I have a question?
Why aren't any of the new freeways in Utah apart of Interstate freeway system? Does the federal government even make/designate new Interstates anymore? Ive often wondered why the Mountain view corridor and Legacy Parkway Freeways are not given Interstate routes? anyone know why? :confused:
Not every freeway needs to be an Interstate. There are many possible reasons that a DOT may not pursue an I-designation...
Quote from: roadfro on August 25, 2011, 09:51:16 AM
Not every freeway needs to be an Interstate. There are many possible reasons that a DOT may not pursue an I-designation...
That said, however, I think that UT-201 will become an Interstate (likely I-x80) someday, and that if a freeway is built from the new UT-85 south along UT-68 towards Payson, it could become an I-x15 as well.
I think that part of the deal is that the roads can be built right away and not up to freeway standards (think of portions of UT-7 and UT-85), then as time goes on, traffic justifies a freeway, and then UDOT can go ahead and upgrade the road. There's also a little more wiggle room in design than if the road was an Interstate.
Quote from: Rover_0 on August 25, 2011, 01:31:44 PM
Quote from: roadfro on August 25, 2011, 09:51:16 AM
Not every freeway needs to be an Interstate. There are many possible reasons that a DOT may not pursue an I-designation...
There's also a little more wiggle room in design than if the road was an Interstate.
By which he means, you can basically design the roadway however you want, to whatever standards you're trying to meet, with full context sensitivity appropriate to a Parkway setting.
Oh, and no Federal interaction means far fewer hoops to jump through.
So, if SR-201 (or any other non-Interstate freeway in the state) were to become an Interstate, what exactly would change? This is assuming that SR-201's been upgraded to a freeway from terminus to terminus beforehand.
Does anyone have any factual info to answer the question? LOL Also, Does the federal government even make/designate new Interstates anymore?
The federal government isn't the front end of interstate designation, usually. States want an interstate and ask the feds if they can use the designation. But yes, the interstate system is still very active. See North Carolina.
Other posters have already answered the question- if you're building the Legacy Parkway through an environmentally sensitive area, it's way easier not to also have to jump through federal loopholes to get the funding necessary to put up the shield. Since you can usually get federal funding for highway construction without having to commit to calling a road an interstate, it's often deemed to the benefit of states to not bother with shooting for the shield.
Some facts about federal funding and regulatory requirements:
* A road on the NHS (including, for example, most if not all of the Loops in Phoenix) attracts federal funding at an 80-20 ratio. But this does not mean that funding split has to be used. The Phoenix Loops, for example, are entirely state-funded.
* If federal funding is used, even if the road is not an Interstate, the whole NEPA process has to be gone through. If construction of the road entails a federal action, such as issuance of a Section 404 permit in relation to waterways and wetlands over which the USACE has jurisdiction, then the NEPA process has to be gone through for the aspects which pertain specifically to the federal action, even if the highway is entirely state-funded. In the case of a major highway, like the proposed South Lawrence Trafficway in Kansas, that can entail consideration of the purpose and need of the project, Section 4(f) and 6(f) impacts, and all the rest of it. Arizona DOT has had to compile federally required environmental assessments in relation to various parts of the Loops, including the SuperRedTan TI. "We pay for it" does not allow a state to sidestep federal regulation altogether.
* In practice the total federal funding a state gets is capped, so spending federal money on a given project can entail sacrificing federal funding for another project.
* Interstates built since 2003 (not using Interstate Construction funds) are not eligible for Interstate Maintenance funds. This means that decisions to put up Interstate signs on a brand-new freeway tend to be driven by routing and economic development considerations, not ensuring eligibility for IM funding (which can in any case be done without actually signing an Interstate designation, provided it was in place before 2003).
Utah is one example of a state where not pursuing an Interstate designation has opened the door to relaxed standards through an environmentally sensitive area, but in Arizona and many other states, Interstate designations are not pursued for new freeways because there is simply no point--there are plenty of other places where federal money can be spent without going to the trouble of creating new eligibility for IM funding (which in any case has ceased to be possible for brand-new freeways since 2003). An Interstate designation, regardless of whether it leads to IM eligibility, also demands compliance with Interstate design standards, which can accommodate environmentally sensitive areas, but in general require a level of provision that is too expansive for roads which cannot be economically justified as full freeways throughout their entire corridors. A typical example might be an expressway like US 29 in Virginia, where construction to full freeway standard is necessary only for short lengths around towns like the Lynchburg Bypass.
