http://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2017/08/24/udot-seeks-to-convert-us-89-into-a-freeway-in-davis-county/
QuoteThe Utah Department of Transportation is proposing to convert U.S. 89 into a full freeway in Davis County to connect Interstates 15 and 84.
That preferred alternative in a new draft environmental study released Thursday is designed to relieve severe and worsening congestion on the 10-mile corridor, as well as to improve safety and even speed up east-west traffic that crosses it.
But an opposition group says putting a freeway in what is now almost an entirely residential area will attract commercialization that will ruin communities. Neighbors prefer widening nearby Interstate 15 instead – similar to what happened in Utah County.
UDOT project website: http://www.udot.utah.gov/us89/
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwp.frontlinepi.com%2Fus89%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F06%2Fmain-banner-new.png&hash=749fc39d2d42e5397e4a0f1492111d5a45d4cc15)
Isn't that a little too close to I-15? If anything, I'd rather see the Interstate widened instead.
^ It's largely urban/suburban area and 89 is already an arterial. Traffic volumes generally justify a freeway. Plus that segment of I-15 is already 6+ lanes and the southern part of it would be tricky to widen further.
History tidbit: UDOT requested Interstate mileage for this segment of 89 when the 1968 highway act added 1,500 miles to the Interstate system.
Quote from: froggie on August 25, 2017, 10:36:15 AM
History tidbit: UDOT requested Interstate mileage for this segment of 89 when the 1968 highway act added 1,500 miles to the Interstate system.
And those were the last chargeable additions to the system; the '73 Title 23 revisions essentially put a stop to further funded additions (although "Howard-Cramer" mileage shifts and adjustments were able to avail themselves of funding). It's not likely that there will be a similar push today re this segment of US 89 -- there's just no point!
What would the right-of-way impacts be if UDOT went this route? How many homes and businesses would have to be demolished in order to complete the upgrades to the corridor?
28 houses, 3 businesses. This does not count other adjacent properties which UDOT already owns.
Adding interchanges on US-89 has been sitting on the RTP for decades, so it's hardly a surprise.
Quote from: sparker on August 25, 2017, 03:14:24 PM
Quote from: froggie on August 25, 2017, 10:36:15 AM
History tidbit: UDOT requested Interstate mileage for this segment of 89 when the 1968 highway act added 1,500 miles to the Interstate system.
And those were the last chargeable additions to the system; the '73 Title 23 revisions essentially put a stop to further funded additions (although "Howard-Cramer" mileage shifts and adjustments were able to avail themselves of funding). It's not likely that there will be a similar push today re this segment of US 89 -- there's just no point!
Most likely, UDOT will just keep this US-89 (familiarity and no need to build to 100% standards), but if they did apply for an I designation, I'd suggest I-x84 (probably odd and I-184) as a lot of traffic is from WB I-84 headed south to I-15 and back, but that's me.
"will attract commercialization that will ruin communities"
I would say, prove it. Find evidence of another freeway construction in Utah that ruined a community. Otherwise, this is just NIMBY speak.
I hear a lot of moaning about the sprawl in the valley and how it indeed turned small, agricultural towns into suburban hell.
I notice this plan does not include an upgrade of the I-84/US-89 interchange to full freeway standards. I hope that's the next step (and maybe they can renumber the exit from SB 89 to WB 84 from 87 to 406, like it should be).
As for the NIMBYs wanting to widen I-15 instead and referencing Utah County, those projects actually didn't eliminate congestion. They just allowed more cars to get through the same bottlenecks at the same speeds as before. If 15 is widened instead of upgrading 89, it won't do much good.
That said, I-15 should probably be widened north of Hill Field Rd anyway. It's a 6 lane section with 8 or 10 lane sections on either side of it, and I've never been on that stretch when traffic isn't heavy.
Honestly it was bound to happen considering how dangerous those at-grade intersections are. US-89 and Bangerter are always welcome upgrades to me.
Quote from: Quillz on August 27, 2017, 09:18:24 PM
"will attract commercialization that will ruin communities"
I would say, prove it. Find evidence of another freeway construction in Utah that ruined a community. Otherwise, this is just NIMBY speak.
I mean, anyone who enjoyed living in a small town like Farr West or Spanish Fork or Bluffdale before I-15 made suburban sprawl a reality could make a legitimate argument that freeway construction ruined their communities.
It's silly to pretend freeways don't have impacts. Diesel exhaust kills, and fewer stops = more trucks = more exhaust. I'm not saying freeways should never be built, but don't dismiss the very real impacts out of hand.
Quote from: Sub-Urbanite on August 29, 2017, 11:23:14 AM
Quote from: Quillz on August 27, 2017, 09:18:24 PM
"will attract commercialization that will ruin communities"
I would say, prove it. Find evidence of another freeway construction in Utah that ruined a community. Otherwise, this is just NIMBY speak.
I mean, anyone who enjoyed living in a small town like Farr West or Spanish Fork or Bluffdale before I-15 made suburban sprawl a reality could make a legitimate argument that freeway construction ruined their communities.
