100south
https://www.udot.utah.gov/bangerter4700south
https://www.udot.utah.gov/bangerter9800south
https://www.udot.utah.gov/bangerter13400south
https://www.udot.utah.gov/bangertercalifornia/
SM-G975U
From UDOT's blog: UDOT Seeks Public Input On Proposed Bangerter Highway Interchanges (https://www.udot.utah.gov/connect/2022/01/19/udot-seeks-public-input-on-proposed-bangerter-highway-interchanges/)
QuoteUDOT invites the public to participate in public hearings for proposed changes to three intersections on Bangerter Highway at 13400 South, 9800 South, and 4700 South. UDOT recently released draft environmental studies for proposed freeway-style interchanges at these three locations, and encourages the public to review these studies and provide input to the project team through formal comments.
Since 2012, UDOT has worked to remove stoplights from intersections on Bangerter Highway and convert the highway into a freeway. So far 10 intersections have had stoplights removed, and seven freeway-style interchanges have been completed. Interchanges at 6200 South, 10400 South and 12600 South will be completed this year.
QuoteThe studies are being conducted to evaluate environmental impacts associated with the potential new interchanges, with the goal of minimizing these impacts while meeting local and regional transportation needs.
"UDOT is accelerating the completion of Bangerter Highway to improve safety and traffic flow along this critical connection," UDOT Project Manager Brian Allen said. "When the conversion to a freeway is complete and traffic can flow freely without stoplights, we expect to see a significant reduction in crashes and drive times, both on Bangerter Highway and on cross-streets."
After the studies are finalized and a preferred interchange design is adopted in spring 2022, UDOT plans to move forward with design and construction at 13400 South, 9800 South and 4700 South as early as spring 2023. Additionally, environmental studies are underway and will be completed over the next year at the remaining at-grade Bangerter intersections, with plans to begin construction in 2028:
4100 South in West Valley City
3500 South to State Route 201 in West Valley City/Salt Lake City
California Avenue in Salt Lake City
2700 West in Bluffdale/Riverton (not yet funded for construction)
According to UDOT traffic projections, when the Bangerter Highway freeway conversion is complete and all intersections have their stoplights removed, the time it takes to drive on Bangerter from I-15 in Draper to the Salt Lake airport will be reduced by up to 20 minutes.
So it looks like once the current three (62nd, 104th, 126th) and next three (47th, 98th, 134th) interchange projects are completed, the plan is to upgrade the whole thing from 41st South to California in one go. I will be fascinated to see what they come up with for that section as it is quite a bit more dense than the rest of the highway, so it will be considerably less straightforward to upgrade. Existing traffic lights on that part are spaced less than a half mile apart in some areas. Even now the speed limit on that part is 50 mph, while the rest of the highway is 55 or 60 with a mile or more between interchanges.
I also hope they can pull off something decent at the 201 interchange. There probably isn't enough room for a full stack or freeway system interchange, but the DDI that's there now sucks.
A few years ago, I found a consulting firm's PDF to UDOT which discussed draft ideas from 4100 South to California Avenue.
Spacing between signals makes putting in a sequence of SPUIs very difficult. The consulting firm was proposing elevating "bypass bridges" on the outside with the center lanes going through the signals at grade. Perhaps something like that could happen at SR-201. A more conventional DDI or SPUI connects interchanging vehicles, while the through traffic carries on a bypass third level bridge.
Quote from: i-215 on February 23, 2022, 01:42:29 PM
A few years ago, I found a consulting firm's PDF to UDOT which discussed draft ideas from 4100 South to California Avenue.
Spacing between signals makes putting in a sequence of SPUIs very difficult. The consulting firm was proposing elevating "bypass bridges" on the outside with the center lanes going through the signals at grade. Perhaps something like that could happen at SR-201. A more conventional DDI or SPUI connects interchanging vehicles, while the through traffic carries on a bypass third level bridge.