Quote from: CL on August 26, 2011, 12:11:44 AM
So, if SR-201 (or any other non-Interstate freeway in the state) were to become an Interstate, what exactly would change? This is assuming that SR-201's been upgraded to a freeway from terminus to terminus beforehand.
Shoulder widths, superelevation around curves, median width if no barrier, types of guide rail/barrier if there is barrier. Length of accel/decel lanes, ramp geometry and width. Pavement section width, vertical and horizontal curvature. Oh, I can go on.
Quote from: Steve on August 27, 2011, 12:39:18 AM
Quote from: CL on August 26, 2011, 12:11:44 AM
So, if SR-201 (or any other non-Interstate freeway in the state) were to become an Interstate, what exactly would change? This is assuming that SR-201's been upgraded to a freeway from terminus to terminus beforehand.
Shoulder widths, superelevation around curves, median width if no barrier, types of guide rail/barrier if there is barrier. Length of accel/decel lanes, ramp geometry and width. Pavement section width, vertical and horizontal curvature. Oh, I can go on.
I suppose I mean what would change assuming all that was already in place. Would funding change at all, or would it stay the same? If so, then I wouldn't see a point in converting the road from a state route to an Interstate.
Nope, funding would stay the same. It's just a pretty shield.
Quote from: roundabout on August 26, 2011, 12:22:18 AM
Does anyone have any factual info to answer the question? LOL
Pet peeve. You wouldn't laugh if you asked the question aloud; don't type it out. It distracts and detracts from the flow of the post and makes zero grammatical sense.
QuoteAlso, Does the federal government even make/designate new Interstates anymore?
That depends on what you mean by the federal government. If you mean AASHTO/FHWA, not really. If you mean Congress, look at I-99 and attempts to bring I-3 to Georgia.
For you Utahans: What is the story with Utah's only turnpike? That is the short Adams Avenue Parkway that is tolled from exit 85 on I 84 to Ogden. It seems like an oddity. Is it privately owned?
Quote from: sandiaman on January 31, 2013, 02:36:23 PM
For you Utahans: What is the story with Utah's only turnpike? That is the short Adams Avenue Parkway that is tolled from exit 85 on I 84 to Ogden. It seems like an oddity. Is it privately owned?
Yes. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adams_Avenue_Parkway) All routes maintained by the state receive a route number, and the Adams Avenue Parkway does not carry a number.
While I'm here--I've heard that UT-201's freeway sections are substandard. Is this true? How badly are these sections substandard? Is this for the entire length of the freeway section?
I've heard something like ramp length, but not much after that.
Quote from: sandiaman on January 31, 2013, 02:36:23 PM
For you Utahans: What is the story with Utah's only turnpike? That is the short Adams Avenue Parkway that is tolled from exit 85 on I 84 to Ogden. It seems like an oddity. Is it privately owned?
Wikipedia actually has a decent article : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adams_Avenue_Parkway
Quote from: Rover_0 on January 31, 2013, 03:25:10 PM
While I'm here--I've heard that UT-201's freeway sections are substandard. Is this true? How badly are these sections substandard? Is this for the entire length of the freeway section?
I've heard something like ramp length, but not much after that.
U-201 has long been substandard if you're comparing with what is expected of an IH. Yes, various improvements have been made over the years - especially when the interchange configuration with I-15/I-80 was rebuilt - but there are still quite a few issues remaining. Things such as inconsistent signage, shoulder and median width, exit ramps/configurations, etc. have historically plagued U-201. Admittedly, those "substandard" segments are now limited to areas west of Bangerter Highway, thanks to the reconstruction of the freeway's eastern portions over the past 10-15 years. The eastern end is pretty much up to snuff and would only require minor adjustments, IMO.
That said, the short segment from I-15 to Bangerter is really not long enough to make it worth bothering with obtaining IH status. And, west of there, things get ugly, starting with the at-grade intersection with 7200 West. Then the other at-grade intersections (and driveways) through the Magna area. Not to mention that the road narrows (lanes, shoulders, median) once it travels through Kennecott's complex. It would be VERY expensive and troublesome to widen and improve it through there, yet the only reason you'd even consider adding IH status to this road would be if it connected I-80 at/near Saltair with I-15/I-80 in South Salt Lake. Doing so would require a significant financial investment that is difficult to justify right now. So, I personally don't see it happening in the foreseeable future.
Bumping for what this thread should be about: new freeways in Utah, not bitching about them not being Interstates.
