City Engineer Lloyd Cheney told the Bountiful City Council at its Oct. 28 work session that Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) is preparing to reconstruct I‑15 and will soon release a request for proposals for contractors, with construction likely beginning next year. Cheney presented three landscaping concepts for the Fifth South interchange and asked the council for a preference to guide intercity coordination and UDOT negotiations.

The council was asked to consider whether Bountiful should accept UDOT’s default treatment—a native seed mix with no irrigation and only occasional mowing—or contribute funding and maintenance for enhanced streetscape elements. Cheney said UDOT will allocate $100,000 per interchange toward landscaping but that amount would not cover irrigation or ornamental plantings. "Any enhancements or betterments … they like to have the cities help fund those and, more importantly, maintain," Cheney said.

The staff report included cost estimates based on UDOT unit prices. UDOT’s estimate for a plain decorative‑rock treatment for the entire interchange (north and south halves) was $149,000. Applying that decorative‑rock concept only to the portion inside Bountiful’s city limits (the yellow‑highlighted area in Cheney’s materials) was estimated at $57,000. A larger scenario that would include the south half of the interchange plus the small strip around the Sizzler property totaled roughly $223,000 under the decorative‑rock concept. Cheney said his supplemental takeoffs used UDOT unit prices and that he would verify some boundary details upon further review.

On maintenance, Cheney said the UDOT base treatment includes overseeding and a couple of mows per year. "UDOT will only allocate $100,000 per interchange towards landscaping, and that would not cover anything above their base treatment of stockpiling the topsoil … and then overseeding it with their native seed mix," he said. Cheney and other staff warned that more elaborate plantings and irrigation require ongoing city maintenance and higher long‑term costs, citing Layton’s Hillfield exit as an example of a heavily landscaped interchange that requires substantial upkeep.

Council members repeatedly raised the interchange’s role as a gateway to Bountiful, especially the east side by the Sizzler property. Multiple council members said they favored the middle option (Option 2: decorative rock) as a balance of appearance, cost and reduced maintenance. One council member said: "I don't like the idea of high cost ongoing maintenance … I'm happy with mixed rocks, but I think that it would also be nice for us to use some artwork to decorate up whatever concrete UDOT gives us on those interchanges." Council member Child, participating online, said she was "not fond of the native grass with limited plantings" and also expressed support for Option 2.

Council members discussed how costs could be divided because three adjacent cities (Bountiful, Woods Cross and West Bountiful) share the interchanges at Fourth North, Fifth South and 2600 South. Cheney and staff said city managers are coordinating and will bring each council’s preferences to the intercity discussions; there is not yet a consensus on cost‑sharing methodology (by area within city limits or another formula). Cheney asked the council to give staff a directional preference rather than a final commitment to UDOT.

The council did not take a formal vote. The body indicated a collective preference for Option 2 (decorative rock) with an interest in adding low‑maintenance artistic or gateway elements, and directed staff to convey that preference to the city manager and to neighboring cities during coordination with UDOT.

Staff said they would return with clarified boundary maps and verified cost breakdowns as negotiations continue. Cheney also summarized larger project changes at nearby interchanges, including a planned conversion of a left‑exit at Fourth North to a conventional right‑hand flyover, and more pedestrian/bicycle facilities at Fourth North and Fifth West.

Ending: The council asked staff to continue intercity coordination and report back with refined cost splits, confirmed area boundaries and graphics to support any future decision on funding or maintenance commitments.