1
50
9
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/d4f3fbd12f09a828683306f8f51a21a2.pdf
49771aba8a4baf947f97982500df30bb
PDF Text
Text
ORIGINAL
")
2
3
4
5
6
7
LOGAN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
8
-000-
9
'f
III
0
PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND OTHERS
Logan City Hall
Logan, Utah
'"
~
a:
0
to.
10
March 4, 1987 , 10:08 a.m.
11
-000-
12
Presiding:
Conducting:
)
Todd Weston
State Highway Commissioner
Utah Department of TrCinsportatic:n
Stanton S. Nuffer
Project Manager
CH2M Hill
13
14
15
16
17
III
N
• 18
....
I"l
0>
<
u
19
0
z
III
20
to.!
a:
...
>-
III
21
to.!
~
0
q:
22
z
"
to.!
a.
23
24
25
" , 'x'''''
,
..;;( ~
1
�)
I N D E X
2
8
Statement by Bryan Booth
9
5
Statement by Richard Denton
13
6
Statement by Bruce King
17
7
Statement by Dr. Newel Daines
18
8
Statement by Ted Wilson
23
9
ell
Statement by Robert Fotheringham
4
0
3
3
..,
Statement by George Preston
Statement by Gordon Low
28
III
~
II:
0
...
10
11
-000-
12
13
14
15
16
17
III
18
~
l'I
en
<
19
u
0
Z
IJI
20
'"
II:
IL
~
IJI
21
'"
~
0
0(
22
z
"
L&J
Q.
23
24
25
.,)
i.
�)
LOGAN, UTAH, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 4, 1987, 10:08 A.M.
2
-000-
3
MR. WESTON:
I waited a few minutes beyond the
4
5
I see more participants than I do audience,but we're still
6
•
hour hoping we could get a few more people here.
going to proceed.
7
&
o
We need to make some introductioris.
I think
I'm Todd
N
8
Weston.
I'm Commissioner with the Department of
9
Transportation for Utah.
I'm going to have a few other
10
people introduce some of their people that are here.
11
purpose of meeting today in this meeting--you are aware
12
that we had a large group here last night in this room.
13
The meeting this morning, all those people were invited
14
to come back if they so cared to, if they hadn't had a chance
15
to make any comments on the study we're doing in Logan Canyon
16
for possible improvements and development.
17
I see here again this morning.
18
Our
Some of those
This meeting was mainly directed toward government
19
officials, public officials, those who we look to to
20
represent the public in general in their positions.
21
sorry that we don't have more of them here, and we ought
22
to have in my judgment.
23
what their time frames are, and I'm sure they were all
24
invited, maybe just through the newspaper.
25
Individual letters were sent to all city mayors.
I'm
But each one of those people know
I don't know.
)
2.
�)
(Further comments by Mr. Weston.
2
of officials present were made.
3
Barker.
4
themselves.
5
were projected upon the wall, and Mr. Barker gave a
6
narration.
7
slides.)
9
Mr~
Sheldon
Mr. Barker has all other present introduce
Further comments by Mr. Weston.
Colored slides
Mr. Nuffer continued the narration of the
MR. NUFFER:
8
Comments by
Introductions
If anybody didn't· sign, it doesn't
mean that you're not going to get to testify here.
We will
10
11
Preston representing Rich County.
12
)
begin with this, and the first name on the list is George
microphone or if you would prefer to come up to this one.
13
This is a little better mike.
14
leave that up to your discretion.
MR. GEORGE PRESTON:
15
You can use either that
But that one does work.
Thank you.
I'll
Having made
16
some remarks personally last night, I have talked to the
17
Commissioner, and he indicated to me that he had some remarks
18
that he wanted to be made in behalf of the county.
19
Commissioner Day over there, and that's why the Commissioners
20
aren't here.
21
in it.
n
asked to speak.
It's
It's not that they don't have an interest
It's that they have business over there, and I was
Basically, Rich County consists of 2,000 people
23
24
located along Bear Lake and in the Woodruff and Randolph
25
areas.
These people are concerned about getting in and
,J
3•
�)
out of Bear Lake.
2
If you will recall, the roads in the winter time
3
are extremely difficult and many times impossible.
The
4
life blood of that community is a transportation system
5
for the people coming in and coming out of the community.
6
As you know, the oil interests have decreased there.
7
income of the county has decreased.
8
for businesses.
The
Rich County is looking
You can't attract businesses, you can't attract
9
10
11
transportation system.
12
of Rich County do not want a roadway that · is uncontrolled
13
construction, . consists of poor planning, and one which would
14
essentially disrupt the ecosystems that exist along. the
15
)
tourists, you cannot generate income without an adequate
highway.
16
On the other hand, .the residents
They feel that a critical safety factor is
17
presently in the corners and in the bridges, which must
18
be replaced.
<
u
19
abdicate our responsibility at this time, leave the roadway
IJ
20
where it is, and pass this problem along to our future
21
generations, obviously at a much higher cost both in study
22
time and in construction time.
~
....
..,
.
It is very easy to do nothing.
We can
en
....
VI
....
~
tr
23
Had our forefathers done this--and they traveled
24
to Bear Lake on a wagon wheel road, it took two days--and
25
had our forefathers been members of the Sierra Club and
.J
4.
�)
other clubs, we probably would still be faced with that
2
same form of transportation.
3
something about it.
4
improvement.
5
This is the time to do
This is the time to make a significant
With regards specifically to problems existing
6
on the road, you have approximately five to six turns in
7
that road that are of a decreasing radius turn, depending
8
on which way you're traveling upon that turn.
9
decreasing radius, you are going from a shallow turn at
By
10
its inception to an increasingly sharper turn throughout
11
the course of the turn.
12
If you follow people, particularly out of state
13
people, on those turns, they overshoot those turns.
14
fail to slow down sufficiently on those turns; and,
15
therefore, it is an extremely dangerous turn, not only for
16
)
the person going down, but also the person coming up.
17
18
19
They
The bridges, you have three major bridges that
are problems, the Burnt Bridge and the Upper Twin Bridges.
I'm on the National Ski Patrol, and every year
20
we go up there and pick up beer cans along the road.
21
Incidentally, there's a lot of them, which means there is
22
alcohol consumed on that road to a great extent.
23
you pick up the beer cans under the bridge and look up,
24
you really have a second thought about whether or not you
25
want to travel that bridge.
But when
In many instances, those
)
5.
�bridges by reason of the salt that the state has kindly
2
furnished to the road has practically eaten away the concrete
3
on the bridge, and they are unsafe.
4
I think they're a hazard right now.
5
They should be replaced.
The Burnt Bridge has had two accidents on the
6
Burnt Bridge last weekend as a result of traffic on there.
7
It is so narrow that a pass was not effectuated properly.
And if you have tried to pass a Miller truck
8
9
on the Burnt Bridge, you've got some serious problems,
10
11
uphill and downhill are from a curve.
12
that bridge not from a straightaway, where you can kind
13
of get your sights on it.
14
curve, and it makes it an extremely difficult bridge to
15
pass on.
16
that's· pulling a trailer house on that bridge, they want
17
their share right out of the center.
18
<
u
because both ends of that, both approaches to the bridge,
dangerous place.
~
20
~
You're approaching it from a
If you've tried to pass a person from out of state
So it's an extremely
Those are examples of the types of things that
19
o
z
w
So you're approaching
inhibit travel and which should be looked at.
~
Thirdly, the speed limit.
21
The speed limit is
22
at 35 miles an hour.
23
that speed limit, including the officers that control the
24
canyon.
25
straightaways are reasonable and prudent to go 40 to 45.
Why?
I do not know of anyone who observes
The turns are set for 35, but the
)
6.
�)
So what are we doing?
We're posting the travel
2
in the canyon for the lowest speed limit that is practical
3
on the corners.
4
by reason of the nature of the construction to travel at
5
the higher speeds on the straight, slow down on the corners.
And so we are actually inviting people
I think that improvements to the corners would
6
7
facilitate travel, increase safety · significantly.
The last
8
comment is on bicycles.
9
the canyon in the summer-spring, you will find bikes up
If you look at the lower part of
10
and down the canyon.
In fact, there. is a lot of bicycle
11
travel up there, a lot of people running on the side of
12
the road.
13
Do you find that in the areas under consideration?
14
No, because you put one bike--I'm talking about pedal bikes--
15
but one bike on that road, two cars passing, and someone
16
is going to get hurt.
Now, we can't do anything about the people that
17
d8
have died before on that road.
19
obligation to look at the people who are yet to die on that
20
road.
21
But .I think we have an
Is Mr. Baumgartner present?
Has this road
22
actually been designated presently as a Scenic Highway,
23
or is it under consideration for designation?
24
25
MR. DAVE BAUMGARTNER:
Under consideration.
A
decision has been made in our forest plan to manage it as
7.
�)
a Scenic Highway and then encourage the State to designate
it as such.
3
the Forest Service has an option to do it themselves.
4
If the State isn't capable of doing
that~
2
MR. PRESTON:
5
6
.,
and dried right now?
Is that correct?
7
ell
o
So that designation is not cut
It's still open for some consideration?
MR. BAUMGARTNER:
Yes and no.
Once again, because
'"
l:
a:
8
of .our management policy in the canyon, we are going to
9
o
II..
manage it as a Scenic Highway, even though it doesn't have
10
an official designation.
MR. PRESTON:
11
Thank you.
With those comments,
12
13
tonight.
14
that road with a view towards looking at that road, seeing
15
where damage won't be done, seeing where improvements can
16
be made; and if you decide to drive that road at about
17
)
I would ,like to invite you all to come to Rich County
4 o'clock when the skiers are coming down from the ski area,
. 18
<
u
When you do come to Rich County, please drive
you've got one car every 27 seconds approaching you, some
19
of which have been dri.nking, I think you would want some
20
improvements to that road.
o
Z
1/1
I.J
a:
II..
.:
1/1
21
a
«
z
"
Thank you.
22
I.J
~
MR. NUFFER:
(Applause.)
Thank you.
The next one indicating
I.J
IL
23
an interest in speaking is Robert Fotheringham, and then
24
we have Bryan Booth.
25
MR. ROBERT FOTHERINGHAM:
I'm really not here
. I
(
8.
�)
to recommend any alternatives to CH2M Hill.
However, there
2
is only one alternative that may possibly not affect the
3
stream, and that would be the No Alternative solution to
4
the problem.
5
that.
I'm not presentjng that I'm for that or against
In 1985 the Utah Legislature deemed it necessary
6
7
to amend one of the laws in the state which says that any
8
time you affect a natural stream in any way, you must receive
9
written approval from the State Engineer to do that.
If
10
11
other than Alternative A or No Alternative, there is a
12
probability that you will in some reach of your construction
13
..>
you do, or if you approach any alternative to this problem
affect the river.
14
approval from the State Engineer, and I will leave a copy
15
of the Code, 73-3-29, with one of the committee, so you
16
can look at that.
In doing that, you will require written
I don't know at what point in time you would
17
18
want to start informing the State Engineer of any plans,
19
but the earlier those are received the better they can be
20
reviewed.
21
22
23
24
25
That's all I have.
MR. NUFFER:
(Applause.)
Thank you, Robert.
Bryan Booth,
and then we'll have Richard Denton.
MR. BRYAN BOOTH:
I didn't dare speak up.
I was here last night, but
There were too many here.
Bryan Booth, of course.
My main interest, of
9.
�)
course, is since I am a Bear Laker by nativity and since
2
3
development.
5
park just north of Garden City for 15 years.
6
people from other areas, other states, that came over that
7
with their trailers behind them, they were shaking like
8
a leaf by the time they got in to my trailer park.
9
.,
.
of business, I'm interested in this highway and its
4
o
...
I'm there a good share of the year now and have a place
said they had never driven anything so scary as Logan Canyon.
10
I built and operated an overnight trailer
Some of the
They
They didn't have time to look at the scenery at all.
Since selling this overnight trailer park to
11
12
Camper World about 10 years ago, I have built and operate
13
now a mobile home park back of my home, almost adjacent
14
to that same area.
Whenever a big mobile home comes in from somewhere
15
16
17
Soda Springs, because they are scared to death, and, of
18.
<
u
they have to generally go around by Evanston or around by
course, the Highway Patrol is not too happy to see them
19
go through Logan Canyon, especially if it's a 65 or 70-foot
20
trailer.
o
Z
III
W
a:
...
....
III
W
~
21
Someone mentioned the guardrails.
I'm grateful
o
«
z
"
w
22
to see so many of them installed recently.
Of course, where
23
they have been installed on the edge of the bridges, that
24
has narrowed these bridges about 10 to 12 inches.
25
of course, a lot of people are scared to death of those.
a..
And,
10.
�->
As has been mentioned so many times, it's a hazard to cross
2
them when someone else is coming.
Now, as far as the deer being killed, I'm sure
3
4
that if the trees were moved back a little farther, they
5
would be able to see a deer before you hit him.
6
they just appear out of nowhere without any problem at all,
7
so far as they're concerned.
But now
I would make one suggestion in the interim that
8
9
10
the side of the road that appears about the middle of the
11
summer, the deer sneak out of those in a hurry, and you
12
would be able to see them a little sooner if that were the
13
)
if the Highway Department would cut that high grass along
case.
I've never counted the times I've traveled Logan
14
15
16
State.
17
.f
Canyon from Bear. Lake to Logan.
while I was teaching.
18
I got my education at Utah
I got my master's degree mostly in the summer schools
I taught two years in Cache Valley .
I'm sure the people won't slow down whether
19
20
night, the hazards of people passing you on a double line,
21
I've had that happen time and time again.
22
~lo,..r
anything is done or not, because, as someone mentioned last
someone with a high speed powerful car whizzed by me on
23
a double line, and 10
24
at almost the same speed, and T had to throw on my brakes
25
to avoid a crash; that is, for him to avoid a crash.
On one occasion
and behold, another car was coming
So
11.
�)
it's happening all the time on curves and everywhere.
People
2
are so · anxious to go places and to go there so quickly,
3
that it's almost an impossible situation to control it.
