1
50
3
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/607f9e0aa669bbf32ba04003c3770414.pdf
1abebd82dd16fa4cfb0e4eac1cd71a88
PDF Text
Text
LOGAN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
MINUTES OF INTERDISCIPLINE TEAM MEETING
June 10, 1986
(
ATTENDANCE:
Lynn Zollinger - UDOT
Jim Naegle - UDOT
John Ne ~ l - UDOT
Gale Larson - Valley Engineering
Rudy Lukez - Cache Group Sierra Club
Todd G. Weston - UDOT
Al Stilley - Northern Engineering & Testing
Dave Baumgartner - USFS-Logan
Stan Nuffer - CH2M HILL
Cliff Forsgren - CH2M HILL
Duncan Silver - FHWA
Howard Richardson - UDOT
Sheldon Barker - CH2M HILL
Tom Haislip - CH2M HILL
John D'Amico - CH2M HILL
Frank Grover - USFS-SLC
Steve Flint - Bridgerland Audobon Association
Stan Nuffer called the meeting to order and asked members of
the group to introduce themselves. Following the introductions, some of the members were asked to briefly describe
their views of the project and its objectives.
Jim Naegle indicated that UDOT wants a thorough investigation
and has no preconceived idea as to what, if anything, should
be done in the canyon. He expressed appreciation for the
interest of the environmental community and the public in
general. He also wants members of the 1.0. Team to have
full input into all phases of the project. The most serious
problems in the canyon presently are narrow and obsolete
bridges which are in need of repair or replacement.
Lynn Zollinger explained that UDOT has a responsibility to
the traveling public to provide safe, efficient transportation.
UDOT wants to satisfy the needs of the traveling
public and the environmental community. He expects an openminded study with adequate input from all of the interested
public.
Dave Baumgartner said that the rules of the environmental
"ball game" have changed since the '70's. A successful
study is dependant upon public support and understanding.
This project will be a challenging one and standard
solutions will probably not work in every instance.
I
1
�(
Todd Weston stated that he does not have any notion that
there will ever be a freeway or a 4-lane highway through the
canyon. He feels that there are more problems in the canyon
than old bridges and the study must address those problems
without being locked into one concept. He does expect ideas
to improve transportation can be implemented.
Rudy Lukez stated that there are many personal feelings about
the canyon and that some people will be upset if there is a
large construction project in it. The canyon is an environmentally sensitive area and there is a need for careful study
and analysis before any work can begin. The environmental
community desires to be kept informed. Rudy also expressed
concern that meetings held during the day may be difficult
for those who work elsewhere to attend.
Steve Flint stated that there were many people who questioned
the transportation needs in the canyon.
Stan Nuffer then explained the I.D. Team and the role of
each I.D. Team member. The I.D. Team is to function as the
group which reviews scope, data, methodology and conclusions
of the study and determines whether each stage of the study
adequately addresses the 'critical issues and meets the objectives of the study.
Gale Larson said that Valley Engineering's office in Logan
will be the local contact point and someone will be available
for questions at least 10 hours per week. Valley Engineering
will also perform the field surveys and traffic counts.
Some traffic counts were conducted during the ski season in
order to have the information available for the study this
summer. Gale expects to work closely with Sheldon Barker
with the public involvement task work.
Stan Nuffer then introduced the Scope of Work, as included
in the consulting agreement between UDOT and CH2M HILL, and
led the discussion on the tasks outlined in the agreement.
Task 1 - ANALYSIS OF TRANSPORTATION NEEDS
The discussion covered the major areas of potential need
covered in the agreement; safety, maintenance, substandard
geometrics, and congestion.
If areas with substandard geometrics are identified, options to correct the problems will
be identified, these may include road re-alignment. During
the discussion of congestion, Rudy Lukez asked what was
meant by levels of service c,d,e. Stan Nuffer gave a brief
description and said that detailed descriptions will be provided to members of the I.D. Team in a Technical Memo. Rudy
Lukez also asked how traffic projections were determined.
Stan Nuffer said that UDOT uses projections of population
2
�(
prepared by local councils of governments and other agencies
who are charged with the task of preparing proiections of
that type.
