Monday, May 4, 2015

High Density Coming Soon To Centerville!

Changes made to our City's Master Plan several years ago in the name of encouraging redevelopment and accommodating a fixed rail system on Main Street have opened the door to high density residential developments that *WILL* fundamentally change the nature of our community. That doesn't have to happen if we pull together and act now.
Two proposals are currently being considered: (1) Brighton Home's Walton Village project (east of Main Street & north of Porter Lane) of more then 50 residential units on less than four acres of land--at more than 15 units per acre, the densest development in Centerville east of I-15--and the Hafoka property near 400 W and Porter Lane, where the same developer wants to increase the density from Medium Density Residential (5-8 units per acre) to High Density Residential (9-12 units per acre) on six acres. These developments may decrease surrounding property values and will significantly increase traffic on surrounding roads, particularly on Main Street near the Junior High, where many kids walk home from school. 

Both developments undermine Centerville's sense of itself, as described in the City General Plan: "The Citizens of Centerville desire to achieve a quality of life that is consistent with ... low density residential development." Section 12-420-1 (emphasis added).

If you oppose new, high density housing in South Centerville, particularly in or around historic areas and what have been, to date, streets full of single family homes, please join us, sign this petition, and help protect the quality of life that we value the most: quiet, family neighborhoods where people move in, stay, and become a part of our community.
Beyond signing the petition, please contact the Centerville City Council and the Planning Commission today and let your voice be heard. Lastly, please SHARE this petition with your friends and neighbors. Let's work together to ensure Centerville's future remains bright! 

Tuesday, January 27, 2015

Centerville Planning Commission Meeting

This flyer was recently given to me. I do not have independent knowledge of this matter. There is an item on the Planning Commission agenda for the date mentioned for this property. If you have interest you should attend. I always worry when the city increase destiny to Main Street, they move us one step closer to a fixed rail system on our Main Street. If you remember, even the UTA's study said we lacked density or riders for such a system today, so those who favor a rail system would love to see additional density in our city. It may not be the case, but it is worrisome. 

Friday, September 26, 2014

Please Keep Informed - I Don't Want You Surprised

The above link will take you to the UTA page where the Davis - SLC Commuter Connector study is discussed. You will read much about Rapid Bus and Enhanced Bus, but you will also see maps of rail lines in South Davis County. You will also see a graphic indicating that 44% of us favor light rail in our communities. Oh wait, that was the conclusion after talking to 13 people in Salt Lake City, 2 people in Bountiful, and 1 person in North Salt Lake (see Open House Information). Please stay informed and involved.

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

Oh Dear!!

Officials blast critique of UTA mass transit
Jun 12, 2014 | 1063 views | 0 0 comments | 6 6 recommendations | email to a friend | print
UTA FrontRunner - Louise R. Shaw | Davis Clipper
UTA FrontRunner - Louise R. Shaw | Davis Clipper
BOUNTIFUL - An analysis  of mass transit by a major think tank that includes UTA’s FrontRunner and Trax, was blasted by local officials, including a Davis County commissioner.
The “policy analysis” was conducted by the Cato Institute, and was entitled, “The Worst of Both: The Rise of High-Cost, Low-Capacity Rail Transit.”
It was comparing light rail, so-called heavy rail and buses, and said heavy rail costs far more to build than light rail, but can transport more people.
It noted that UTA chose to build more light rail, along with such cities as Dallas and Portland, Ore. It also called “several light rail lines particularly unproductive, including those in Salt Lake City” and other cities including San Jose, Calif., Cleveland, Baltimore and New Jersey.
The study claims a freeway lane can typically move about 2,000 to 2,200 automobile-sized vehicles per hour. It said a single bus stop could handle 42 buses per hour, carrying up to 60 people per bus.
“The figures are misleading. It’s not a scientific study,” said UTA spokesman Remi Barron. “UTA had the lowest cost per mile of track construction in the country.”
He also disputed the ability of buses to carry more passengers, overall. “We’d have to run buses so frequently to match the capacity of a TRAX train. It doesn’t make any sense.”
County Commissioner Bret Millburn was reached in Louisville, Ky., where he was attending the National Association of Regional Councils convention. He is chair of the Wasatch Front Regional Council, which deals with transportation issues across the Wasatch Front.
“Over the years Utah has been fortunate” to receive federal transportation funds. But the same funding issues are being dealt with now on the federal level as at the state and local levels, he said.
“The buying power just isn’t there. With the increased costs of maintaining the systems and a growing demand for new, it’s a balancing act on how do you accommodate - how do you pay for it?” Millburn said.
“Statistics can say what you want them to say, he said in response to the Cato study.
:”It’s important to note that in Utah, we’re not only building for today, but for the future,” Millburn said. “There may be a difference between rail and bus. When you put rail in, there’s some permanency. We can build some economies around that. You know it won’t be changing from season to season,” as far as service.
He referred to the development of housing and other amenities along rail lines, such as Kays Crossing apartments at the Layton FrontRunner line, which has housing for hundreds of people.
“I don’t dismiss the bus component, but the rail has been put in as a kind of spine. Now we start to add meat to that, infrastructure. We’ll have a robust system,” he said.
Looking at the future, Davis County alone could add more than 100,000 people before build out, Millburn said.
Several bus/mass transit studies are being conducted across the county, such as the South Davis/Salt Lake Corridor study. 