4
Sometimes these people in Bear Lake who have
5
6
.,
a lot of trouble with the deer wish there were more killed
·on the highway, especially the females, with the hay stacks
7
o
Of course, we've got one · man in Rich County who will ·take
9
III
and elsewhere.
8
..
And I've had a lot of experi'encewi.th that .
care of it, if you don't do something about
~
a:
o
...
10
that~
So I'm anxious to have something done.
I haven't
11
12
recommendations.
13
for the whole thing must be finalized before any portion .
14
of it is done.
15
is done and whatever can be done as the time goes on, I'm
16
for it; and I'm sure that if we vote against anything being
17
done in Bear Lake, the Logan Canyon Road, that that money,
18
whatever is available, will go somewhere else, and I think
19
we want it on this canyon.
20
particularly recently complaining about the first half of
21
Logan Canyon.
22
of screaming about the spoiling of the environment.
23
it's a beautiful road, and I think it's much better now
24
than it was before, and the scenery is better.
25
<
u
studied the proposal carefully enough to make any specific
see the leaves in the fall; and if the trees are too close
o
I suspect that whatever is done, the plan
That is my guess, anyway.
And so whatever
I don't remember anybody
Z
!II
101
II:
IL
Yet, when that was proposed, we heard a lot
I think
You can
)
12.
�to the road, you can't.
One other item that hasn't been mentioned.
2
3
Someone mentioned last night that it would be a good idea
4
to move the trees back, but some of them and most of them
5
that are right close to the road are being killed by salt
6
that the snowplows obviously and unavoidably have to plow
7
off, and it hits these trees and eventually some of them
8
die.
9
with a wood stove wouldn't dare cut one or he would be in
So many of those trees are very unsightly.
A person
10
11
of those that are dead and haul them in for wood for somebody
12
.)
trouble, but I wish the Highway Department would cut a few
the widows or someone else who needs them.
13
I think that's all I have to say.
14
MR. NUFFER:
15
16
17
· 18
19
. ( Applause. )
After Richard, we'll have Bruce
King.
MR. RICHARD DENTON:
My name is Richard Denton.
I'm an environmental scientist with the Bureau of Water
Pollution Control.
I'm not going to address one of ·the different
20
issues that have been addressed here whether the road should
21
be built or not.
22
concern as far as water quality within the canyon.
23
Logan River is classified in the state system as 2B, which
24
is for water-borne recreation, 3A a cold water fishery,
25
and 4, agriculture and irrigation.
I'll try to limit my remarks to our
Bureau'~
Presently
13.
�Under state law we are required to protect the
2
3
type of thing going on.
7
•
probably a limited amount of canoeing, kayaking, and that
6
o
agriculture.
5
II
mainly as a cold water fishery and aquatic life and for
4
..
Logan River for these three different stream classifications,
imagine at campgrounds and things like
8
9
In that section of the river there is I think
There is some water contact I
this~
The entire Logan River from the mouth of the
canyon upstream on the forest is also classified as an
10
antidegradation segment for the State, and as such we are
11
required to protect the stream from any type of activity
-12
13
14
wi thin that stream that may degradate the water quality
and the aquatic system within the canyon.
After talking with our staff and looking at some
15
16
Right Hand Fork to -Ricks Spring, we as a staff feel that
17
very little widening of the road or construction in that
18
area could be done without affecting water quality.
19
Presently in most of those reaches through there there is
20
a good riparian zone, trees and shrubs and what not, that
21
protect the river from the highway and from the use from
22
the highway.
23
<
u
of the alternatives here, especially in the section from
water quality would suffer.
o
Z
III
'"
...
I[
If any of that area was disturbed, then the
24
One thing the riparian zone does is it acts as
25
a buffer system to protect the stream from such things as
)
14.
�)
surface runoff of the road, which is extremely high in
2
salts, turbidity from any type of erosion that may occur,
3
affords some protection from any type of gasoline spills.
4
If a tanker turns over, what not, it offers some protection,
5
unless in some places it would go directly into the river.
So I think that's where our Bureau is coming
6
7
from.
8
we will be insisting that we review what plans are come
9
up with by the committee or the tech team, and we will have
10
11
We are involved in the NEPA process, and as such
to give approval for the different aspects of that.
One thing is that if there is any construction
12
13
road alignments, we will have to have turbidi ty waivers
14
for · the stream.
15
affected, those will require sediment control structures,
16
.>
involved, whether it's bridges or whether it's anything,
different things, to protect water quality.
17
If any section of the stream will be
I don't want to say this in picking on the DOT
18
right at the moment, but we have seen some good and some
19
bad things that have happened on road construction within
20
the state in the last few years.
21
seen in the last few years is the new Interstate 80, or
22
70, I guess it is, through Clear Creek Canyon.
23
with everyone to protect water quality and to improve the
24
stream or to reconstruct it, whatever needed to be done,
25
I think we've ended up with a compatible situation there
A good example that we've
DOT working
")
15.
�where the stream runs through a closed canyon and we still
2
have a good trout fishery, we have good water quality, and
3
those things have been met.
4
A situation that's 100 degrees around from that,
5
6
by thousands of tons of sediment a year going into the Weber
8
River.
9
ca
o
see that we have increased turbidity loads in that canyon
7
·
..
though, is the interstate down through Echo Canyon.
We
Wasatch Front.
l:
II:
o
...
The Weber River is a culinary water source for the
And now we're going to end up--we have a
10
team put together to try to correct some of those things,
11
and it's probably going to cost hundreds
12
dollars to try to reconstruct that stream and to get - rosion
e
- 13
14
-15
of
thousands of
under control and to protect water quality that's going
into the Weber River.
We have had problems in Little and Big Cottonwood
16
17
I f think we're going to have - to work very closely with you
19
to ensure that we do not see some of these same problems
20
o
construction.
18
<
u
canyons, for example, with erosion because of road
in the canyon here.
So like I say, I'm not picking on DOT, but
Z
(/)
W
II:
...
t(/)
21
w
~
o
<
As I look at the alternatives, and we've studied
22
them with the staff, I think that we as a staff would have
23
to recommend probably Alternative B.
24
go with "A."
25
z
"
...
and still protect the integrity of the stream.
a..
I see no reason to
I think things could be done within the canyon
But, like
)
16.
�)
I say, especially on the lower one section in there, as
2
a staff we feel that very little could probably be done
3
and still ensure water quality and protect the state's
4
standards, and that's where we're coming from.
I believe those are about all the comments I
5
6
have.
We would like to, like I say, be kept informed, and
7
we will be requiring you to put some of these things through
8
as part of the NEPA process.
9
Thank you.
MR. NUFFER:
10
Thank you.
(Applause.)
and then Newel Daines.
11
MR. BRUCE KING:
We'll have Bruce King
Bruce King representing Cache
12
County Government.
13
commendation to UDOT and the consultant here for the process
14
that's going forward.
15
irreconcilably separated on distant poles, I think a ·great
16
purpose is being accomplished by affording the public this
17
opportunity to be heard.
18
I'd like to comment just briefly by
Even if the various interests were
There's great value in that.
On the second point, I don't think we are
19
irreconcilably disparate on our poles.
20
also by what I see as an ability to get together and carve
21
a compromise here that will preserve important values and
22
still give us a significant benefit by way of facility and
23
improvement in that canyon.
24
25
I am encouraged
With regard to the position of public officials
and specifically Cache County, I don't have anything to
)
17.
�recommend at this point, except to indicate that our new
2
3
that you'll have that.
6
of the council here today.
7
III
submit something in writing during the comment period, so
5
.,
one section.
4
o
...
county council has reviewed this issue preliminarily in
presence.
Of course, there are two members
I want to acknowledge their
So something should be forthcoming there .
I'm also going to take the initiative in meeting
8
9
I'll encourage them to do so again and to
with the Mayors
Association a week from Saturday, to take
10
11
them either collectively or individually, and perhaps in
12 .
)
copies of your comment sheets and summaries and encourage
consultation with individual city councils to give you some
13
written response within the comment period, as well.
14
So, again thanks for the opportunity afforded
15
for us to be involved in this process.
16
something meaningful to you within the period.
17
( Applause.
18
<
u
o
We hope to have
Thank you.
)
MR. NUFFER:
Mayor Daines is the last one who
19
has indicated an interest.
20
If there is anyone else, we
will open that up.
Z
III
W
a::
I<.
~
III
W
~
TIR. NEWEL DAINES:
21
I was kind of the old timer
o
«
Cl
z
22
W
in this group until I saw Mr. Booth.
Q.
I have driven that canyon road since it had no
23
24
asphalt from the mouth of the canyon up.
25
it.
I've ridden on
I didn't drive it at that time.
18.
�)
I'm kind of wearing three hats this morning.
2
I would like to wear the hat, the personal hat as an old
3
timer from the 1930's right on through to today.
4
taxpayer and a supporter of Rich County as well as Cache
5
County.
6
boxes along Bear Lake and utilize it a considerable amount
7
of the time, about six months out of the year.
8
that canyon consistently on an average I would imagine 100
9
times a year.
I'm a
I own one of those what they refer to as cracker
I'm a skier.
10
I'm a boater.
So I drive
I don't have a
11
10-foot-wide boat.
12
wide boats.
13
than about an 8-foot through the canyon without some special
14
permits.
15
an important part of the things that I'd like to talk about.
16
I don't think there are many 10-foot-
As far as I know, you can't take anything wider
Isn't that correct, Howard?
But I think that's
No.2, the hat that I would like to put on is
17
my surgical hat.
18
emergency physician in Logan for 3 a years.
19
I've been a physician and the prime
I was the first anesthesiologist and intensive
20
care physician in the valley.
So I've seen the change in
21
emergency medical services that has come into the valley.
22
I also have relatives that have practiced medicine in
23
Evanston, Montpelier.
24
that has 10,000 clients that use that road for emergency
25
medical services.
We really have a medical center here
There are about 8,000 people in the Bear
.)
19.
�Lake County.
We are the largest Class 2 medical center
2
that services Star Valley, all of Rich County, Bear Lake
3
County, and even down into the southwestern part of Wyoming,
4
Cokeville and those areas.
5
So I've seen the use of this road as an emergency
6
7
.,
III
o
road for medical services, and I would like to mention that
for a minute .
OJ
1:
II:
8 A n d then I am a Johnnie-Corne-Lately of about
o
'"
9
five years experience as the mayor of Logan.
Both Bruce
10
and I have the same feeling.
We will bring these problems
11
to the Cache County Mayors' Association for their input,
12
and I certainly will go to the Municipal Council as we had
13
discussed this in the past for their involvement in
14
recommending to th.isgroup what kind of a road services .
15
we feel we need .. .But I want you to remember that Logan
16
City is about half of the population of Cache County.
Back in the sixties, I was aware of the alarm
17
III
,..
OJ
18
miles.
20
<
u
that attended our community as we upgraded the lower 12
19
en
'"
I am proud of even the lower 12 miles.
o
z
I have lived in Logan continuously since 1957, and
(/I
w
:z:
'"
21
Next week I have a house guest coming from New
22
York City who is the vice president and director of all
23
the travel services for American Express.
24
be proud to show her the whole canyon and take her and her
25
children, and ·my grandchildren are coming out from New York
This lady, I'll
20.
'Ie -..
,
•
~ .. , "
�with them, skiing and show them what we have.
I'm proud
2
of all that canyon, and I certainly join with the rest of
3
you in not wanting
4
the Right Hand Fork and Ricks Spring.
to rape that five or six miles between
But I think that this bottleneck that I look
5
6
at from my medical standpoint and my personal standpoint,
7
I think that bottleneck from the Forks to the Ricks Spring
8
deserves our sensitive attention.
9
and augment the facilities to make this area safely
I think we can preserve
10
11
to remember that it is also a conduit for 10,000 residents
12
.>
available for all of our citizens.
I think that we want
over the hill, that we have to be sensitive to their
13
requirements .
Now, it's only last Saturday about 10 o'clock
14
15
that we had a IS-year old from Soda Springs receive as he
16
collided with a six-inch Quaker serious injury to his femur,
17
a fracture.
18
This is my third time to ski this winter.
19
my day of skiing to bring him down the canyon in my Ram
20
Charger ambulance, so to speak, because he needed continual
21
traction on that.
22
time with a bare road.
23
accident, as we have had many bad head injuries in the canyon
24
by hikers and especially bikers--I remember the bad one
25
that occurred just below the dugway--if this had occurred
He had circulatory impairment of his foot.
I interrupted
And I was happy that it was in the winter
If this had been the type of an
21.
�)
in the summer, between June and September, I would have
2
had a significant delay as I had tried to negotiate that
3
area between Ricks Spring and the Forks as I tried to bring
4
this patient down the canyon rapidly to put him in a position
5
where we could give him the best of medical care.
6
~
Our records are replete with instances of
7
transportation time impacting survival of life and limb.
8
And Mr. Booth doesn't know about them, but I could name
9
ca
o
you within the last five years significant impact of time
N
10
transmitting patients from Bear Lake with medical emergencies
11
such as ladies with massive hemorrhages, what we call
12
placenta previa or retained placentas.
13
them here.
14
you look at the tradeoffs in this choke, this choke that
15
I call from Ricks Spring to the Forks.
16
And we have to get
So I think you need to keep this in mind as
But I think we can come to make some compromises
17
in this area on alignment, bridge repair.
18
ought to really look at having significant areas in this
19
section of the highway that do have adequate passing lanes,
20
especially for emergency vehicles.
21
that happens to people as they drive on areas of roads where
22
they don't get around, and then they start taking
23
And that's what happens as I've seen it over the last 40
24
years that I've been driving the canyon, 45, that I
25
personally have been driving that canyon road, over 45 years.
<:
u
o
But I think we
z
I/)
'"
"-
II:
And then the frustration
chances~
)
22.
�I think it's a thing that we should try and cut down that
2
frustration.
3
I am sensitive to the water quality.
4
has tried to work and will work and have worked as we have
5
tried to preserve the canyon.
6
that have to be considered as we look at the canyon as a
7
commercial, as a recreational resource, and as a base for
8
the resources of our community; and certainly water quality
9
and recreation are probably very important ·as we look at
10
11
12
13
it.
