OCR Text |
Show NOVEMBER 1995 Provo Canyon Highway Expansion: Environmental and Financial Nightmare Opinion By Darrell Mensel he leviathan known as the Provo Canyon highway expansion — perennially delayed and critics and naysayers — pestered by is poised to take its next enormous step toward Heber City. In October, the Utah Department of Transporta5) tion put the 1.9 mile road sec- to for $43 build emerge to assault UDOT over anoth- er change in design or an overlooked commitment. The most recent group to coa- lesce and assail the Provo Canyon highway expansion came together a couple of years ago to battle a major design change, which would have put tion, known as the “tunnels,” out for bid with the hope of finding someone sory committees and revised environmental analyses. Yet, inevitably, a fresh band of canyon lovers will an enormous 1,000-foot-long bridge over the river. Calling themselves the Provo Canyon Coalition, many of the newly energized antagonists were fishermen from such organizations as Trout Unlimited, who didn’t want a massive bridge shading their blue ribbon trout waters and it million. It will be the most expensive piece ever built in Utah. bringing of state road incessant truck noise over- ago, head. Their persistence eventually forced UDOT back to the original two-tunnel design. this beleaguered piece of highway may achieve unbeatable records in number of years under construction and in dollars spent per mile. Indeed, the progress of the road up the dinator for Sundance, sparked the formation of the new group when she brought the bridge plan to the attention of the fishing community Conceived canyon has nearly been 30 so years glacial, so Julie through Mack, Steve environmental Schmidt, coor- owner of expensive, and so fraught with controversy that participants from both sides of the aisle have wondered aloud whether the road would ever be completed. The environmental community has been at odds with this project for Western Rivers Flyfisher. She remains the foremost watchdog over UDOT’s promises and performance on the decades. Their antagonism and gone in phases, as new grievances. Most of these have to do with aesthetic problems. For instance, UDOT is now making noises about placing a “colored” bureaucratic with UDOT concessions, new has the come ever- exhausts them designs, advi- highway project. At a recent meeting at Sundance, Mack once again brought together various activists to lay out a series of jersey barrier in the median of the four lane section, which already has been built. Such a barrier would violate a prior the question has been commitment of how and honest raises UDOT in advertising safety advan- tages of the new road. n addition, the portion of the Provo River, which they have already planned to reconfigure to accomodate the new road, looks like a rock ditch, and not a natural river system. Other promised aesthetic improvements, such as_ irrigated plantings to cover road cuts, have failed and there are no plans to fix or revive them. Although Sundance, through Ms. Mack, remains active in criticizing the details of the project, they are constrained from challenging the larger concept of the road, itself. Sundance owner Robert Redford agreed a number of years ago to accept a four lane road in the canyon. Whether UDOT’s broken promises and environmental indiscretions drive him to retract his consent remains to be seen. Other members of the Provo Canyon Coalition have not been so constrained. They entered the fray to stop a massive bridge. Now they have emerged with serious questions Continued on page 9 ee VALU Es |-800-424-DEER “Utah Locals Coupon DEER VALLEY Book. Some restrictions apply. PAGE 8 // |