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=40.433164,-111.82198&spn=0.013311,0.028346&t=k&z=16&layer=c&cbll=40.433257,-111.822034&panoid=0LTn7T5RO-ZvbJoQm6_yCA&cbp=12,186.38,,0,4.61
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=40.431465,-111.887512&spn=0.013312,0.028346&t=k&z=16&layer=c&cbll=40.431454,-111.887674&panoid=0vitdK9WL8Jyo4Ta-dg6fA&cbp=12,113.98,,1,2.01
UDOT built a parallel freeway to SR-92. But instead of calling it SR-92, signs say "Commuter Lane". And that "RIGHT EXIT" tab? Yeah.
Oooo. Another diverging diamond interchange. Utah seems to like these.
Quote from: KEK Inc. on February 11, 2014, 02:14:11 AM
Oooo. Another diverging diamond interchange. Utah seems to like these.
Now in St. George (UT-34/St. George Blvd. and I-15) and coming soon to Brigham City (US-91 and I-15/84)!!
There is also the West Davis Corridor:
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/56322000-90/alternative-davis-freeway-glovers.html.csp
QuoteThe Utah Department of Transportation on Thursday (May 16, 2013) unveiled its preferred route for the new West Davis Corridor freeway — the northwestern extension of Legacy Parkway — that it says will best reduce congestion, be least expensive and have fewer impacts to existing homes, farms and wetlands.
QuoteUDOT proposes to start the new freeway at Glover Lane in Farmington, where it would have an interchange both with Legacy Parkway and Interstate 15. That is a couple miles south of the existing northern end of Legacy where it connects with I-15 and U.S. 89.
A different alternative would have started the freeway farther north at Shepard Lane and avoided routing the new freeway through western Farmington near the Great Salt Lake. But UDOT says the Shepard Lane alternative would have required removing more homes and was more complicated and expensive.
The preferred alternative also will follow closely Bluff Road as it travels northwest through Syracuse, instead of an alternative farther west nearer the Great Salt Lake. It will turn straight north and follow roughly 4100 West through West Point and Clinton to about 5500 South in Hooper.
A new four-volume, 1,444-page draft environmental impact statement predicts the route will cost $587 million (in 2012 dollars, including land acquisition), be 19.7 miles long, force relocating 26 homes and five businesses; and directly impact 52 acres of wetlands and 110 acres of prime farmland.
QuoteWhile UDOT hopes to make a final decision on routing next year, no funding sources have been identified for the freeway. However, long-range plans envision construction of the first section from Glover Lane to Antelope Drive by 2020, and completion of the rest by 2030.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/57598171-90/conservation-easements-environmental-farmington.html.csp
QuoteFarmington is serving notice that it may sue to block the proposed route of the West Davis Corridor freeway and force the Utah Department of Transportation to redo the project's environmental-impact statement.
The city says it will do so unless UDOT removes three "conservation easements" the city owns near the Great Salt Lake from the freeway's route, which it contends is required by federal law and rule.
"Farmington City will be required to protect its interests if these problems are not rectified by complete avoidance by the West Davis Corridor of these conservation easements," wrote Jeffrey W. Appel, an attorney hired by Farmington.
His seven-page letter, dated Feb. 21, 2014, was sent to UDOT and the Federal Highway Administration.
The freeway would be the northwest extension of the Legacy Parkway — which itself was built after a four-year legal battle over potential damage to wetlands.
Appel wrote that Farmington believes UDOT and the Federal Highway Administration decided first where they wanted the freeway to go, and then their environmental review "and conclusions were reverse-engineered to support that preconceived result" to take advantage of the empty fields in the conservation easements.
He contends that federal rules require giving deference to local officials to identify significant public lands that should be excluded from such routes, and said Farmington told federal and state officials in the process that the easements "must be preserved for such things as parks, recreation areas or wildlife/waterfowl refuges."
QuoteUDOT has said it hopes to issue a final environmental impact statement by this summer, and hopes for a confirming final record of decision by the Federal Highway Administration by the end of the year.
UDOT slowed that process after receiving a flood of 1,600 comments last year on its draft environmental impact statement, including one from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that threatened to deny permits needed for construction because of potential damage to Great Salt Lake wetlands.
Regards,
Andy
Work has brought me to the Salt Lake area and I am generally impressed with the freeways around here. I-15 is a monster south of the belt. I love being able to use the HOT lane all the way to Spanish Fork. There are SPUI's and DDI's everywhere! Then there are these superstreet intersections on the Bangarter Highway.