TASK 2 - LOCATION STUDIES
The study area will include the roadway between Right Hand
Fork and Garden City. The alternatives listed in the contract scope will be evaluated as well as others identified
during the course of the study. New roadway alignments may
also be considered from the summit to Garden City. John
Neal asked what the termini of the project were. FHWA must
approve the termini in order for the project to be eligible
for funding. Lynn Zollinger said that Logan City to Garden
City had been proposed to the FWHA and he expects approval
shortly. Since Logan to Right Hand Fork has already been
improved there would be no action considered on that stretch
of road. Tom Haislip said that the development of the alternatives will be one of the biggest phases of the project.
Mapping was also discussed.
Existing mapping available
through UDOT will be used on the project wherever possible,
however adequate mapping is · not available over the entire
route. As the mapping is completed, maps will be made
available to members of the 1.0. Team.
TASK 3 - GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS
(
The extent of the geotechnical investigations will be determined as alternatives are developed.
It is expected that
they will be needed primarily in areas where re-alignment is
considered.
Dave Baumgartner expressed concern about the role of the
I.D. ream in this study.
If the team is to be advisory
only, he does not think a satisfactory solution to identified problems can be found.
To be successful, the I.D. Team
should have a role in establishing study criteria and in
formulating recommendations. Other team members expressed
their views on the subject, and expressed their belief that
the 1.0. Team would function in a manner that would lead to
a successful resolution of the transportation problems identified in the study.
TASK4 - PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT
Sheldon Barker said that CH2M HILL would make three promises
in the public involvement program; (1) to be a good listener,
(2) to get input from all interested individuals and groups
and to treat each with respect, 3) when the report is prepared, it would contain no surprises because everyone had
been involved in the process.
3
�.
(
(
The scoping process was also discussed.
It will include the
development of the project objective, holding informationai
meetings to educate the public, meetings with small groups
as well as large, preparation of a video tape, and maintaining a project office in Logan where interested parties could
come to obtain information on the project. Rudy Lukez suggested that information also be made available at the USU
Library and the Logan Public Library so that it would be
available during evening hours. Sheldon Barker said that
the suggestion was a good one and it will be implemented.
There was considerable discussion on the number and scheduling of meetings. Rudy Lukez did not feel that a lot of
meetings was necessarily a good thing. He used as an example
the recent meetings held by the Division of Water Resources
on the proposal to build a dam on the Bear River. Meetings
should be proceeded by 2 or 3 weeks of media coverage and
should be well prepared. Rudy was also not certain if there
would be any value to meeting with small groups because it
would not' give people with differing views an opportunity to
hear the opinions of others. Sheldon Barker indicated that
the different views would come out in the larger public
meetings and that meeting with small groups would give the
project team the opportunity to better prepare for the larger
meetings. Rudy Lukez said that fall would be the best time
to hold the scoping meetings because more people would be
able to attend.
(
. TASK 5 - COORDINATION
Tom Haislip discussed the 1.0. Team and its organization and
the need to have each member involved.
TASK 6 - ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESS~lENT
Tom Haislip said that the 1.0. Team would playa key role in
the project by providing input and direction to the study
team. Tom also asked for help from the environmental community.
If there were any data or studies that are available
and not in UDOT files, they may be of great help in the study.
Rudy Lukez said that there was a study underway at USU investigating the impact that high speed traffic has on deer.
Tom Haislip indicated that field studies were not planned
because there is extensive information available. Tom also
explained that it is intended that Technical Memos be prepared presenting in detail the findings of each phase of the
study. After the 1.0. Team has reviewed, discussed, and
revised the Technical Memos, the information would be summarized and placed in the report.
4
�(
There was more discussion on the role of the 1.0. Team.
Dave Baumgartner again expressed his concern that 1.0. Team
members be in a position to do more than simply review conclusions and give their comments. Stan Nuffer said that
study data, methodology, and conclusions would all be presented to the I.D. Team and discussed before incorporating
anything into the report. Tom Haislip said that CH2M HILL's
job would be to the "doers" who would gather information,
review data and prepare Technical Memos for the I.D. Team.
The I.D. Team would then review and discuss the memos and
hopefully resolve any differences. Dave Baumgartner said
that it may be necessary for superiors in each agency to
resolve conflicts if they could not be handled on the I.D.
