Categories
Local politics State

My Utah Lake Perspective

I obviously ruffled the feathers of one commenter when I wrote a post in support of a bridge over Utah Lake. He argues that those who want a lake bridge hate the lake and that we should instead be working to restore the lake to its natural beauty. I argue that building a bridge and restoring the lake are nearly independent issues and to that end I decided to share my position on what we should do to restore the lake.

First, I think that Utah Lake would be a great natural resource for the county and the state if it were restored. In its present condition it is little more than a big puddle interrupting our transportation and growth.

There are currently efforts to rid the lake of the carp that were introduced to the lake a century ago. I believe that is a crucial step to improving the beauty of the lake and I think the Department of Wildlife Resources should take every possible step to make that happen – some suggestions they could consider include offering a bounty to fishermen for every carp caught (and kept), making it illegal to release carp (like they have with burbot), or even trying to host a tournament for carp fishing as Texas has done. I’m not sure what the effects on other animals and plants of the ecosystem would be if they try poisoning the carp (as has been suggested).

When the carp have been contained we should be able to reintroduce cutthroat trout and nurse the June sucker populations back to sustainable levels. This would both improve the beauty of the lake, and increase the opportunities for tourism and recreational use of this natural resource.

None of this depends, or is hindered, by a lake bridge as far as I can see. Some have even argued that a lake bridge could be a toll road and that the tolls could be used to fund other lake improvements. The only conjunction I can see between the two issues is that the specific placement of a bridge might influence the recreational activities available on the lake.

Categories
culture State

Taking a Long View

Aside from my interested in transit and my general appreciation for the possibilities of Utah County, I did not expect that I would have much to gain from FrontRunner South now that I have moved North. When I read about the groundbreaking for FrontRunner in Utah County the comments helped me see that I still have a stake in the project.

This comment:

Great, now I can take commuter rail all the way to Cougar football games on fall afternoons.

Reminded me that I will not likely go to many BYU games with family memebrs which has been a fun event once or twice a year for me while I lived in the area. Once the line is finished I could go from Bountiful as easily as I did from Lehi for those games.

Another:

They really should finish first what they have now considering the line from Ogden to Pleasant View City is still not complete.

Reminded me that there are still detractors who must still be countered with leavel-headed reason. Which section of rail is likely to have more riders per mile – Ogden to Pleasant View, or Salt Lake City to Provo?

Categories
culture technology

Progression of Transit

Hopefully the idea of growing into light rail does not come as a real surprise to anyone.

{Darrell Cook}, executive director of Mountainland Association of Governments, said if the dedicated bus system linking Utah Valley University, Brigham Young University and Provo’s East Bay works as expected, the system could, in time, be replaced by a light-rail system.

There would seem to be a natural progression for public transit that city planners could prepare for that would allow for public transit to be tailored to the current needs of a community with a defined growth potential as ridership needs increase over time. With advanced planning it should be relatively painless to meet expanding needs by starting early without investing prematurely in expensive systems.

The transition from BRT to light-rail is a last step along one line of progression, but I think there may be two progressions available. There is the regional transportation which starts with simple bus service and graduates to more complex bus service (with BRT and dedicated bus lanes etc.) before converting dedicated bus lanes into light rail – assuming that the growth and ridership supports each successive transition. Then there is the longer range transportation between metropolitan areas which starts with shuttles or express buses and eventually graduates to commuter rail or even high-speed rail. There may even be a step between the express/shuttle phase and the commuter rail phase that can be filled with DMU’s.

If early development incorporated the possibilities of future transit options then it might be easier and less costly to build and maintain transit commensurate with population.

Categories
Local politics

Advocating a Utah Lake Bridge

One of the things that is good about Editorial boards is that when they are right about something they usually do a good job of defining and defending their position and they have the power of the press at their disposal. (One of the problems is that they have all those advantages when they are wrong too.) A great example of that is the Daily Herald Editors putting the issue of a bridge over Utah Lake in perspective.

Local pressure groups are lining up to fight even thinking about the possibility of a bridge across Utah Lake. They might as well protest the heat of a Utah Valley summer. It’s inevitable that some kind of passage will be forged over the lake in coming years, and the most productive course would be to find the best feasible alternative that will serve the widest number of people.

When my close interest in the transportation issues of Utah County began, the idea of a lake bridge seemed like a distant possibility – something that might happen in 20 or 30 years if at all. Years of living there and following the issues easily have me convinced that the question of if a bridge should be built is short-sighted, the only real questions to answer are where, when, and how to do the job right.