I believe that 3-level SPUI is the current short-mid range plan for the I-84/US 89 interchange, so the concept is definitely on UDOT's radar. I'm not a huge fan of it, especially up there where there is more room, but ROW is so limited along Bangerter that I'd take anything over what we have now.
That said, the project is listed in UDOT's 2021 TIF as "Multiple Bangerter Interchanges & One Way Frontage Roads from SR-201 to 4100 South and California Ave Int." with this slide, suggesting some sort of Texas style frontage road system may be considered with a volleyball interchange at 201:
(https://i.imgur.com/eSFsQ43.png)
Oh wow! That's it. :-o Nice job.
Where did you find that? The TIF for me is just an excel spreadsheet as a PDF.
Quote from: i-215 on February 23, 2022, 08:14:10 PM
Where did you find that? The TIF for me is just an excel spreadsheet as a PDF.
https://maps.udot.utah.gov/wadocuments/Apps/STIPApplication/data/TIFProposed.pdf
That's great. Thank you!
What's up with UDOT's hesitance to build direct connect ramps? It seems like this is growing trend of placing high capacity DDI or SPUI interchanges on what should be free flowing stacks.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 07, 2022, 11:00:22 AM
What's up with UDOT's hesitance to build direct connect ramps? It seems like this is growing trend of placing high capacity DDI or SPUI interchanges on what should be free flowing stacks.
I'd imagine cost.
Quote from: Rothman on March 07, 2022, 11:01:03 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 07, 2022, 11:00:22 AM
What's up with UDOT's hesitance to build direct connect ramps? It seems like this is growing trend of placing high capacity DDI or SPUI interchanges on what should be free flowing stacks.
I'd imagine cost.
Utah isn't a poor state though. If UDOT can't build proper freeway to freeway interchanges maybe they need a new funding source or the state needs to fund them better.
I understand with all the new plans they can't afford to do it all at once but hopefully overtime they plan on changing upgrading these interchanges.
There are also space considerations. There ain't much room at 201 & the Bangarter. Especially with another interchange so close to the east on 201. By the time you start putting in flyovers and the approaches thereto it becomes an ever larger, expensive project. I look at this location and wonder about how to make it work while at the same time, trading out some of the loops at 201 and I-215 for flyovers/turbines to clean up that weaving situation as well. It starts to look like a much, much larger project than simply freeway-izing the Bangarter.
Yeah UDOT has some interchanges they should "Texafy" before this one but I wish they'd start on some.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 07, 2022, 03:11:07 PM
There are also space considerations. There ain't much room at 201 & the Bangarter. Especially with another interchange so close to the east on 201. By the time you start putting in flyovers and the approaches thereto it becomes an ever larger, expensive project.
This is absolutely correct. You'd have to braid the crap out of it with 32nd West and I-215 closeby. And there would be quite a few buyouts near the interchange to accommodate the flyovers.
Here's a really poor Photoshop of the Ontario, CA stack atop Bangerter (close scale):
(https://i.imgur.com/XwsZ8Q1.jpg)
Meh, Texas can do it Dropped pin
https://goo.gl/maps/T9WGb6Uzrnh8YfuMA
That might not be a bad approach. Build it as a sort of "volleyball" interchange initially, and then add the flyovers later as volume demands it.
In either case, you're still gonna have to braid 32nd.
Doubful then a stacked diverging diamond like the one who was once proposed and aborted due to protests at BC-99 and Stevenson highway near Vancouver.
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/steveston-interchange-george-massey-tunnel-bridge-richmond
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on March 13, 2022, 11:24:45 AM
Doubful then a stacked diverging diamond like the one who was once proposed and aborted due to protests at BC-99 and Stevenson highway near Vancouver.
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/steveston-interchange-george-massey-tunnel-bridge-richmond
That looks more like a DCM interchange (a DDI variant, but with the cross movements grade-separated instead of at grade).