Team level. He also indicated that the whole process would
work much better if each alternative developed offered a
real solution to the problems so that the alternative evaluation would be believable.
Todd Weston pointed out that the Forest Service, UDOT, and
rHWA must all agree to whatever solutions are presented in
the report.
If any of the three agencies disagree with the
findings, the project will never be completed.
(
In discussions at the end of the meeting, there was no agreement as to when the first public information meeting should
be held, or what purpose it should serve. After further
discussion, it was decided that the date of the first meeting
should be set after the next I.D. Team meeting.
It was recommended that a feature article on "the project be prepared
for the Logan paper. This should be published prior to the
Logan public information meeting.
The next meeting will be held on Monday June 23, at
7:00 p.m. at District 1 headquarters in Ogden.
SLC73/39
(
5
�
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/59">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/59</a>
Purchasing Information
Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item.
To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2013
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, at 800 dpi. Archival file is PDF (800 dpi), display file is JPEG2000.
Checksum
2735761469
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
3942259 Bytes
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Environmental assessment minutes of interdiscipline team meeting, June 10, 1986
Description
An account of the resource
Minutes from the environmental assessment meeting of the interdisciplinary meeting including a summary of the scope of work, analysis of transportation needs, location studies, geotechnical investigations, public and agency involvement, agency coordination, and environmental assessment.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Nuffer, Stanton S.
Naegle, Jim
Zollinger, Lynn
Baumgartner, David
Weston, Todd
Lukez, Rudy
Flint, Steve
Larson, Gale
Neal, John
Barker, Sheldon
Haislip, Thomas
Subject
The topic of the resource
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Traffic engineering
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Administrative records
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1986-06-10
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Utah
United States
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1980-1989
20th century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 27 Folder 3
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Libraries Photograph Curator, phone (435) 797-0890.
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Highway 89 Digital Collections
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
MSS148VIIIB27_Fd3_Page_4.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/4038b7921c9612c213b6165be6f65f44.pdf
e4730b7646d6b520ab44b840022ec1c5
PDF Text
Text
'i
ClOd HIll
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Interdisciplinary Team
FROM:
Stan Nuffer
DATE:
June 19, 1986
SUBJECT:
Logan Canyon Environmental Study
PROJECT:
B21163.AO
Your attendance and participation in the first Interdisciplinary Team meeting held on June 10, 1986 was appreciated.
Enclosed are minutes of the meeting for your review, and an
agenda for the next meeting on June 23, at 2:00 p.m. at the
UDOT District office in Ogden.
We look forward to seeing you there.
BOC5/025
slc76/d.101
�AGENDA - LOGAN CANYON STUDY
INTERDISCIPLINARY STUDY TEAM
MEETING NO. 2 - OGDEN, UTAH
JUNE 23, 1986 - 7:00 p.m.
1.
Review minutes of June 10, meeting.
2.
Discussion of role of interdisciplinary team.
3.
Discussion of Level of Documentation required by NEPA
for environmental studies.
4.
Public involvement program outline.
5.
Schedule of interdisciplinary team meetings.
BOC5/026
slc76/d.102
�LOGAN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
MINUTES OF INTERDISCIPLINE TEAM MEETING
June 10, 1986
ATTENDANCE:
Lynn Zollinger - UDOT
Jim Naegle - UDOT
John Neal - UDOT
Gale Larson - Valley Engineering
Rudy Lukez - Cache Group Sierra Club
Todd G. Weston - UDOT
Al Stilley - Northern Engineering & Testing
Dave Baumgartner - USFS-Logan
Stan Nuffer - CH2M HILL
Cliff Forsgren - CH2M HILL
Duncan Silver - FHWA
Howard Richardson - UDOT
Sheldon Barker - CH2M HILL
Tom Haislip - CH2M HILL
John D'Amico - CH2M HILL
Frank Grover - USFS-SLC
Steve Flint - Bridgerland Audobon Association
Stan Nuffer called the meeting to order and asked members of
the group to introduce themselves. Following the introductions, some of the members were asked to briefly describe
their views of the project and its objectives.