No comprehensive plan to meet the growing transportation needs of Utah County can fail to include some route across the lake. Anyone who wants to delay or minimize a lake bridge had better approach their goal through community planning and business development in Cedar Valley. Only by lowering the overwhelming incentives to travel between that growing area and the established communities on the east side of the lake will allow for a more leisurely approach to designing the bridge that will still become necessary at some point in the future for economic and quality of life reasons.

One nice change in their rhetoric is that they no longer appear to lay the blame for this issue at the feet of Lehi City – like they did only 2 months ago.

Categories
Local politics

Re: Growth Will Force a Lake Bridge

It must be nice to be paid to publish your opinions – especially when there is nobody to dispute your position. With the power of the press you get to proclaim who is right and who is wrong, and you get to make your living taking the time to make a considered opinion not only about the right answer to current issues, but also to the best way to sell that position without regard to the truth. Such an attitude appears to be the driving force behind the Editorial Board of the Provo Daily Herald (DHEB) as they criticize Lehi city for what they see as the inevitability of a bridge across Utah Lake.

Using little more than their own words and logic from that one editorial it is clear that they are using Lehi as a scapegoat on an issue that is uncomfortable but which has no real villain.

Based on their words, only 17% of wage earners in Cedar Valley will be heading north for work in 2040. Would those headed East be very excited to drive to 2100 N in Lehi to travel to Provo/Orem just because it is a full freeway instead of a 6 or 8 lane arterial road (which it will undoubtedly be by 2040)?

The DHEB argues that there are “a dozen east-west corridors of five to seven lanes each” in Salt Lake County and only two in Utah County. If we compare apples to apples then we must recognize that the “measly two-lane compromise that Lehi forced on Utah County” is actually a 4 lane road (two lanes each direction) and will likely be at least 6 lanes within 15 years. That’s respectable compared to the 5 – 7 lane roads in Salt Lake County they are comparing it to as well as the 6 or 8 lane freeway that it is replacing. In addition, this compromise should be built in under 5 years rather than the 2100 N freeway which would not even be started for nearly 10 years. This early increase in capacity should allow for Main Street in Lehi to receive a long overdue widening as well so we could have an extra 10 east/west lanes within 15 years (not counting the 4 lanes at 1000 S. in Lehi). Between main street, 2100 N, and 1000 S, Lehi will have at least 14 east-west lanes for travel on the west side of I-15 – you could hardly expect more form a single city.

Do I expect that 14 lanes would be able to handle the traffic from 1/4 Million people expected to be in Cedar Valley? No. The real limitation on east-west travel in the county is that we have a lake spanning most of our north-south distance between our east and west side communities – why should the DHEB blame that on Lehi? The only possible solutions to that problem are a bridge over the lake or else a reduction in the necessity of east-west travel. Even the DHEB wording that this “will only hasten the construction of an east-west bridge across Utah Lake” is a reminder that such a bridge is a matter of when more than if. Is there any extra environmental impact if it is built 5 years earlier rather than 5 years later?

I find it ironic that it is the Mayor of Lehi, and not the DHEB, that has been talking for years about the need for a Cedar Valley highway (that DHEB is now calling an inevitability) and a lake bridge.

Categories
Local meta politics State

Party Shenanigans

I would think that people who are politically involved enough to be elected as delegates and precinct chairs for the Republican party would want to be contacted by candidates so that they could choose who they would support. That is at odds with the assertion that the Utah County Republican Party promised not to give the emails of their delegates to the candidates. The water becomes extra murkey in light of the fact that there is evidence that some candidates do appear to have those email addresses. Kip Meacham has links about this as it develops plus his own experience as a precinct chair. The story is also being followed at Out of Context. This is definitely a case where people need to keep the issue in the public eye and put pressure on the party to not interfere with a fair political process – if some candidates have the email addresses then they should be released to all Republican candidates.

If delegates do not want to hear from candidates then they should not accept the position of being delegates – but I don’t think that’s what is happening here. If candidates want to try spamming the delegates to win the primary then I think the delegates are smart enough to vote against those candidates at the convention – but I don’t think that’s what’s really happening here either. Maybe it’s my own personal bias here, but this seems like exactly the type of thing I would expect from a party that has no significant opposition (meaning another solid party to counter them) which has grown accustomed to simply dictating who will come before the citizens on the ballot for their perfunctory approval.

I sure hope to see the Utah County Democrats grow to the point that they can regularly get their candidates elected – forcing the county Republican party to stop talking and start listening. We also need to see more active Republicans like Kip who will stand up to their party and say publicly that this is unacceptable.

Categories
politics

The Wide Middle

I just discovered The Wide Middle today and I think that the concept of “open source public policy” is an example of how more political discourse ought to take place – based on the assumption that we agree on more things than we disagree on and that we can find solutions where we identify problems. I hope that the discussion takes off – I certainly plan to contribute where I can.