03-22-2018, 08:14 PM
Guys - this is highly unlikely. No one has even mentioned (forgotten?) that another little agency called the Corp of Engineers also has a bit to say. It’s called a 401 permit. If you MUST fill a wetland, last word was that the corps was asking for a 5 to 1 replacement.
The developer wants 10,000 acres of fill, so 50,000 acres of new wetland. That’s about 78 square miles (640 ac / sq mile).
So someone has to believe that this developer is going to buy 78 square miles somewhere near Utah Lake and then excavate that land to convert it to wetlands. Really?
That’s aside from all of the other obvious concerns.
Seems like a waste of staff time to even bother with this kind of nonsense.
The last time this came up was the non-economic sense toll bridge. The most basic calculations on traffic volume to cost, vs the developers projections showed utter nonsense.
How dumb would the State look with a partially built bridge or half started island development.
[signature]
The developer wants 10,000 acres of fill, so 50,000 acres of new wetland. That’s about 78 square miles (640 ac / sq mile).
So someone has to believe that this developer is going to buy 78 square miles somewhere near Utah Lake and then excavate that land to convert it to wetlands. Really?
That’s aside from all of the other obvious concerns.
Seems like a waste of staff time to even bother with this kind of nonsense.
The last time this came up was the non-economic sense toll bridge. The most basic calculations on traffic volume to cost, vs the developers projections showed utter nonsense.
How dumb would the State look with a partially built bridge or half started island development.
[signature]