Payson staff, UDOT seek council input on Nebo Beltway/I‑15 interchange aesthetics, utilities and future expansion

Payson City staff and a Utah Department of Transportation representative asked the City Council on June 18 for guidance on aesthetic “betterments” and utility planning for the Nebo Beltway interchange that will span I‑15.

At a council work session, Robert, a city staff presenter, told council members, “what we really need from you tonight is some feedback, some direction on how we proceed,” and described staff recommendations for a “mountainous themed” planting palette, durable rock and low‑maintenance shrubs along ramps and a colored, stamped concrete median to be provided by UDOT.

City staff emphasized maintenance, durability and future expansion needs. “We really want to make this easy for our team to maintain because it will be our responsibility as a city to maintain these areas,” Robert said, noting materials should be heat‑ and salt‑resistant and that grassed areas, if used, should be large enough to function rather than thin strips.

Why this matters: the new interchange includes a bridge over I‑15 and the Union Pacific/UTA FrontRunner tracks and will fundamentally change access patterns, maintenance responsibilities and opportunities for city branding along a major corridor. Decisions about lighting, fencing, public art and conduit for future utilities affect the city’s near‑term construction budget and long‑term maintenance costs.

Key design elements and constraints - Phase 1 scope: staff described the orange area on project maps as the Phase‑1 footprint — two travel lanes (one each direction), raised center median, shoulders and a shared‑use path along the Nebo Beltway. UDOT will construct a colored, stamped median as part of its work. - Bridge and clearances: the structure will cross the railroad and I‑15; council discussed whether the bridge will be single or multiple spans and whether the design anticipates future additional I‑15 lanes. Robert said the bridge is “being planned, designed to accommodate future growth.” - Lighting and trail treatment: staff proposed conduit in the beltway to enable future street lighting and suggested bollard lighting for the shared‑use path as an alternative to full street lights to improve ambiance and reduce long‑term operating cost. - Fencing and finishes: staff recommended upgrading UDOT’s standard chain link to black vinyl‑coated chain link and offered dark green or black for girder colors. Staff also discussed adding concrete relief motifs (for example, a mountain motif) on the bridge underside if feasible. - Wetlands and mitigation: UDOT staff said wetlands exist along the corridor and any impacted wetlands must be mitigated at ratios set by federal regulators; the project team is evaluating mitigation sites within the county.

Funding, schedule and jurisdictional questions - Schedule milestone: UDOT reported completion of a 30% geometry review — a design milestone that enables right‑of‑way work and additional utility coordination. UDOT is targeting an early grading package next summer and mainline construction of structures and roadway in 2027–28. - Funding options and timing: staff discussed potential funding sources, including WIFIA and other state programs, and suggested the city might phase some betterments now and reserve others for later development when growth makes investment more cost‑effective. Council members suggested transportation impact fees as one possible funding source for growth‑related improvements. - Jurisdiction and ownership: UDOT said the corridor is being designed to UDOT standards with the intent of allowing the Transportation Commission to consider accepting jurisdiction in the future; the final decision rests with both the city and the Utah Transportation Commission. - Utility placement: staff stressed the importance of planning conduit and crossings now to avoid costly cuts after the roadway is paved. UDOT noted a typical 2‑year moratorium on cuts to new hard surface within the project area; staff recommended installing conduit and space for trunk lines during construction to reduce future disruption.

Environmental and partner constraints UDOT staff told the council the project must satisfy requirements from multiple partner agencies, including Union Pacific Railroad and UTA, whose restrictions can affect design around the interchange. Wetland mitigation must follow federal mitigation ratios and be located within the county; the team is evaluating candidate sites.

Council feedback and next steps Council members generally favored low‑maintenance, rock‑and‑shrub landscaping over turf near I‑15 and supported exploring black‑coated fixtures and upgraded fencing for visual consistency with other city streets. Staff said they will gather cost estimates for several levels of betterments, coordinate with UDOT’s design team, and return with estimates and design options for council consideration.

The city urged council direction rather than final approvals at the June 18 session; staff will bring cost estimates and refined designs to a future meeting. UDOT encouraged continued coordination and public outreach as design advances.