Jim Naegle indicated that UDOT wants a thorough investigation
and has no preconceived idea as to what, if anything, should
be done in the canyon. He expressed appreciation for the
interest of the environmental cowmunity and the public in
general. He also wants members of the I.D. Team to have
full input into all phases of the project. The most serious
problems in the canyon presently are narrow and obsolete
bridges which are in need of repair or replacement.
Lynn Zollinger explained that UDOT has a responsibility to
the traveling public to provide safe, efficient transportation.
UDOT wants to satisfy the needs of the traveling
public and the environmental community. He expects an openminded study with adequate input from all of the interested
public.
Dave Baumgartner said that the rules of the environmental
"ball game" have changed since the '70's. A successful
study is dependant upon public support and understanding.
This project will be a challenging one and standard
solutions will probably not work in every instance.
1
�Todd Weston stated that he does not have any notion that
there will ever be a freeway or a 4-lane highway through the
canyon. He feels that there are more problems in the canyon
than old bridges and the study must address those problems
without being locked into one concept. He does expect ideas
to improve transportation can be implemented.
Rudy Lukez stated that there are many personal feelings about
the canyon and that some people will be upset if there is a
large construction project in it. The canyon is an environmentally sensitive area and there is a need for careful study
and analysis before any work can begin. The environmental
community desires to be kept informed. Rudy also expressed
concern that meetings held during the day may be difficult
for those who work elsewhere to attend.
Steve Flint stated that there were many people who questioned
the transportation needs in the canyon.
Stan Nuffer then explained the I.D. Team and the role of
each I.D. Team member. The I.D. Team is to function as the
group which reviews scope, data, methodology and conclusions
of the study and determines whether each stage of the study
adequately addresses the critical issues and meets the objectives of the study.
Gale Larson said that Valley Engineering's office in Logan
will be the local contact point and someone will be available
for questions at least 10 hours per week. Valley Engineering
will also perform the field surveys and traffic counts.
Some traffic counts were conducted during the ski season in
order to have the information available for the study this
summer. Gale expects to work closely with Sheldon Barker
with the public involvement task work.
Stan Nuffer then introduced the Scope of Work, as included
in the consulting agreement between UDOT and CH2M HILL, and
led the discussion on the tasks outlined in the agreement.
Task 1 - ANALYSIS OF TRANSPORTATION NEEDS
The discussion covered the major areas of potential need
covered in the agreement; safety, maintenance, substandard
geometrics, and congestion.
If areas with substandard geometries are identified, options to correct the problems will
be identified, these may include road re-alignment. During
the discussion of congestion, Rudy Lukez asked what was
meant by levels of service c,d,e. Stan Nuffer gave a brief
description and said that detailed descriptions will be provided to members of the I.D. Team in a Technical Memo. Rudy
Lukez also asked how traffic projections were determined.
Stan Nuffer said that UDOT uses projections of population
2
�prepared by local councils of governments and other agencies
who are charged with the task of preparing proj'ections of
that type.
TASK 2 - LOCATION STUDIES
The study area will include the roadway between Right Hand
Fork and Garden City.
The alternatives listed in the contract scope will be evaluated as well as others identified
during the course of the study. New roadway alignments may
also be considered from the summit to Garden City.
John
Neal asked what the termini of the project were.
FHWA must
approve the termini in order for the project to be eligible
for funding.
Lynn Zollinger said that Logan City to Garden
City had been proposed to the FWHA and he expects approval
shortly.
Since Logan to Right Hand Fork has already been
improved there would be no action considered on that stretch
of road.
Tom Haislip said that the development of the alternatives will be one of the biggest phases of the project.
Mapping was also discussed.
Existing mapping available
through UDOT will be used on the project wherever possible,
however adequate mapping is not available over the entire
route. As the mapping is completed, maps will be made
available to members of the I.D. Team.
TASK 3 - GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS
The extent of the geotechnical investigations will be determined as alternatives are developed.
It is expected that
they will be needed primarily in areas where re-alignment is
considered.
Dave Baumgartner expressed concern about the role of the
I.D. Team in this study.
If the team is to be advisory
only, he does not think a satisfactory solution to identified problems can be found.
To be successful, the I.D. Team
should have a role in establishing study criteria and in
formulating recommendations. Other team members expressed
their views on the subject, and expressed their belief that
the I.D. Team would function in a manner that would lead to
a successful resolution of the transportation problems identified in the study.
