December 6, 2024: High Valley Transit revisited Park City Council
with reduced road width, or "shoulder improvements", dimensions to help cut overall costs for the proposed Bus Rapid Transit project for SR 224. Council member Jeremy Rubell wants to keep the existing road footprint within Park City limits due to the negative impacts that road widening would have on wildlife and residents. Council member Bill Ciraco would like to see something that: "...provides some movement (for wildlife) from east to west across that corridor (SR224)...".
Save People Save Wildlife would like to see wildlife crossings placed at the same time as any planned project for SR 224, as this would be the most efficient use of all components and resources involved. For example, traffic mitigation, construction equipment on site, etc. This means that the crossings would not be part of proposed projects in terms of budget and credit, but in tandem with projects already planned and pending for SR 224. That way, existing projects would not have to revisit their schedules and budgets.
Bill (Ciraco) noted that he has concerns about the wildlife issue. This would have to come from the council as a whole, but his intention would be to try to rally the council (confirm with his colleagues) "...to come to HVT with an ask about being supportive of doing something that does something for wildlife mitigation in that corridor...provides some movement from east to west across that corridor...so, obviously, I'm not asking to make a commitment here, but I just want you to understand that that is going to be a question, if we can get consensus on our council, that I would like to have asked."
Jeremy (Rubell) said that the proposed widening of the road (SR224) "gives him heartburn". Not a new question, and, over the years, the proposed widths continue to fluctuate from the existing footprint and back again. On the record, as it sits today, he is pro BRT regarding the technology and intersection improvements...it sounds amazing, and it will be awesome for the community.  He is absolutely against road widening in PC simply due to the fact that the value of widening of the road within PC limits cannot be explained, and, anecdotally, the value of doing so is simply not there for the negative impacts it introduces..both on community risk and wildlife risk and the nice residential area neighborhoods along this corridor would now border a seven lane "freeway" (tongue in cheek)...but, honestly, that's where he gets tripped up on this. As this progresses, it is going to continue to come up for him...he is going to continue to push on that one, and if it comes down to timing, nope, this is the same question that has been on the table for years, and if it makes it a "no" because of that, and we couldn't solve that problem and couldn't even explain the value of doing it, that's going to be a hard one.
Jeremy (Rubell) replied to Gabe Shields' (HVT) question of monetary commitment from PC today by saying: No, because of the uncertainty of the numbers and funding discrepancies/gaps at this point. Warrants further discussions. Sales tax discussion that staff prepared, before funding conversation takes place. Is any funding from a previous project or commitment being reallocated to BRT? Seems to be the case, so we need to make sure. Are we missing out on other things by committing to BRT funding?
Mayor Worel stated that a subcommittee is working on that and should have more specific allocations and proportions by late summer, early fall.
Need to determine exactly from where and how much to understand.
Gabe agreed that there could be funding discrepancies as the design phase proceeds. Final monetary ask will be mid summer to early fall. Â
Contractors (just on-boarded by HVT 12/5/2024 for design phase of project) have indicated that the decrease in width should allow for less of a funding discrepancy, therefore less monetary ask from PC.
Bill noted that there was a detectable difference in the palatability of this project this meeting compared to the discussions 11/18/2024. Last meeting, people put words in their mouths regarding the council being opposed to the BRT, when that is not entirely the case. Credited HVT with making notable changes that positively affect the bottom line. Cumulative effect of little changes here and there are making a difference and they are communicating that to the PC Council. There are still things that we need to work on...