Maybe a standard diverging-diamond interchange at that location would have sufficed? Getting back to UT 154, will there be any diverging-diamond interchanges to replace the existing intersections on the Bangerter Highway? Or will we see more single-point-urban-interchanges constructed instead?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 14, 2022, 03:08:27 PM
Maybe a standard diverging-diamond interchange at that location would have sufficed?
Nah, something needs to be done. From experience I will say that DDI sucks. It is damn near impossible to drive straight through without waiting several light cycles, and the left turns from westbound 201 to southbound Bangerter will routinely back up all the way down the ramp into westbound mainline 201 - even outside of rush hour.
I don't know if every single movement needs to be free-flowing, but as far as I am concerned, through traffic on Bangerter should be grade-separated and there needs to be free flow for the west-to-south and north-to-east movements. I'm not sure if all of that is possible without ripping out some of the development down there, but the closer we can get to that the better.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 14, 2022, 03:08:27 PM
Getting back to UT 154, will there be any diverging-diamond interchanges to replace the existing intersections on the Bangerter Highway? Or will we see more single-point-urban-interchanges constructed instead?
Well, given that the state has just built seven SPUIs on Bangerter and is currently in the process of building three more... I would be absolutely shocked if they built something that wasn't a SPUI outside of that dense 41st-to-201 corridor mentioned earlier. They are especially nice for cases like this because they don't require a whole lot of right-of-way and for the most part can be built in the space that already exists. The same early conceptual designs for the interchanges at 13400 South, 9800 South, 4700 South, and California Ave are all SPUIs.
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on March 13, 2022, 11:24:45 AM
Doubful then a stacked diverging diamond like the one who was once proposed and aborted due to protests at BC-99 and Stevenson highway near Vancouver.
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/steveston-interchange-george-massey-tunnel-bridge-richmond
Wow what a beautiful interchange. Damn shame that wasn't built. I hope the people that opposed it enjoy a lower quality interchange and more traffic congestion in this area than what wouldn't otherwise be true if they built this. I guess they don't really care.
QuoteI would be absolutely shocked if they built something that wasn't a SPUI outside of that dense 41st-to-201 corridor mentioned earlier. They are especially nice for cases like this because they don't require a whole lot of right-of-way and for the most part can be built in the space that already exists. The same early conceptual designs for the interchanges at 13400 South, 9800 South, 4700 South, and California Ave are all SPUIs.
Right now, the 9800 South SES shows a "tight diamond." They'll probably regret that in 20 years.
It appears work is largely complete on the 62nd/104th/126th interchanges project. Some orange barrels and lane restrictions remain for finishing touches and such, but it looks like all movements are open and complete.
The 126th South interchange is now signed as Exit 6, and 62nd South has Exit 15 signage. Nothing permanent is up at 104th yet, but if 114th is already exit 8, 90th is already exit 11, and 98th is getting a future upgrade some time soon... I'm putting my bets on 104th becoming exit 9.
Per UDOT's website, all work on the 62nd, 104th, and 126th South interchanges is now complete. They also have an updated on future construction plans:
Quote from: UDOT NewsUDOT has now completed 10 interchanges along Bangerter Highway, and in 2021, the Utah legislature allocated more than $600 million toward completing the remaining improvements. Construction is slated to begin next year at 4700 South in Taylorsville/West Valley City, 9800 South in South Jordan, 13400 South in Riverton and 2700 West in Riverton/Bluffdale.
Additionally, UDOT plans to begin work on 4100 South in West Valley City to California Avenue in Salt Lake City in 2028. When those are complete and all stoplights are removed from Bangerter Highway, the time it takes to drive from I-15 in Draper to the Salt Lake City International Airport will be reduced by up to 20 minutes, according to UDOT traffic engineers.