It's silly to pretend freeways don't have impacts. Diesel exhaust kills, and fewer stops = more trucks = more exhaust. I'm not saying freeways should never be built, but don't dismiss the very real impacts out of hand.
The difference between your Farr West/Spanish Fork example and the Layton east bench is that suburban sprawl has already occurred today. This area is almost completely urbanized, with what little new development there is replacing agriculture on the west side near the lake.
US-89 is already a major expressway running through this area, and it's inadequate for current/projected traffic volumes, which is the primary reason for the upgrade. Aside from the 28 homes which have to be torn down, US-89 in its current state has already "ruined" those communities.
Perhaps sprawl would be a valid argument if this was a community sandwiched right in the middle of the metro (between Ogden and SLC).
Is this were Perry or Payson, perhaps you'd have a valid argument.
From KSL: 6 lanes still planned for US 89 through Davis, Weber counties (https://www.ksl.com/?sid=46230909&nid=148&title=6-lanes-still-planned-for-us-89-through-davis-weber-counties).
QuoteAlthough keeping the highway at four lanes was considered, the change was not included in newly released revisions to a draft state environmental study for the $275 million project expected to be completed in 2021.
"This has become a major thoroughfare and changes are needed," UDOT Region One spokesman Vic Saunders said, including adding a lane in each direction to accommodate projected increases in traffic.
QuoteConcerns about widening the highway were raised after the initial draft statement was released in October, so Saunders said UDOT is planning to use quieter, noise-dampening pavement and erect sound walls to reduce the impact.
QuoteSaunders said a new connection to the expressway will be at Gordon Avenue in Layton, which has been realigned to help property owners in the area as well as to conform with plans by the city.
Another change from the initial draft is a new northbound ramp at state Route 193 connecting with Valley View Drive in Layton to provide access to residents living east of the expressway.
QuoteSaunders said UDOT is hoping for final approval for the project by early summer, with construction planned to be underway in the fall of 2019. He said it should take two years to finish.
Here's a PDF with maps (http://udot.utah.gov/us89/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Volume-4-Screening-Matrices-and-Preferred-Alternative-Maps.pdf).
Gauging from those maps and illustrations, it appears what isn't being considered within the scope of these plans is a freeway-to-freeway interchange with I-84 (plans for the southern terminus at I-15 seem to be MIA). I'd guess that UDOT would rather maintain the status of I-15 as the primary through route between SLC and Ogden; the US 89 upgrade would be simply for safety/efficiency to local traffic.
Quote from: sparker on January 08, 2018, 01:51:58 PM
Gauging from those maps and illustrations, it appears what isn't being considered within the scope of these plans is a freeway-to-freeway interchange with I-84 (plans for the southern terminus at I-15 seem to be MIA). I'd guess that UDOT would rather maintain the status of I-15 as the primary through route between SLC and Ogden; the US 89 upgrade would be simply for safety/efficiency to local traffic.
South of SR-273, US 89 is already built up to freeway standards, so UDOT didn't include that part of US 89 in this study.
I agree with your point about the I-84 interchange. I feel like I remember hearing that something was to be done there around 2025, but I can’t remember where.
This doesn't seem like a terrible plan to me. Impacts I expected to be higher here. It should only be done if the I84 interchange it would intersect gets upgraded. $275 million isn't too bad for a freeway here.
I don't see a problem with building the freeway upgrade of US-89 between S Main Street and I-84 and putting off building a new US-89/I-84 freeway to freeway interchange at a later date. Build what you can afford to get built now rather than waiting later when it costs a lot more. It looks like there's already enough ROW at the existing US-89/I-84 partial cloverleaf interchange to build direct connect fly-over ramps in a T-configuration between I-84 and US-89. Meanwhile, some properties will have to be taken for the US-89 freeway upgrade. It's going to be a lot cheaper to buy up and clear the affected properties now rather than wait until both the freeway and US-89/I-84 interchange can be done at the same time.
Traffic report on the radio this morning: I-15 southbound (inbound) had a couple of crashes through Kaysville, so everyone was jumping over to US-89. Sounds like they broke it. Signals all failed with people having to wait 2-3 cycles to get through.
The day has arrived. Time for the US-89 freeway.
Article in KSL today: Citizens’ group asks UDOT to address community needs in US 89 expansion (https://www.ksl.com/?sid=46238942&nid=148&title=citizens-group-asks-udot-to-address-community-needs-in-us-89-expansion)
The group is called Residents’ Voices United on 89, or ReVU89 (https://www.revu89.org).
QuoteRealizing they couldn't bring the project to a complete halt due to ongoing traffic concerns, a citizens' group calling themselves Residents Voices United on 89, or ReVU89, is pushing the Utah Department Of Transportation to keep the road's nearest neighbors in mind.
Quote"UDOT has said they'll use noise-reducing asphalt rather than concrete," Groberg said. "We're promised to have a policy of no billboards."
