A UDOT Project

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

The Mountainland Association of Governments (MAG) updated the travel demand model that was used as a basis for traffic analysis of the alternatives in the Draft EIS. The updated model shows substantially more traffic on north US-40, to the extent that three of the action alternatives (WA1, WB1, WB2) may no longer meet the purpose as currently designed so we will be reviewing all five action alternatives (WA1, WB1, WB2, WB3, WB4) to determine the extent of the revisions needed to meet the purpose based on the updated model. We are in the process of evaluating this new information to help inform our decision-making as we work towards a preferred alternative in the Draft EIS. As a result, the study schedule has been delayed. Because our decisions will have long term ramifications, we believe it is critical to take the time to make the best decisions possible. We will provide an updated schedule when we have a better understanding of the full extent of the additional analysis and revisions required to support the decision making process.

Click to enlarge

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

Last revised: 3-14-2024

Draft EIS Publication Delayed

Thank you for your continued interest in the Heber Valley Corridor Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). As you are likely aware, UDOT is conducting an 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.

The last time we provided an update, we were in the process of identifying a preferred alternative and conducting additional analysis on future growth scenarios and had anticipated publishing a Draft EIS this spring. Since that update, we received new traffic information that we are in the process of evaluating to help inform our decision-making as we work towards a preferred alternative.

Our team has been assessing this information to better understand the impacts this would have on our study and to provide you with an accurate status update. As part of this process, we are working with Heber City, Wasatch County and the Mountainland Association of Governments (MAG) to make sure we correctly understand the projected growth and planned development in the area.

Completed activities

  • Conducted a sensitivity analysis that was necessary to understand how, given projected growth in the north end of the valley, current alternatives would perform beyond 2050.
  • Evaluated a draft version of the updated travel demand model which includes new traffic growth projections that require the Draft EIS traffic analysis to be updated.
  • Met with Heber City, Wasatch County, and MAG to understand the changes in the updated travel demand model and to verify that the new assumptions showing a substantial increase in population and employment in the North US-40 vicinity are consistent with local plans and provide the best available information.

Ongoing Activities

Traffic Modeling

Every four years the regional travel demand model is updated by MAG with the latest approved growth projections and planned transportation improvements. Usually, new models validate assumptions and results from previous models so UDOT can rely on decisions based on previous models to keep moving forward. However, we have evaluated draft versions of the new model and determined the traffic volumes are different enough to warrant using the updated model. Because the updated model is still undergoing calibration (adjusting the parameters to be confident that the model is accurately representing traffic conditions), it is not yet available for our team to incorporate into our analysis. 

Preliminary information from the updated model shows considerably more traffic on North US-40 than previously assumed. As a result, of the current alternatives, only the alternatives that include an extension through the north fields would likely meet the purpose and need. The alternatives on North US-40 would likely need additional improvements to meet the project’s purpose and need. With this in mind, we are assessing the full extent of what potential adjustments need to be made to carry all five of the action alternatives forward. As a result, the study schedule has been delayed.

UDOT understands how frustrating this delay is to the community. Because our decisions will have long term ramifications, we believe it is critical to take the time to make the best decisions possible. We will provide an updated schedule when we have a better understanding of the full extent of the additional analysis and revisions required to support the decision making process.

Assessing potential impacts of proposed conservation easement

UDOT is aware of Wasatch County’s recent decision to approve funding for the Gertsch conservation easement. We heard from Heber City and Wasatch County that they are supportive of following UDOT’s process, however the conservation easement as proposed overlaps all five of the action alternatives. A conservation easement that overlaps the alternatives will require additional analysis and revisions to the Draft EIS documentation and will likely increase the regulatory, legal and financial complexity of selecting and constructing an action alternative. 

We are reviewing the potential implications of the conservation easement on our project and will continue to work with Heber City and Wasatch County to find solutions to minimize impacts to these resources that fit within the EIS process and future implementation.

What to expect next

It is unclear how substantial changes to the action alternatives could be at this time as a result of the new travel demand model and the proposed conservation easement. If the new models show that substantial changes would be required of any of the action alternatives, we will provide the community an opportunity to review and comment on new information.

We will provide you with an updated schedule once we have a better understanding of necessary changes to the action alternatives as we want to provide a transportation solution that will benefit the community now and into the future.

More detailed information on the proposed alternatives and the analysis published to-date is available here.

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.

Heber Valley EIS Website Comment Form

Frequently Asked Questions

Early Scoping Comment Period Frequently Asked Questions
Scoping Comment Period Frequently Asked Questions
Alternatives Comment Period Frequently Asked Questions
Alternative Screening 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.

Email Us

hebervalleyeis@utah.gov

Phone

801-210-0498

Facebook

Join the group

Write Us A Letter

Heber Valley Corridor EIS
c/o HDR
2825 E Cottonwood Parkway # 200
Cottonwood Heights, UT 84121

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.