Development of Needs

In addition to responding to public input, the rural projects in the 2023–2050 LRP address travel needs identified using the Utah Statewide Travel Model. This model accounts for anticipated population and employment growth throughout the State of Utah, and predicts how Utahns will travel in the future — where they will want to go and which routes they will prefer to use. For this plan, these needs were analyzed for the rural parts of the state, or those areas that are not within the boundary of an MPO. UDOT coordinates with the MPOs to make sure transportation agencies have a clear picture of all travel needs around the state and to coordinate on future projects. 

Travel needs for Utah’s future residents in the rural parts of the state were estimated using two different measures from the travel model: traffic level of service (LOS) and estimated travel speeds. These measures help planners understand the experiences people will have on Utah’s roadways, focusing on how much delay is likely to occur during a typical workday commute. Traffic LOS is a common measure used in transportation planning and is reported on a scale of A to F, similar to grades on a school report card. For this LRP, LOS was evaluated based on estimated future peak period traffic volumes on individual roadways compared to the capacity of those roadways. If, during peak times, future roadways are less than 58% full, UDOT considers that to be LOS C or better, without a need for additional capacity improvements. Roadways that are between 58–75% full are LOS D, indicating that the need for improvements is beginning to increase. Roadways that are greater than 75% are considered to be LOS E or F, and may have unacceptable levels of delay during peak travel times in the future. Needs identified for this LRP focus on roadways with LOS D, E, or F in the future.

Another important metric is future travel speeds. The Utah Statewide Travel Model identified roadways where travel speeds under congested conditions are much lower than travel speeds when traffic flows freely. If the peak period travel models indicated congested travel speeds were 30% slower (or worse) than free flow speeds on any particular roadway, that roadway was identified as being in need of improvements. The LRP categorized roadways as needing improvement if they met either the congested speed measure or the LOS D/E/F measure, for multiple time horizons in the future: 2032, 2042, and 2050. 

In addition to the information gleaned from the travel demand models, federal reliability performance and passing lane needs were assessed. Federal metrics, such as travel time reliability and truck travel time reliability, to determine the reliability or consistency of current travel times were analyzed to determine those highway segments that were not meeting performance targets. Passing lane needs were assessed by utilizing data to identify segments with a grade of 2.5% or higher, speed limits higher than 50, only one lane in each direction, and no opportunities to pass for extended distances.

Transportation planners matched the needs identified with general highway strategies by context to determine potential projects, and shared these for review and comment by local governments and the public. In some cases, area planning studies, such as Solutions Development processes, have been completed that more effectively identify the appropriate strategy based on context.

Public comment and local government input was gathered related to the location of transit needs. Local transit plans were also used to assess future need. Once the locations were identified, UDOT coordinated with transit service providers across the state to validate needs and determine what strategies should be used to address them.

UDOT received public comment and local government input related to the active transportation needs and gathered local active transportation plans to identify and incorporate regional project needs into this LRP. In addition, UDOT evaluated the U.S. Bike Routes that connect communities across the state for potential improvements.

Methods of evaluating these needs included looking at the active transportation demand and level of traffic stress. Active transportation demand is driven by trip generators, such as public services and recreation, along with population centers that may be more dependent on active transportation options. The level of traffic stress is assessed by evaluating the separation of vehicular traffic from active transportation and the characteristics of vehicular traffic such as volume and speeds. Strategies to address these needs were taken from local plans or identified by transportation planners where local plans did not exist and provided for public comment and review.

These measures help UDOT determine which locations are a priority for investment in the long-term future, while taking into consideration feedback from regional UDOT staff, stakeholders, and the public. However, there is not enough funding expected to address all the needs identified; the maps associated with this LRP highlight locations where improvements are still needed after all available transportation funds have been spent and where future spending efforts might need to be focused.