Read more: The Davis Clipper - Officials blast critique of UTA mass transit 

Are the Buses Full Now?

No streetcars in Davis, but more buses
Jul 10, 2014 | 1059 views | 0 0 comments | 13 13 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Model of a sample bus station  - courtesy image
Model of a sample bus station - courtesy image
FARMINGTON - Streetcars probably won’t be coming to Davis County, but UTA hopes that a lot more busses will.
The Davis County Commission officially adopted bus rapid transit as the locally preferred alternative for public transportation expansion in south Davis. The information comes from UTA’s Davis-Salt Lake Community Connector Transit Study, which also determined that local residents need more public transportation options to downtown Salt Lake and the University of Utah.
“Our long range transportation plan is to improve service on Davis County’s east side,” said Hal Johnson, manager of project development and systems planning for UTA. “A lot of people from Davis County are going to work and recreational activities in Salt Lake, and a lot of students from Davis County are going to the U.”
Though no rail lines are used, bus rapid transit often includes a dedicated lane for busses along the route and stations in the center of the road to avoid curb-side delays. Platforms would also likely be raised to bus height, and busses would likely get priority at intersections.
Johnson said that the preferred route for those busses would start on Main Street in Bountiful, connect to Highway 89, then continue to 400 West in Salt Lake. They would then head up to the University of Utah along 200 South.  The route would also connect to the Woods Cross FrontRunner station.
“It takes awhile for people to get to FrontRunner,” said Johnson. “It will be much quicker with the new project.”
According to County Commissioner Bret Millburn, that connection is one of the reasons the council approved the route.
“What’s nice about it is the enhanced opportunities for east-west travel,” he said, adding that the commission would like to see more projects from UTA. “For quite some time, I think we’ve all identified that transit improvements could be made to Davis County as a whole.”
UTA officials will also present the route to the North Salt Lake and Bountiful City Councils for their approval. After that point, UTA hopes to move ahead into the environmental process for the project.
“We’ll go into a little more detail on the study, and a lot more detail on the engineering and design,” said Johnson. “We’d know within inches where everything would be.”
Before that can happen, however, UTA needs to raise the funding needed to begin the process.
“We’ll be working with our stakeholders,” said Johnson.
Though he estimates that it will be at least a few more years before the project begins to have an impact on South Davis residents, Millburn can see the potential benefits.
“Some of the key elements we’re looking for are ways to increase mobility, connectivity and transportation choices,” he said, adding improving the county’s environment and economic opportunities to the list. “Transit has the opportunity of helping out in a number of different areas.”

Read more: The Davis Clipper - No streetcars in Davis but more buses 

Is There Trouble at the UTA?