TASK4 - PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT
Sheldon Barker said that CH2M HILL would make three promises
in the public involvement program; (1) to be a good listener,
(2) to get input from all interested individuals and groups
and to treat each with respect, 3) when the report is prepared, it would contain no surprises because everyone had
been involved in the process.
3
�The scoping process was also discussed.
It will include the
development of the project objective, holding informationai
meetings to educate the public, meetings with small groups
as well as large, preparation of a video tape, and maintaining a project office in Logan where interested parties could
come to obtain information on the project. Rudy Lukez suggested that information also be made available at the USU
Library and the Logan Public Library so that it would be
available during evening hours. Sheldon Barker said that
the suggestion was a good one and it will be implemented.
There was considerable discussion on the number and scheduling of meetings. Rudy Lukez did not feel that a lot of
meetings was necessarily a good thing. He used as an example
the recent meetings held by the Division of Water Resources
on the proposal to build a dam on the Bear River. Meetings
should be proceeded by 2 or 3 weeks of media coverage and
should be well prepared. Rudy was also not certain if there
would be any value to meeting with small groups because it
would not give people with differing views an opportunity to
hear the opinions of others. Sheldon Barker indicated that
the different views would come out in the larger public
meetings and that meeting with small groups would give the
project team the opportunity to better prepare for the larger
meetings. Rudy Lukez said that fall would be the best time
to hold the scoping meetings because more -people would be
able to attend.
TASK 5 - COORDINATION
Tom Haislip discussed the I.D. Team and its organization and
the need to have each member involved.
TASK 6 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSl-lENT
Tom Haislip said that the I.D. Team would playa key role in
the project by providing input and direction to the study
team. Tom also asked for help from the environmental community.
If there were any data or studies that are available
and not in UDOT files, they may be of great help in the study.
Rudy Lukez said that there was a study underway at USU investigating the impact that high speed traffic has on deer.
Tom Haislip indicated that field studies were not planned
because there is extensive information available. Tom also
explained that it is intended that Technical Memos be prepared presenting in detail the findings of each phase of the
study. After the I.D. Team has reviewed, discussed, and
revised the Technical Memos, the information would be summarized and placed in the report.
4
�There was more discussion on the role of the I.D. Team.
Dave Baumgartner again expressed his concern that I.D. Team
members be in a position to do more than simply review conclusions and give their comments. Stan Nuffer said that
study data, methodology, and conclusions would all be presented to the I.D. Team and discussed before incorporating
anything into the report. Tom Haislip said that CH2M HILL's
job would be to the "doers" who would gather information,
review data and prepare Technical Memos for the I.D. Team.
The I.D. Team would then review and discuss the memos and
hopefully resolve any differences. Dave Baumgartner said
that it may be necessary for superiors in each agency to
resolve conflicts if they could not be handled on the I.D.
Team level.
He also indicated that the whole process would
work much better if each alternative developed offered a
real solution to the problems so that the alternative evaluation would be believable.
Todd Weston pointed out that the Forest Service, UDOT, and
FHWA must all agree to whatever solutions are presented in
the report.
If any of the three agencies disagree with the
findings, the project will never be completed.
In discussions at the end of the meeting, there was no agreement as to when the first public information meeting should
be held, or what purpose it should serve. After further
discussion, it was decided that the date of the first meeting
should be set after the next I.D. Team meeting.
It was recommended that a feature article on the project be prepared
for the Logan paper. This should be published prior to the
Logan public information meeting.
The next meeting will be held on Monday June 23, at
7:00 p.m. at District 1 headquarters in Ogden.
SLC73/39
5
�
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/40">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/40</a>
Purchasing Information
Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item.
To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2013
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, at 800 dpi. Archival file is PDF (800 dpi), display file is JPEG2000.
