UDOT representatives presented the Tooele Valley connectivity study to the Tooele City Council on Nov. 19, saying the state network will face substantial delays as population and employment increase across the valley.

"There are significant delays on the state network based on the locations of major development and how additional East–West routes distribute traffic," said Travis Hair, UDOT emerging areas project manager, summarizing the study's core problem statement. UDOT told the council the modeling used committed zoning and projects and that the study will inform the next long‑range plan update scheduled for 2027.

Why it matters: UDOT projected roughly a 50% population increase across the valley by 2050 and modeled traffic that raises total vehicle‑hours traveled and commuter delay dramatically under a baseline network. In one baseline scenario the council heard delay could rise from single‑digit percentages today to roughly 18% by 2050; a stronger local network reduced that modeled delay to about 15% in the study’s scenario.

Key recommendations: UDOT advised building a stronger local East–West network to relieve pressure on state routes. Specific recommendations presented included extending 33rd Parkway from the west side through to Durfee and Grantsville, extending 2000 North to SR‑36, extending 2400 North to Sheep Lane, and improving connections between SR‑138, SR‑112 and Mid Valley. For SR‑112, UDOT described a conceptual cross section of five lanes with a center turn lane, a multiuse path on one side and a sidewalk on the other.

Mid Valley: UDOT said Mid Valley most benefits SR‑36 but does not by itself solve valley‑wide East–West needs. "Mid Valley … benefits a part of the valley, but it doesn't benefit the entire state network or the local network entirely," UDOT staff said, adding that completing the middle connector to SR‑36 provides greater regional benefit than staging disconnected segments.

Funding and preservation: UDOT staff discussed the long‑range plan's funding buckets and warned that plan phasing reflects projected revenues, not guaranteed funding. They urged use of corridor‑preservation funds to secure right‑of‑way on a willing‑buyer/seller basis and encouraged local governments to apply for technical assistance and grant programs. "My TPA manager, Jordan Backman, was very emphatic of, like, please please please apply to update your transportation master plan. We will give you money to do it," UDOT said. The agency also offered to provide a list of programs and expected match rates; the presentation noted some matches may be as low as about 6.7% while larger infrastructure programs can require higher matches.

Rail crossings and local constraints: Council members asked about Union Pacific coordination for additional rail crossings; UDOT said it can engage a rail division and staff such as Brad Palmer but cautioned that freight railroad operating practices can complicate at‑grade solutions and that under/overpasses are costly and typically require multiagency funding.

Local impacts and next steps: Council members pressed on Sheep Lane, which UDOT characterized as a local road carrying heavier commercial traffic than it was designed for, and highlighted imminent safety work: UDOT said a traffic signal at the SR‑112 intersection is planned for next spring after property issues are resolved. UDOT also committed to update the study graphics and provide match percentages and funding sources requested by council members.

What happens next: UDOT staff said the final study map will be refined for the 2027 long‑range plan and offered technical and funding contacts (Chris Potter for program engineering; Jordan Backman for TPA funding). The council requested the updated presentation and additional details on funding matches and corridor preservation progress.