A TRAFFIC SIGNAL IS BEING PROPOSED AT 500 NORTH AND COLUMBUS.
Please attend a Final Open House to review and discuss options for this proposed traffic signal at 500 North and Columbus Street. UDOT, SLC Transportation and InterPlan will be in attendance with information regarding their traffic analysis and how a traffic signal will impact our neighborhoods and homes.
Lisa Zundell from UDOT and Charles Allen from InterPlan have been involved since last December in an effort to address traffic flow issues that affect our neighborhood. We have held multiple meetings and two Open Houses in advance of the proposed 500 North traffic signal solution.
This will be our last opportunity to ask questions and provide comment as a neighborhood prior to the proposals being forwarded for final review and design.
The Open House will be held:
Wednesday, July 30th
6:30 p.m. – 8:30 p.m.
Copper Room in the East Annex (where we hold our Council meetings)
Please alert your neighbors and friends about this Open House.
If you would like to preview the proposed solutions and analysis, please click on the following link:
Comments 4
Unfortunately I will be out of town when the open house takes place. I was at the last presentation by UDOT and their consultant when the 3 final solutions were presented. I am in favor of installing a traffic light at Victory and 500 N and favor solution A2. A3 calls for cul-de-sacs that will take up a great deal of space once the fire department’s turn-around requirements are taken into account. A4 essentially does the same thing as A2 relying on signs instead of a median which I don’t think will be as effective. In favoring the median, I assume that Salt Lake City will fund its landscaping and maintenance. A bare concrete median would be an eyesore.
At the last meeting, I suggested that UDOT and the city look at street lighting alternatives on Victory Rd. as you approach the proposed signal from the north. Using urban-style streetlight fixtures and spacing rather than highway cobraheads would give drivers additional notice that they are approaching a developed area. It would also enhance a major gateway into the city.
There is enough room to actually connect Columbus to Zane. Use one wall to shut off both streets and solve the Firetruck requirements. I would have to believe it would lower costs as well. Less non resident traffic, less late night loitering at the end of Columbus St., increased saftey, and another route option to access proposed 500N traffic light for some residents.
I support solution A2.
“I favor option 4A, including adding the traffic light at 500 North, but with the following modifications:
1. Leave all left turns in tack. To eliminate them simply moves the traffic heading to the airport from one part of a residential area to 1/2 block south. It doesn’t reduce it. Also, leave Columbus Street two-way. Let’s accommodate the residents who live here and are most negatively impacted by the one-way street.
2. More important is to regulate the traffic lights and other elements of 3rd West at the base of Victory Road to encourage commuter traffic to stay on 3rd West. Third West is better designed for commuter traffic than is the residential area along Victory to Main. We’ve all heard, repeatedly, that commuters take Victory Road because it is faster and a short cut to the University or downtown. The residents in this area shouldn’t be the principle ones shouldering the burden of the increased traffic. This is also illustrated by the identified intent to demolish someone’s home along that route.”