The concrete pavement on I-80 in the eastern foothills looks really old; is that original?
I've had a chance to check out the Mountain View Corridor. On a map, it seems like they should have just built the freeway right away, but having driven it, I can see that won't be necessary for some time. Nice to have the option for expansion in the future, though.
(And it will take you right past the NSA "freedom center".)
Seems I've come to the SLC at the start of a big rebuild project for I-15 between here and Ogden.
http://www.udot.utah.gov/i15southdavis/ (http://www.udot.utah.gov/i15southdavis/)
More HOT lanes ahoy!
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 09, 2014, 12:38:29 AM
Work has brought me to the Salt Lake area and I am generally impressed with the freeways around here. I-15 is a monster south of the belt. I love being able to use the HOT lane all the way to Spanish Fork. There are SPUI's and DDI's everywhere! Then there are these superstreet intersections on the Bangarter Highway.
The concrete pavement on I-80 in the eastern foothills looks really old; is that original?
I've had a chance to check out the Mountain View Corridor. On a map, it seems like they should have just built the freeway right away, but having driven it, I can see that won't be necessary for some time. Nice to have the option for expansion in the future, though.
(And it will take you right past the NSA "freedom center".)
Seems I've come to the SLC at the start of a big rebuild project for I-15 between here and Ogden.
http://www.udot.utah.gov/i15southdavis/ (http://www.udot.utah.gov/i15southdavis/)
More HOT lanes ahoy!
Glad to hear your compliments about Utah!
As one who has regularly driven it, it seems like I-15 through the greater Wasatch Front is a perpetual project, but at least you're far more likely to be moving than having to stop or take a detour.
BTW How long are you in Utah for?
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 09, 2014, 12:38:29 AM
The concrete pavement on I-80 in the eastern foothills looks really old; is that original?
probably. there is some very old button copy signage in that area.
Quote from: Rover_0 on April 11, 2014, 08:44:35 PM
BTW How long are you in Utah for?
Probably another month or so.
Going to school in the morning on Foothill is a pain in the a** with the huge amounts of traffic. I say if this were an extension of I-215 or a SR 186 6 lane freeway/expressway going past the U and Rice-Eccles, it would take less time, maybe even less than using I-80 and 13th/7th East.
I dunno, that's what my dad (who works at the U) and me (I go to Rowland Hall) were thinking...
Quote from: andy3175 on March 06, 2014, 11:59:15 PM
There is also the West Davis Corridor:
An update... http://www.sltrib.com/news/1816746-155/udot-freeway-shared-alternative-solution-lanes (11/12/14) states that the proposed West Davis freeway may instead be replaced with boulevard and street improvements.
Quote
Instead of building the proposed West Davis Corridor freeway, officials are studying converting existing arteries into boulevards – some with through-traffic lanes in the middle, separated by tree-lined medians from outside lanes just for local access.
That is part of a "shared solution" alternative that claims such boulevards – along with better signal timing, more lanes and innovative intersection designs that limit left turns – will "allow users to drive slower but travel faster."
The Shared Solution Coalition, which has said such options are better than the proposed controversial freeway, has just finished putting meat on the skeleton of its early proposals. The Utah Department of Transportation has posted those details online at http://udot.utah.gov/westdavis.
Quote
UDOT has moved back its schedule a couple times for deciding whether to build the freeway in order to consider that "shared solution" after opposition arose over the agency's proposed preferred alternative for a 19.7-mile, $587 million freeway that would be a northwestern extension of the Legacy Parkway.
Some federal agencies complained the freeway would destroy too many Great Salt Lake wetlands, and a variety of community groups said it may displace too many homes or create more urban sprawl. Several of them called jointly for consideration of the "shared alternative" instead.
Quote
Jefferies said UDOT once had 46 alternatives for the freeway, and they all went through such initial screening – and a handful advanced for additional study on their impacts.
The current schedule calls for UDOT to approve a final Environmental Impact Statement and choose its final alternative next spring – but Jefferies said that will be delayed if the "shared solution" moves to a second-level of screening, or even more detailed study later.
Newly posted details of the shared solution call for a grid system of new boulevards along existing major arteries in west Davis County, addition of bus rapid transit routes, incentives to increase use of mass transit and design of walkable, mixed-use communities along boulevards that would reduce the need for vehicle travel by having people live, work and play in the same area.