She said recent changes also include so-called "dark-sky" lighting, which will focus lights at intersections rather than adding to light pollution in the area.
QuoteWhile ReVU89 has made some progress, Groberg said their focus now is on aesthetic improvements to the road, hopefully making it look in the end more like Legacy Parkway than I-15.
Among other things, they want the speed limit to be 55 or 60 rather than 65, as well as truck restrictions and a scenic byway status for the freeway.
"Scenic Byway?" :-D
That's rich.
"If you look real quickly between the McMansions you can glimpse Great Salt Lake. And that's not just any old airport down there; that's Hill Air Force Base."
I think the vehicle restriction idea is ridiculous. Moving trucks, delivery trucks, etc still have to move through areas like this. The idea of "Dark Sky" lighting is certainly do-able. One example is the I-25 re-build in Trinidad, CO. Instead of installing the usual overhead lighting on posts CDOT installed recessed, directional lighting into the concrete retaining walls. It just lights up the road without lighting up a bunch of other stuff around it.
Either a "No Trucks Except Local Deliveries" or a "No Trucks Over 6 Wheels", would address Bobby's truck issue, prohibiting the big semis that the residents are probably worried about while allowing box truck access (which is the bulk of moving/delivery trucks). There's basically zero industry and little commercial/retail along the corridor so delivery-via-18-wheeler is not a major thing.
Semi trucks are already allowed on US-89.
Perhaps on a greenfield new build project, the restriction makes sense. But I'm not sure it is even legally possible to restrict truck traffic on a US trunk network highway (US-89), let alone to restrict it after nearly a century of use.
http://kutv.com/news/local/utah-drivers-will-soon-have-a-new-freeway-to-drive-on-but-not-everyone-is-happy-about-it
QuoteUnited States Highway 89 in Davis and Weber counties is approved to become a full freeway but faces possible legal action from citizens..
Utah Department of Transportation made the decision because it said with growth, it is needed to reduce possible travel delays. But a group of residents is against the decision and may take legal action.
"I will be hugely affected by the project," Glade McCombs, who lives three doors down from US 89 in Fruit Heights said. "That frontage road going right past my house will carry an awful lot of traffic getting onto 89."
He's also part of ReVu89, a grass-roots campaign against UDOT's wishes to transform US 89 into a full freeway. McCombs said the group has multiple concerns including decreasing property values, noise, and privacy concerns with the flyovers.
"Once they elevate the freeway it will be at the height of a two-story house and so a lot of the residents who live along 89 will have cars looking in their second-story bedroom windows," he said.
Tuesday, UDOT gave its final approval for the project and will be moving forward with its plans to widen US 89 from four lanes to six, and convert it into a freeway between Shepard Lane in Farmington and Interstate 84 in South Weber.
"By and large it's driving their cars is what people want to do so that spurs us to look for us to provide transportation solutions that will help them get to their destination," UDOT's Vic Saunders said.
All traffic lights will be changed to freeway on and off ramps. Final plans will take out 22 structures, one business, a gas station which is already closed, one municipal water tank, and 20 homes, but Saunders said UDOT has been ready for this and UDOT already owns most of those homes.
"Over the years UDOT has acquired many of the properties that were going to be impacted by this future roadway."
UDOT said it will use noise dampening pavements to try to bring down highway noise based on citizens requests. But McCombs said that's just a band-aid on a hemorrhage, speaking as a resident and not a board member for the ReVu89.
"We are just concerned that they are going to take our nice little community and turn our houses which now are very quiet and serene and enjoyable and turn those into a noisy interchange or frontage road," he said.
McCombs said he understands there are problems with 89.
"Something has to happen to fix 89, the traffic flow is congested," McCombs said. He just thinks it should happen in phases, and he doesn't want to see the flyovers at all. "If they depress the freeway and just have the interchange going direction over 89 it would have a huge less impact by doing the elevated freeways in those interchanges."
ReVu89 has been fighting this proposal and they are not done yet.
"We have contacted an attorney, they think there has been some failure from the viewpoint of planning and UDOT's perspective planning and moving this thing forward and there's some concerns," McCombs said.
UDOT said without the project, congestion would increase by 20 to 35 percent on the corridor by 2040, creating peak travel times of one hour from Shepard Lane to I-84. With planned improvements, the same trip is projected to take nine to 10 minutes.
"We have some places that at nighttime traffic doesn't move very quickly. We are talking 10 mph in some places. What we want to do is speed that traffic up get people to where they want to go in a reasonable amount of time. If we don't build this project we won't we be able to see that," Saunders said.
Construction on the project is set to start in spring of next year and is expected to be finished by 2021.
"We want to help drivers and motorists get to their final destinations in a reasonable amount of time that will allow them to be with their families and the things they want to do," Saunders said.
The Final SES (State Environmental Study) for the US-89 freeway has been completed. The study can be read here (http://www.udot.utah.gov/us89/final-ses/). Also, here is a new interactive map (http://uplan.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=51f2ddc73dc543d4a19ce657c9cadb79) detailing the project plans.