Thank you.
Logan City
But there are other menus
(Applause.)
MR. NUFFER:
Thank you.
Thank you, Mayor.
Is
there anyone else who would care to comment?
MR. TED WILSON:
This is a very impressive group
14
as far as Logan Canyon.
15
quite this strong a group.
16
a resident of Logan and of Bear Lake.
17
developer in Bear Lake.
18
towards the development or the property which is greatly
19
affected by any of these alignments.
20
I didn't think they could gather
My name is Ted Wilson.
I'm
I'm also a real estate
My comments are not going to be
I have traveled Logan Canyon all my life and
21
very heavily.
A couple of things that I kind of see that
22
I feel may be overlooked or a little bit on the soft side,
23
I have just jotted them down here.
24
that states that anticipated growth would .be about 2 percent,
25
I think that's very mild to what the growth can be if the
No.1, in the survey
23.
�road is improved.
2
Now, I'm for the improvement of the road, and
3
I'm against it in a lot of instances.
4
Daines just mentioned is a very, very critical, touchy area.
5
I think we can go through that area with some mild
6
improvements and some major improvements above.
7
really backs up really bad in the summer time.
8
R.V., recreational vehicles towing other recreational
9
vehicles towing other recreational vehicles, I've seen them
The area that Mayor
That road
Right now
10
hooked on to three.
11
a boat.
12
idea.
13
behind, it, even on the straightaways, where the lines are
14
passable now, they won't pass.
15
and another car and another car.
16
tempers building as people are trying to get to Bear Lake
17
or Yellowstone or wherever.
18
I've seen a motor home, a car, and .
Now, how the State even allows that, I have no
I mean, that going up Logan Canyon, you get people
Then you get another car
And you can just see the
The first 1.8 miles with mild improvement of
19
a couple of pass lanes, a couple of pulloffs, heavy signing,
20
slower vehicles, you know, if you get four behind you, in
21
some states you have to pull off.
22
have that law.
23
backing up four, you can get a ticket.
24
Legislature ought to look into something like this, because
25
it's terrible.
Now, I guess Utah doesn't
But I've heard of other states, if you're
Maybe the
I have counted 20, 30 cars backed up behind
.)
24.
�)
one cautious Midwesterner that hits these mountains and
2
is petrified.
3
Like Bryan said, it's scary to people.
If you touch that area carefully where it's
4
critical, come out in what we call the Crookston Flats,
5
improve it more than these maps are, with decent passing
6
lanes where you're back off the river and won't disturb
7
the water quality.
8
pieces of water in the United States.
There's just no
9
question about it.
We need to watch
10
the water quality.
The Logan River is one of the classic
So is the canyon.
Mr. Denton referred to the salt, or improvement
11
12
of the road making the salt run into the river and possibly
13
a tanker spill.
14
runs into the river.
15
is no place for it to go but into the river.
16
of that road could improve the possible tanker spills.
17
shoulders of that road are so dangerous.
All the water and all the salt right now
I mean, you get the runoff.
There
Improvement
The
Myself--I'm not Dr. Daines--I have helped seven
18
19
to eight very critical accidents in that canyon.
20
one of them has been above the Forks.
21
of them.
22
out of rivers.
23
with an improved road, most of those accidents may have
24
been prevented, because they were almost always on a steep
25
or people passing where they should not have been.
Every single one
I've pulled babies out of cars.
That's my nature.
Every
I've pulled people
I'll stop and help.
But
Why
')
- ~
25.
�)
they do that, I don't know.
An improved road won't stop
2
that, but it will help it, if you can get traffic around
3
the slower vehicles.
4
My recommendations, then, would just be really
5
6
If you got that so that they can pass there, I think you
8
CII
o
you've got half the canyon, half the canyon is passable.
7
.,
..
careful in the critical areas, but the open flat areas--
would speed up the flow and deter accidents.
9
Mr. King, who, of course, just moved into his
10
position, mentioned that the County hasn't looked at the
11
situation thoroughly yet.
12
look at it.
I would recommend that Mr. King
13
17
along the side of the lake.
and coming down in, instead of through Cache County.
19
I would strongly suggest Cache County officials really look
20
at the situation very carefully.
21
money.
22
o
Lake to get to Bear Lake where they have these shanties
18
<
Canyon.
16
U
really being hurt because of the flow of traffic in Logan
15
" f
Our economy of Cache Valley and Rich County is
14
)
as far as the economy of Cache Valley for that purpose.
Many, many of the people now go up through Salt
They are going through Randolph
So
Z
III
W
II:
~
It's economy.
It's tax dollars.
It's
And Logan Canyon needs to be improved
The people going to Yellowstone are looking for
23
24
alternate routes.
25
highway.
Logan Canyon is a dangerous piece of
The deaths that occur in there I think you all
"
)
26.
�should think of that.
Some day it might be one of your
2
kids.
I've had friends' kids that have been killed in there
3
senselessly.
4
helped a baby out of a semi-truck that had rolled over.
5
The baby was wrapped in a blanket in a windshield.
6
windshield had collapsed right around the baby.
7
was unconscious, and the father was out wandering around
8
through the field just totally in a daze.
9
the semi-truck, it was upside down.
It's got to be improved.
The shoulders--I
The
The mother
When I got to
The wheels were still
10
11
pulled that baby out of the windshield.
12
in that baby blanket, comforter, a real thick comforter--that
13
baby didn't have a scratch on it.
14
accident was a shoulder of the road.
15
pulled off because another truck was coming by.
16
one wheel off that shoulder, and he went just like that.
17
It was not his fault.
18
fault as far as I'm concerned.
19
It really is.
20
whatever you decide is the best for all.
21
)
turning and everything.
an interest that needs to be looked at.
22
That baby started to cry, and I
Had it not been
But the cause of that
That semi driver just
He caught
It's the Department of Highway's
That road is atrocious.
It needs to be repaired, fixed, changed,
All of you have
As far as the people of Garden City.
I have
23
a business in Garden City.
All those little black dots
24
on this one map, I guess some people say I raped the mountain
25
But that was my choice to do with my land.
But the residents
)
27.
�)
of Rich County and Bear Lake county are being financially
2
3
o
by way of Soda Springs.
6
that they manufacture up here,is almost financially not
7
worth it over there, because it costs $1,000 more today
8
than it did five years ago simply because of the route that
9
III
a piece of farm equipment to Rich County, they have to go
5
.,
restricted the width through here.
4
-
handicapped because of this road.
they have to take to get a manufactured home into Rich County,
....
The State of Utah has
If they want to take
A home, one of these double wides
:l:
a:
o
...
10
and I guess the width is the reason they are restricted.
11
I appreciate your time, gentlemen.
I'm sorry
12
I was unable to be here last night when the public should
13
have spoken, but I appreciate your giving me a moment.
14
(Applause.)
MR. NUFFER:
15
16
Thank you.
Is there anyone else?
Yes, sir.
MR. GORDON LOW:
17
As indicated earlier, I'm Gordon
18
<
u
o
Low.
I'm here on behalf of Lyle Hillyard.
He didn't ask
19
me to state a position or any recommendations.
20
to him that he ought to consider--not consider--suggest.
21
I have just a couple of comments to make.
I suggested
Z
til
W
a:
...
...:
til
w
~
o
<t
"
Z
22
W
IL
One concern I have is that this projection goes
23
to the year 2010.
As I understand it, the improvements
24
may make this an adequate road until that year.
25
is what happens thereafter.
My concern
28.
�I think everybody doesn't anticipate a four-lane
2
highway through this canyon.
3
going to be adequate for 20 years, perhaps we ought to look
4
at an alternative route.
5
economic development and so on, I think there are some strong
6
feelings on the other side that perhaps people from Salt
7
Lake and Ogden should take alternate routes to Bear Lake
8
and Yellowstone and not use Logan Canyon.
9
are not amenable to the kinds of traffic that some of us
10
My concern is if this is only
Contrary to Ted's feelings about
Some places simply
like to see go up there.
I know this hits at the heart of economic
11
12
13
it's time to take a close look at that.
14
what other alternatives have been considered as far as
15
perhaps major roadways, the Blacksmith's Fork area,
16
)
development.
But, on the other hand, I think that perhaps
Strawberry, by Preston, or whatever.
I'm concerned about
I'm concerned about restrictions on this road.
17
18
I'm not sure how big of a problem the trucks are.
19
passed them on the bridges also.
20
some restrictions on the use of this highway for that kind
21
of traffic.
22
an alternative consideration.
23
I don't know.
I have
Perhaps there should be
But I hope that that would be
I'm concerned about enfoT-cement.
Perhaps I've
24
25
..
been on the other side of the counsel table from Jud Preston
too many times.
But I get a little concerned when we want
)
29.
�')
to widen the road and increase the speed when one of the
--
2
concerns is alcohol.
3
Frankly, I drive from here to Brigham quite often.
4
5
Garden City.
Maybe we need better enforcement and more
7
enforcement.
I don't know.
8
III
between here and Brigham as I'll ever see between here and
6
"
o
...
I'll see three or four times as many Highway Patrolmen
alternatives.
I'm just suggesting these as
~
a:
o
"-
I'm concerned, as I'm sure many are, with respect
9
10
11
concerned about sediment and a second dam right now.
12
suspect that much improvement will present a considerably
13
larger problem with sedimentation both in that dam and in
14
the Third Dam.
And I suspect that
15
11.-+
to the alteration of the river.
I see Logan City is
consideration.
Perhaps it has been.
I
ought to be a
I really don't have any strong suggestions or
16
17
18
are strongly considered, with not just 20 years anticipated
20
in the future, probably 40 or 50, and perhaps increased
21
o
have already been expressed.
19
<
u
recommendations.
I just have some concerns, most of which
enforcement.
I hope alternative routes
Z
IJI
101
a:
"-
....
IJI
101
~
o
<(
u
MR. NUFFER:
22
Z
Anyone else?
Now is your chance.
101
II.
23
Again, let me mention that we will receive written comments
24
up through the 6th of April.
25
to do that.
And we would encourage you
)
30.
�Yes, sir.
2
3
A VOICE:
Where will those comments be directed?
I don't see any address or an agency.
4
MR. NUFFER:
I believe we have a sheet of paper
5
at the back that is set up for that purpose that has an
6
address at the bottom.
7
8
Anything else that anyone would like to comment
on or bring to our attention?
9
Thank you all for being here.
10
appreciate your input.
11
We really
the future.
12
)
I believe you were just handed one.
13
14
We will be in touch with you in
(At 11:28 a.m., Wednesday, March 4, 1987, the
hearing ended.)
-000-
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
.J
31.
�"
.
C E R T I F I e ATE
:l !
!
I
3
4
i State of Utah
i
I County of Salt
I
I
Lake
I, Ronald F. Hubbard, do hereby certify that I am
5 I
!
a certified shorthand reporter in and for the State of Utah,
6
I'
7
I
8
License No. 32; that I reported in shorthand the foregoing
I
! proceedings, and that this transcript is a full, true, and
i
9
correct record of said proceedings.
to
da.y
Dated at Salt Lake City, Utah, this
"
of
1931·
12
13
'I
i
___ ~Q"J. ~~__ _
~ald
F. Hubbard
230 Judge Building
Sal t L .:} ke Ci ·ty t uta.h
14 .!
,i
·1
15 :
( 801)
!
i
.
355- 3611
I
16 I
i
i
!
17 j
18
!
!
19
1
20
!
21
I
i
I
221
23
I
24
!
I
I
251
.
-- _. _._- -_._---_ - ----- - _._._ - ----_._---._
�/
1r~~~
I D~
LOGAN-CANYON STUDY - PUBLIC SCOPING MEETINGS
~
March .~, 1987 - Logan, Utah
\
/0
:0-0
-Ma.Gb 4, 1-987 - Galdell City;--Utah-'
DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK?
)
�LOGAN·CANYON STUDY - PUBLIC
SCOPING~NGS
i --;
\
March 3, 1987 - Logan, Utah
March 4·, 1987 - Garden City, Utah
NAME
)
)
.
' ''. · .. h..
,
'
'
REPRESENTING
DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK?
�
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/89">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/89</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
1011421546
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
20000735 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
Public scoping meeting for public officials and others
Description
An account of the resource
Public scoping meeting for public officals and others on the Logan Canyon Environmental Study at Logan City Hall on March 4, 1987.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Hubbard, Ronald F.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Preston, George
Fotheringham, Robert
Booth, Bryan
Denton, Richard
King, Bruce
Daines, Newel
Wilson, Ted
Low, Gordon
Nuffer, Stanton S.
Weston, Todd
Subject
The topic of the resource
United States Highway 89
Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon
Logan (Utah)
Logan Canyon (Utah)
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
1987-03-04
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan (Utah)
United States
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 MSS 148 Series VIII Box 27 Folder 11
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_Fd11_Page_2.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/9df15fee1b62048a0db38c6f5a5ee6b4.pdf
1a18d841f44852d756943df04bf3fd33
PDF Text
Text
LOGAN CANYON PUBLIC MEETING
November 3, 1986
COMMENTS FOLLOWING CH2M HILL PRESENTATION:
(
With that information we are here to listen, so we would invite you
to make your comments. We are recording the meeting so we would
like you to identify who you are for our record. This is not a formal hearing, we are here to get ·your input. We want to know
what your concerns are, what you see as the issues and we invite
you to star~. You can address your comments to the consulting
team, the Highway Dept, so let's be brave and lead off.
Bryce Nielson: . 1 was wondering what the original decision or
reason was to have three alternative routes come from the summit
down. What is the specific problems associated with the existing
route?
Stan: Well, as you know, there are several hairpin curves on that
alignment. We will be looking at that alignment, we are not discarding it, but we are saying, Is there another way? There is some
unstable ground in that alignment that the Highway Dept. has had to
deal with over the years. And it is now being built up along this
portion of the road. We were just asked by the Highway Dept. to
look at the ~ossibilities, to review the whole route. If therp is
not a better way, we'll find out, if there is, maybe it is worth
looking at· in more detail.
Price: I have a question for Commissioner Weston. What
kind of priority is. the Highway Department assigning to this
project?