"In most cases, boulevard enhancements, including increasing the number of travel lanes, can be achieved within the existing right-of-way by re-purposing existing wide shoulders," the proposal says.
Most non-Interstate freeways aren't Interstate freeways for a reason. The main reason why SR-201, SR-85, and Legacy Parkway (I forgot it's SR-designation number xD) don't have I-designations is because they're not actual Interstates, and they're not auxiliary routes of them either.
By "not actual Interstates", I mean freeways that are entirely Intrastate. I think the I-86 in Idaho, for example, should be re-designated to an Idaho state route. But since, say, the I-84 goes to 2 other states after Utah, it can stay an Interstate.
Quote from: authenticroadgeek on April 13, 2015, 11:45:43 AM
Most non-Interstate freeways aren't Interstate freeways for a reason. The main reason why SR-201, SR-85, and Legacy Parkway (I forgot it's SR-designation number xD) don't have I-designations is because they're not actual Interstates, and they're not auxiliary routes of them either.
By "not actual Interstates", I mean freeways that are entirely Intrastate. I think the I-86 in Idaho, for example, should be re-designated to an Idaho state route. But since, say, the I-84 goes to 2 other states after Utah, it can stay an Interstate.
I-86 should just be a 3di. Even some longer 3di's go between states; I-295 (DE/NJ), I-684 (NY/CT). I don't really care what the number would be or even if they make it I-X15 or I-X84. I-515 is a fun number, but it really shouldn't be I-86.
Grading has started on Phase 4 of the Southern Parkway (UT 7) as a Super-2 between Warner Valley Road (Exit 10) and 4300 West (connection to Washington Dam Road). UDOT lists expected completion in January.
This will provide a continuous road from I-15 to just outside Hurricane, which could attract a lot of Zion-bound traffic.
In a related note, the speed limit on both existing parts of UT 7 was raised from 60mph to 65mph a couple of months ago.
Quote from: Kniwt on October 01, 2015, 09:50:48 PM
Grading has started on Phase 4 of the Southern Parkway (UT 7) as a Super-2 between Warner Valley Road (Exit 10) and 4300 West (connection to Washington Dam Road). UDOT lists expected completion in January.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FM6yzAh7.jpg&hash=46cc1af14a3cfd9be89b631bd51f14424ab2cf01)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FMWn2lS3.jpg&hash=bb1a1f419a865bc2561f70e09385eaa3061980fe)
Quote from: Kniwt on October 01, 2015, 09:50:48 PM
Grading has started on Phase 4 of the Southern Parkway (UT 7) as a Super-2 between Warner Valley Road (Exit 10) and 4300 West (connection to Washington Dam Road). UDOT lists expected completion in January.
This will provide a continuous road from I-15 to just outside Hurricane, which could attract a lot of Zion-bound traffic.
In a related note, the speed limit on both existing parts of UT 7 was raised from 60mph to 65mph a couple of months ago.
That's good to hear; there's been the need for a bypass of St. George of sorts (maybe UT-7 can become part of an extension of US-64 or 160 in the foreseeable future when it connects with UT-9). It's also interesting that the speed limit was raised, though it seems to coincide with the general statewide rise in speed limits (from 75 MPH to 80 on rural stretches of Interstate and from 65 to 70 on urban stretches).
Quote from: Kniwt on October 02, 2015, 12:13:19 PM
Quote from: Kniwt on October 01, 2015, 09:50:48 PM
Grading has started on Phase 4 of the Southern Parkway (UT 7) as a Super-2 between Warner Valley Road (Exit 10) and 4300 West (connection to Washington Dam Road). UDOT lists expected completion in January.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FM6yzAh7.jpg&hash=46cc1af14a3cfd9be89b631bd51f14424ab2cf01)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FMWn2lS3.jpg&hash=bb1a1f419a865bc2561f70e09385eaa3061980fe)
Good pictures! Doesn't look like much is going on right now as far as laying asphalt down is concerned, though.
Paving is in progress on the new segment of UT 7, the Southern Parkway. About half a mile remains unpaved, where grading work still is going on.