Quote from: roadguy2 on March 19, 2018, 08:10:39 PM
The Final SES (State Environmental Study) for the US-89 freeway has been completed. The study can be read here (http://www.udot.utah.gov/us89/final-ses/). Also, here is a new interactive map (http://uplan.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=51f2ddc73dc543d4a19ce657c9cadb79) detailing the project plans.
What's the potential of the I-84 interchange someday also being upgraded to a full proper free-flowing freeway-freeway connection?
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on March 19, 2018, 08:28:49 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on March 19, 2018, 08:10:39 PM
The Final SES (State Environmental Study) for the US-89 freeway has been completed. The study can be read here (http://www.udot.utah.gov/us89/final-ses/). Also, here is a new interactive map (http://uplan.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=51f2ddc73dc543d4a19ce657c9cadb79) detailing the project plans.
What's the potential of the I-84 interchange someday also being upgraded to a full proper free-flowing freeway-freeway connection?
Mike
Upgrading that interchange to a freeway-system interchange is listed in the area's RTP. However, it is a phase 3 project, which is the time period 2031-2040.
The sad thing is that I found an EIS from 1996 which showed a plan to convert that interchange to a full cloverleaf. Obviously that never happened, and a full cloverleaf is looking unlikely at this point due to the development to the NE and a large gravel pit to the SE.
Quote from: mgk920 on March 19, 2018, 08:28:49 PM
Quote from: roadguy2 on March 19, 2018, 08:10:39 PM
The Final SES (State Environmental Study) for the US-89 freeway has been completed. The study can be read here (http://www.udot.utah.gov/us89/final-ses/). Also, here is a new interactive map (http://uplan.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=51f2ddc73dc543d4a19ce657c9cadb79) detailing the project plans.
What's the potential of the I-84 interchange someday also being upgraded to a full proper free-flowing freeway-freeway connection?
Mike
Yes, it's in the RTP. Utah won't replace it until traffic volumes "break" it functionally. Then you'll see it get bumped up to a 3-year timeframe.
If it doesn't break, it could remain in current form for a loooooooooong time.
Everyone expected it, but now it's official: the ReVU89 group mentioned above has filed a lawsuit.
Link to article in KSL: Residents file lawsuit against US-89 expansion (https://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=46304200)
QuoteThe lawsuit says UDOT didn't follow procedure while studying the potential environmental impacts of the project.
"UDOT impermissibly constrained and restricted the study area for this project to avoid the full review of all regional impacts," the complaint reads.
Because the widening project alters interstate highways and connections to federal interstates, the lawsuit argues that UDOT needed a rigorous Environmental Impact Statement instead of just a State Environmental Study.
This project has sat quiet for a bit as UDOT and its contractors design the road, with construction expected to begin likely in 2020. However, one of the major updates as of late is that alternatives with the freeway under the cross street are now being considered. I'd imagine this is UDOT "throwing a bone" to the NIMBYs and environmentalists who are opposing this. Hopefully the speed limit can still be 65.
Here's a rendering of the current design for the Oak Hills Drive (SR 109) interchange:
(https://us89.somers-jaramillo.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Render1-768x462.png)
Designs available online here: http://www.udot.utah.gov/us89/index.php/right-of-way/
Some new interchange designs are out, including:
200 North interchange:
(https://udot.utah.gov/us89/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/24N.jpg)
Gordon Ave interchange:
(https://us89.somers-jaramillo.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Gordon-Rendering.jpg)
Nicholls Rd overpass:
(https://us89.somers-jaramillo.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Nicholls-Rendering.jpg)
Crestwood Rd overpass:
(https://ci6.googleusercontent.com/proxy/NpEqh8nauZoQG1mAyXWXch5eO9QqL6u8BZSX4o38AVVv_8E_M5BkTXGWiqr6H8-3vduY8t9Xa8aIPad_2ufwncKKGwc3aNAxyLe35MJ7ITavh1EB_avEXf_4v7vJYHE3qxAI_1YrpP2G=s0-d-e1-ft#https://files.constantcontact.com/4e88c47d001/317d80a7-6ee8-4492-a863-a9c3b9bdad27.jpg)
^^^^^^^^^
With all the design changes as shown above, is the I-84/US 89 interchange still planned as a non-free-flowing facility with signalized movements, or has that also been upgraded?
Quote from: sparker on April 24, 2019, 07:22:30 PM
^^^^^^^^^
With all the design changes as shown above, is the I-84/US 89 interchange still planned as a non-free-flowing facility with signalized movements, or has that also been upgraded?
Unfortunately, this project does not include any modifications to the Uintah interchange, aside from maybe some minor work on US 89 itself. As mentioned above, an upgrade of that interchange is in the area's RTP, but it appears to have been pushed back to a phase 4 (beyond 2040) project. Which is odd, because that same RTP has a US 89 freeway upgrade between I-84 and Harrison Blvd in Ogden as a phase 2 (2025-2034) project.