Todd Weston: Well, very low. I've got to answer that honestly.
The problem we are in with money right now, we can't separate funds
from the north part, south part, or Wasatch Front and with the
problems we've got on the Wasatch Front right now, funding for this
project is considerably down the road a ways. That is as honest an
answer as I can give you. It is not a high priority. If we had
all this decid.ed today, ~t wouldn't be the most high priority, JoJut
it is something we have to go through, irregardless. It is still a
long ways down the road.
.,.. . /
I'm Brian Stringham 'and I've been travelling that road for a long
time, and that is a deplorable situation to have seven 18 foot
bridges on ~ US highway. That ~s uncalled for. This is 1986.
That road was started back in ~he late 20's and finished up in
1932, and there has been little improvement on that road except for
th~ lowe~ end that was improved 20 years ago.
But, I travel that
road as much ~S anyLody in this room for a lot of years ana the~ is
one of the biggest beefs I've got when I talk to anybody, that
lousy road that we have to travel on. So if we can do something
with those bridges, and I'm glad this summer that they finally put
in a few guard rails, but half of the places they put guard rails
in they didn't need them. Up the street here there is about 600
feet of guard rail that drops over 10 feet. A mile· above that
where you come around the curve where you need it and it drops 100
feet or 150 feet, there is no guard rail. Now why is that? I think
what has happened is that the contractor come up here and missed
the place where he was suppose to put it. Those are some of the
7
�·
,
gripes I've got. , We've got to change those bridges. I've drive a
big truck down there and I go down there and a woman was coming up
in a big car and she stopped in the middle of the bridge and I was
coming down at 40 miles an hour and she was just petrified, and
finally we worked it out so we got through, but I was afraid I was
going to push her off into the river. These 18 foot bridges have
got to be changed and we are not going to accept anything. less.
That's the main thing I'm unhappy with, those lousy bridges we've
got.
I'm Alan Harri~on, Director of Bear Lake Regional Commission. Ken
Brown, County Commission Chairman of Rich County asked me to read a
statement.
"Having watched traffic increase for the past ten years, I
feel the canyon road should definitely be improved. Minimum
improvement should include three lane passing such as in the
lower canyon. Tourist flow to and from Bear Lake is important
to our economy and Logan Canyon is a problem. Safety is a
real COllcern, and anyone who travels the road regularly w')uld
agree that it is becoming more and more cumbersome and time
consuming. I feel no more studies are necessary and we should
commence with construction.
Stan:
Would you please give us a copy of that?
Alan Harrison:
Yes sir.
Paul Webb: I understand that this study has ' been in progress since
June of this year. One question is how much longer is the study
going to continue and the other question is, if this is a low priority on the UDOT budget, what is the time frame for any kind 0::
improvements rather it be the status quo approach or the whole ball
of wax?
Stan: We will be completing our work in June of next year. We
were given a year to do the ,study, and we are about halfway through
with our efforts right now. As far &s the priority listing, there
is a number of funding programs that the state has ' access to,
things such as the br~dge repla~ement, maybe, could be a different
priority than improving the whole road. I'll. let the UDOT answer
that more fully.
~.,,-
UDOT: If we 10 any work at all in the canyon, it will have to ~e
documented quite well from an environmental approach, that is to
justify the expenditure of fedelal funds on this project, and that
it will not harm the environment. One purpose of this study is to
identify various ways in which projects may be staged in the
canyon. It is our opinion that the structures are an important
issue and should be addressed as soon as possible. ~ut even if we
had the money right now to replace the structures, we couldn't do
it until we complete the _environmental study that is underway now.
So the first step in this process is to evaluate the alternatives
and to also evaluate them on an environmental basis to justify the
8
�,
(
,
expenditure of funds, and then funds could be awarded. Portions of
this project will go sooner 'than other parts. But if we are going
to do any work at all we must complete this long process.
Question: Who has the final say, the UDOT or the environmentalists?
UDOT: Both. What we are doing through this environmental study is
coming to a mutual understanding as to what we can realistically do
in the canyon.
Question: Okay my other question is, environmentally, which is
more important, to lose a life, even if an ambulance has to go
through any kind of weather through this canyon, which is more
impor~~nt saving the environment or saving a life?
Lynn Zollinger: Those questions are hard to answer.
(There was an
uproar in the crowd). Let me say what we intend to do is to design
a facility that will be the best facility we can build within the
constraints we are given. And it is not going to be a super route
or 60 mph he~e ...
Comment: I'll bet if you ask any person in this room which is more
important they would say it is a person's life.
Question: I'm a citizen here in town. Didn't you have funds
approved for the entire Logan Canyon before the environmentalists
shot it down? Isn't that why the improvements were shut down
before?
Lynn Zollinger: There was a construction scheduled to begin at
Right Fork and continue to Ricks Spring. That was following
closely on the heels of the one completed on up to Right Hand Fork.
In the early seventies is when that was slated to go to construction and the funds werp. completed and I believe we were almost
ryady to advertise. Then the environmental issues surfaced and the
momentum at that time was stopped to this date.
Comment: I can't believe with all the rocks and trees we've got
around here there is anything so particular in that canyon.
Lynn Zollinger: There is, bel~eve me. . There are very many issues
that are sensitive from an environmental standpoint.
Question: !~:>w mar.Y lawsuits do we have to file to get this
standard road improved?
Lynn Zollinger:
. .-/
s"o-
I can't answer that.
Question: What has 'happened to all those funds that they have from
the 5% tax in the whole U.S., there was supposed to be 60 million
dollars in the State of Utah to take care of substandard roads,
such as bridges. This was going to make employment, upgrade the
roads in the secondary and third grade roads in the whole u.S. and
9
�-(
(
each state was going to get their share.
any of the pie back, did we?
I don't think we even got
Commissioner Weston:· I thought I was in a friendly area here.
I
think in all fairness, · and I know your concerns, I travel that road
quite often myself, and I know that there are some things that
ought to be done, and I don't think there is anybody that doesn't
agree with that. How far to go is the problem. We know that we
have to replace some bridges. We've got some bridges up there that
are too narrow and besides that they are structurally unsound, so
that if we don't do something pretty quick, we may have to do something more drastic. As far as why we have to do these studies, I
think I have the same position you have. I was County Commissioner
in Cache County for seve~al years, and we went through several
exercises trying to make improvements up the canyon and we never
could satisfy enough people on what we needed to do and to get
enough unity in what to do in order to have the federal government
release funds.
NOw, that is a pure and honest statement. We have
some bridge replacement right now. These funds rollover and each
year and what funds aren't used rollover to another year.
Th~
priority for our funds in Logan Canyon may be better next year than
this year, we don't know. We know that highway funds are badly
depleted right now. We are at least 40 million dollars behind our
funding of state highways right now. We actually got far enough
along in the last year- to program points for Logan Canyon on three
bridges, two of them are close to being funded, and we decided that
we needed to go through the necessary requirements to get the
·federal dollars. Remember that 95% of the money that wo~ld be
spent on this canyon is coming out of Washington. I appreciate
that it is your money, but it still has to be released by the
Federal Highway Dept. and when we requested to move ahead with
just the tridges we were told there would be no money given to us
by Federal Highways ~ntil a complete and indepth environmental
study fo~ the whole canyon was complete. So, that's why these
peopile are hired. ·1 sat on the commission over there and we had
$500,000 allocated one year to go from Right Hand Fork to Ricks
Spring, which would have in those days, built the thing.
But we
couldn't move. We didn't have our homework done. Of course, I
wasn't in the highways then, but I was on the county commission and
I sat in the position you are in - frustration wondering why can't
we go. Well, it is even more complicated now than it was then.
We've got a terrible shortage of money for highways. We've got
SOhle ter.;:ible problems. This isn't the only bad strotch ooC highway
we hdve in Utah.
I've been over a lot of it in ~~e la!c year and · I
want to tell you this is not· the worse stretch of road.
It is
maybe, from your standpoint becc..use you have to travel it, but if
you go from across the state you'll find many roads in pretty bad
shape. We are doing the best we can with the money we have. As
soon as the environmental study is complete, then we will go back
to the federal government and say, "Here's our plans, here is what
we can justify from a reasonable standpoint, here is what the
people think we need, and here is what we can do with the dollars
we've got, and not impact the canyon to the point that we are
foolish, and yet build a road that we need and will supply our
10
�(
needs to the year 2010 and if we can hit that happy medium, then
we'll get approval. Of course, we've got to work with the Fo~est
Service. They own the land. You people need to understand that.
Comment:
They work for the people.
Todd Weston:
Yes, but they administrate it.
Dave Baumgarner:
land.
(
,
Forest Service doesn't own the land it is public
Todd Weston: You people own the land, but the forest ser,ice
administrates it. ' And we are going to build improvements to that
highway. When I say "improvements" I sometimes get a gun pointed
at my throat.
Some people consider that anything we do up there is
not improving. You need to know we have a lot of people that feel
that way.
I'm not saying that they are right, or that you are
right.
I know that somewhere in the middle we are going to find
some mutual ground that we can satisfy our needs with and that is
what we are ~rying to do. There are some places up in that ca~yon
that I don't want to see destroyed and I've got the same concerns
you have, but we are going to do the best job we can. We've got
make sure that it meets with their plans in their management
process for the canyon. Dave Baumgarner is charge with his office
to see that anything that is done in · that canyon is the proper
thing to do for what the people need and want .
.
Question:
I enjoy driving through the canyon as much as anybody
else does at anytime of the year. I really enjoy it.
I don't
think anybody in this room would like to see the beauty of that
canyon destroyed.
It would be ludicrous on our part to assume
that.
It is a great calling card for us to bring people over here.
However, when you drive through it and you realize how o~d the road
is an~_ the fact that a lot of improvements can be made, , ~. hen wilCn .
' you've got to go through all these agencies you are talking abol1t
and all the red tape and bureaucracy you are talking about, I don't
see why these entities, public and environmental, forest service, '
can not sit down and give a little bit so that this road can be
improved whereby the flow of traffic will be safer for all
concerned going both ways. NOW, the last two years there have been
a great flow of traffic throug~ the canyon. The truck traffic flow
has increased considerable from Millers over there. And · that is
fi~e, we"d like to see them come over here, but when you gpt in
c~rtain places in that road, those trucks take up 3/4s of the highway and that leaves you with very little. As far as arguing about
the road, we need the road and ~e deserve the road. And we need to
have all the.s e entities sIt down and say, "Alright, these are the
pr~blems, 'but let's get on with the program.
Let's find out what
has to be done, let's take and ~ive a little.
(
.. ,./
11
�(
Sheldon: I appreciate all your concerns, they are great. Wet~lked earlier about the length of our study.
I think it might be
appropriate to answer why it-takes a year to do the study. We are
trying to do the study correctly. If you read your newspaper you
can see what happened in Provo Canyon.
I'm not saying that will
happen here, but, by gosh, we are going to do everything we can to
keep that from happening. But there are some lawsuits in Provo
that have been filed against UDOT and we do want to make sure that
we take time to get everything documented well enough, · so that when
our recommendations are accepted, or UDOT makes the recommendation
and they and the Fore's t Service agree, we've got the proper framework to support any potential lawsuit that might come down. That
takes time and I apologize for that.
Question:
I have a question for Mr. Baumgarner. I think everybody
has preconceived notions about this entity out there called an
environmentalist, that they are instantly going to battle with the
residents over here. Since you are with the Forest Service and you
are going to represent the federal government's interest and proba- .
bly a lot of the biological and ecological interest in the can~on,
I'm interested in your comments as to do you really think the envi~
ronmentalists and the citizens are that far apart?
/
Dave Baumgarner: No, they are not. I don't have an answer any
different than that. There are some legitimate concerns on both
sides. But other than argue about statistical data that justifies,
or unjustifies the project, when it comes right down to it, the
issues aren't really that strong. Almost down to the point of talking about a specific corner as to whether or not for a fishery or
an environmental issue, there aren't very many serious issues about
bridges. If we had this to do allover again, to be quite frank,
and the state had the money to build bridges without having to qo
to the federal government for funds, we would categorically exclude
brid~~~.
What that means in our process is that with a half page
d~cision signed by my boss, the project would not have to go
through the entire environmental process on the specific bridge
replacement. In talking about individual corners, we are almost in
the same box, but not quite, depending on the issue on the specific
corner. From the Forest Service perspective, we are a lot closer
than people realize. However, there are some processes involved
that are giving us some troubl~, timewise.
St ~ ~:
S! ~eldon : why don't you identify where we go from herp with
t:le public involvement process.
Sheldon: This meeting was really only intended as a public information meeting. Certain:y to solicit your comment, but this is
just the first of several opportunities that will come up over this
whole period of this study for people to have input. This is an
information meeting; we are just getting started. As we get into
the environmental assessment we will have what we call a Scoping
Meeting where we identify issues. We'll go from there with public
hearings and you will have plenty of opportunity to speak up and
frankly, I think it is great, and please keep doing it.
12
�Bill Peterson: I am questioning your statistics on your growth
rate. We've been in a down trend in our economy in this area, but
in the last year there have been a number of major projects express
interest in building motels and hotels here and 'I think that your
2% growth rate is going to be way short of the actual growth rate
of the traffic on the highway. I think we will get that 2% just
from our locals. If there is any other increase, it will go way
over that.
Stan: We shar~ that concern. Cliff Forsgren did that study for us
and it was reviewed very carefully by UDOT and by the interdisciplinary team we work with on a fairly regular basis. Cliff, why
don't you cover the background on that.
Cliff: The approach to putting together projections requires a
great deal of knowledge, experience and skill, and computers and
everything else and when you are done? Frankly, we look at it from
a couple of different perspectives. We look at it from what has
occurred over the past 10 or 12 years as long as we have the cata
from a counter station. We also took the State of Utah's projection for economic growth in northern Utah and we came up with
numbers that were very close to the same. From the standpoint of
those of us that were preparing this projections, 2% is a bit
uncomfortable. But based on the information we had, it was difficult to come up with anything higher. Believe me, I tried. Looking at the average daily flow in the summer in one year you may
have a significant increase from one year to the next, but the next
year then it will drop off some, and it averages out. If someone
could give us some data or some information that would show that it
needs to be higher, but based on what we have got, that's all we
could justify.
