Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Utah Lake Bridge Controversy

A bridge over Utah Lake has been proposed and hotly debated in Utah Valley.  It is projected that the valley will double in population from the current nearly 600K to1.2M by 2040, and that the population west of Utah Lake will go from 40K to at least 250K.  From the standpoint of added time and fuel expended, not having a bridge over Utah Lake will become wasteful for a rapidly increasing number of commuters who will be traveling twice daily around the lake to get to the central business (Provo/Orem) area.  The bridge is opposed on the grounds of disrupting migratory waterfowl, being too expensive, and being built prematurely.  Here is a detailed document with pics of the proposed bridge from various vantage points, including those used in this blog entry.

Having lived in southern Louisiana for over ten years, it becomes hard to understand why there would be much controversy as to whether to build a bridge over Utah Lake.  Try going anywhere from New Orleans without going over a substantial amount of elevated highway not much different than is needed to go over Utah Lake which itself is only 12' deep at its deepest point.  The causeway over Lake Pontchartrain is 24 miles compared to the 6 miles proposed to go over Utah Lake.  The stretch of elevated freeway from Ponchatoula to the Mississippi River (I-55, I-10, I-310) with nothing but swamp and open water underneath, is nearly 50 miles.  Maybe the die hard opponents of building the bridge need to come live in New Orleans for a summer. Let them go on I-10 from Slidell to New Orleans to Baton Rouge to Lafayette.  Each leg will take them over far more open water than the 6-mile proposed bridge at the north end of Utah Lake.  And by the way, they will see plenty of bird life down here, for those who worry about how a bridge over the north end of Utah Lake is going to disrupt bird migration as it relates to the lake.  As to the prohibitive cost of building the bridge ($300M to $600M, depending on the estimate), perhaps Utah needs to get an estimate from those who built the elevated highways in Louisiana.  These estimates seem excessive, but then again, what do I know?

One final thought:  We have committed to living in Tennessee and look very much forward to what we believe will be a rich experience there.  If we had decided to return to Utah Valley, living on the west side of Utah Lake would have had enormous appeal for me.  The west side is a respite from the rat race on the east side. Yet it is close enough to have an amazing view of the "big city" across the lake and the Wasatch Mountain backdrop behind it.  One example of a future planned community is Mosida Orchards...worth checking out for those who live in the general area.

4 comments:

Lori said...

I agree that a bridge is the way to go - it seems clear, especially after your experience in Louisiana. The argument of it being built prematurely seems really short-sighted. Seems like we're always putting off projects until it's a crisis. Pay now or pay later, it has to be done. Sounds like UT could have some serious congestion problems in the future. Hopefully TN will move at a slower pace!

BayouCane said...

That, in fact, is what makes me very comfortable with our decision to settle in a rural part of Tennessee.

Handsome B. Wonderful said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
They call him James Ure said...

Agreed. I was thinking that they needed a bridge when I lived there in the late 90s. The example of the raised road-ways in Louisiana is spot on.