Checksum
46884717
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
4338797 Bytes
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Minutes from June 10, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting
Description
An account of the resource
A memo from Stan Nuffer detailing the minutes from the Interdisciplinary Team meeting from June 10, 1986.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Nuffer, Stanton S.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Zollinger, Lynn
Naegle, Jim
Neal, John
Larson, Gale
Lukez, Rudy
Weston, Todd
Stilley, Al
Baumgartner, Dave
Silver, Duncan
Richardson, Howard
Barker, Sheldon
Haislip, Tom
D'Amico, John
Grover, Frank
Flint, Steve
Forsgren, Clifford
Subject
The topic of the resource
Roadside Improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon
United States Highway 89
Logan Canyon Study
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Administrative records
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1986-06-19
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Ogden (Utah)
Weber County (Utah)
Utah
United States
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1980-1989
20th century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 27 Folder 1
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Libraries Photograph Curator, phone (435) 797-0890.
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Highway 89 Digital Collections
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
MSS148VIIIB27_Fd1_Page_8.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/b3ecb49ba327f0abb2eca7980b40ab59.pdf
f68aac7adf92ffd6535e610eee796306
PDF Text
Text
LOGAN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
MINUTES OF INTERDISCIPLINE TEAM MEETING
June 23, 1986
Attending:
Torn Haislip - CH2M HILL
Sheldon Barker - CH2M HILL
Gale Larson - Valley Engineering
Lynn Zollinger - UDOT
Bill Helm - Interested Party
Jack Spence - Cache Group Sierra Club
Rudy Lukez - Cache Group Sierra Club
Steve Flint - Bridgerland Audobon Association
John Neil - UDOT
Cliff Forsgren - CH2M HILL
Jim Naegle - UDOT
Stan Nuffer - CH2M HILL
Clark Ostergard - USFS
Mark Shaw - USFS
Fred LaBar - USFS
Duncan Silver - FHWA
Howard Richardson - UDOT
(
ITEM 1 - Discussion of Minutes
Stan Nuffer called the meeting to order and asked if anyone
had comments on the minutes of the last meeting.
There was
a question raised about the review function of the ID Team
which was described in the minutes.
The role of the ID Team
was an agenda item for this meeting and discussion of the
function was postponed until later in the meeting. There
was no further discussion of the minutes.
ITEM 2 - Discussion of Role of Interdisciplinary Team
A statement of the role of the interdisciplinary team
was distributed and discussed.
The major functions
were:
1
...I... •
2.
')
..J •
Provide management input Provide technical input CH2M HILL will provide the primary input and
the USFS would provide the technical input on
environmental items. Other team members
would add input as the need or opportunity
arose.
Review technical memoranda and draft Environmental Report -
�4.
The team members will review the technical
memoranda and will also review the draft
environmental report.
Level of environmental action determinationRudy Lukez asked if this means that a decision will be made during the study on what
the proposed project will be. He also wanted
to know who would make the decision.
It was
explained that the final decision on what
project, if any, will be proposed will be
made by the three cooperating agencies, UDOT,
USFS and FHWA. Prior to the decision on a
project however, a decision must be made on
the class of environmental action (EA or EIS) .
Jack Spence was not sure who would make the
recommendation on the class of environmental
action to the cooperating agencies.
It was
determined that the ID Team would make the
recommendation.
Modifications to the statement of the role of the team
were made.
The revised statement is attached to these
minutes.
ITEM 3 - Level of Documentation Required by NEPA for
Environmental Studies
(
NEPA requirements for environmental studies were reviewed
and discussed. A handout taken from the UDOT publication,
Procedures for Project Development, described the basic categories.
ITEM 4 - Public Involvement Program Outline
Ap outline of the Public Involvement Program had previously
been sent to ID Team members and was discussed at length.
The principle topics of discussion were:
1.
. The terms "projectlf and "study" were both used in
the outline. To be consistent "study" should be
used throughout when describing the ongoing activity.
This will help to alleviate any fears of those who
equate Ifproject" with actual construction.
?.
Jack Spence wanted to know what the rational for
the study was. Lynn Zollinger explained that whenever UDOT went into Logan Canyon, people asked the
question If What is going to happen next?" After
this study is complete UDOT can point to a plan
which will address the transportation needs in the
Canyon through the year 201rr.
�3.
The press release was discussed and Rudy Lukez
suggested that the ID Team be described in it.
John Neil stated that UDOT's community relations
department would release the information as soon
as it was prepared.
4.