Ted wilson:
Doesn't I-IS plan to finished off further past
Tremo~ton?
UDOT:
That is correct.
Ted Wilson:
into Logan?
Are they planning to improve the Valley View highway
UDOT: We haven't got any engineering done on Valley View.
o~ our hJpe list.
It is
Ted Wilson: At present, I'm sure everybody would agree that the
canyon is beautiful, but we wou ..d also becoming a deterrent to
traffic coming this way. An improved highway may bring as many as
10% higher flow rate almost immediately. People are getting scared
of Logan Canyon. It is getting bad. The shoulders are horrible.
They washed out really bad this last year. People don't like to
travel it once they have seen it. If they want to get some place,
they·are starting to go around. Other communities are advertising
to draw the traffic away from Logan to Soda Springs, to Randolph,
that type of thing. As for looking to the past, we have had a
13
�(
falling off of percentage and that 2% may look that way, but if you
have an improved highway, business wise and traffic flow wise, I
think you'll see a tremendous higher use, and especially if 1-15 is
finished and good access to Logan, to Tremonton. We still are the
major route to Jackson Hole and Yellowstone areas, but Logan Canyon
is a mess.
Question: I have a couple of questions for Mr. Weston. First, how
much do you project it will cost to fix the existing substandard
bridges and how much did it cost to hire CH2M Hill?
Westo~~
I'll turn those questions . over to the engineers; they've
got the exact figures.
Lynn Zollinger: The cost to build a structure cost about $45.00
per square foot. The new bridges I expect will be 40' wide, give
or take a few feet, and the length is about 150'. That is a
preliminary guess, so whatever 40 times 45 times 150 would be the
structure cost.
Question:
How many substandard bridges?
Todd Weston:
.I
/
Seven.
Lynn Zollinger: Some are longer than others, like at Tony Grove
where they are relatively short span, but others sucn as Lower Twin
Bridge and Burnt Bridge and Red Bank Bridge that are considerably
larger. So the way I look at it, there are four major structures
and at least three minor structures.
Question:
What about hiring a construction firm for a year?
Lynn Zollinger: The fe~ for hiring the consultants is around
$50(\.1)00. It is a very expeasive study. I . think it shows the
UDOT'::; commitment to solve the problems at Logan Canyon.
Kathy Webb: If you have two other options here you are thinking
about for alternate routes through the canyon, how realistic is it
that you are going to do something with the existing canyon? Are
you plauning on doing any funding anyway?
Stan:
~~a thy
Yes, that's all part of the study.
Webb:
And the other two options are
Stan: The other two options are only from the summit to G.lrden
City, so they don't rea_Iy impact the canyon at all.
Kathy Webb: The other question I have is I have to know what the
logic· is behind the passing lane at Ricks Springs. I just have to
know that. That is the craziest passing lane I have ever been on!
Is that what it is? (Lots of laughter)
Lynn, do you want to handle that?
14
�(
Lynn.: There was a passing lane built at Ricks Springs. That was
done as a desperation move. There is no other term for it, by the
UDOT to provide some improvement in the canyon. (more laughter).
In a lot of ways we had our hands tied as to spending money to make
improvements in Logan Canyon. One group says improve it, do this,
do that, and the other group says you can't do anything without the
appropriate studies. And I guess the best .way to look at ·the passing lane is that while it did offer some relief and some improvement for that section, is that we wanted to make an improvement and
go out and do something. ·
Question:
meetings.
You mentioned here tonight that there will be other
Where are they going to be?
Stan: We will have another Scoping Meeting when we get very
specific about what are the alternatives we are going to be looking
at. There will be one of those held in Logan and one held here in
this valley.
Question: Another question I have is how much weight does this
meeting we are having here hold? Is Logan going to be able to
override us . again?
Stan: ' I don't know if that is ' a fair assessment. There are a lot
of people in Logan that feel the same as you do. But they are
unfortunately, the silent majority. So we are going to make these
studies and identify some alternatives and there will be reports
produced that will show what the benefits and non-benefits of each
alternative are. The final result of this will be the recommended
alternative, but the agencies will select, those being the UDOT and
the Forest Service. They will select the recommended alternative
and a hearing will be held that will discuss that.
Paul Webb: I think it was commissioner Weston that mentioned that
our project was a low priority project. I assume he W·: l,S talking
about expenditure of money. I would like to know whose list we are
on. Is that the UDOT's priority list and how will this study
affect that priority?
Todd Weston: Paul, I guess I've got to say that everyboGy -is on a
low priority until we get more money. We just have some many
projects ahead of us that we ~re ju .~t putting out fires, is what we
are doing. We know that if we don't do some~hing ~;n 1-15 within the
next three years, we are going to have a big parking lot between
Brigham -:ity and Salt I·ake, and I'm talking about that lit ~rally.
And we are talking about a major part of the population living in
that part of the state. We have to put things in the perspective.
I think our preconstruction engineer put it as well as I can. We
are going to do what we can. See, there are different funds; there
are bridge funds that are ready to go. We had some that were ready
to go, but we were stopped by Federal Highways to do any bridgework
until we completed this exercise we are going through now. Had
Dave Baumgarner and I been able to sit down together as the Forest
15
�Service and UDOT we probably could have built those bridges and had
Federal Highway release the dollars, and they probably will now.
But in defense of the environmental study with CH2M Hill, why we
are hiring these people, is that we are hiring to gain some time.
We simply do not have staff to put them on this project and do· it
in the time frame we are trying to do and get on with the construction. They are hired to do the job we didn't have staff to do it
in the time frame we need.
Question: I remember going to a meeting several years ago with the
UDOT and talking about a problem we had in Laketown Canyon. That
priority was very low, and then suddenly it jumped up to where it
was partially completed. You mentioned that ·95% of the funds can't
be approved until this study is done. If this study is done to
their satisfaction and application is made and they approve 95%
funding, what chance do we have to have that priority jump?
Todd Weston: Of course, after that is done we have to go to preconstruction plans. You know, we could start on some bridges
rather rapidly. But you see, when you start on some bridges, well,
take the bridge at the bottom of the dugway, a tall bridge, an
expensive structure, needs to be widened. Now, when you widen it,
do you just widen the bridge, or do you go down .stream a ways and
take that big sharp curve off from it and make a decent curve at
the bottom of it? One thing leads to another to where -you start
impacting further down the road. So we've got to do it in an
orderly fashion, and frankly, I'm glad we are doing it this way
because once and for all, we will have a document in our hands that
says, "This is what we can reasonably do. to improve the canyon."
Now, well you say the environmentalists stopped the other projects.
Well, maybe yes, and maybe no, maybe we didn't have our homework
done. We just got two lawsuits slapped on us on Provo Canyon,
which is a similar project, with more traffic and more people, bu~
sim;1ar. We got slapped with two lawsuits, and neither one of them
are €:nvironmentalists, typical qualified environmentalist groups
' like the Sierra Club, and others. They were not recog~ized as
environmentalists g:roups. The person who stopped us was an economics professor at BYU. He is the one that filed the suit. I
don't know if he has any other money behind him or not, but he is
the one who stopped us. And he stopped us because he sain they
didn't need the type or road we were putting through tha~ canyon.
Pure and simple. And the judge decided he had better hear more
about it and ·so there is an j.njunction on it. That is the kind of
problem we run into.
Comment: I appreciate all that you have to go through, but I still
wonder if that low priority is all we are going to get.
)
Todd Weston: -'Well, I guess we are a little bit like a squeaky
wheel. If the demand is there strong enough and we can justify it
then we are going to move faster where we can. But when I say
16
�(
Logan Canyon has low priority, I've got to say it has low priority
compared to 1-15, it has low priority compared to probably a dozen
other projects in District 1 and we are only one District in the
state.
Don Huffener: You mentioned the squeaky wheel.
I was at the meeting you had in Logan, too and you mentioned it again here, that in
the summertime is the big volume of traffic and 80% of that traffic
is through traffic all the way through the canyon. Most of those
people never get heard because they are not from Logan or here, so
Todd Weston:
Don Huffener:
picked it up.
I think we have some better figures than that.
Well, I stopped down at Valley Engineering and
Todd Weston to CH2M Hill:
Is that your statement?
Sheldon: The people who start through the canyon, 80% go all the
way through the canyon rather th~n stop in the canyon to recreate.
,
Don Huffener: So the majority of the people who use the canyon
aren't getting a hearing on this. The other thing is at the other
meeting your spokesperson said that the ID committee was unanimous
in their desire to keep Logan Canyon .as a destination. Your
spokeswoman said that. I'm sure I am right. So, the pass through
traffic, how much consideration are they getting? That was a
statement from your office.
Stan Nuffer:
I think she might have been misunderstood.
COffirr;ent:
She was implying that they want to make Logan Canyon a
and recreational :area, where people come into the
canyon, recreate and then go home.
de~~ination
Cliff: That is the desire of many people to make it that way.
I
guess the way to answer that is that you really have two views, and
I don't see anything that is going to keep both of these from being
answered.
John Murphy: When I first cam~ to tr~ valley about 15 years ago I
was looking for a place to buy some suppli~s and I soon found
another route to Ogden and on through. Going on a dirt road in the
south ena of the valley down there, which is called
Canyon, which is 500 feet lower than your Logan Pass; it doesn't
have any environmental problems, there is no river to fight, you
can go down into Ogden and · it is 15 minutes longer than using your
superhighway through Logan Canyon •. So if the people in Logan are
so upset about the environmental impact of us people who live and
drive the canyon, rather than those that stop and turn around and
go home, why don't they build us a road into Ogden? We could get
to Ogden in the same time it takes to get to Logan. Re-route
17
�Highway 89 up through Cottonwood, up through the flats up there, no
river, basic road is facing south, so the sun does most of the
clearing for you rather than snow plowing; it goes to the area of
Monte Cristo, we can go on down there and get our supplies, route
the tourists through there, and Logan can have their canyon and go
up there and recreate and turn around and go home.
(Applause)
My name is Ernest Henry, with the Bridgerland Audobon Society in
Logan, and I would like to second what was mentioned earlier.
Environmental groups aren't out to stop everything and anything,
but we do have distinct and definite concerns about Logan Canyon.
That is why I am here tonight. There is nothing I'd rather be
doing that be home tonight, but I'm here because I'm very concerned
about the quality of the environment in Logan Canyon. So, we will
work with you, and compromise, but I do have one concern. Something that has been repeatedly stated and stated here tonight and
often times stated in the paper and that is that a big impediment
to your economic development and the economic development of Bear
Lake is the Logan Canyon road, that if it was somehow improved, the
economy would be better. That may be true, I don't know, but one
thing I have yet to see is any facts on that.
Comment: MOVE OVER HERE. Try driving the canyon twice a week and
you would change your mind.
.~
UDOT:
I'd like to make a comment on the alternate route. We have
looked at it and an alternate route would cost about 1.2 to 2
million per mile. We don't have that kind of money right now. We
do feel that two decades from now that will be a realistic alternative to look at. Right now the money we have available is to
improve the facility we have built. I hope you are right about the
environmental situation. When we get there I'm afraid there might
be more problems that we anticipate, but alternate ro~tes have been
lQ~l~~d at but at this time we don't feel the availability of funds
makes it a viable alternate. We need to be upgrading what we have
here.
Comment: Just one comment about alternate routes. Someone must be
sniffing glue if they tried an alternate route through Hodges
Canyon. It is almost impossible to get through. You would never
see a snow plow out. So the studies you are doing on alternate
routes are not very well done. The other route that original
pioneers used which is pretty ,:"lose ' : 0 your yellow route is a much
better route. NOw, I talked to some of the old timers who worked on
the route that we've got now and they said those crazy guys from
Salt Lake City don't know how to build a road, but since tht.~y are
paying us, we'll build it anyhow. The y~llow route does look like
it is . ~ better route.
.j
UDOT: The yellow route is the principal route at this point, but
we did indicate to the consultant that we wanted to look at some
alternatives. We they took some geotechnical data and they have
indicated that the green route is not desirable, but that the
yellow one is, again we are going to have to look at that when it
�comes time to getting the property and alignment, which will be in
the latter stages of the whole study. But we will probably be
working with the county people and if we can establish that that is
a desirable route, and the local people are in agreement, then we
will work with the county commission in reserving the rights of way
so we don't have to come in unprepared. But that is the principal
route at this time.
CH2M Hill:
Comment:
my eyes.
We share your conclusions about the green route.
Do you?
I saw what you were doing and I couldn't believe
Comment: I was wondering, the lower part of the canyon that has
been improved, was there any data before so that you can compare
the impact that it has had on the lower route so you might have
some information to apply to the higher route? Is that being
considered?
Stan: We have looked at all the data we can get. Unfortunately,
the safety data, the basis has changed, so it is kind of hard to
draw conclusions. We just have to go along with what is nationally
accepted approaches to these kinds of problems.
/
Barry Negus: One. concern I have is if you change to an alternate
route on the lower portion here, what are the people going to do?
What is going to happen to the existing road there now and what is
going to have to be done for the people that are living along that
route to get out in the winter?
Lynn Zollinger: If we realign the highway to another locations, it
doesn't mean the other one will be clos~d, we'd probably say we
would turn it over to Rich County to maintain and plow.
Comment:
Don't do
~~at.
(laughter)
Lynn Zollinger: The UDOT is not likely to maintain two routes.
disposition of the old route would have to be resolved.
The
Comment: I would like to ask the gentleman from the Audobon
Society if he is a native of the area, is hea student at ~he
college, do you live in Logan as a temporary position the~e, what
is your impact personally on improvements in the canyon or is this
just an assignment you have f::.-:>m thE: college or Audobon Society?
... .,-
Ernest Henry: No, I was born in Cincinna~i, Ohio; my parents moved
to Albuqu~rque in 1969. I got a bachelors degree from Colc.rado
State in Wildlife Biology in 1979. I lJoved to Logan to attend
graduate school and I have a masters degree in Range Science there
and I now work with the USDA in the agricultural research service
doing research in alfalfa growth and I am a member of the Audobon
Society because it is something I believe -in and am interested in •
So, anyway, I live and work in Logan right now and I intend to stay
there for the foreseeable future.
