Study Overview
The Utah Department of Transportation’s (UDOT) mission is to keep Utah moving while enhancing quality of life through transportation improvements in our state. UDOT is conducting an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to improve regional and local mobility on US-40 from SR-32 to US-189 and provide opportunities for non-motorized transportation while allowing Heber City to meet its vision for the historic town center.
Project Update
Revised Date: 2/10/25
Recent activities include updates to local councils and designing the alternatives with enough detail for Level 2 screening. Ongoing efforts focus on coordinating with Utah Open Lands, revising alternatives for 2050 traffic, and quantifying screening criteria to begin Level 2 screening. Monthly meetings with local governments continue, with updates scheduled in February. The community will be invited to review and comment on the Draft EIS once traffic analysis, updates to the alternatives, and impact analysis are complete.
Study Area
The Heber Valley Corridor EIS project team will be working with the stakeholders to evaluate improvements to address and enhance mobility through the Heber Valley and improve the operation of Heber City Main Street (US-40).
Through this process UDOT will develop transportation alternatives that could include a variety of solutions including reconfiguration of Main Street, improvements to other area roads, constructing new roads, and other options identified by the public.
Current Phase
Revised Date: 2/10/25
A status update of activities on the EIS through January and what to expect in coming months.
Completed activities
Local Government Coordination:
- Wasatch County Open Lands Board Meeting (Jan. 13, 6:30 p.m.)
- Wasatch County Interlocal Meeting (Jan. 15, 6:30 p.m.)
Alternatives Design
- Completed the traffic analysis for Level 1 screening and designed the alternatives with enough detail for Level 2 screening.
- Coordinated with local government staff to incorporate feedback where feasible into further design refinement.
Ongoing activities
Open Lands Coordination
- Coordination with Utah Open Lands to ensure there is no conflict between the proposed bypass and proposed conservation easements.
Alternatives Design
- In the process of revising alternatives and incorporating feedback from local government staff.
- Quantifying screening criteria (metrics that determine which alternatives move forward in the EIS) to begin screening in the upcoming months.
- The alternatives going through the screening process this spring will generally follow the same alignment as the alternatives that were previously published; however, modifications will be necessary at two locations to meet design standards.
Local Government Coordination
- Monthly coordination meetings with Heber City and Wasatch County staff.
What to expect next
Local Government Coordination
- Update at Wasatch County Council work session (Feb. 12, 4 p.m.)
- Update at Heber City Council General Session (Feb. 18, 6 p.m.)
- Updates to other local governments if requested
Alternative Design
- After we quantify the screening criteria, we will eliminate alternatives that don’t meet the purpose and need or that will result in additional impacts without proportionate benefits.
- Anticipate publishing an addendum to the alternatives screening report this spring.
- Design for Level 2 screening is preliminary. The alternatives that pass through Level 2 screening will be designed in more detail in the Draft EIS. The additional design work will address non-motorized transportation components, drainage design and stormwater management, access and connectivity to local road networks, conflict with major infrastructure and utilities, and avoidance or minimization of impacts to key resources.
Detailed Evaluation of Alternatives
- In addition to developing more in-depth designs for the alternatives that pass through Level 2 screening, we will also conduct a more detailed impact analysis.
- During the detailed evaluation of alternatives, additional engineering is conducted and impact analysis is considered in more detail and for more resources. It is during this more detailed evaluation that impacts to land use (including open space), farmland, water quality, wildlife, visual resources, social and community resources, economics, and other resources are evaluated. For more information on resources that are commonly evaluated in EISs for highway projects, please visit https://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/legislation/nepa/guidance_preparing_env_documents.aspx
- This detailed analysis will be included in the Draft EIS and will allow a comparison of alternatives, including the No-action Alternative, to help inform a decision on the preferred alternative.
For more information on commonly asked questions that we received throughout the study, please visit the FAQ section available on the study website: https://hebervalleyeis.udot.utah.gov/#faq. Please note, these FAQs are from previous phases of the study and have not yet been revised to the current phase.
More detailed information on the previously proposed alternatives and the analysis published to-date are available on the study website: https://hebervalleyeis.udot.utah.gov/alternative-screening/.
Public Engagement Opportunities
- Public hearing and comment period for the Draft EIS
Current And Upcoming Activities
Study Process and Timeline
The anticipated project timeline outlines the phases to accomplish development of the Heber Valley Corridor EIS. Ongoing engagement with the public will take place during the estimated time periods to keep the community informed during the EIS.
Submit Comment
Comments provided to the project team will be reviewed and considered by UDOT as it develops the project. All comments received will be documented in the project record. The study team will contact you if they need additional information or clarification.
Comments provided during the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process to UDOT are a matter of public record and subject to public release, if requested. For more information, see the Terms of Use at the bottom of the Utah.gov website.
Comments that are publicly displayed through online tools must follow our UDOT Social Media Policy Participant Code of Conduct. Comments that are unacceptable under that policy may be removed at the administrator’s discretion.
If you receive an error when trying to submit a comment, please refresh your browser.
Frequently Asked Questions
Environmental Impact statement
- UDOT conducts planning studies early in the project development process to help determine if there is a need to progress a project into the environmental stage. It also helps UDOT identify potential issues to better understand a project before moving it forward.
- One purpose of planning studies is to preserve corridors in rapidly-developing areas. However, corridor preservation does not predetermine the outcome of the EIS process but does allow local jurisdictions some level of future planning.
- In addition, the preliminary study helped UDOT build stakeholder relationships and learn stakeholder needs.
- Conducting a planning study also allowed UDOT to clearly identify a need for further environmental study and inform that study of key issues and recommendations.
- An EIS is required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for actions that could significantly affect the quality of the natural and human environments when there is a federal action (e.g., federal funding, federal permit or approval).