That last paragraph... the "all stoplights removed" claim...does not account for the interchange at I-15. That should have been built as a free flowing interchange back in the 90s when there wasn't too much going on down there. That SPUI is sort of a mess now and I don't see anything UDOT can do to fix it at this point short of tearing down a bunch of development that's now right up against the interchange.
UDOT news article link: https://www.udot.utah.gov/connect/2022/05/19/three-new-bangerter-highway-interchanges-now-complete/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRSnnQtvGA4
The final segment (and the most complicated part) of the Bangerter Highway freeway upgrade from 4100 S to California Avenue has its preferred alternative selected, and it's Alternative B (Interchanges).
Interchanges will be located at 4100 S, 3500 S, Parkway Boulevard (2700 S), 2100 S/SR 201/1820 S, and California Ave.
https://udot.utah.gov/bangerter4100tocalifornia/#/public-meetings-documents
About bleeping time. I drove the at-grade segment of Bangerter in August and it can be a slog. The interchange at SR 201 sucks.
Interesting that they're making 201 a Breezewood, a la E-470 at I-70 east of Denver. Wonder if they'll ever find a need to fully upgrade that?
I'm sure in some future decade, interchanges at SR-201 and I-15 (south) will become full system interchanges. But probably not for another 20 years.
Bangerter Highway's existence demonstrates UDOT's modus operandi: That it's better to building something "good enough" now and put it to work than to wait forever trying to build the "right" solution. As a result, we got to use a Freeway Jr. since 1994, rather than waiting another 20 years for a real freeway. Mountain View is similar, except they build the future improvements into the design, so there is adequate R.O.W. to build it in the future.
The Bangerter system interchanges are probably similar. Their microsimulation models probably show reasonable Level of Service through some distant horizon year. And it'll be the job of the next generation to fund/improve on their work. In the meantime, we have something affordable that does the job now.
The 201 interchange isn't a Breezewood, because the Bangerter mainlaines will pass over adjacent to the SPUI point of intersection with the off-ramps. It's more like a "3-level SPUI" than anything else. It may not need upgrading to a full stack/fully directional interchange for a while.
Maybe once the Bangerter Highway is completely freeway, they can work on making the Mountain View Corridor completely freeway as well.
Unlike Bangerter Highway, Mountain View is
designed from the ground up to Interstate standards, though it will likely never join the Interstate system.
MVC cost several billion dollars. Utah couldn't afford it in 2009. So the state had two choices:
- Collect private capital (investors), turn the toll concession over to them, and let them toll us for many decades to recoup their investment, plus interest and a handsome profit
- Build what the state could afford, decade by decade, until the project is finished
After outrage from westsiders, the state wisely chose the second option. MVC will eventually get all of its bridges, with the first phase being the Herriman Freeway in 2027. Other bridges (3500 S) are funded before 2030, though I'm not sure how soon.
Quote from: Anthony_JK on June 09, 2023, 01:56:23 AM
The 201 interchange isn't a Breezewood, because the Bangerter mainlaines will pass over adjacent to the SPUI point of intersection with the off-ramps. It's more like a "3-level SPUI" than anything else. It may not need upgrading to a full stack/fully directional interchange for a while.
At this point I don't see a need for a free-flow full stack. The main reason that DDI is so bad is because DDI's don't work super well if there's a significant amount of through traffic on the cross street, since you obviously can't let both directions go through at the same time. That means it's really a poor choice to put on an expressway like Bangerter where you can expect a decent amount of through traffic, even if the dominant movement is 201 west to Bangerter south and vice versa. This design removes most through traffic on Bangerter entirely. If they can design that SPUI so that the west-to-south left turn is prioritized and those extra lights are kept green most of the time, the interchange should flow much smoother.