19
�Comment:
What do you think about the problems on the road?
Ernest Henry: I think there are two major environmental problems I
see with road construction. One is the river itself, water quality, quantity, diverting it, changing it from something that is
rather free flowing with biological integrity to something that is
riprapped and has little biologica~ integrity, and also I think the
scenic value of the canyon is important. If your only interest is
in economic development, I don't think you can deny that something
that is going to bring people to this area is the scenic quality of
Logan Canyon. It is an important aspect to this area. It is a
recreational resource, granted more in Logan's favor than in Bear
Lake's favor. But it is a recreational resource of significance
and that shouldn't be overlooked.
Comment: I'm just glad to know a transplant from the Sierra Club
in Oklahoma.
Comment: I don't think it matters wher~ we are from, but I think
the thing that this gentleman is stating and what the residents
from this side of the hill are willing to work with them. We don't
want to change the whole canyon. We think there are improvements
that can and should be made and as a community we all feel that
way.
Comment: We all love the canyon.
We don't want it spoiled.
We do.
We want it preserved.
Comment: And I think we are all saying the same thing allover
again. We want quality, but we also want some improvements and I
think it is possible to work with them if we can just get on with
it. Let's work together and get it done.
Richard Mills: Have you as the state studied the other road coming
in from Salt Lake and Evanston in the summer as far as ~oad
counters?
Stan Nuffer:
proposed?
Are you talking about the existing highway or those
Richard Mills: The existing highway. You have a traffic study,
right? You have two counters .. one Q....)ing north and one coming into
Garden C.ity. : . .ave they done anything coming in from Evan~.~on UF
over Laketown Canyon?
Stan Nuffer: We are somewhat familia~ with the state procedures.
They have permanent traffic counters allover the state.
UDOT: We no longer have a permanent counter in Laketown Canyon,
but they do annual studies. Sometimes they vary from a week or a
day. But because of lesser volumes they don't go to the expense of
a full time permanent counter there, but they use statistic projection methods to get a short count and project it. to a longer count.
20
�Stan Nuffer: They have a guide that is called "Traffic on Utah
Highways that is published biannually that lists all this traffic
information and I'm sure you could get a copy of that.
Richard Mills: My point is if you would study that information you
would probably f.ind out that as people get more scared of Logan
Canyon, they are probably coming around the other way. A good
share of the people that come in are from Salt Lake and Ogden.
Stan Nuffer: I don't know if you can draw tha~ kind of conclusion
from the data that is there, but it could be looked at.
Joe West: I'm wondering how bad the lower end of the canyon looks
now. I remember when that was rebuilt; realigned and they were
fighting on that, and that was what stopped them from going on up
into the canyon. I'd be interested in knowing how that looks 'now
that the growth is back up. I can see that when construction goes
on you are going to have a problem for a year or two, but growth
comes back. I heard one man say that th~t was the first time he
went down Logan Canyon and saw anything but the yellow line. You
know, before the rest of this canyon gets built, the lower end of
the canyon is going to be obsolete.
J
stan: We hope to get at least the same standard throughout the
whole canyon. Beyond that, if traffic continues to increase, there
might need to be alternate routes looked at to take some of the
pressure.
Joe West: I'd like to ask the Audobon Society how the lower end of
the canyon looks to him.
Ernest Henry: My general reaction is that it doesn't look that
bad. Nevertheles~ . I don't think you, call just say, "Okay, there it
t worked." We don't want to take any chances. I guarantee you that.
We arc not out just to slow things up but we want it to stay a
recreational resource second to none. I'd like to make another
comment and this is strictly factual. As I mentioned I lived in
Colorado for a while and if you think this battle over a road was
somethin<3', Glenwood was an a\'lesome battle. That was on interstate
70 that went on for years and years and years. And they finally
worked something out. I think Ch2M Hill would do well to look at
some of the approaches that we~e use~ there.
Stan Nuffer:
We were involved in that process.
Jim Naegle: Two months ago we visited Glenwood Canyon, and we
built the Interstate 15 through the
River by St. George at
$1,000,000 per mile and we thought that was a great cost for building a road. The 12 miles of Glenwood Canyon now cost 14 million to
put a bike path through, and 235 million dollars to build the road
and it is because of tradeoffs with the envizonmental organizations. I want to add just this. That UDOT is more environmentally
sensitive than we have ever been as a Highway Department; some of
21
�it from need and some of it from desire. The lower part of the
canyon wasn't as environmentally sensitive as the middle portion of
the canyon. We are intent on building a facility that will accommodate as much as possible. We are willing to make tradeoffs. We
are looking for tradeoffs with the environmental people, the forest
service and the Highway Dept. We want to get in and build the best
highway with the least amount of impact that can be done. And we
will be keeping you people appraised as to our progress on that,
but we need your input and your support as to how you feel and that
is why we appreciate your 'coming tonight. It is our intent to
build something that will serve us as best as possible and to minimize the impacts. ~hat's the tradeoffs we are looking for.
Cliff: Maybe as a summary comment, we can still have more questions, but I would carry it a step further than what Jim said.
Other than the time that it takes to complete the study, which I
'would agree with is intolerable from your perspective, but other
than. the time I'm not pessimistic as to how this will turn out. In
fact I'm rather optimistic as Dave Baumgarner and others have
stated that we are going to be able ~o f~nd some common ground that
satisfies the environmental needs and still gives you a good road
through the canyon that you all deserve. So, I wouldn't be pessimistic about it, but I would be careful to take the time to make
your presence known, even if it takes going to Logan to do it. We
need toe input and we need a balanced input.
J
Comment: I'm been on a committee representing this area for a number of years when we first started these studies, and I know when
we got the information on this study we requested you come here and
we do appreciate your coming here because it is cumbersome to
travel that road in the wintertime. We want you to know we do
appreciate your coming here and we hope you appreciate the impact
the canyon has on the people on this side of the mountain. There
are a lot of peop'~ from Bear Lake County . that have some concerns.
We . would strongly ·~ncourage you to continue to hold some meetings
over here and not to look at sheer numbers, but you are talking
about real users and real business people, not an organized group
by any means like you might find in Logan, because I listened to
them and I've seen their tables etc. but please continue to come
over here and keep us informed. I would suggest you may even
explore the idea of holding a meeting in Salt Lake City, because
that affects a lot of those people Don Huffener was talking about
that travel through here const::!.ntly ~. nd a majority of those people
are in ~he ' Wa3atch Front.
CH2M Hill: We spoke with them today and they let it be kno\7n that
they expect to see us.
Comment: Good. Also you might consider that the next time you
have a meeting in here if you hold it on a summer night and a
Friday night you'll get some of those same types of people and
you'll get a good cross section •.
Stan Nuffer:
That is a good idea, thank you.
22
I
�I'm Cliff Brown and I'm a member of the town council in Laketown
and I just think that the beauty of the canyon is out of this world
at time, nobody disagrees with that. I'm also an EMT and I've
driven the ambulance through there through all kinds of weather. I
think we need to keep in mind that that road is our lifeline to the
outside world. We are up here isolate otherwise. There are a
couple of other places we can travel, but this is our main
lifeline, between here and Logan and I think that is what we need
to keep in mind.
Question: Are there any preliminary plans as far as re-routing the
existing road in places?
Do you have any plans there at all?
Stan Nuffer: We are just getting started in that ·process. We want
to get your input first and then we will get into that process.
(
)
Comment: As you drive through the canyon, in reference to the gentleman's comments about riprapping the river, as I drive through
the canyon I see very few places where th0se kinds of places are
going to exist and where the road possibly could be moved completely away from the river and actually add to the quality of the
river instead of pushing the snow (I'm sure you are concerned about
the salts that come off into the river and environmentally impact
it that way.) But just driving through and seeing where some
improvements can be made I don't see where there is that much that
will impact the river, just by doing a few minor things.
Comments: Along . with your accident statistics have you ever
thought about having almosts? You should request people to send in
and report how many times they have "almost" been wiped out. (lots
of laughter)
.
Comment:
That wOllld affect
aL~ost everyL~J.y,
wouldn't it?
Commen~:
Gale Larson went up there traffic counting and almost got
hit himself.
Comment: If any of you would like to write your comments I've got
some busin=ss cards here that you can pick up on your way out.
Stan Nuffer: If we have no more comments, some of you who felt to
shy to speak in public, we'll be here for a while. Come up and
look a~ the raps and drawings. : Is there anyone else that: want'"'d to
make a comment?
Comment: I'm John Hansen, and I don't think it has been brought up
that
We all do a lot of business on
the other side of the hill and I'm very much concerned about the
safety and while we talk a lot about the environment, but I wonder,
since when do we place a higher value on plant and animal life than
we do on human life? That is what has crossed my mind quite a bit.
It looks to me like we are here tonight as a community to express
this.
23
�
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/71">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/71</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
1803649205
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
14577551 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
Comments on the Logan Canyon CH2M HILL presentation
Description
An account of the resource
Answers to questions from the public about proposed changes to Logan Canyon.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Nielson, Bryce
Weston, Todd
Stringham, Brian
Harrison, Alan
Webb, Paul
Zollinger, Lynn
Peterson, William
Wilson, Ted
Webb, Kathy
Huffner, Don
Murphy, John
Henry, Ernest
Negus, Barry
Mills, Richard
West, Joesph
Brown, Cliff
Hansen, John
Nuffer, Stanton S.
Baumgartner, David
Utah. Department of Transportation
CH2M Hill (Firm : Salt Lake City, Utah)
Subject
The topic of the resource
United States Highway 89
Logan Canyon (Utah)
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
1986-11-03
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan (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 10
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_Fd10_Page_2.pdf
Highway 89;
-
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/fe40f9168446c8d40313a03df21de24b.pdf
9aaca0cff5cf93cd5df13adfe8c971d3
PDF Text
Text
oR161ttAL
2
3
4
5
6
..
"
o
...
PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING
LOGAN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
7
City Hall
145 West Center
Garden City, Utah
~
I[
o
IL
8
9
-000-
10
Presiding:
Todd ~~eston
state Highway Commissioner
Utah Depar tm ent of
,..
TI'8.nsportation
Conducting:
stanton S. Nuffer
11
12
13
Project Manager
14
15
16
17
, 18
<
U
19
o
Z
UI
\oJ
I[
IL
20
~
UI
\oJ
~
o
«
z
"
21
22
\oJ
D..
23
24
25
CH2M Hill
�I N D E X
2
3
Statement by Mr. Dee Johnson
6
5
Statement by Mr. Barry Negus
7
6
Statement by Mr. Val Peterson
8
7
Statement by Mr. Bryce Nielson
10
8
Statement by Mr. Ted Seeholtzer
13
9
Statement by Mr. Bryce Stringham
19
10
Statement by Mr. John Flannery
20
11
Statement by Mr. George Preston
23
12
Statement by Mr. Russ Currel
25
13
Statement by Mr. OWen Wahlstrom
26
14
Statement by Mr. Paul Webb
27
15
Statement by Mr. Bill Peterson
28
16
Statement by Ms. Cathy Webb
29
17
Statement by Mr. Ray Elliott
32
18
Statement by Mr. Lynn Hillsman
35
19
Statement by Mr. Don Huffner
36
20
Statement by Mr. Todd Weston of UDOT
38
21
Statement by Mr. Jess Anderson
42
22
Statement by Mr. Howard Richardson
43
23
'of
Statement by Mr. Ken Brown
4
ell
0
3
3
..
Statement by Mr. Otto Mattson
Statement by Mr. Dave Baumgartner
45
~
II:
0
Ii.
III
~
1'1
C7I
<
u
0
z
II)
'"
II:
Ii.
~
II)
'"
~
"0
0(
z
"
III
Q.
24
-000-
25
)
i.
�GARDEN CITY, UTAH, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 4, 1987, 7:00 P.M.
2
-000-
MR. WESTON:
3
Ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to
w~'re
4
begin this meeting.
5
County, in Garden City.
6
for the use of this room, this facility.
1
here tonight on behalf of three agencies and a lot of other
8
interested people.
9
Commissioner of the Utah Department of Transportation,
10
happy to be over here in Rich
We thank the Garden City officials
We welcome you
My name is Todd Weston.
I'm the
representing this part of the state.
11
We're here tonight to further our discussions
12
that we started with some information meetings some time
13
ago in this same room.
14
tonight.
15
had one in Logan last night and another one this morning
16
in Logan, and this will complete the scoping process of
11
the study that we're entering into on Logan Canyon.
This is called a scoping meeting
It's the third of three that we are holding.
We
The meeting will be conducted by the people from
18
19
CH2M Hill, who are the consultants employed by the Department
20
of Transportation to make the study in Logan Canyon.
(Further comments by Mr. Weston.
21
Introductions
22
of officials present were made.
Further comments by
23
Mr. Weston.
24
were projected upon the wall, and Mr. Barker gave a
25
narration.
Comments by Mr. Sheldon Barker.
Colored slides
Mr. Nuffer continued the narration of the
2.
�)
slides.
Further comments by Mr. Weston.)
2
MR. WESTON:
3
followed by Ken Brown.
4
We will first have
MR. OTTO MATTSON:
Ott~
Mattson,
Gentlemen, after all these
5
6
route on a main artery, the highway system.
9
o
Our economic growth is severely hampered by the fourth-class
8
III
to be deprived of an adequate means of travel to and from?
7
.,
studies, these surveys, the discussions, do we still have
future is not to continue to be deprived because of a few
N
~
a:
...
o
10
We hope our
we feel know nothing of our protective situation.
We all love beauty, but we also love Twentieth
11
12
13
situations, transportation, livestock, construction, goods .
14
1-15 is an artery.
15
not least, recreation, the Wasatch Front's playground.
16
.J
Century progress.
economic growth now depends on the travel of these routes.
<
our future.
o
Last but
Our
Build, and remove the change for
We hope you will consider that.
MR. NUFFER:
19
U
It's a Yellowstone route.