A few pics:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FNjhrzow.jpg&hash=e3bccaeab0dc01986585ae43d05207cf8626db4f)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fjr603Za.jpg&hash=5d6cdfa0f24ffcb024af1e26035214daf1c449e9)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FJnZUYiO.jpg&hash=7fbd7f6e30fbfdb27dbfe14c96e47c186a5cc396)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FyGzrkpG.jpg&hash=4f4ec99b3f7b4edcde86aa496d017c832cd1efed)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FoPkIBOU.jpg&hash=ef3079511d4d31e41f493708d2d2e7d36766ffb2)
A few more here:
http://imgur.com/a/vjuIy
The new segment of SR 7 will open to cyclists only on the afternoon of December 19.
https://www.facebook.com/SouthernUtahBicycleAlliance/photos/a.209584392503728.45361.207805469348287/778511932277635/?type=3&theater
QuoteSUBA and our friends at UDOT have a little holiday surprise for all local cyclists...a chance to ride the newest and final section of the Southern Parkway before it is open to motorists. This Saturday, Dec 19 from noon to 3:00pm the new section of the Southern Parkway (between Warner Valley Road and Washington Dam Road) will be open only to cyclists...it opens to traffic later this month.
Quote from: Kniwt on October 25, 2015, 04:13:11 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FoPkIBOU.jpg&hash=ef3079511d4d31e41f493708d2d2e7d36766ffb2)
I like that red concrete (paint?). Fits in well with the environment.
More common than not in the 4-corner states + Nevada.
In Western Colorado, earth toned concrete, guardrails, signposts and even high-tension powerlines are painted either brown or green.
Quote from: thenetwork on December 18, 2015, 10:55:56 AM
More common than not in the 4-corner states + Nevada.
No doubt. It just stood out to me in that photo. I have seen plenty of objects painted earth-toned colors, but for some reason, concrete barriers weren't one of the things that I remember being painted.
Quote from: jakeroot on December 18, 2015, 08:45:40 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on December 18, 2015, 10:55:56 AM
More common than not in the 4-corner states + Nevada.
No doubt. It just stood out to me in that photo. I have seen plenty of objects painted earth-toned colors, but for some reason, concrete barriers weren't one of the things that I remember being painted.
In Nevada, that color (or similar) is becoming a more common accent color to paint the exterior of bridges and abutments, with a lighter, sandier-looking brown/tan as the main color. This scheme is prominent along the west & north legs of the CC 215 beltway in Las Vegas, and also featured in the I-80 upgrade in Reno.
However, the concrete barrier walls on the inside view of the bridge from the roadway are usually painted white or left unpainted.
How far is the SR 7 designation intended to apply?
Quote from: halork on December 20, 2015, 05:53:40 AM
How far is the SR 7 designation intended to apply?
As of now, it's supposed to run from Exit 2 on I-15 and up the route built to the southwest corner of Sand Hollow Reservoir/4300 West in Hurricane (Segments 1-4), then it's supposed to continue around Sand Hollow Reservoir and north to SR-9 (Segment 5 in orange).
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fenet.sgcity.org%2Fdepartments%2Fpublicworks%2Fcapitalprojects%2Fupload%2Fs_p_all.jpg&hash=f8445ae8f9dde4d165fa774fc1c0885d497f9072)
Both SR-7 and SR-9 from SR-7 west to I-15 comprise what's called often referred to as part of a greater "Dixie/St. George Beltway" (if not the complete Southern Parkway) as UDOT documents (which I can't find at this point) have mentioned SR-7 and the portion of SR-9 between SR-7 and I-15 are supposed to become expressway standard at some point in the future.
Segment 4 of UT 7 is just about complete and will be opening to traffic any day now. Pictures taken today.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fb8dYgQy.jpg&hash=aa001cb6ba694a0ce466f4f02ade2536c54c79d2)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FdqPyn0h.jpg&hash=69edbff5fec7450cad15c31199a8d2aaafe2222e)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FHWksvGn.jpg&hash=cd3f51a8ab279b618308bf0a51497499dc820ae1)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FvqIy40z.jpg&hash=9243f7a870c0f6daea2117bebe17795465e6ef3f)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fd4ws4hX.jpg&hash=c1742927175754600199c332eece1f4749308ea5)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FxNG18Db.jpg&hash=d6fee4ee45e36d3cab69d940c011271280451bc8)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FUPm6cXW.jpg&hash=1c0f4e58c40bb82bda890ab484d6134d598106f9)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F0NYJHVJ.jpg&hash=60d1109c1c7935830bbbc3f7c57085868f6ae3f1)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FGKxsZo3.jpg&hash=1d1f52c50467ae298b1cad1fdd092163eaf30c93)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FDs4V9Ni.jpg&hash=6f41839815c77a9a83b06cb58145e15d4b3bd26b)
So is Long Valley Road the exit at Washington Dam Road? Or is that 4500 W?
