Wednesday, 02 July 2008
IN OUR VIEW: Provo Canyon: Fix road now Print E-mail
Daily Herald   

Another fatal crash raises more urgently than ever the question: What is being done about the road in Provo Canyon?

Not enough. Not by a long shot.

On June 25, a Provo man was killed when his compact car veered across the center line at mile marker 11 on U.S. Highway 189 and smashed into a sport utility vehicle. It was the fourth fatality in three accidents in Provo Canyon within six weeks. Yet the Utah Department of Transportation seems to be sitting on its hands.

On May 18, a Provo woman turned left out of Vivian Park, and her car was broadsided by a pickup. Two children, 8 and 7, were killed. Our editorial of June 15 pointed out that a sign on the opposite side of the road obscures the sight of vehicles coming from the right. A driver exiting the park could glance that way, see nothing, check to the left and pull out -- with potentially deadly consequences.

Why is that sign still there? A workers should be given an ax and ordered to take the thing down -- now.

On June 6, a car traveling west at night turned left at Squaw Peak Road. An eastbound vehicle T-boned it, killing a BYU student athlete. The dangers there are obvious. The driver goes into a left-turn lane, but traffic continues to thunder down the canyon on his right. The eastbound lanes curve around the mountainside; a Jersey barrier tends to obscure some oncoming vehicles. Drivers must hit the gas to get across the road quickly, while knowing that hitting rustic Squaw Peak Road too fast is also dangerous.

The site was described to experts at Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, a Washington-based group. The experts' opinion jibes with what many Utah County drivers already know: This spot is death waiting to happen.

Something needs to be done, and that something is variable speed limits in the canyon. With electronic signs, vehicles approaching danger zones, such as westbound traffic just above the Sundance turnoff, could be slowed to speeds that would prevent accidents.

Some real experts -- 30 people who live in and adjacent to the canyon -- have signed a petition calling for reduced speeds. (See letter at right.) To quote a key section:

"One problem is that UDOT went the opposite direction in July of 2004 when the agency raised the speed limit from 50 to 60. Those of us who use the canyons can tell you that the average speed has increased in response to UDOT's action. Those who drive 60 mph now block traffic. During the summer motor bikes (judging by the speed with which they pass others) sometimes exceed 90 mph. Additionally, they often do this at night when visibility is reduced. Where are the speed monitors then? It often seems that we see more emergency equipment than officers controlling speed."

The more one studies the road (and you don't have to be a UDOT engineer), the more potential problems appear. For instance, UDOT has chosen cable median barriers in a number of spots, and is even adding to them. But Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety criticizes the barriers, saying they can "trip" an SUV and roll it over, while acting as a slingshot to fling smaller cars back into the path of other vehicles. And big trucks go slicing right through them, the group says.

Are more advanced steps needed? Clearly, yes. Illinois, Washington and Oregon have automated systems to nab speeders in work zones, like those red-light cameras that keep watch at intersections. Utah regularly boasts about its growth as a high-tech hub. Maybe it's time it looked into high-tech ways to save lives: Provo Canyon would be a great place to experiment with automated speed-law enforcement.

We call on state and county officials, including legislative leaders, to take immediate action. Lives are at stake. As you read this, drivers are roaring down the highway as others are nervously looking for ways to get on or off.

It is time for UDOT to bring some simple common sense into play.

Article views: 1,110  
User Rating: / 12
PoorBest 
Discuss (8 posts)
Pittakos Jul 03 2008 16:35:05
iceman wrote:
The road has nothing to do with human error...which everyone of these accidents were related to. People do not take the time to be aware or are busy on the &$^)# cellphones!
How dare you insinuate that responsibility lies with the vehicle operators! We are not supposed to have any personal responsibility. The government is supposed to be responsible for everything in our lives.
#377625
iceman Jul 03 2008 16:40:02
Pittakos wrote:
iceman wrote:
The road has nothing to do with human error...which everyone of these accidents were related to. People do not take the time to be aware or are busy on the &$^)# cellphones!
How dare you insinuate that responsibility lies with the vehicle operators! We are not supposed to have any personal responsibility. The government is supposed to be responsible for everything in our lives.


Dagnabit Pitt! I hate it when you bring me back to reality...my bad!
#377626
Pittakos Jul 03 2008 16:42:57
iceman wrote:
Pittakos wrote:
iceman wrote:
The road has nothing to do with human error...which everyone of these accidents were related to. People do not take the time to be aware or are busy on the &$^)# cellphones!
How dare you insinuate that responsibility lies with the vehicle operators! We are not supposed to have any personal responsibility. The government is supposed to be responsible for everything in our lives.


Dagnabit Pitt! I hate it when you bring me back to reality...my bad!

Sorry. I just gotta make sure you are in lock-step with the new America.
#377627
Frank Slide Jul 03 2008 19:03:44
UDOT could also fix the road by tearing out the concrete and replacing it with asphalt.

The concrete is way too noisy for a recreational area. When you use the canyon for recreation such as camping, fishing, etc., instead of hearing nature, all you hear is the roar of noisy traffic.
#377675
WaynesWorld Jul 04 2008 13:54:31
Frank Slide wrote:
UDOT could also fix the road by tearing out the concrete and replacing it with asphalt.

The concrete is way too noisy for a recreational area. When you use the canyon for recreation such as camping, fishing, etc., instead of hearing nature, all you hear is the roar of noisy traffic.
There's another blunder...I agree. Yes, concrete is more durable, lasts a long time and is probably cheaper in the long run (?).

BUT, no-one who decided to use that concrete has ever fly-fished the Provo River alongside it. Vrrroomm!!! Vrrrooommm!!! That's just the cars. Then come the diesels "BRBRBRBRBRBRBbbbbb$RRRrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!"... "EEEWWWWeeeWWWeeeeeeeeeWWWWaaaahhhhhhh !!!!"

And all that with extrememly minimal speed limit enforcement.

Robert Redford insisted the widened road was to be nature friendly. It was for a while. But we've got the cement and now those ungodly looking tension cable median barriers.

If the natural beauty of the canyon has some kind of cognizance about her, I suppose she would be taking human life in revenge for such ugly blunders.
#377802
There are too many comments to list them all here. See the forum for the full discussion.

Discuss this article on the forums. (8 posts)

Last 6 Days - Herald Editorials

Sorted by popularity

No stories available for the selected dates.
Saturday, 6th of September 2008
Friday, 5th of September 2008
Thursday, 4th of September 2008
Wednesday, 3rd of September 2008
Tuesday, 2nd of September 2008
Prepress Technician The Daily Herald
Servers, Hosts, Bartenders, Cooks, etc JWT Specialized Communications
Mentoring of America LLC Office/Admin Help Wanted
Attorney Brad Myler & ASSOC.
Care Giver $10.70/hr RN/LPN positions Utah State Developmental Center
Staff Nurse and Medical Assistant Full time Heritage School
Utah Department of Corrections-Human Resources Healthcare Help Wanted

See All Top Jobs Post your job
PAYSON- 549 N. 750 E. Real Estate South County
Lehi. Prestigious East side. $499,000 Real Estate North County
BRING YOUR TOYS! Summer Recreational Property

See all Top Homes List your property
Generated in 0.64586 Seconds