|
Local pressure groups are lining up to fight even thinking about the possibility of a bridge across Utah Lake. They might as well protest the heat of a Utah Valley summer. It’s inevitable that some kind of passage will be forged over the lake in coming years, and the most productive course would be to find the best feasible alternative that will serve the widest number of people.
Note that this doesn't mean a perfect solution. The quixotic search for public policy that poses no problems and imposes no costs has become a national fetish. Utah Valley isn't immune to this ailment, but it's time to seek realistic solutions that balance various interests, not impossible fantasies that pose no inconvenience to anyone. Look at it this way: Salt Lake County has a dozen east-west corridors of five to seven lanes. Utah Valley has only two. The reality is that traffic is already clogging up east-west routes in the county, as anyone who's been on Lehi's Main Street recently can attest. In 25 or 30 years, Utah Valley will have a million residents, and the Cedar Valley area will have as many people as Salt Lake City has today. Just as a big cottonwood tree's roots push through soil, the expanding megalopolis of Utah Valley-Cedar Valley will create corridors running east and west. The only question for drivers will be which east-west route is best. And that brings us to convenience -- or least inconvenience. All plans to build roads across the populated area bring opposition. The best alternative is to build it where no people, homes or businesses would be uprooted, disturbed or bothered. Look at the map: Least inconvenience clearly means a bridge or causeway across Utah Lake. News that several agencies are studying the future of the lake, including a bridge, has aroused opposition even before the first proposal is released. But looking at some of the complaints actually will make the case for a bridge clearer. Some say a "causeway" would cut the lake in two, leaving the sections stagnant and vulnerable to algae growth, as occurred at the Great Salt Lake. Such an image, however, is really just an example of another kind of aquatic growth -- the red herring. The planners looking seriously at the lake's future cringe at the very idea of a solid passageway bisecting the lake. No one wants to repeat the mistakes made in the Great Salt Lake. Any passage across the lake will be some form of a bridge that allows water to flow underneath it to maintain the ecological balance. Other objections include the notion that a bridge would mar the "beauty" of the lake. It's a mistake, in our view, to think of this particular lake as though it were a Lake Tahoe that must not be tampered with. Utah Lake presents an appealing picture at the foot of the mountains, and it offers some recreational opportunities. Yet it is infested with carp and clouded by silt. We are speculating here, but we doubt that any significant number of people would think that any real harm had occurred to the lake if a well-designed bridge crossed it. One well-regarded route would link Eagle Mountain to Vineyard, near or at the Geneva Steel site. Again, look at a map. It's a natural. Such a passage would cross the lake near its top, leaving nearly as much room as there is now for boating, fishing or other pastimes. You don't have to be a civil engineer to see that other routes could also cross the lake while leaving most of it open. The most dangerous argument against the bridge, however, is that it would spur growth, as if it would automatically make the area into a clone of the least attractive parts of Southern California. First, as above, Utah is already assured of growth. The children living here now will grow up and start families, and the state's many advantages ensure business and people will flock here. The question remains not whether we will grow, but how to manage the growth well. The anti-growth argument also fails in its very foundation. Utahns may take growth for granted. But travel to places where the economy and population are stagnant, or even shrinking. They aren't nirvanas for the environment or anything else. Growth supplies the resources and energy for solving problems. Utah Lake furnishes a good example. Right now relatively few people have a stake in its future. If the Cedar Valley area grows, those people become a constituency for the lake. They'll want to look out the windows of their homes and offices at the blue water; they'll want to go boating or fishing or just walk along the shore. They'll support efforts at improving the lake -- if they can live and work by it, yet travel to Utah and Salt Lake valleys. And building a bridge across the lake is by far the best way for making that happen. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Should a highway span Utah Lake? Send your comments to
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
or call 344-2942. Please leave your name, hometown and phone number with your comments. E-mail comments should not exceed 100 words; voicemail comments should be no longer than 30 seconds. Anonymous and unverifiable responses will not be published. You can also comment online at our home page at heraldextra.com. The Daily Herald will publish results on July 27. |