Did they include any exits between Warner Valley and Washington Dam? Seems like 3090 S would make sense.
That is a nice looking road. Thanks for posting the pictures.
Quote from: NickCPDX on December 28, 2015, 02:02:08 PM
So is Long Valley Road the exit at Washington Dam Road? Or is that 4500 W?
Did they include any exits between Warner Valley and Washington Dam? Seems like 3090 S would make sense.
Long Valley Road is where the eastern orphan stub of the freeway previously ended. It's the connector to Washington Dam Road, but the name hasn't appeared on any signs before. Until now, the exit had no signs at all; it was just the point where all traffic had to exit. (It doesn't appear to show up in any online mapping, so no idea where UDOT got the name.)
No exits between 10 and 15. It seems reasonable that, someday, there might be one to support the new housing that's going in nearby and will be very close to the highway. But on the other hand, if the goal is for UT 7 to be a Zion relief route for tourists, there might not be much sentiment for adding exits, especially if doing so could add local traffic (which, for all intents and purposes, is nearly nonexistent on the existing highway) and force UDOT into four-laning the highway sooner than expected.
2014 AADT was just 1,805 from exits 6-7 ... only 500 from exits 7-10, and 1,000 from exit 15 to the end.
http://www.udot.utah.gov/main/uconowner.gf?n=23660615311933151
It'll be nice once all of UT 7 is divided four lane. I look forward to seeing pictures and reading about it. Though I wonder if these freeways will really help places like Hurricane or if that's just political bluff? :confused:
Quote from: 707 on January 12, 2016, 01:34:12 AM
It'll be nice once all of UT 7 is divided four lane. I look forward to seeing pictures and reading about it. Though I wonder if these freeways will really help places like Hurricane or if that's just political bluff? :confused:
I can't imagine it doing much for Hurricane. It's not much / any of a time-saver from I-15 right now. There's limited opportunity to extend it north of UT 9 because of terrain.
I mean, it's a great airport access route, but as far as I'm concerned it's still quicker to stay on 15 and cut over.
The new segment of UT 7 officially opened to traffic today without ceremony or fanfare. UDOT press release:
http://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/archive/2016/01/12/djg-newest-segment-of-state-route-7-opens-for-motorists
QuoteThe Utah Department of Transportation has opened the newest segment of state Route 7, also known as the Southern Parkway to motorists and cyclists.
The latest segment extends a connection from Sand Hollow Reservoir on the north to the St. George Airport and beyond to Exit 2 on Interstate 15 to the south and west. Prior to this connection, motorists had to exit the parkway and use local streets through the City of Washington to make the loop from Hurricane City.
Construction of the new roadway, valued at $21 million, includes a single lane in each direction with shoulder space for alternative transportation and connects previously constructed interchanges at Warner Valley and Washington Dam Road. The project design and recent construction also provide the foundation and corridor for future lanes and local connections as demand grows in eastern and southern Washington County.
The project was built using state funding with the addition of $220,000 of local funds for improvements.
Construction of the Southern Parkway began in fall 2007 with an interchange at milepost 2 on I-15, a local interchange adjacent to I-15, and groundwork for a divided expressway extending east toward St. George's River Road.
Pavement on the first seven-and-a-half miles of SR-7 reached the new St. George Airport by September 2010. By January 2014, a segment immediately north of the airport to Washington City and one near Sand Hollow added an additional seven miles of pavement and brought the number of interchanges up to seven. The new segment now brings the total number of continuous roadway miles through eastern and southern Washington County up to 19.
Future expansion of lanes and an extension of the Southern Parkway up to state Route 9 are not currently funded for construction.
Quote from: NickCPDX on January 12, 2016, 12:50:11 PM
Quote from: 707 on January 12, 2016, 01:34:12 AM
It'll be nice once all of UT 7 is divided four lane. I look forward to seeing pictures and reading about it. Though I wonder if these freeways will really help places like Hurricane or if that's just political bluff? :confused:
I can't imagine it doing much for Hurricane. It's not much / any of a time-saver from I-15 right now. There's limited opportunity to extend it north of UT 9 because of terrain.
I mean, it's a great airport access route, but as far as I'm concerned it's still quicker to stay on 15 and cut over.
So in other words, it's just a way to access an airport from I-15 near the Arizona border and from Hurricane?