Our views:
17
18
In our situation we have medical
Thank you.
Ken Brown.
Then we'll
Z
til
101
20
a:
t..
have Dee Johnson.
...:
til
101
MR. KEN BROWN:
21
~
Good evening, ladies and
o
«
22
gentlemen.
23
to see you, a good number of people here in attendance.
24
It shows good support, whether you're in favor or not in
25
z
"
I appreciate being here tonight, and it's good
favor.
101
CL
)
3.
�)
The newsman from Channel 2 gave me a title of
2
being outspoken.
3
in there to indicate that.
4
But on the news, I didn't put- anything
So I'm a little disappointed.
As everyone knows, the Logan Canyon road
5
improvement issue has been one of a lot of controversy,
6
and I think that's probably unfortunate.
7
bit about the road.
8
been improved in Logan Canyon, as you know, is a very narrow
9
road, difficult to pass, problems for good flow of traffic.
Just a little
In my opinion, the area that hasn't
10
The bridges are a disaster, in my opinion, a real hazard
11
to traffic.
12
With respect to the study--and somebody correct
13
me if I'm wrong--I understand that this is the fourth study
14
--is that right, Todd?
15
)
MR. WESTON:
16
17
, 18
Well, I've been involved in three.
I wouldn't be surprised if there was a fourth.
MR. BROWN:
That's a real concern to me.
going into the fourth study of this area.
We're
What are we going
19
to gain from the fourth study that we couldn't have gained
20
in the first, second, or third?
21
in my opinion.
22
The improvements.
So I think that's a waste,
I look for a design, improved
23
road, such as that in the lower portion of the canyon, or
24
that which has been improved.
25
essential for the flow of traffic.
The passing lanes are
New bridges need to
)
4.
�)
be built, in my opinion.
2
It's been my understanding that there has been
3
some proposal of a four lane system in Logan Canyon.
4
totally opposed to anything of that nature.
5
and it wouldn't be cost-effective.
6
Traveling in the canyon.
I'm
It isn't needed,
I have spent most of
II>
7
my life in Rich County.
8
of times, a lot of miles, a lot of different years, going
9
"
o
to college and Utah State University.
N
I've traveled the canyon a lot
~
II:
o
...
I think I have a
10
pretty good feel for how the road was prior to improvement
11
as now.
Going through the canyon
12
now, and especially
13
the improved section, I can't see where you can tell there
14
was any disturbance carried out.
15
affect the beauty
16
there now, how can you tell, as I said, anything was ever
17
done?
418
<:
u
o
I don't think it will
once it's restored.
As you drive through
From a business standpoint or an economic
19
development, it's essential and critical.
We know that
20
all businesses are struggling.
21
money, from the county standpoint, as well as from a grant
22
aspect, to the economic development in the Bear Lake region,
23
and we need to be able to get people to and
24
the Cache Valley area, as well.
z
UI
LoI
II:
...
We are putting money, public
~
UI
LoI
~
o
«
z
"
'"
a..
25
from~
I think
As I said, I'm very much opposed to a fourth
5.
�study coming forth of this issue, and I am very much in
2
favor of a road improvement in the portion of the highway
3
where the improved area ends in Garden City.
4
entire route needs improvement.
MR. NUFFER:
5
6
I think the
Thank you.
Dee Johnson.
Then we'll have Barry
Negus.
MR. DEE JOHNSON:
7
Good evening, ladies and
8
gentlemen.
I appreciate the opportunity to comment.
9
I
don't want to be repetitious of what's been said.
I represent Rich County as a Commissioner and
10
11
12
)
as a citizen also.
I sit in the middle.
Mr. Francis was
at the Logan meeting, and you've heard from Commissioner
13
Brown.
14
the other one is the other.
15
way to be would be to get in the middle of the road of those
16
two, and by so doing I sort of am an eternal optimist.
And one of them is just as bullheaded one way as
So I have decided the best
I don't think there is anything that can't be
17
18
done if all people concerned try to make it happen.
As
19
long as there's dialogue and study, then things like that
20
can happen.
It's been mentioned that the entire economy,
21
22
of course, on this side of the hill depends on that road.
23
It is a major artery.
24
certainly fraternized by our people on this side of the
25
hill.
I think Cache County's economy is
You know, babies are born over there, and they will
6.
�)
always be born over there, and I'd like to see the road
2
improved and the environment withheld to a point that these
3
babies that's being born today and those that are going
4
to be born in 10, 15 years, can enjoy it.
I see a situation where we have a present road
5
6
standard of approximately 25 feet.
To get a standard or
7
a modified standard, we need to have about
8
I just can't help but think we can't add another 10 feet
9
in places where it's needed and still keep the environment
io feet, and
10
so that it's protected, scenic.
There has to be a way,
11
and there will be a way if we're all willing to work towards
12
it.
If we go with Plan A, and we simply say no action
13
14
taken, then we haven't helped everyone concerned.
We've
15
only helped one particular element, that being the element
16
who said, nBy doing anything, we disturb the environment."
17
If we go to the extreme and take alternatives
18
D or E, then we haven't maintained the environment as it
19
needs to be.
20
a road that can service the needs now and in the future.
21
We all have to work together.
22
the time.
III
N
....
f
''"'
"
<
u
Somewhere we have to get in the middle, get
o
z
I/)
101
a::
IL
...:
I/)
101
~
I think we can.
I appreciate
'0
«
z
"
Thank you.
101
11.
23
MR. BARRY NEGUS:
I agree well with everything
24
that's been said so far, and I think there is a definite
25
need for an improvement on the road.
I think I can say
', )
7.
�most of the people travel on that road at least once a week,
~nd
2
3
to make it a little better and to help things out, not only
4
for us over here, - but for anybody else that wants to travel
5
the road.
6
think there are ways it can be done to keep the scenics
7
there and still make a good road and help everyone out.
8
12. ·
if not two or three times.
Thank you.
And with the scenic beauty and everything, I
MR. NUFFER:
9
10
it does need to be improved
Thank you, Barry.
Next we'll have
Val Peterson, followed by Bryce Nielson.
MR. VAL .PETERSON:
11
~ntothe
I would like to have read
12
position that was taken by the Cache Chamber of Commerce
14
board of directors on the 15th of October in 1986 relative
15
to the Logan Canyon road study.
such a study, which may eventually provide clearance to
17
much needed road improvements in the Logan Canyon.
18
our understanding that the study focuses primarily on the
19
stretch of canyon road between Right Fork and Garden City.
20
~
13
16
)
or recorded
official record of this meeting a
This is basically the unimproved section of the canyon road.
We are pleased to support
It is
As a Chamber of Commerce we recognize that our
21
22
neighbors to the north in Idaho and Wyoming as well as Utah
23
depend on the canyon, Logan Canyon corridor, to provide
24
transportation access to services found in Logan and Cache
25
County.
Their patronage to our businesses are encouraged,
.)
8.
�)
welcomed, and appreciated.
To these outlying communities,
2
this access is critical and fulfills a great need, a
3
lifeline, if you will, to much needed services and goods
4
not found in their areas.
5
Bear Lake is one of the largest bodies of clean
6
7
Salt Lake, and other Utah areas.
9
III
facilities for not only local needs, but those of Ogden,
8
.,
o
...
fresh waters found in Utah.
This area provides recreational
area, as well as the canyon itself, attracts out of state
::E
a:
o
IL
10
The beauty of the lake
tourists, especially in the summer months.
We think that the upper reaches of the Logan
11
12
Canyon Road should be made safer and more usable by upgrading
13
to an acceptable modern day standard as much as possible;
14
specificall~
15
bridges widened, curves made less sharp, sight distance
16
lengthened, and areas widened.
passing lanes installed, turning lanes built,
It is recognized that environmental consideration
17
III
...
N
'"
f
18
must be taken into account and in some cases allowed to
19
govern the situation.
20
attraction of the canyon is its uniqueness in its natural
21
setting.
22
uncontrolled road construction in Logan Canyon.
III
<
u
ci
It is agreed that the charm and
Z
..,
1/1
a:
IL
~
..,
1/1
~
We do not want nor do we propose to support
0
<{
z
"
..,
0.
23
It is reassuring to know that an interdisciplinary
24
study team has been formed to guide the development of the
25
study currently underway.
This team is made up not only
9.
�of economists, biologists, engineers, UDOT, Federal Highway
2
Administration representatives, U. S. Forest Service
3
personnel, but the environmental community as well.
4
should provide a well balanced technical steering group
5
for recommended improvements.
This
Economical developments and the well being of
6
7
our existing businesses and those that may come into Cache
8
County is the basis of the Chamber of Commerce.
9
important for a Chamber of Commerce to help build a better
It is also
10
11
the economic and social stability of our valley.
12
an opportunity for us to get behind this effort to do
13
something about the Logan Canyon Road and to work together
14
to improve our northern access from Logan to Garden City.
15
)
community by encouraging people to work together to improve
Thank you.
..
16
17
18
MR. NUFFER:
Thank you.
Mr. Nielson.
This is
And after
the Mayor, we will have Ted Seeholtzer.
MR. BRYCE NIELSON:
I appreciate the opportunity
19
to speak tonight.
I look at the Logan Canyon Road from
20
various points of view.
21
up and live in Logan and to utilize the canyon from a
22
recreational point of view.
23
to live for a good number of years in Rich County and use
24
the canyon as a main artery towards the livelihood that
25
we require; doctors, stores, that type of stuff.
I've had the opportunity to grow
I've also had the opportunity
)
10.
�!
.
I have also have had the opportunity to be a
2
fisheries biologist and a "environmentalist," you might
3
say.
4
the mayor of Garden City, and been able to see many of the
5
concerns that citizens of the area have about travel,
6
tourism, businesses, the life blood of communities.
I have also been on the other side of the coin · as
about
I feel this gives me a good overview of the
7
8
problem on the Logan Canyon road.
I feel that I can't really
9
state what alternatives I'm in favor of or opposed to.
10
11
13
appeal.
is extremely important to me, since I transport my family,
15
my loved ones, through the canyon, and my friends travel
16
through the canyon.
17
to say which is more important that one or the other.
18
<
throughout the canyon, its scenic values, its esthetic
14
u
both the fishery environment and the other environments
12
)
Obviously, the environment is extremely important to me,
think they're both extremely important.
19
o
But on the same hand, the safety of the canyon
So it's very difficult for me as one
I
I don't think speed is an issue in the canyon,
Z
III
III
20
can you go around a corner?
22
many minutes can you save?
23
with most of the people in Rich County.
24
an issue with many people.
25
...
and I constantly hear this brought up as speed.
21
a::
very much in favor of improvement of bridges.
How fast
How many miles an hour, how
I don't think that's an issue
I don't think it's
Safety is an issue, and I'm
I'm very
)
11.
�much in favor of improvement of passing lanes, so that
2
individuals who are impatient, want to get on down the road,
3
will not take hazardous actions that may affect the safety
4
of myself or people that I know and that I think a lot of.
I think that it's important that the canyon is
5
6
improved for the tourist industry in Garden City and the
7
Bear Lake area.
8
about in many of these meetings is the fact that you talk
9 '
about loads through the canyon, people, numbers of cars;
You know, one thing that's not been talked
10
but nobody has really talked about the amount of people
11
that go through Evanston, other routes to the area, primarily
12
to avoid the canyon.
13
utilize this exceptional resource .
.J
I'd like to see more of these people
One other thing that I'm probably not--well,
14
15
I'm not in favor of--is any realignment of the Rich County
16
side.
17
and boats and semi's labor up and down the hill.
18
I also can see the scars of the old road that existed in
19
the thirties, and I don't want to see additional scars in
20
that beautiful area.
21
of the valley here and many of the tourists who come through
22
thoroughly enjoy seeing deer, moose, and associated wildlife
23
in that area.
24
25
I live on that alignment.
I see the cars and trucks
However,
I know that many of the residents
I think with some minor changes I can be very
happy with the route as it exists at present.
12.
�On the economic side, I don't want to see citizens
2
of Rich County be unduly taxed to maintain a road that they
3
would abandon if in fact they actually did abandon the road
4
or the alignment was changed so that it was our
5
responsibility as taxpayers to maintain the road that exists
6
right now.
Above and beyond all, and in quick summary, I
7
8
would like to see more of us get together, both the
9
"environmentalists," "the users of the canyon," and the
10
politicians and look together to see the type of ending
11
that I think we can all be proud of.
12
)
MR. NUFFER:
13
MR. TED SEEHOLTZER:
14
15
Thank you.
Ted.
It's hell to get old,isn't
it?
My name is Ted Seeholtzer.
I'm affiliated with
16
17
Travel Council for 11 years.
18
<
u
Beaver Mountain ski area.
Bridgerland Tourist Council, which includes Rich County
19
and Cache County.
20
Some of them sit a little sideways from time to time, but
21
basically I'm straight down the middle type of a guy.
a
I'm a past member of the Utah
I am now chairman of the
So I can speak with two or three hats.
z
\II
101
a:
...
...:
\II
101
~
o
'"
"
Z
22
I have been accused of being a special interest
101
IL
23 ·individual regarding the canyon.
Perhaps I am to a point,
24
but I'm here to tell you one thing, whether or not I'm
25
associated with Beaver Mountain, if I thought for one minute
13.
�that canyon was going to be uprooted, I would be completely
2
on the other side of the fence.
So I do have some very,
3
very strong concerns about the canyon and what ought to
4
happen to it and the condition it ought to be in hopefully
5
when we get some work done on it.
Just to throw a few insights to you regarding
6
7
the area and traffic patterns that we have there, on a day
8
that Beaver Mountain has 1,200 skiers, that develops into
9
roughly 440 cars at 2.7 persons per car, which is a good
10
average.
It's pretty much a set number by all the resorts
11
in Utah-Colorado areas.·
We have that happen any number of times during
12
)
2.7 is a pretty good figure.
13
the winter.
14
Day and some of these type things that we get upwards of
15
1,300, 1,400, 1,500 people.
16
of 1,200 to 440 cars, if those people were to leave the
17
resort in an orderly fashion in a two-hour period, every
18
27 seconds an automobile would hit that road.
