The Heber Valley Bypass project is at a standstill as the Utah Department of Transportation considers several possible routes, none of which will satisfy the concerns of all elected officials and community members.
There are five routes being considered as UDOT prepares a draft Environmental Impact Study set to be released this fall.
Each of the five are meant to help congestion on Heber City’s Main Street by connecting U.S. Routes 189 and 40 south of Heber City with U.S. Route 189 to the north of the city, but they do so in varying ways.
One key difference between several of the proposed routes has led to disagreements among local officials as two of the alternative routes would cut through the wetlands to the northwest of Heber City.
Routes WA 1, WB 1 and WB 2 all bypass Heber’s Main Street before turning toward and connecting to U.S. Route 189 at 800 North.
Routes WB 3 and WB 4 do the same, though they also offer a route through about 3 miles of wetlands north of 800 North, running almost parallel to 600 west before connecting where River Road meets U.S. Route 189.
According to UDOT, the inclusion of these alternatives came after public comments that urged the department to explore the options.
An “Early Scoping Period Comments” document available on UDOT’s website shows that Heber City Council Members Rachel Kahler and Mike Johnston both shared with UDOT their suggestions that the bypass be connected to U.S. Route 40 further north than planned in WA 1, WB 1 or WB 2.
“Due to the planned major growth of the North Village and the Upper Jordanelle area, being probably 10,000 homes in the next 40 years, I feel it is imperative that UDOT plan for the north connection to be as far north as possible,” Johnston commented.
Speaking with The Park Record, Johnston clarified that he is happy to let UDOT make whatever decision the department determines most appropriate, and that he doesn’t represent Heber City or its council at large.
Still, with the background of a civil engineer, Johnston said he believes a route that connects just above Heber City and doesn’t include a vein running farther north will not solve the congestion the project aims to resolve. Making the turn likely won’t appeal to truckers traveling Main Street, he explained, and four planned traffic lights between Heber City and the intersection where River Road meets State Route 189 will only move congestion slightly north.
On her “The Mayor’s Report” blog, Heber City Mayor Heidi Franco stated her opposition to cutting through the north fields, referencing a meeting that took place in February of this year.
“Unitedly, I and Chairman Park asked UDOT to keep the originally planned bypass route around the City, which is mostly in proposed routes WA1, WB1 and WB2,” she wrote.
According to the minutes of a March 7 meeting, Council Member Yvonne Barney also expressed her opposition to a route cutting through the north fields, stating the same sentiment was felt by thousands throughout the county.
The position of Heber City as a municipality is far less resolute.
On March 21, the council voted 3-1 to pass resolution 2023-07, which acknowledged all five possible alternatives UDOT is set to consider in its Draft Environmental Impact Study.
“Heber City supports UDOT’s continued evaluation of all five West Bypass Road Alternatives,” the resolution states. “Heber City does not want any of the five alternatives to be excluded from evaluation.”
In an email to The Park Record, Heber City Manager Matt Brower explained the city’s reasoning for the council’s largely neutral resolution.
“The public needs to have confidence in the process being used by UDOT,” Brower wrote. “Any active role by the City to influence that process to achieve a certain outcome would only serve to undermine the public’s confidence.”
Wasatch County has taken a much more definitive stance on the matter. Just over a year ago, it passed resolution 22-09 to submit a comment to UDOT as council. “Wasatch County feels that the value the community places on the North Fields and the impacts to that area were not adequately considered in the selection of options WB3 and WB4,” the resolution states.
It explains that the county sees the fields as qualifying “as a Historic site of significant value,” and references both Heber City and Wasatch Counties’ general plans to show that both entities recognize the importance of preserving open space.
In December, as reported by KPCW, the county council voted to allow people owning land in the north fields to apply for their property to become “agriculture protection areas,” which could further complicate UDOT’s process if it chooses WB 3 or WB 4.
Though there’s not an exact date set, it is anticipated UDOT will finish the project’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement in the coming months. Its release will be followed by another period of public input which UDOT will consider before revising the document.