Quote from: 707 on January 12, 2016, 11:38:23 PM
So in other words, it's just a way to access an airport from I-15 near the Arizona border and from Hurricane?
Today, perhaps. But the southwestern Utah (aka "Dixie") region is growing by leaps and bounds -- fifth fastest-growing metro in the country -- with population expected to
double over the next 15-20 years. UT 7 is essentially defining a new expanded urban boundary, and new housing developments are already beginning to sprout along the route (most notably at Exit 6, running right up to the Arizona line, and just off the current end of the route at Sand Hollow Road).
I joke with friends, but with a bit of seriousness, that in 20 years, UT 7 is going to be lined from end to end with Home Depots and Applebees. Meanwhile, I-15 will get only more congested (a story this week says that there are now plans to six-lane it all the way from the state line to at least Exit 10), so folks will start looking for alternatives.
Quote from: Kniwt on January 13, 2016, 12:14:07 AM
Quote from: 707 on January 12, 2016, 11:38:23 PM
So in other words, it's just a way to access an airport from I-15 near the Arizona border and from Hurricane?
Today, perhaps. But the southwestern Utah (aka "Dixie") region is growing by leaps and bounds -- fifth fastest-growing metro in the country -- with population expected to double over the next 15-20 years. UT 7 is essentially defining a new expanded urban boundary, and new housing developments are already beginning to sprout along the route (most notably at Exit 6, running right up to the Arizona line, and just off the current end of the route at Sand Hollow Road).
I joke with friends, but with a bit of seriousness, that in 20 years, UT 7 is going to be lined from end to end with Home Depots and Applebees. Meanwhile, I-15 will get only more congested (a story this week says that there are now plans to six-lane it all the way from the state line to at least Exit 10), so folks will start looking for alternatives.
I need to start keeping up with population statistics. That's incredible! Will any of this anticipated expansion grow that part of Arizona and reach Nevada eventually?
Quote from: 707 on January 14, 2016, 02:03:19 AM
I need to start keeping up with population statistics. That's incredible! Will any of this anticipated expansion grow that part of Arizona and reach Nevada eventually?
Only 5% of the land on the Arizona side of the Virgin River basin is privately owned, and 91.7% of the land is federally owned and managed by the Arizona Strip Field Office of the Bureau of Land Management, so highly unlikely.
Source: http://www.azwater.gov/AzDWR/StatewidePlanning/WaterAtlas/WesternPlateau/Land/VirginRiver.htm (includes a map)
Quote from: Kniwt on January 13, 2016, 12:14:07 AM
I joke with friends, but with a bit of seriousness, that in 20 years, UT 7 is going to be lined from end to end with Home Depots and Applebees.
Definitely everybody's vision of success
Today, I learned about a new freeway in construction in Washington County, Utah...I hadn't been through Saint George and anywhere in Utah since 1997 (almost 20 years). The area is among the US' fastest growing regions and I'm guessing the population is over 150,000 now...the 2010 census finds there were 138,115 residents.
With this new St Geogre growth, they're gonna have to put a 3-di in that area. Maybe bring back the I-415 designation? Or give UT-7 a designation like I-115? I understand this isn't a Salt Lake scale city we're dealing with, but in fifty years when growth has multiplied exponentially we should put a 3-di road.
Quote from: authenticroadgeek on February 28, 2016, 03:24:15 PM
With this new St Geogre George growth, they're gonna have to put a 3-di in that area. Maybe bring back the I-415 designation? Or give UT-7 a designation like I-115? I understand this isn't a Salt Lake scale city we're dealing with, but in fifty years when growth has multiplied exponentially we should put a 3-di road.
I've thought of upgrading SR-7 into I-715 and making it a spur extending east, connecting to SR-59, and possibly to Hildale or along AZ-389 ending just east of Fredonia AZ (as part of a possible I-17 extension and Hurricane bypass). Or, since SR-9 between the future junction of SR-7 west to I-15 is set to eventually to at least become an expressway (maybe it becomes a freeway?), I-415 works just as fine, as it would loop back to I-15.
Utah has been pretty content to keep state route numbers on their newer freeways. The best candidate for upgrading IMO is SR-85 (the Mountain View Corridor) once complete (especially if an extension roughly along SR-68 to I-15 near Santaquin becomes a reality), and possibly SR-67 (Legacy Highway/West Davis Corridor).
However, UDOT would rather build and widen roads as traffic needs warrant instead of upgrading them to some seemingly arbitrary standard for a blue and red shield.