The 60-day public comment period for the Heber Valley corridor bypass project is over. The Utah Department of Transportation received approximately 800 comments by the March 9 deadline.
UDOT Region Three Project Manager Craig Hancock said Wednesday that number is on “the high end” of what the entity was expecting in terms of public input. But Wasatch County residents have spoken out in more ways than one since Alternative B was selected from UDOT’s draft environmental impact statement in January.
More than 200 residents showed up at a public hearing in January to speak out about environmental concerns, traffic safety and the protection of the North Fields, through which Alternative B cuts between Potters Lane and 900 North. This month, more than 50 Wasatch County residents gathered at a “tractorcade” to protest UDOT’s chosen alternative.
Wasatch County has also publicly spoken out against Alternative B. The government entity rejected the chosen route entirely, suggesting an alternative instead that shifts Alternative B as close to U.S. 40 as possible. The county received unanimous support on its public comment from the Midway City Council and a smaller showing of support from Heber City councilors.
Yvonne Barney, Aaron Cheatwood, Morgan Murdock and Heber City Mayor Heidi Franco all signed the county’s public comment, which was sent to UDOT prior to the public comment period finish line.
Hancock called the 60-day process “very engaging.”
“We’re still reading through everything, sorting it out, trying to get our hands wrapped around all the comments, and so we’ll be doing that over the next few weeks as we try to understand what we’re looking at,” Hancock said.
But Hancock indicated there are common themes in the responses.
“So far, we’ve seen support and opposition to the alternatives, including the ‘no action’ alternative,” Hancock said.
There are reportedly repeated concerns about the benefits or lack thereof with regard to travel times. Then, concerns about impacts to natural resources and agricultural operations in the North Fields. Hancock said UDOT has also seen questions about noise, property impacts, design modifications, new alternatives and construction improvements.
“We’ve also gotten a number of comments recognizing that Alternative B, our preferred alternative, does provide a long-term solution for the community and planned growth and an appreciation for the completion of the alternative route,” Hancock said.
Hancock said there were a number of requests to prioritize wetland mitigation and access to the North Fields area.
The sheer number of comments may push back UDOT’s timeline, according to Hancock. The final environmental impact statement draft was scheduled for completion by the end of the summer. Now, Hancock said it’s more realistic to picture an end-of-year end date.
Wednesday, Wasatch County Councilor Colleen Bonner asked Hancock how much “weight” the comments bear in UDOT’s decision-making process.
“If there are comments where we have to fix things or adjust things … those are things that we will do. If there are alternatives that we can look at that make sense from an environmental point of view, then those are things that we can begin to also consider,” Hancock said.
County Councilor Erik Rowland, who led the charge in writing Wasatch County’s public comment to UDOT, said the public comment period was “invaluable.”
“That ability to find something in our community that we can get behind is unique and rare, and this has been one of those that I’ve just been very appreciative to be a part of the process,” Rowland said. “That has helped, I think, push us forward as a community to really decide who we are and what it is we want.”
Hancock said UDOT will now begin reviewing and responding to each comment the entity received over the past 60 days. That step must be completed before any final record of decision is published. UDOT will continue to meet with Wasatch County and Heber City on a monthly basis.