UDOT is doing a survey where the public gets to help decide some of the aesthetic features for the project. The survey includes a poll on bridge beam paint color, decorative bridge design, and retaining wall stone pattern:
https://us89.from-ut.com/survey
From a recent email update regarding this project:
Quote from: Fall 2019 Project UpdateMajor roadway construction is anticipated to begin after the first of next year. The project team is finalizing the design and construction schedule. The team continues to develop ways to best maintain two lanes in each direction while completing the necessary work. This process includes ongoing refinement of the construction phasing and traffic planning, which also drives the project schedule. So, more details will be shared as they are confirmed later this year.
Perhaps more interesting is an agenda item on this month's state transportation commission meeting, which will transfer $2.5 million to this project (https://utahdot.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&event_id=201&meta_id=27481) to rehabilitate the I-84 bridge decks over US 89. Not all that notable by itself, but the item comes with this description:
QuoteAfter this Uintah Interchange project was approved and funding was programmed, Region One completed a study with plans for a future Interchange configuration that will replace the existing bridge at the mouth of Weber Canyon. The future interchange configuration is needed to accommodate the expected growth and needs of this location. To address the immediate need on the Uintah Interchange, pothole patching and a polymer overlay bridge decks was placed this past summer to preserve them until a future project can be funded. The Region will look for funding within its long range plan and program at a future date.
So UDOT does plan to upgrade the 84/89 interchange. I'd love to see the proposed design, but I haven't been able to find the study or any other diagrams online, and the US-89 project design map (https://horrocks.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=707017d33a7a48c6bf4b7403ef93d9cd) doesn't show it either.
Got an email update this morning announcing the start of this project, along with a proposed construction phasing map:
QuotePreparatory work begins this week and includes setup of a construction yard inside the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) property on the west side of 200 North. Tree and shrub removal, fence removal and other clearing activities along the west side of U.S. 89 are planned to begin as early as January 13 near 200 North.
In order to streamline construction, utility relocation will occur in advance of work on the mainline of U.S. 89. There are 35 different utility owners on or next to U.S. 89 and the project team will relocate over 150 miles of utilities to facilitate project construction.
During early work, motorists can expect shoulder or lane closures on the frontage roads and/or side streets during non-commute times. No impacts to U.S. 89 traffic are anticipated until later in the spring.
(https://i.imgur.com/CBIFUUa.jpg)
If this were Texas or North Carolina, I'd expect them to slap an Interstate designation along this corridor, such as Interstate 415, or Interstate 284. I highly doubt Utah has any interest in going that route, and will keep the road US 89, which is the only designation the roadway should have.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 09, 2020, 06:24:43 PM
If this were Texas or North Carolina, I'd expect them to slap an Interstate designation along this corridor, such as Interstate 415, or Interstate 284. I highly doubt Utah has any interest in going that route, and will keep the road US 89, which is the only designation the roadway should have.
I always thought that if this corridor were to get an Interstate number, it would be either I-115 or I-184. But you're right–I don't think that Utah has any interest in slapping an Interstate number on the route, as there's no real need to.
Quote from: Rover_0 on January 09, 2020, 11:59:03 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 09, 2020, 06:24:43 PM
If this were Texas or North Carolina, I'd expect them to slap an Interstate designation along this corridor, such as Interstate 415, or Interstate 284. I highly doubt Utah has any interest in going that route, and will keep the road US 89, which is the only designation the roadway should have.
I always thought that if this corridor were to get an Interstate number, it would be either I-115 or I-184. But you're right–I don't think that Utah has any interest in slapping an Interstate number on the route, as there's no real need to.
Quite right; US 89 is simply a local server, not a "shortcut" from NB 15 to EB 84 or vice-versa; that task is already accomplished by I-80. Adding an Interstate designation would be gratuitous; Utah -- so far -- has resisted that particular siren call.
Looks like major construction will officially begin this March, lasting until potentially through 2023:
QuoteImpacts to U.S. 89 are anticipated to begin in March and extend through 2023. We know you have a lot of questions about impacts to your area. In addition to the information below, we have posted early construction phasing information for commuters and the first three areas of focus on this online construction kickoff site (http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=0018u16dcjhdYBV1uWHCYWNEqm7gUT_NpdOuXJfNHdkgl8UR6udyIkvtUROJcuhGoFh3tiXln2nPrKfvq3FiEZBMP80Aydzp8wCSQkbKvRRTHmplhrpewRBnIJqLnbo6Z87KEQqWrBqSCxeeggjgixHZg==&c=PrAmywk5eruj61SkQk2oaIsjMapPRhW006c3KECzi1zo25TqqoTnCA==&ch=9JSjYPOnFW6Fiacqpzjfi0gxnVGhT7sBKajyhrPG_RhlkbWd05fswA==). More construction schedule and impact information will be provided as work gets underway.
QuoteThe project team has developed an accelerated schedule to complete the more than nine miles of U.S. 89 mainline reconstruction and all six bridges/interchanges by 2023. In order to complete this massive amount of work, while keeping traffic moving on U.S. 89, the work will be phased.