Audit blasts UTA, says it gave millions in sweetheart deals
Problems » Excessive pay, questionable fares, deep debt and bus-route reduction also are in spotlight.
First Published Aug 26 2014 01:28 pm • Updated 32 minutes ago
The Utah Transit Authority "prepaid" a developer $10 million to construct a parking garage — which it turns out he never built — just after he made a multimillion-dollar deal benefiting a UTA board member. The agency never got all the money back from that advance.
The troublesome incident is one of many described in a blistering, yearlong legislative audit into UTA operations that was released Tuesday.
  1  14
At a glance
UTA Board meeting
The UTA Board will hold its monthly meeting Wednesday at 2:30 p.m. at the agency’s headquarters, 669 W. 200 South, Salt Lake City. A group is scheduled to present a petition with more than 3,000 signatures seeking more late-night service.
Join the Discussion
Post a Comment
It complains about other sweetheart deals, extravagant pay and bonuses, failure to plan well for $2.9 billion in maintenance costs from new rail projects, a fare structure that may force the poor to subsidize the rich, and massivedebt that might prevent restoring bus service that was cut to fund new train lines.
The UTA takes issue with the audit and issued a 50-page response. It says questionable developer deals actually made UTA money, that executives (with up to $400,000 annual compensation) are paid less than at similar agencies, and that UTA is run well and was recognized for its achievements in a recent award as the nation’s best transit agency.
State auditors, meanwhile, complain that UTA changed explanations and delayed producing data — a patternthey say "leaves us doubtful about whether we have obtained full and complete information. In some instances, we are uncertain what to believe."
Sen. John Valentine, R-Orem, who requested the audit and is retiring to head the Utah Tax Commission, says it confirms allegations ofshady deals and other concerns that critics brought to him.
"I had some inside people come to me and say, ‘We don’t think things are right here.’ " After reading the audit, he adds that "the information that was given to me was accurate."
The scathing audit findings could kill ongoing efforts to raise sales tax for transit, Valentine says. "If the voters understand there are problems with the use of present tax dollars, as shown by the audit, I think they are going to be reticent to allow additional tax dollars until things get cleaned up."