During the discussion of Milestone 2, it was recommended that the word "improvements be replaced
with "action" so that both repair and improvements
would be covered. Rudy Lukez asked where traffic
forecasts would be used and how they would be
developed.
It was explained that the permanent
traffic counter at Garden City, and spot traffic
counts, would be used to establish the present
tra f fic load in the Canyon. Population projections prepared by agencies having that responsibility would then be used to project traffic
volume ahead to the year 2010.
It was explained
that there had already been spot traffic counts
taken at two locations, on 2 different days this
past winter and that more would be taken this summer. Jack Spence was not sure that the data
gathered would be sufficient.
He said that one of
the problems with past studies was the lack of
reliable traffic data from which to project future
traffic flow.
Jack asked to see the methodology
and data when it was available.
Rudy Lukez asked
if sampling was an accepted means of gathering
current traffic flow data. Duncan Silver answered
that it was, provided the sample size was large
enough and the sampling techniques were acceptable. He also suggested that the ID Team evaluate
the sampling techniques.
Stan Nuffer said that
information on the methodology and sampling techniques would be ready for the next ID Team meeting.
Rudy Lukez asked if they could be prepared far
enough in advance to allow the team members a
chance to review the information before the next
meeting.
Duncan Silver restated his belief that
the key issue on this · item was the methodology
used to gather the present traffic flow data.
Duncan also wanted to know why a 2-day 10-hour
sample period was selected, a period of this type
would be acceptable for traffic classification but
probably not for counts.
Stan Nuffer said that
information on the methodology and sampling techniques would be available before the next meeting.
ll
5.
Jack Spence expressed concern about having too
many meetings during the summer vlhen many of the
USU students and facility are out of town.
Sheldon
Barker indicated that the schedule of meetings was
�flexible and that something could probably be worked
out.
6.
During the discussion of Milestone 3, Jack Spence
asked if the Public Involvement Program was designed to meet the requirements for an EIS in case
there was a need for one. Tom Haislip explained
that the program was designed with an EIS in mind.
Sheldon Barker also asked the team members for
names of persons or organizations who should be
added to the mailing list. Anyone who has a suggestion should either give Sheldon the information
after the meeting or mail it to him.
ITEM 5 - Schedule of Interdisciplinary Team Meetings
Stan Nuffer presented a schedule of team meetings through
September.
It was suggested that 3:00 p.m. would be a better
time for some team members than 10:00 a.m.
It was agreed
that all meetings scheduled for 10:00 a.m. would be held at
3:00 p.m. instead.
Before the meeting adjourned, Duncan Silver again stated
that he felt the traffic data must be good enough to satisfy
the group before the study proceeded too much farther.
Jim
Naegle stated that standard accepted methods were used during
the gathering of data.
The next scheduled meeting is 3:00 p.m., July 14, 1986, in
the District office in Ogden.
SLC77/59
�
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Local URL
The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website
<a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/21">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/21</a>
Purchasing Information
Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item.
To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a>
Digital Publisher
List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online.
Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library
Date Digital
Record the date the item was digitized.
2013
Conversion Specs
Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, at 800 dpi. Archival file is PDF (800 dpi), display file is JPEG2000.
Checksum
4097134252
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
2578459 Bytes
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Minutes of June 23, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting
Description
An account of the resource
Minutes of June 23, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Review of minutes, discussion of role of Interdisciplinary Team, level of documentation required, public involvement program outline, and the schedule.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Haislip, Tom
Barker, Sheldon
Larson, Gale
Zollinger, Lynn
Helm, Bill
Spence, Jack
Lukez, Rudy
Flint, Steve
Neil, John
Naegle, Jim
Nuffer, Stan
Ostergard, Clark
Shaw, Mark
LaBar, Fred
Sliver, Duncan
Richardson, Howard
Forsgren, Clifford
Subject
The topic of the resource
United States Highway 89
Roadside Improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Administrative records
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1986-06-23
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Utah
United States
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
1980-1989
20th century
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS148 Series VIII Box 27 Folder 2
Is Referenced By
A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource.
View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a>
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Libraries Photograph Curator, phone (435) 797-0890.
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Highway 89 Digital Collections
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
MSS148VIIIB27_Fd2_Page_5.pdf
Highway 89;