- Other studies, such as a corridor study, may identify a potential corridor or route for consideration and planning purposes. An EIS provides in-depth analysis of impacts to the natural and human environments for a range of alternatives. The EIS identifies a preferred alternative based on a comparison of potential benefits and associated impacts of each alternative evaluated in detail.
- In addition, an EIS provides decision-makers with the necessary information to make an informed decision on the anticipated benefits and impacts of the action.
- UDOT is the project sponsor and the lead agency on the EIS, responsible for things such as:
- Managing the process and resolving issues.
- Identifying and involving cooperating and participating agencies.
- Providing opportunities for public involvement in defining the purpose of and need for the project.
- Determining the range of alternatives and determining methodologies and the level of detail for the analysis of alternatives.
- As the lead agency, UDOT is responsible for the decision on the preferred alternative and whether to move forward with an action.
- UDOT has assumed the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) responsibilities under NEPA. The environmental review, consultation, and other actions required by applicable Federal environmental laws for this project are being, or have been, carried out by UDOT pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327 and a Memorandum of Understanding dated January 17, 2017, and executed by FHWA and UDOT.
- Part of the process is engaging with cooperating and participating agencies, stakeholders and the public. UDOT will be engaging with all those groups in various ways.
- A cooperating agency is an agency or tribe, other than a lead agency, that has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved in a proposed project or project alternative. A state or local agency of similar qualifications may, by agreement with the lead agency, become a cooperating agency.
- A participating agency is a federal, state, tribal, regional, or local government agency that might have an interest in the project.
- Key stakeholders are audiences that are integral to achieving the study’s objectives and goals. The range of stakeholders may be expanded as the study develops.
- Air quality
- Residential and commercial property impacts
- Economic development
- Hazardous materials
- Historic structures
- Land use
- Noise
- Potential construction impacts
- Social (e.g., emergency services, neighborhood unity and community character)
- Wildlife and threatened and endangered species
- Wetlands
- Safety
- Bicycle and pedestrian access
- Business and residential access
- Complex utility relocations
- Economic development plans
- Regional mobility
- Regional growth
- School walking routes
- Transit
- Travel delay and congestion
- Freight movement
- The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process requires that UDOT evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives and provide an opportunity for public input on those alternatives.
- For example, UDOT received numerous comments that a bypass should be extended farther to the north to account for planned development and growth on north US-40 and that a bypass that ties into US-40 at 800 North is not a long-term solution because of that planned growth.
- UDOT is required to consider these comments, regardless of support or opposition.
- The range of alternatives under consideration allows an examination of the impacts and tradeoffs of improving regional mobility by upgrading north US-40 on its existing alignment, providing a new connection, and comparing those alternatives against not making any improvements.
- Only by evaluating the full range of alternatives can UDOT make an informed decision that will result in the best solution overall.
- Ignoring potential alternatives or dismissing them prematurely would not result in a full examination of impacts and tradeoffs and would leave the process open to legal risk.
- The screening process determines which alternatives will move forward for detailed evaluation and, at this stage, UDOT will eliminate alternatives only based on screening criteria that identify them as clearly not reasonable. Reasonable alternatives are those that are technically and economically feasible, rather than simply desirable.
- Level 1 screening criteria evaluate how well an alternative meets the project purpose.
- Level 2 screening criteria evaluate impacts to key resources including wetlands.
- Alternatives that pass through screening will be evaluated in detail in the Draft EIS.
- The Draft EIS analysis is when detailed impacts to open space, visual impacts, water quality, wildlife, community impacts, and so on, will be evaluated. The results of this detailed evaluation will inform UDOT’s selection of a preferred alternative.
- UDOT can’t eliminate alternatives for impacts to these resources during screening because the analysis has not been done yet.
Public Involvement
- The EIS project team encourages public involvement throughout each phase of the study and will consider public input in developing the EIS as well as to support the decision-making process.
- This EIS will feature a robust public process, including formal public comment periods, public meetings, solicitation of public input, email updates and notifications, and project information shared on social media channels and the project website.
- Preferred alternatives are not determined based on the amount of positive or negative comments received.
- Commenting is not a vote on an alternative or action, but a way for the public to provide the project team with information for consideration in the NEPA decision-making process.
- Decisions will be made by following the process, utilizing best available data including public input.
- Comments received outside of the Draft EIS formal comment period will be documented in the project record but will not be formally responded to or included in the Final EIS.
- Only responses to comments made during the Draft EIS formal comment period will be included in the Final EIS.
- Social media discussions are not part of the official EIS record, but they provide insightful information and help the team make the most informed transportation decisions for the Heber Valley study area.
- Outside of the formal NEPA public comment periods, the EIS team will update the public on the current status of the project and provide notice when new information will be available.
- Preferred alternatives are not determined based on the amount of positive or negative comments received.
- Commenting is not a vote on an alternative or action but a way for the public to provide the project team with information for consideration in the NEPA decision-making process.
- Decisions will be made by following the process, utilizing best available data including public input.
- Comments received outside of the Draft EIS formal comment period will be documented in the project record but will not be formally responded to or included in the Final EIS.
- Only responses to comments made during the Draft EIS formal comment period will be included in the Final EIS.
- Social media discussions are not part of the official EIS record, but they provide insightful information and help the team make the most informed transportation decisions for the Heber Valley study area.
- As the EIS progresses, the project team will update the public on the current status of the project and provide notice when new information will be available.
Contact Us
For more information on the environmental study underway in the Heber Valley and to share your ideas, please contact the project team through one of the ways listed below.
The environmental review, consultation, and other actions required by applicable Federal environmental laws for this project are being or have been carried-out by UDOT pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327 and a Memorandum of Understanding dated May 26, 2022, and executed by FHWA and UDOT.