story continues below
story continues below
Sweet deal » The audit raises red flags about two UTA "transit-oriented developments" with companies run by Jeffrey Vitek. It says UTA essentially acted as Vitek’s banker by providing a huge advance in one deal and, in another, may have awarded him a bid unfairly and then granted him a too-generous contract.
These deals came just after Vitek bought the development rights on land near the Draper FrontRunner station from Terry Diehl, who at the time was a senior member of UTA’s board. A 2010 legislative audit said Diehl may have violated state law by using inside information to obtain the Draper development rights. He later was pushed to resign from the UTA board, but not before being given a waiver from its regular one-year ban on former board members doing business with UTA.
When Diehl sold his development rights to Vitek, according to earlier audit notes, Diehl made "millions." Auditors didn’t put an exact estimate on the amount except to say it was "less than $24 million." Diehl has said most of the money was to reimburse his costs and that he "made very little" profit.
Diehl and Vitek did not return phone calls Monday and Tuesday.
The newly released audit says that in December 2009, the same month Vitek bought development rights from Diehl, UTA "prepaid" $10 million to a company Vitek runs to build a parking garage at the Draper FrontRunner station "even though there were no design specifications or immediate plans for construction."
A couple of years later, "UTA hired another contractor to build the garage, but the developer no longer had all the funds immediately available to repay UTA. UTA is still owed $1.7 million."
While UTA officialsclaim the publicly funded organization actually realized a $12.5 million returnon the deal over the years, auditors dispute that.
"UTA appears to be acting as a banker for the developer," auditors say.
They add thatthe agency offered various reasons over time why it had not sought full repayment of the advance to Vitek. UTA’s official audit response says such collection efforts could have delayed the FrontRunner station for years amid legal wrangling over land used as collateral in the deal.
Auditors say the land beneath the parking structure "was not listed on UTA’s official property assets list prepared and presented to the [UTA] board. This omission raises questions about the sufficiency of information presented to the UTA board."
Valentine says the newly revealed details of the deal cause him heartburn. "It looks like there is some kind of insider trading going on."
Senate Minority Leader Gene Davis, D-Salt Lake City, a member of the legislative audit subcommittee that received the report said he thinks UTA should not be in the development business on its land.
"You’re not a developer. You’re the mover of people from point A to point B. We’ve got to get to that point in the state," he said.
Sweet Deal II » The month after Vitek received the $10 million prepayment for the Draper garage, UTA selected another company run by Vitek as the developer for a residential-commercial project on UTA land at the Jordan Valley TRAX station, according to the audit.
The award was made even though Vitek did not provide the agency required information about his company’s finances, in contrast to two other bidders.Despite some staff complaints documented in emails to higher-ups, management approved the deal.
UTA told auditorsthat West Jordan drove that decision "even though only two of the nine individuals scoring the proposal were from the city."
An outside law firm hired by auditors to review the agreement concluded it "unduly favored the developer" and was "far out of market." The legal analysis says UTA seemed to be"acting more as a funding source than a partner" and noted wording in the contract creates "uncertainty and ambiguities that could be used against UTA" if the development never makes the money envisioned.
In all, $26 million in local and federal funds were spent to build two large garages and other facilities at the West Jordan site to help the planned transit-oriented development. Meanwhile, auditors say, the developer has not yet paid its $3.9 million share of the cost for the pair of 598-stall structures, which two years after completion continue to sit mostly empty.
"Had UTA not built the parking structures and upgraded other infrastructure needed for the TOD [transit-oriented development], the cost of the Jordan Valley site would have been significantly less," the audit says.
"These transit-oriented developments are something that UTA does not have much experience with. So they are making some mistakes," Valentine says. "I can’t think of anyone in the private sector that would give a $10 million advance."
UTA says it has made all changes recommended by auditors to improve oversight of transit-oriented developments.
High pay »The audit says UTA executives receive much higher compensation than at similar agencies, use unfair comparisons to justify it and failed to report all benefits on the state’s transparency website.
For example, it says UTA’s top nine executives were paid 49 percent more than the top nine highest-paid employees at the Utah Department of Transportation — and UTA bonuses were six times larger.
UTA General Manager Mike Allegra’s 2013 compensation was $402,187, including a $30,000 bonus, the audit says. UDOT Executive Director Carlos Braceras received $221,433 and no bonus.
Allegra’s compensation is 15 percent higher than the director of the Salt Lake City International Airport. The next two highest-paid UTA employees are paid 83 percent more than the two corresponding officials at the airport.
The audit says it intended to compare compensation to other transit agencies, but did not because UTA persuaded it that other agencies had not provided much data beyond base salaries.
In its response, UTA says Allegra’s salary is below average for directors of comparable transit agencies, spurring auditors to note those comparisons don’t take into account full compensation, including benefits. The agency adds that it is restructuring its bonus program in a way that will lower them for many executives.
The audit also points to perks given to top UTA executives, including car allowances (Allegra receives $12,240 annually) and match-free payments of up to $23,500 each into retirement plans. Rank-and-file employees, meanwhile, pay $3 for every $2 matched by UTA.
Additionally, the audit says Allegra and UTA General Counsel Bruce Jones have special insurance policies not available to others. Jones also is allowed to earn double service credits toward a pension for his first 10 years of service. After 10 years, the pension would be worth $100,000 a year instead of $50,000.
Valentine, an attorney, says Jones’ total compensation of $384,472 — including $222,835 in salary — is high in this market for "any general counsel, especially for a government agency. To put it in perspective, it [the base salary] is over twice what my compensation will be as chairman of the tax commission."
As The Salt Lake Tribune previously reported, UTA failed to report to the state’s transparency website about 15 percent of employees’ total compensation from benefits, but has since mostly fixed that.
However, auditors say they warned UTA "several months prior to" its submission of 2013 data, but the agency chose not to include all data anyway, saying its lawyers advised that was unnecessary.
Now-updated data on the transparency website still do not match audited amounts for some officials. UTA data on the website list Allegra’s compensation, for example, at $397,900 — while the audit puts it at $402,107.
UTA spokesman Remi Barron says UTA’s figures reflect actual dollars rather than an actuarial rate used by auditors. Nevertheless, UTA plans to match auditors’ methods next year, Barron says.
Financial problems » Auditors also outline several financial problems that could hurt long-term UTA operations.
Because of borrowing for new rail lines, the audit says 50 percent of UTA sales taxes now go just for debt payments. By 2018, it will be 60 percent before debt starts to decline as bonds are retired.
The audit says UTA has been dipping into reserves rapidly "to cover ongoing and capital expenses." It adds, "UTA has little margin for error if sales tax revenues do not meet expectations."
Only recently, UTA identified $2.9 billion in expected costs to maintain new rail systems through 2033, the audit says. "UTA has not yet worked much of these costs in its long-term planning documents and needs to identify future funding sources," and that needs to be covered before building more projects.
"Bus service has suffered because of the financial constraints," the audit adds. Bus revenue miles decreased by 8 percent between 2009 and 2013, in part to help pay for new rail service — where revenue miles increased by 109 percent.
UTA responded that it has sufficient money to operate and maintain its existing system, but that new projects will require new funding.
The audit notes that some lawmakers point to the need for more bus service to push legislation to raise caps on sales tax for transit, and allow local elections on raising taxes.
House Transportation Committee Chairman Johnny Anderson, R-Taylorsville, unsuccessfully ran such a bill earlier this year. He says the audit could hurt its future chances — especially among voters.
"That’s going to be a tough sale," he says.
Claire Geddes, a longtime activist critic of UTA, says the audit appears to confirm many of her concerns. "The audit shows UTA is basically going the wrong direction in providing more bus service, but is full-speed ahead with high pay."
Fairness »Auditorsquestion whether UTA’s fare structure forces the poor to subsidize the rich.
It says the FrontRunner commuter rail receives a 95-percent subsidy from sales tax, while buses receive an 85-percent subsidy.
"The majority of FrontRunner riders earn more than $50,000 per year, whereas the majority of bus riders earn less than $25,000 per year," the audit says.
A big discrepancy also exists between people who have discounts through employers or schools, and those who pay full fare or passes without discounts.
"The average fare per boarding for a public pay rider was $1.70, well above that of a pass program rider at $0.66," the audit says. The regular cash fare is $2.50.
UTA responds that its fares "have helped the organization achieve its highest ridership ever, over 44.2 million trips, and increase farebox revenue."
The agency is conducting a new fare-policy analysis "to better structure fares in order to maximize ridership." That review includes studying charging distance-based fares, instead of the current flat rate.
Twitter: @leehdavidson

