OCR Text |
Show O r-.;;'e::'-n cf I.-.'er.s'a'.e Il'ir.vay c:..Tsracti.n in Utah is bt.rg a x-tir.pl'ihf.'d at a r. e cons d rally above th-j na'.'.'.nd a'.er.g-, aecorJin.? to a re pert released this week by Utah Foundation, a p:i-va'.e, p:i-va'.e, nor.pref.t service agency. agen-cy. This trend appears to have ctri'. inued over a considerable time. However, the Beehive Stale continues to run be-,h:nd be-,h:nd the national average in terms cf per cent of total aulhcrb.cd Interstate milc-cje milc-cje comploted, largely because be-cause cf basic decisions made at the beginning of the Interstate In-terstate program. As of January 1, 1970, Utah had 389.7 Interstate miles open to traffic, or about 42 per cent of its authorized total to-tal (935 18 miles, the Foundation Foun-dation noted. The total Interstate In-terstate system (42,5119 miles) was 70 per cent complete on ' the same date. However, during dur-ing the year 1969, Utah Inter- sidle limeade upeucu lu uai- fic rose from 32 per cent to 42 per cent of total autihor-'Izalliort, autihor-'Izalliort, wljde the malt ion al pirc-er.t: ge went from 65 per dr.! to 70 p r cent. Utah has mere than 132 Interstate In-terstate miles now under con-s con-s ruction, cf wh en 116 miles ar.d pci-s'bly mere if conditions con-ditions are favorable are expecled to be opened to traffic traf-fic in 197. Completion therefore there-fore will continue to climb at a much faster rate tha a the national average. A Foundation report issued in the summer cf 1957 (' Status Stat-us cf Utah's Highway Program. Pro-gram. 1967," Research Report No. 250 for August, 1967) indicated in-dicated tthat Utah had deliberately delib-erately adopted a policy of constructing .the most difficult diffi-cult and costly urban Interstate Inter-state segments first, leaving until later the relatively less ccstly and less complex rural siacilirfis. The decis'ion was fcased on factors of economy, safety, and handling cf existing exist-ing traffic patterns. The 1967 report indicated that the policy poli-cy was working out and that Utah's remaining construction construc-tion would cost relatively less per mile than that already completed, while in many states the .reverse would be true. "Duririg ithe 32-month interval inter-val between April 1 1967 and January 1, 1979, 136.6 additional addi-tional Utah Interstate miles 'have been opened to traffic, which is 14.6 per cent of the shut's total aath Tizaiion." co.trer.t Foundation report re-port states. ''This gives the Beehive State Sixteenth rank among the stahs in terms cf addi.lrnal miles completed, and nineteenth rank in terms of per cent cf total authorized author-ized miles completed in the stated interval. In the entire nation, an average cf 120 miles per slate, cr 13.8 percent per-cent cf total authorized mileage, mile-age, has been completed in the thirty-two months." A number of stales which stood near the lop of the 1st in percentage of total au'hcr'.zed m'les completed in 1937 showed a high ratio cf ccst-per-miles yet to be ccmpla'ed in relation to that which had been finished. Indications In-dications were that these states had their most diffi- c'.lt construction still ahead rr.d wou'd be forced to proceed pro-ceed s'owlv, according to the Fea-atien report. Tliis analy s'5 arrears to have been borne 'out hi many instances. Cor.tieolicut, for example, has competed cnly 2.8 additional Interstate miles in 32 months and Oregon only 11. Ten states have completed fewer than 59 additional Interslaie miles in the interval. Due largely to constructio.i cutbacks ordered by Washington Wash-ington as anti-inflation curbs, substantial reserves have built up in Utah's share of the Federal Highway Trust Fund and in the state's own reserves for matching funds. The Foundation report says that ifhere are no apparent problems 'in 'the immediate financing of the overall Fed-erall Fed-erall aid 'highway construction construc-tion programs in Utah, even if funds should be released at a substantially faster rale than in the recent past. Tak ing a long range point of view of the state's total highway program, however, induces a far less optimistic analysis. A sizeable deficiency is projected pro-jected over the next twenty years in terms of overall Utah highway construction needs. The Utah State Hiihway Department has recommended recommend-ed extension of the life of tihte Federal Highway Trust Fund and of continuing a major ma-jor Federafl-aid program after 1975, according to the Foundation Foun-dation report. At the same time, Utah highway officials strongly oppose any addition to the presently authorized Interstate system .until the originally or-iginally authorzed system has (been completed. They also 'oppose any diversion from the Trust Fund to non-highway uses. |