Work in 2020 is planned along the East frontage road from Layton to Fruit Heights, and at the new interchange locations at Oak Hills Drive, Gordon Avenue and 200 North/400 North. Please see the anticipated phasing schedule and map below for more details.
(https://publicinput.com/img/enl2fsomiv4mvv4luhaz_1000_1000.JPG)
Unrelated to the Davis County freeway upgrade, but a study has recently been completed (https://avenuecon.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=3ff29cd42ff143f688a20d9bf22443b6&fbclid=IwAR3K5KSiDXeE5DvMbqXD2beBwP2SQPPuabz8Slx6ZQVIDxKExcijiafzzfE) for the portion of Highway 89 from the I-84 interchange to Harrison Blvd. This is an especially complicated area due to a confluence of factors such as the Weber River, gravel pits, the UP railroad line, steep grades on 89 north of 84, and nearby at-grade intersections. It also gets messy because the coming upgrades to 89 south of 84 will overwhelm the 89/84 interchange, and then any upgrades to that would overwhelm the Skyline and Harrison intersections further north on 89.
Reading through the study, it appears two short-term solutions have been proposed - one for the I-84 interchange and one for the Skyline intersection. It looks like UDOT plans to upgrade the Skyline intersection to a four-leg CFI, while the I-84 interchange would be converted to a SPUI with an extra lane added on 89 through the interchange. Personally I hate freeways that end at SPUIs, but this seems to be somewhat of a Utah thing as there are already three examples of this in the state.
There are a couple of long-term solutions proposed, but reading the study it seems the most likely solution is the Center Bypass, which would build a free-flowing through routing for US 89 below grade and add freeway ramps for most of the 89/84 ramps, while keeping the SPUI from the short-term phase. A couple options exist for the Skyline intersection, but one possibility is for that to eventually become a "braided SPUI" with a free-flowing ramp from the 89 freeway to northbound Harrison.
UDOT recently posted a time-lapse of bridge beams being placed for the new Gordon Avenue interchange:
From the Ogden Standard-Examiner: UDOT adds $60 million worth of new work to its ongoing reconstruction of U.S. 89 (https://www.standard.net/news/udot-adds-60-million-worth-of-new-work-to-its-ongoing-reconstruction-of-u-s/article_e78d9d6d-3641-53d9-a052-0b4611dc4a39.html)
QuoteUINTAH – The Utah Department of Transportation has added a significant amount of new work and money to its ongoing reconstruction of U.S. 89 in Northern Utah.
On Friday, the Utah Transportation Commission approved a UDOT request to add $60 million to the project, bringing the total value of the work up to $555 million.
Scheduled to be completed in 2023, UDOT had planned to rebuild U.S. 89 and widen the highway to six lanes from Main Street in Farmington to State Road 193 in Layton. As part of the project, four new interchanges are being built at 200 North, Oak Hills Drive, Gordon Avenue and Antelope Drive in Layton. Gordon Avenue will be extended approximately three miles east, connecting to the highway, and the state will add two new bridges over the highway at Nicholls Road and Crestwood Road.
UDOT's director of financial programming, Ivan Hartle, said the original scope for the project stopped short of the Interstate 84 junction in Uintah, mainly due to funding constraints. But, Hartle said, the state has heard from a vocal public about concerns of current and future traffic backup at the I-84 interchange if something isn't done soon to address it.
Hartle said that in response to the concerns, UDOT did some additional traffic analysis and has confirmed that traffic near the interchange on U.S. 89 can back up for more than a mile on the northbound section of the highway during peak evening commuting times.
"(And) this delay is only anticipated to increase with the completion of the U.S. 89 reconstruction project," Hartle said.
As part of the new work, UDOT will take the current U.S. 89 extension north to the I-84 junction near Weber Canyon, will build a new interchange at the junction with new on- and off-ramps, and will rebuild the I-84 bridge over the Weber River.
"This is a really critical need," said Utah Transportation Commissioner Wayne Barlow, who represents Box Elder, Cache, Davis, Morgan, Weber and Rich counties.
UDOT Deputy Director Teri Newell said the additional work on U.S. 89 is necessary to "make the project whole."
"While it's a large amount that we're adding at this point, it's because we are programming out our money for some time," Newell said. "This is important to get the correct scope on this."
The ongoing work on U.S. 89 through Davis County is the largest active highway project in the state, according to a UDOT press release. By the time the project is finished in 2023, the state will have spent four years on the project. UDOT spokesman John Gleason told the Standard-Examiner that the project, which includes eliminating stop lights and cross traffic, will accommodate the anticipated traffic growth in the area through 2040 and beyond.
It looks like the website hasn't been updated with the new plans yet, but this is great to see. The 84/89 interchange does in fact suck with modern US 89 traffic levels, and it was probably the #1 issue raised in UDOT's Facebook group for the project. (Side note: there are a LOT of people in those groups who are
definitely not road enthusiasts.)