Thursday, April 17, 2014

Davis-SLC Community Connector

Looking at the UTA website this morning, you will notice one of the current projects is the Davis-SLC Community Connector. Folks, the rail has not gone away! UTA would very much like to get some form of rail (in addition to FrontRunner) into Davis County and our neighbor to the south (Bountiful) is part of the process currently underway. If the rail comes into the south part of the county, they will be in a position to extend it in the coming years. Please follow the efforts being made. Here is what is posted on the UTA website:

Davis-SLC Community Connector

The Utah Transit Authority is partnering with Bountiful, North Salt Lake, Salt Lake City, the Wasatch Front Regional Council and the Utah Department of Transportation to conduct a transit Alternatives Analysis (AA). The focus of the AA is to better understand current and future transit needs of residents in Southern Davis County through the planning horizon of 2040. The study area includes Bountiful, North Salt Lake, parts of downtown Salt Lake City and connections to the Woods Cross FrontRunner Station. Considering the nature of the corridor and extended potential transit needs further north of the study area, the cities of Woods Cross, West Bountiful, Centerville and Farmington are included as a planning influence area. The area of influence reflects regional considerations in the analysis and selection of future transit options for the study area.

Project MaterialsThe Davis-SLC Community Connector held a pubic open house on December 11, 2013 to explain the study process and present initial corridor alternatives for public feedback. Comments were received at the open house, as well as through email, phone and Open UTA. Many of the questions asked were similar in nature. Here are some of the most common questions asked, along with answer from the project team. Below are the materials that were presented at the open house::
Jurisdiction participation map
Overview (Welcome Presentation)
Background & Orientation
Purpose & Need
Initial Alternatives
Modes & Technologies
Public Involvement
Next Steps

The Davis-SLC Community Connector team held a second open house to discuss detailed alternatives and specific modes. Here are the materials that were presented at the open house.
Open House Information
Alternative A
Alternative B
UDOT and UTA completed a previous study (the South Davis Transit Alternatives Analysis) in spring 2008. Previous efforts built a foundation of data and experience that will be updated and expanded upon to inform the current study and set the stage to identify desired transportation investments. While the previous study selected a preferred mode and alignment as part of its Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA), they are not pre-determined for the current study – all mode and alignment options will be considered of current and future conditions. The opening of FrontRunner commuter rail service and the expansion of the UTA transit system since the study has created new opportunities in the previous study area. The LPA will be selected through a strong public involvement process including input from local officials and the general public. The process for the corridor is iterative, to insure that community needs are met and that feasible solutions can be implemented.

