The Bypass: UDOT’s Heber Valley Corridor Live
The record
The requests that the March 2026 joint letter made of UDOT, the public documents, and the news. Each item links to its source.
What the March letter asked UDOT for
When the Final EIS comes out, this page adds the page that answers each request, and UDOT’s answer in its own words. It does not grade the answers.
The main request (letter, page 1)
“An alternate alignment based on Route B but located as close to the existing US-40 footprint as possible.”
UDOT’s answer so far: UDOT studies a shift of Route B to the east in the North Fields. It says the shift “could reduce impacts to agricultural operations in the North Fields” and could make the route less effective. UDOT project page
28 more requests, counted one for each request that the letter states on its own. Read the letter in the UDOT comment record
UDOT responds to substantive comments in the Final EIS, which it expects in spring 2027. Until then, the requests below wait for that answer. The Draft EIS already covers part of some of them.
Water
- GIS maps of recharge areas and drinking water source protection zones for each route. Letter, p. 2
- Chloride and dissolved-solids projections beyond the design year. Letter, p. 2
- Groundwater monitoring with places, frequency, thresholds, and corrective actions. Letter, p. 2
- A demonstration that Route B does not raise groundwater risk compared with Route A. Letter, p. 2
- An assessment of future compliance with the state rules on source protection. Letter, p. 2
Historic
- An evaluation of the North Fields as a historic district or a farm landscape. Letter, p. 3
- A clear split between direct effects and effects on the setting. Letter, p. 3
- A Section 4(f) explanation of the avoidance options and of the plan to reduce harm. Letter, p. 3
Wetlands
- The legal basis for each aquatic feature, and which findings are preliminary. Letter, p. 4
- The design changes that UDOT studied to reduce aquatic impacts, and why UDOT rejected them. Letter, p. 5
- Numbers that support the other significant consequences that favor Route B. Letter, p. 5
- The status of work with the Army Corps of Engineers, and the documents for the permit record. Letter, p. 5
- A public appendix with the full comparison tables and data. Letter, p. 5
- A list of the documents, tables, GIS layers, and reports that UDOT gives the Army Corps. Letter, p. 6
Coordination
- Recognition of the local coordination effort. Letter, p. 6
- A schedule of work sessions with UDOT, the cities, the county, and the landowners. Letter, p. 6
Farmland
- Keep the farmland that UDOT buys, beyond what the road needs, in farm use “to the maximum extent practicable”. Letter, p. 6
Roads
- A side-by-side table of each road, private access, and farm crossing that either route closes or changes. Letter, p. 7
- The added travel distance for farm equipment and livestock. Letter, p. 7
- Farm equipment turning movements at the overpasses. Letter, p. 7
- Emergency response time and route redundancy models. Letter, p. 7
- Maps of connections before and after the project. Letter, p. 8
- The other designs studied: partial grade separation, roundabouts, lower speeds, and context-sensitive design. Letter, p. 8
- Proof that the closures and overpasses are the least disruptive practical design. Letter, p. 8
Walking
- A comparison of pedestrian safety and connections for each route. Letter, p. 9
- An assessment of walking conditions near the historic center of Heber City. Letter, p. 9
- The effect of interchange design on pedestrian crossings. Letter, p. 9
- A list of commitments for pedestrian facilities. Letter, p. 9
The letter also makes an offer. The city and the county offer to help find “agricultural lands within Wasatch County that may fulfill the applicable 2:1 mitigation requirement”. (p. 7)
Read the sources
- Heber Valley Corridor Draft EIS, January 2026UDOTAll chapters and appendices.Open it Heber Valley Corridor Draft EIS, January 2026
- Draft EIS summary fact sheetUDOTThe Alternative A and B fact sheets are on the same UDOT page.Open it Draft EIS summary fact sheet
- Full-alignment scroll plot of both routesUDOTThe design drawings on an aerial photo.Open it Full-alignment scroll plot of both routes
- Joint letter on the Draft EIS, March 2026 (comment 689)Wasatch County, Midway City, and other officialsWith its attachments: Resolutions 06-04, 2007-05, 22-09, and 24-03, and the 2018 canvass. The list of signers is in Volume 1.Open it Joint letter on the Draft EIS, March 2026 (comment 689)
- Joint Wasatch County and Heber City letter to UDOT, June 13, 2000Wasatch County and Heber CityThe preferred bypass route around the west side of Heber City, with a map.Open it Joint Wasatch County and Heber City letter to UDOT, June 13, 2000
- County Resolution 06-04, August 9, 2006Wasatch County CouncilEndorses the bypass corridor.Open it County Resolution 06-04, August 9, 2006
- County Resolution 22-09, July 13, 2022, with Exhibit AWasatch County CouncilComments to UDOT on the screening: the North Fields and routes WA1, WB3, and WB4.Open it County Resolution 22-09, July 13, 2022, with Exhibit A
- County Resolution 24-03, May 15, 2024Wasatch County CouncilSupports conservation in the North Fields and the bypass study.Open it County Resolution 24-03, May 15, 2024
- Heber City letter on the Draft EIS, February 2026 (comment 206)Heber CityEight requests, seven of them design changes. In May 2026, UDOT said it added a sidewalk and a bike lane at the Midway Lane interchange, and that it would study a move of the 1300 South leg (Park Record, May 20, 2026).Open it Heber City letter on the Draft EIS, February 2026 (comment 206)
- All public comments, Volumes 1 and 2UDOTVolume 1 lists each comment. Volume 2 holds the attachments.Open it All public comments, Volumes 1 and 2
- Draft EIS lines of Routes A and B (GIS)UDOTThe source of the maps on this site.Open it Draft EIS lines of Routes A and B (GIS)
- Open space program and the 2018 bondWasatch CountyOpen it Open space program and the 2018 bond
In the news
- UDOT UDOT identifies preferred alternative for the Heber Valley Corridor
- KPCW Wasatch County leaders to share bypass traffic, wetlands concerns with UDOT
- Salt Lake Tribune Tractors lead protest in Heber over proposed highway through North Fields
- KPCW Wasatch County leaders send letter to UDOT proposing new bypass option
- KSL UDOT defends Heber Valley bypass plan despite community concerns
- Park Record UDOT considers redesigning the Heber Valley bypass after elected officials raise concerns
- KPCW More delays tie up Heber Valley bypass as UDOT studies North Fields impact
- TownLift Heber Valley bypass decision delayed to 2027 as UDOT revisits route
What comes next
UDOT expects to publish the Final EIS and the Record of Decision in spring 2027, and it says it will give updates when the schedule is final. It posts updates on its project page. This site has no comment form. For an official comment, contact UDOT through its project page.