Dan Fazzini Jr.

Light WAY to long for turning left onto 5400 S. Today it was 3:15 from the time we arrived at the light, and it was red driving up to it already as well. No peds present.

We have little other options to travel WB out of our subdivision. I realize TE's don't like having people turn left, but sometimes there isn't another reasonable option.

Video: https://youtu.be/zK_pwml8uhw

This is a constant problem. The last time this happened at one of these exchanges where the RT traffic is "suppose" to yield, the guy went off the road like this kicking up rocks and cracked my windscreen. https://youtu.be/q_G8fHxITC8

E/W Ped signals activated most/all the time. This results in NB to WB/NB traffic to have to wait through a very long cycle more than likely.

Often when there is no other cross traffic, we must wait the whole cycle before changing, even at 0630.

With no cross traffic and no prior NB traffic, you'd think that these would start changing immediately.

It seems like one of the Ped buttons is stuck.

The SW Corner ped signal hawk/audio isn't functioning properly, continued beeping through light changes.

One of the drain pipes from the above bridge EB is missing a segment. Can't remember which bridge it was between I-15 and the RR bridges.

The utility cover on the sidewalk approaching 5400 S on the N is broken. I believe this is part of signal control boxes.

It is a fall/rip hazard for pedestrians.

LT traffic (NB) strays into competing RT (has ROW). Since both have greens, this is at full speed. This operator was likely assuming that they could just illegally take the lane #3 to get on the freeway. In reality not only is this behavior against the traffic code on making turns, the RT traffic has the ROW as well and would more likely be the one injured being on the driver's side.

The intersection at 5400 S also has this problem with MANY businesses right after the turn that LT traffic a often need to turn into (here there is plenty of room to merge later for that operator). Also the 5400 S is a much tighter turn with less distance traveled and curb closer to the intersection due to the double RT lanes going SB/WB.

Both of these should be timed for at least the first few seconds to hold the RT traffic to avoid these incidents. I see this happen all the time at 5400 S, but didn't expect it here as the layout is more permissive. I have been stuck at the 2nd light at 5400 S due to this as well as operators are cautious slowing the turn, and the wait for the signal is atrocious there at some times over 2m

Video: https://youtu.be/8WCERzwr7WE

This is both EB and WB.... This is a repeat of a previous one that was closed after a delay in responding. I have recently been in the area at the condition still exists.

It appears that 12300 S and 1-15 was repaved/slurry and re-striped. Unfortunately the road crews put back down the very poor and not to standards bike lanes (AASHTO/MUTCD).

The on ramps have the BL to the Right of the on-ramp lane, and at the intersections with combined RT/Through lanes the bike lane is also to the right of the travel lane. In these cases at the very least there s/b a sign saying "RT Yield to bikes" and dashed BL line for 200' (guidance is 50-200, but since there is a RT/Straight arrow and the volume, I think the 200' is appropriate. The other alternative is to "merge" the BL with the travel lane with sharrows.

Needless to say I am VERY disappointed with the results of this project, it was a perfect opportunity to "fix" a poorly designed section, and another example of the "failed" current process we have for evaluating such things.

Photos attached at some of the sections, but there are more in this area.

http://goo.gl/jtmFJl
http://goo.gl/YbwMo0
http://goo.gl/Zfx78H

3 of the construction signs were completely blocking the shoulder. At best this is negligent, but borders on criminal give the high volume of bicycle traffic using the shoulder. Even if during the week they have flaggers out there, these signs could have been in the gravel in the shoulder.

I don't understand how this can happen. I'd hope that when these go out to bid that the signage placement is required to be in a location if at all practicable as to not interfere with a bike lane or a shoulder with high bicycle usage. And be specific about it as UDOT puts these out they should be aware of the conditions and if that will work or not, rather than just putting in general boilerplate language. Likewise when reviewing permits if a municipality or others are applying for roadway work.

The construction cones here create a very dangerous situation in addition to the already dangerous situation.

Cones were placed for for what appears to be curb/gutter work. The work has not yet started in this area and appears to be currently worked on nearly a 1/2 mile away by 4800 S.