Alternatives Analysis Process
The AA process will identify reasonable modal and multi-modal alternatives and alignment options in the corridor between southern Davis County and downtown Salt Lake City. It includes the following steps:
  • Identify study goals and objectives
  • Establish purpose and need for improvements
  • Identify evaluation criteria for potential alignments
  • Identify alignments for initial screening
  • Identify alignments for in-depth screening
  • Identify Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA)
South Davis Transit Timeline
2004 – Wasatch Front Regional Council releases South Davis Transit Needs Analysis 
2004 – Wasatch Front Urban Area Long Range Transportation Plan Update: 2004 - 2030
2005 – The Wasatch Choice for 2040 plan completed by the regional metropolitan planning organizations (WFRC, MAG) in conjunction with local mayors, elected officials and Envision Utah.
2008 – South Davis Transit Study Alternatives Analysis (AA) recommends Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA). 
2010 – South Davis Draft Environmental Study Report (ESR) released by UDOT and UTA
2013 – Davis-SLC Community Connector Study kicks off.
2014 – Davis-SLC Community Connector will be complete and recommend an LPA.
Study Goals and Objectives
The Davis-SLC Community Connector Study is designed to examine ways to:
Improve regional connectivity
- Improve transit options between southern Davis County and Salt Lake City
- Provide better connections to regional transit in downtown Salt Lake City
Match transportation solutions to potential markets
- Identify viable market segments
Revitalize corridors
- Improve land use opportunities
- Enhance the urban environment
Create jobs
- Attract and support business activity
- Increase tax base through development/ redevelopment of urban centers
Improve travel through the study area
- Increase mobility options for both North-South and East-West travel
- Integrate with existing transit facilities
Improve air quality
- Provide local commuters more environmentally-friendly commuting options
- Be part of the solution to address the local air quality problem
Support the Wasatch Choice for 2040 plan
- Enable interconnection of systems
- Balance jobs and housing
- Enhance regional economy
- Enhance regional collaboration
- Strengthen sense of community
- Protect and enhance the environment
Frquently Asked Questions
What is the Davis-SLC Community Connector Study?
The Davis-SLC Community Connector Study is an Alternatives Analysis (AA) being conducted by UTA, WFRC, UDOT, Davis County, Bountiful, North Salt Lake and Salt Lake City.
Which areas are included in the study?
The study area includes Bountiful, North Salt Lake, downtown Salt Lake City and connections to the Woods Cross FrontRunner station. The cities of Woods Cross, West Bountiful, Centerville and Farmington are included as a planning influence area.
What is the Davis-SLC Community Connector Study’s objective?
This study will provide a better understanding of current and future transit needs of southern Davis County residents. Additionally, this study is designed to improve regional connectivity, match transportation solutions to potential markets, revitalize corridors, create jobs, improve travel through the study area, improve air quality and support the Wasatch Choice for 2040 plan.
Who is overseeing this transit study?
UTA is leading the study along with the WFRC, UDOT, Davis County, Bountiful, North Salt Lake and Salt Lake City.
How is the Davis-SLC Community Connector Study different from the 2008 South Davis Transit Study?
The local transit market has changed since the previous study. The UTA system has grown and is now more comprehensive – including the addition of FrontRunner commuter rail service in the previous study area. This study will be more targeted and will cover a smaller geographic area than the previous study. The previous study focused on determining a mode and an LPA. This study will not initially focus on a specific a mode; all modes will be considered leading up to the LPA. Additionally, this study will also build on valuable travel demand data and public feedback received as part of the previous study.
How long will the study period last?
The study will conclude in spring 2014 with the identification of a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA).
How will study research and data be collected?
Data from previous studies will be updated and expanded upon to inform the current study and set the stage to identify desired transportation investments. Additional travel demand modeling/evaluation, updated land use plans and coordination with local municipalities and agencies will also supplement the data collection effort.
How will study alternatives be developed?
Once a purpose and need for transit improvements has been established, the study team will evaluate a range of alternatives meeting the criteria identified in the study goals and objectives (see above). Coordination with local municipalities and agencies and input from the general public will aid in the evaluation of alternatives and selection of the eventual LPA.
Will economic benefits associated with this project be considered or just transit benefits? 
The study will evaluate both economic and transit benefits of proposed improvements. The study team will closely coordinate land use and future development plans with local municipalities as economic benefits are evaluated.
Public Involvement 
UTA has gathered extensive public input from previous studies and is considering previous comments and feedback as it moves forward with this study. Expanded opportunities for public involvement are part of the current study, including regular advisory committee meetings with local government officials, updates to elected officials, a series of community focus groups, meeting with and soliciting feedback from the local business community, presentations to community interest groups and public and online open houses.

Stay Informed and Get Involved 
Interested in staying up to date with the latest Davis-SLC Community Connector Study information? Join our mailing list.

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required
We’re interested in hearing what you have to say. Feel free to send us a comment.
Let us know if you’re interested in having a project representative meet with your community interest group or business. We’ll be happy to come speak with your group. Just send us an email or give us a call at 801-236-4798.
Public Comment Opportunities
UTA is interested in your feedback.  If you would like to submit input after browsing the materials, you can send us an email or fill out a comment form.

Contact Us
Call: 801-236-4798