Wonder if this will bump up the timeline for improvements on 89 further north at Skyline and Harrison.
Quote from: andy3175 on March 17, 2018, 12:13:00 AM
http://kutv.com/news/local/utah-drivers-will-soon-have-a-new-freeway-to-drive-on-but-not-everyone-is-happy-about-it
What are the prospects of this section of US-89 receiving an interstate designation after it has been converted to a freeway? Is that something being discussed?
Quote from: abqtraveler on May 10, 2021, 09:29:10 AM
Quote from: andy3175 on March 17, 2018, 12:13:00 AM
http://kutv.com/news/local/utah-drivers-will-soon-have-a-new-freeway-to-drive-on-but-not-everyone-is-happy-about-it
What are the prospects of this section of US-89 receiving an interstate designation after it has been converted to a freeway? Is that something being discussed?
Most likely slim to none. Utah isn't really an interstate highway crazy state; both Mountain View and West Davis Corridors are getting state route numbers, and there are plenty of freeways donning US highway badges anyway. Plus US 89 is a pretty important whole-state number, and painting over it with an interstate designation would be rather useless in the end based on name value --- I'd bank everyone in Davis and Weber counties knows what US 89 is.
If you had your way, what Interstate designation would you give the US 89 corridor, abqtraveler?
Quote from: BigManFromAFRICA88 on May 10, 2021, 05:13:58 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on May 10, 2021, 09:29:10 AM
Quote from: andy3175 on March 17, 2018, 12:13:00 AM
http://kutv.com/news/local/utah-drivers-will-soon-have-a-new-freeway-to-drive-on-but-not-everyone-is-happy-about-it
What are the prospects of this section of US-89 receiving an interstate designation after it has been converted to a freeway? Is that something being discussed?
Most likely slim to none. Utah isn't really an interstate highway crazy state; both Mountain View and West Davis Corridors are getting state route numbers, and there are plenty of freeways donning US highway badges anyway. Plus US 89 is a pretty important whole-state number, and painting over it with an interstate designation would be rather useless in the end based on name value --- I'd bank everyone in Davis and Weber counties knows what US 89 is.
Agreed - if for some reason UDOT were to get an interstate designation for this, everyone would still call it US 89 and you'd get a situation like I-64/US 40 in St Louis.
Plus, unless plans have changed and I haven't seen them yet, the interchange with I-84 will continue to have at-grade intersections after the reconstruction, so an interstate designation wouldn't really be appropriate. Unless you wanted to create something like I-585 SC, where the interstate designation ends right before junctioning the other interstate... which just doesn't seem right.
Finally tracked down the agenda item for the $60m addition from last month's transportation commission meeting: https://utahdot.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&event_id=243&meta_id=30305 (rather large PDF - pages 1-2)
QuoteThe original scope for the US-89 project stopped short of the I-84 interchange due to funding constraints. The public has been very vocal about concerns of current and future traffic backup at the interchange at I-84. In response to the concerns, UDOT has done additional traffic analysis and has confirmed that the traffic can back up for more than a mile on Northbound US-89 during the PM peak and add
more than 5 minutes of delay to commuters. This delay is only anticipated to increase with the completion of the US-89 reconstruct project.
The additional scope proposes to add a new SPUI (Single Point Urban Interchange) at the I-84 / US-89 junction. New on and off ramps will be built to provide better sight distance, standard deceleration and acceleration lengths and improved storage. The bridge on I-84 over the Weber River will also be reconstructed as part of this project.
So it appears they are indeed converting the existing partial cloverleaf to a SPUI. Personally not a fan of that, but the geometry on some of those existing ramps does suck (particularly the ramp onto westbound 84) and definitely could use some improvement.
Quote from: US 89 on May 17, 2021, 06:54:46 PM
Finally tracked down the agenda item for the $60m addition from last month's transportation commission meeting: https://utahdot.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&event_id=243&meta_id=30305 (rather large PDF - pages 1-2)
QuoteThe original scope for the US-89 project stopped short of the I-84 interchange due to funding constraints. The public has been very vocal about concerns of current and future traffic backup at the interchange at I-84. In response to the concerns, UDOT has done additional traffic analysis and has confirmed that the traffic can back up for more than a mile on Northbound US-89 during the PM peak and add
more than 5 minutes of delay to commuters. This delay is only anticipated to increase with the completion of the US-89 reconstruct project.
The additional scope proposes to add a new SPUI (Single Point Urban Interchange) at the I-84 / US-89 junction. New on and off ramps will be built to provide better sight distance, standard deceleration and acceleration lengths and improved storage. The bridge on I-84 over the Weber River will also be reconstructed as part of this project.
So it appears they are indeed converting the existing partial cloverleaf to a SPUI. Personally not a fan of that, but the geometry on some of those existing ramps does suck (particularly the ramp onto westbound 84) and definitely could use some improvement.