The problem here is that 1980s-UDOT had no foresight and didn't anticipate the amount of development that ultimately happened in the west side of the Salt Lake Valley, so no extra right of way was reserved and the connections around that area weren't planned well. As a result, we now have development all the way up to the original diamond ramps - and that's industrial development instead of something like a few houses, which I'd imagine is quite a bit more expensive to relocate. Plus a lot of that industrial park area can only be accessed easily from Bangerter using cross streets very close to 201 (1820 South, S. Frontage Rd). So at this point, not only is the cost of ROW going to be prohibitively expensive, but you can't build an interchange that's big enough it blocks access to these industrial areas. Given those restrictions, this is probably the best 2020s-UDOT could come up with and I don't think we'll be too much worse off for it.
I don't think we'll ever need a full set of free-flowing ramps as some of those movements are simply used much less than others (east-to-north, for example, is basically only for people going from Magna to the airport and will never serve anything more beyond whatever local industrial development occurs). Some would eventually be nice to have, especially the west-to-south connection if and when that movement outgrows the SPUI, but traffic is going to have to get
really bad to justify how much that's going to cost.
Mountain View is the way it is because 2009-UDOT learned from the mistakes of 1980s-UDOT. It will take a while to see full build-out, but that highway will never see the right-of-way issues that have plagued nearly every Bangerter upgrade project like this one.
Either a free flowing stack should be built for efficiency and safety purposes.
Preliminary work is beginning on the last four interchanges not associated with the 41st South to 201 project. The three in the south end of the valley - at 98th South, 134th South, and 27th West, are being combined into one "Bangerter South" project. Current timeline for that is shown below:
(https://i.imgur.com/FmAAGWj.png)
Construction at 47th South won't start until next summer because the Jordan Valley Aqueduct has to be relocated first. When all is said and done, 47th and 134th will be freeway-under SPUIs, and 27th West will be a freeway-over SPUI. The 98th South and 27th West interchanges will be the first non-SPUIs built on Bangerter; they will instead be "tight diamonds" - freeway-over at 27th and freeway-under at 98th.
Quote from: US 89 on November 06, 2023, 11:02:02 PM
Preliminary work is beginning on the last four interchanges not associated with the 41st South to 201 project. The three in the south end of the valley - at 98th South, 134th South, and 27th West, are being combined into one "Bangerter South" project. Current timeline for that is shown below:
(https://i.imgur.com/FmAAGWj.png)
Construction at 47th South won't start until next summer because the Jordan Valley Aqueduct has to be relocated first. When all is said and done, 47th and 134th will be freeway-under SPUIs. The 98th South and 27th West interchanges will be the first two non-SPUI built on Bangerter; it will instead be a "tight diamond".
Fixed your information on the 27th West interchange... it will be a tight diamond interchange, not a SPUI.
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on November 06, 2023, 11:15:03 PM
Quote from: US 89 on November 06, 2023, 11:02:02 PM
Preliminary work is beginning on the last four interchanges not associated with the 41st South to 201 project. The three in the south end of the valley - at 98th South, 134th South, and 27th West, are being combined into one "Bangerter South" project. Current timeline for that is shown below:
(https://i.imgur.com/FmAAGWj.png)
Construction at 47th South won't start until next summer because the Jordan Valley Aqueduct has to be relocated first. When all is said and done, 47th and 134th will be freeway-under SPUIs. The 98th South and 27th West interchanges will be the first two non-SPUI built on Bangerter; it will instead be a "tight diamond".
Fixed your information on the 27th West interchange... it will be a tight diamond interchange, not a SPUI.
Hmm. you are right. Could swear I saw a SPUI on the 27th West individual project page but apparently not.
98th South and 27th West aren't nearly the level of major arterial that most of the other interchange cross streets along Bangerter are. I bet the tight diamond saves on ROW acquisition costs for interchanges that aren't expected to have SPUI-worthy left turn volumes.
Are they planning to eliminate the right-in/right-out intersections at S. 200 W. and S. Jordan Basin Ln. (S. 100 W.)? They seem out-of-place for a roadway that will eventually be completely-freeway (save for the interchanges at Interstate 15 and UT 201).