The dual LT lane here now is merging with free-flowing RT traffic into just 2 rather than the 3 lanes. Even with the 3 lanes, I see near misses nearly every day. Now it is not clear who has the ROW. See video from this AM.

https://youtu.be/02iFjJ1VewI

These cones should be removed until there is "actual work" being performed at this location and then only with a flagger present to direct traffic.

Even when without construction, a RT light prohibiting the RT during the very short LT phase would reduce/eliminate any conflicts considering that the LT wait time is now over 2.5 minutes.

Candlesticks/lane closure prior to intersection for no valid reason. This limits the RT traffic at this intersection where that is the primary traffic in the right lane. The constructions appears to be far enough down Redwood to have the lane closure on the north side of the intersection and still allow enough space (more than typical acceleration lanes) prior to the construction and not needlessly block the lane prior to the intersection. At the very least allow RT only traffic in the lane prior to the intersection.

The LT phase is getting entirely to long in the morning. Wait time was over 2:36. Anything over 90 seconds seems long and 2 minutes used to be the longest. This intersection (and the N/S at 1300 W) seem to just get longer phases as time goes on. Local residents did NOT want this intersection nor did they need it.

Pedestrian and bicycle traffic has dramatically dropped off (I'd estimate 1/3 prior to the CFI and flex lanes) since this intersection was put in only increasing the use of a motor vehicle for area residents at these locations.

I rarely have to go through this intersection at 5:00. But this is completely un-acceptable if this is a regular occurrence. The meat of the commute hasn't even started yet and traffic is backed up so much SB that the VERY short cycle for WB-LT traffic is not long enough to clear the drivers who did not properly clear the intersection SB. Even if they did, there would not be enough room for more than one car to make the left turn per 2 minute cycle. I had to sit through 3 cycles before proceeding by weaving my way through the backup.

It took me 10 minutes to drive the 1 mile from my house to get to the store in light E/W traffic. It NEVER took that long under any conditions even in the middle of rush hour prior to this CFI. As I have said before, the residents surrounding this intersection did NOT want this and made it more difficult to get around our own homes and local businesses.

Also I see probably 1/2 to 1/4 the pedestrian and almost ZERO bicycle traffic now along this corridor which likely means that those people are now in cars creating more congestion even for their short trips such as this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8FK3x8NTY0

It's great your contractors are trying to make due with the AM hours, but the work lights facing south are blinding traffic on NB 500 W. Due to the curve in the road, they are facing directly into the path of NB cars past Lowes. This is extremely dangerous in the twilight AM hours and if I had done that I'd been cited.

I realize that the intersection alignment may have contributed with needing a double LT SB, but NB the through and RT lanes are the ones which normally get backed up.

Also confused as to why a sidewalk was not installed between the N Lowes entrance and the corner. I see people crossing who park in Lows and work at Diamond nearly every day darting in-between traffic, now with an extra 2 lanes and no median, this will likely lead to an accident. Although you'd think that Diamond's Worker's Comp and Liability insurance would have them enforce using the signals, I have NEVER seen anyone use the signal to cross that is 50' away. Can we put in "no ped" crossing signs there?

The SB LTO lane is missing it's arrow after the 5400 S construction. Although the City/County was also doing improvements along 1300 W as well.

There are no signs indicating which lane is for what and has nearly caused a few accidents already.

Sidewalk: The sidewalk on the NW corner of Canal and 5400 S is missing, and given the amount of weeks has been missing well before the current project. This needs repaired ASAP as it inhibits safe passage for those with mobility challenges right near a bus stop as well and now NO SHOULDER. forcing people to walk on private property to get around.

We appreciate that UDOT is finally fixing 5400 so, but the crews UDOT hired are completely inconsiderate to the neighborhood. Not only did they leave only 1 lane available for no apparent reason they blocked the LT into 1300 W, forcing drivers to go nearly a mile out of the way to the next light to turn around as u-turns are exceptionally dangerous and nearly impossible with the barrels everywhere, and likely illegal due to the sight distance of the roadway.

This was mildly amusing when it happened without any advanced signage for a couple of hours at a time, but to leave it for the entire weekend is inexcusable! At the very least there s/b signage that no right turns are available back by Redwood there so we could take a different route or provide a detour through the neighborhood. 5400 S and 1300 W is the only access to that part of the neighborhood from the south.