Unless there was a concurrent project to increase capacity on I-84, especially west toward I-15 and Ogden, configuring the northern terminus of the US 89 project with a SPUI instead of a free-flow interchange would make sense to regulate the flow of NB traffic onto WB 84. Otherwise the segment of 84 west of the interchange would likely become a chokepoint, particularly during commute hours. Not so much with the opposite traffic movement unless the RH turn onto US 89 was itself signal-regulated.
Took the opportunity to drive through the project area recently (and realized I never posted my pictures from back in January). As of now, 89 is now a free-flowing road from the I-84 interchange signals all the way down through Farmington, and the southernmost three interchanges (200 North, Oak Hills, Gordon) are all open. It appears all direct access to side streets has now been closed - and that currently includes Antelope Drive, whose interchange will be completed probably next year sometime. No new permanent signage yet, so no new exit numbers so far.
Work appears to be substantially complete at the three open interchanges, other than the ultimate restriping to 3 through lanes which will probably wait until the whole project is complete. The bridge design that the public voted on wound up looking like this:
(https://i.imgur.com/N9EMtrA.jpg)
The latest project update email also contained some interesting information about a temporary bridge that will carry US 89 over the Weber River while the permanent bridges are being rehabilitated:
QuoteAt the far northern end of the project, work is moving forward to replace the support beams and driving surfaces on the two bridges over the Weber River. In order to keep all lanes open in both directions while we do this work, our project team has rented a temporary steel bridge that has been assembled on-site and then pushed into place over the river.
Crews plan to shift northbound traffic onto this bridge as early as May 26, with a southbound shift planned after the Memorial Day holiday. Drivers should be prepared for a new traffic configuration in the area.
(https://i.imgur.com/mNysWAK.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/jeIIbuE.jpg)
The temporary bridge is 210 feet long, 45 feet wide and weighs approximately 500,000 lbs. It will be in place until late fall, when traffic is scheduled to shift back onto the permanent US-89 bridges. This same bridge has been recently used on another UDOT project that replaced two I-80 bridges west of the SR-201 interchange near Saltair. In addition to providing temporary detours during construction, these bridges are also used to restore critical routes during emergencies (like floods or hurricanes), and by military forces – some models are sturdy enough to accommodate tanks and other armored vehicles.
Also, the environmental study process for the I-84/US 89 interchange has officially begun. It's currently in a pre-environmental stage where they're collecting data on existing traffic conditions and feedback from affected cities. That's supposed to last through this August, with the formal environmental study process to follow. That is a separate project from the 89 freeway upgrade and has its own website (https://udotinput.utah.gov/84-89interchange).
Oh neat, a Bailey bridge. You don't see those in the US too often. (They're mostly used for military applications, or in lower-income countries that cannot afford a more permanent crossing.)
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 21, 2022, 09:58:21 PM
Oh neat, a Bailey bridge. You don't see those in the US too often. (They're mostly used for military applications, or in lower-income countries that cannot afford a more permanent crossing.)
I've seen them used a few times in Washington, notably as an emergency fix when the I-5 Skagit River bridge collapsed back in 2013, but also for more normal bridge replacements or repair like this one here in Utah.
Example on I-90 in Cle Elum, WA from 2019 (looks like streeview car went through as they were putting in the approaches for it): https://goo.gl/maps/F2DYxxcNs3KeUQ7N7
Antelope Drive Interchange is now open:
https://www.constructionequipmentguide.com/officials-laud-second-largest-state-project-milestone/58972
Don't they have one at the PA Turnpike and PA18, it's been temporary for like 10 years.
At long last, this project is done. Apparently it was the biggest project undertaken by UDOT since the I-15 CORE (Utah County reconstruction) project wrapped up in 2012. Which seems kind of surprising - I'd have thought the I-15 Point of the Mountain and south Davis County reconstructions would be more, but apparently not. Either way, a long needed project is finally complete.
https://www.udot.utah.gov/connect/2023/06/30/udot-marked-completion-of-largest-project-in-the-last-decade/
Unfortunately, this will now leave a pretty significant bottleneck where the freeway now ends just before the I-84 interchange. Facebook group suggests this is because Weber County had no interest in spending any money there right now but who knows how accurate that is. As far as I know, no free-flow upgrade to this interchange is in the cards for the foreseeable future. At some point soon (perhaps already?) the outdated parclo design is planned to be reconfigured into a SPUI with I-84 passing over US 89.
^ A SPUI at 84/89 is considered a "short term solution". UDOT is looking into the longer term with a current study (https://udotinput.utah.gov/84-89interchange).
It looks like in the long term they will consider a fully directional stack so that is nice.
Quote from: froggie on August 01, 2023, 09:59:37 AM
^ A SPUI at 84/89 is considered a "short term solution". UDOT is looking into the longer term with a current study (https://udotinput.utah.gov/84-89interchange).
But even so, the SPUI will be better than the current state of affairs. Would have been nice if it could have been included with the Davis County freeway project instead of having an upgraded, longer US 89 freeway still dumping directly into the outdated parclo that's there now.