19
within an hour period, every 13.5 seconds an automobile
20
hits that highway.
21
Of course, we have some peak days.
President's
But as an average weekend crowd
If they leave
So we know that that road cannot be developed
22
to handle total peak traffic.
The 24th of July, Labor Day,
23
Fourth of July type crowds.
24
considered when that road is designed that those types of
25
traffics are possible on it, and consideration should be
But it certainly ought to be
14.
�"
given to that.
We're noticing a great deal more traffic coming
2
3
4
We need those people in this area for their tax dollars,
6
the tourism industry, probably the easier industry to
7
attract.
8
water systems, and that for them.
9
(II
resort.
5
"
o
'"
from the Soda Springs, the Wyoming country in to use the
your tax dollars.
This side of the mountain needs some help also.
We are not asked to build schools; cess pools,
~
II::
i
10
11
They don'tccme out of
All they do is add to the coffers of
the cities and counties where they visit.
There are a few misconceptions that probably
12
have been handed out in the last 30 to 60 days concerning
13
the study that ought to be discussed just a little bit.
14
If you remember, the information was put up here on the
15
board regarding Logan Canyon as a designated scenic highway.
16
It · has been designated only in the Forest Land Use Plan.
17
It has not been registered in the Congressional Record at
18
this point in time.
19
that people think it is now in the record.
20
Forest Use Plan, not in the Congressional Record.
III
N
,..
1'1
0>
<
U
o
I think that's a point of confusion
Only in the
Z
VI
III
II::
'"-
21
It's been suggested that we use wider stripes,
22 ·
brighter paint, to mark the canyon with.
23
But, you know, it's rather difficult to see it in the winter
24
when it's covered with snow.
25
That's great.
It doesn't show up too good.
They talk about better
.ighway
atrol, law
)
15.
�I.
enforcement on speed down through the lower end, the lower
2
section of the project.
I hope the heck they don't throw
3
the whistle at me when I'm on the way down, because there
4
is no place off of there.
5
for you and me to pull off if we're in trouble.
6
those things really need to be taken. care of.
There are very, very few places
Some of
True, there could be some destruGtion to the
7
8
river. In places they have to build ret.a'ining walls.
9
question.
It is a Class 2 fishery river.
No
But keep in mind
10
11
and it will always be a put and take river as long as the
12
)
it has been a put and take river for the last 10 to 12 years,
fishing pressure is there.
13
it is possibly not a rating of a Class 2 river at this time.
14
So we have to consider .that
We're been told that it will kill the algae in
15
the river if they work along the banks.
16
grow back next year.
17
have to be disturbed somewhat, providing we do not have
18
to maintain too many retaining walls.
19
So some of that stuff may have to be sacrificed for the
20
interim period, but it will return.
21
True.
It will come back.
But it will
The bushes may
Those will come back.
Talk about campground destruction.
Some of the
22
campgrounds will be eliminated.
Two campgrounds are involved
23
in that lower section of the road.
24
other is the one at Cottonwood.
25
been blocked out for the last five or six · years by the
One is China Row.
The
The one at Cottonwood has
16.
�"
Forest Service.
It is no longer in use at this time.
The
2
3
of the corridor of the trees.
6
granted.
7
GO
have an extremely difficult time getting back on because
5
o
You have . a difficult time getting off the road, and you
4
.,
one at China Row shouldn't be, as it's far too dangerous.
point .
It is a beautiful place,
But it is also a very dangerous place at that
N
~
II:
Logan Cave, a very definite problem area, probably
8
o
...
9
10
the most controversial area in Logan Canyon.
question about it.
Beautiful place.
Agreed.
No
But it can be solved.
The last four or five years, UDOT has had to
11
12
more fill in later on, nor push it into the river, which
has been done the last two or three years . . I think that
17
problem could be handled very easily without a lot of
18
U
it, and it's set.
16
o
road.
15
<
13
14
)
haul fill in there to keep the river from coming over the
destruction to it.
19
portion of the canyon--probably the one phenomenon in all
20
of Logan Canyon.
Why don't we elevate the road?
No problem.
Cantilever out over
We don't have to haul any
And heaven's knows, I don't want that
Z
1/1
W
II:
...
One thing that hasn't been discussed here a great
21
22
deal is the amount of snow that falls in Logan Canyon from
23
the Forks to, say, Sunrise Campground on this side of the
24
canyon.
25
there's somewhere between 300 and 500 inches of snowfall
The records we've kept over the last years shows
17.
�1/
within that area.
,
The 500 inches would fall from Tony Grove
2
over the top into Sunrise.
Have you ever considered the
3
size of bar pit that you need to put that much snow in?
4
Sure, some of it can be blown away, but a
5
lot of it also blows back on.
6
ask the gentlemen who drive the plow trucks through there,
7
they will tell you -that 100 inches could blow in one night
8
that they have to push off, not only that that falls.
I'm sure if you were to
So we do need some bar pit room.
9
We do need
10
some shoulders for those in trouble to get off and to make
11
the road safer and less narrow in the winter time when there
12
is an awful .lot of snow falling.
My recommendation would be on the improvement
13
14
15
estimation an excellent job on the bottom end of the road,
16
they have used awfully good judgment to improve that road.
17
f
of the road to let the UDOT people, who have done in my
It is not unsightly.
18
place, but that was necessary for a passing lane.
19
you did not have the one passing lane along by Brown's
20
Rolloff, you would only have the passing lane from Malibu
21
area until you hit the dugway, and that is too far for people
22
who need to get through the canyon.
True, they got into the river in one
And if
I thank you very much for your time, and I
23
24
appreciate the privilege of speaking to you tonight.
25
Thank
you.
18.
�..
MR. NUFFER:
2
Bryce Stringham.
Then we'll have
John Flannery.
3
MR. BRYCE STRINGHAM:
I'm Bryce Stringham.
I've
4
5
It was about eight years before that that I was a part-time
6
resident.
7
that canyon any more than I have in the last '28 years, and
8
I put in quite a lot of input in the last meeting we had
9
~
III
o
been a resident here for all the time for about 20 years.
here, and I kind of protested about that road, and I'm sure
I don't think there is anybody that has traveled
Of
I
II:
o
...
10
11
that's been covered many times.
The concern I have on this is changing the route
12
13
'he's for keeping it on the route it's going.
14
go along with that to a point, that if we've got to change
15
that route, that we change it on the face here because of
16
the scenic values, because of the people who are already
17
)
on this side of the hill.
I think, as Bryce has said, that
there who need to serve in part.
18
need to change the road, let's keep it near where it is,
19
and let's come out where we're at.
I essentially
,~
In other words, if we
ill
N
,...
t'I
01
<:
u
o
We have to look at the
Z
til
W
II:
...
W economic part of it, too.
21
Now, if they're going to change the route down
22
Hodges Canyon, they've got to buy more property, they've
23
got to ·change the route.
24
maybe using some of the old route they had, or whatever.
25
I don't know what . the study is.
That costs a lot more money than
But I'd be violently against
19.
�II
changing any other route but essentially the route we've
2
got.
Now, with some variations and like that would
3
4
be fine, but to change a whole new route that's the thing
5
that I'm opposed to.
Thank you.
6
MR. NUFFER:
John Flannery.
7
MR. JOHN FLANNERY:
Thank you for the opportunity.
8
Can you hear me in back?
I'm a writer, not a speaker.
9
So
I'm going to read what I have for all here.
First of all, I have no financial interests in
10
11
any way in Logan Canyon or Logan or Rich .county.
This is
12
not in opposition to what has been said or to the idea of
13
improving the road we have.
14
it as a note of caution.
I would prefer to think of
When I came to Utah to work for the State 32
15
16
years ago, it was Parley's Canyon that said:
11
good place.
18
two-lane road going into Salt Lake City is marvelous.
19
gone.
This is beauty."
"This is a
That small stream by the
It's
Provo Canyon was a quiet meander from Provo to
20
21
Heber Valley, with a few scattered mostly summer homes.
22
Excellent brown trout fishing and shade.
23
and winding.
24
gone.
25
The road was slow
It was a place of tranquility.
And it is
The road from Ogden to Huntsville is less exciting
)
20.
�perhaps.
2
homes.
3
13.
k~
Steeper, a little bit.
Narrower.
Not too many
That, too, is gone.
One canyon remains, admittedly butchered in part,
4
riprapped in part, but maintaining its uniqueness.
5
Logan Canyon, as you all know.
As a sometimes travel writer and photographer,
6
.,
That's
7
I find that will attract and appeal to both the veteran
9
o
my concerns are the esthetics of an area.
8
III
What is it that
traveler and the first-time or once in a lifetime voyager?
N
10
11
I have visited and worked in a lot of states and a lot of
12
countries, flown over quite a few of them too.
13
..J
Without going into a travel log, I would like to say that
of these have been visually diminished by the straight
14
ribbons of cement and blacktop we equate with progress and
15
call development.
Too many
Less than a month ago in Hawaii, I had the
16
17
privilege of driving a road called the Road of a Hundred
18
Bridges, and it runs down across the back of Maui to the
19
tiny town of Hana.
20
is 20 miles an hour.
21
And at many, many bridges you have to stop, yield to oncoming
22
traffic.
· 23
There are 23 miles.
The top speed limit
You often have to go 10 miles an hour.
These are one-way bridges.
And you'd be glad
that you're in a Japanese car and not an American car when
24
you do try to cross those.
Still, it's an unforgettable
25
drive of leisure and beauty, with enough ·pullouts to
21.
�)
encourage dawdling and savoring a unique place on earth.
2
The Hawaiians don't lament those 23 miles of beauty, and
3
that leisurely drive makes people come allover the world
4
who care about scenic beauty.
5
of the tourist industry.
6
It's the backbone of some
I submit that Logan Canyon and its river are
7
similarly unique.
Certainly there is nothing like this
8
canyon and the Logan River left in . Utah.
It's butchery, and it could happen.
9
It will
10
diminish its ability to draw the many people who come to
11
savor what we have.
Injuring this canyon will diminish Utah's full
12
13
house of attractions.
Its damage could and will reduce
14
the value of what is a gateway to your beautiful valley
15
and perhaps wipe out travelers' enthusiasm for the total
16
experience of the drive from the Wasatch Front communities
17
to Bear Lake.
Minutes saved will never repay posterity for
18
19
the measured damage that may be done to the unique canyon
20
we have.
Thank you for listening.
21
I know you're not
22
sympathetic to some of the things I've said.
23
this is not opposition.
24
you.
25
MR. NUFFER:
As I said,
It's a word of caution.
Thank you.
Thank
Well, those are
~ll
)
22.
_. ____ .. _ .. _.... ..... .. _. . .... . _.................. . . . . . _ . . . . ....... ....... _... ...... .... , ... ... ....... .\.\.. _,"\ H'"
... .
.
.?
.
• • _ .' .. r .. r .... ' ..... ·. _-•• , • • -·.""\ ' ..... ·--; .... _l
�II
the ones that signed the list that indicated they would
2
wish to speak.
3
home at 10 after 8:00, now, do we?
4
Some said maybe.
We don't all want to go
I hope the setup here hasn't intimidated anyone.
5
This looks kind of official, but we would certainly invite
6
you to come up.
7
if there is anybody that's changed their mind about talking
8
--if you said no here, I don't care.
We sincerely want to have your input.
MR. GEORGE PRESTON:
9
So
Come on up.
My name is George Preston.
10
11
of residency, but not newcomer in the sense of being over
12
here and enjoying the place, and I have a very deep sense
13
of feeling towards the responsibility that we each have
14
)
I guess I'm a newcomer to this county, newcomer in the sense
towards this community.
15
16
Club and have thought as Mr. Flannery thinks, we would still
17
have a double width wagon track through the canyon.
18
<
u
If our forefathers had been members of the Sierra
would be totally cut off from any sort of civilization;
19
and as far as any economy, there would be none.
20
there is now.
o
We
Less than
z
I/)
LoI
a:
IL
~
I/)
LoI
~
I have listened to five hours of meetings.
21
I
o
«
z
"
22
have listened to both sides, pro, con, all the way from
23
Alternative A to Alternative D.
LoI
IL
With that in mind, I drove through the canyon
24
25
today.
As I drove through, I convinced one person, and
23.
�that was myself, that this road can be improved, it can
2
be widened, passing lanes can be made.
All of this can
3
be done with the gentlemen that are here and available as
4
experts, without compromising the esthetic beauty of the
5
canyon, without compromising fish, wildlife, with hardly
6
any· compromise to the ecology, because we can do it.
7
looking at the alternatives, and driving through the canyon,
8
Alternative C category, improvements can be made in the
9
first lower portion.
In
The C category can be made in the
10
upper portion.
11
down into Garden City, significant improvements can be made.
Two of the worst corners in the entire canyon
.12
)
· 13
And, of course, from the top of the canyon
can be eliminated.
We all know what's happened on those
14
corners.
We all know of the accidents.
There is no reason
15
to maintain a ·hazard like that in which it affects me and
16
potentially you, because those that have gone before us
17 .
on those corners, they're gone.
Who is next in the future?
18
When the economy of Cache County was sorely in
19
need of a highway leading into Logan, so that Logan could
20
say, "We need that highway to boost the economy," it was
21
given to Logan.
22
road and those modifications, compatible with the ecology,
23
to boost this economy."
Rich County is now saying:
24
Please give it to us.
25
MR. NUFFER:
"We need that
Is there anyone else here?
Yes, sir.
)
24.
�II
MR. RUSS CURREL:
My name is Russ Currel.
As
2
3
I came together.
5
...
I do speak for myself today.
4
n
--
I look over this group, I recognize nearly everyone here.
in Logan, Cache County, when that statement was made.
6
do support the statement of the Chamber of Commerce.
I did come over.
Val and
I was president of the Chamber of Commerce
I
I would like to make some comments of my own.
7
8
I do own property in Bear Lake and property in Cache Valley .
9
I was born in Bear Lake county, and I don't think there
10
11
My family, as we were talking about taking a posi t ·ion here--
12
)
is anyone here that enjoys Logan Canyon anymore than I do.
I have five children, and without exception, all five said,
13
"Dad, please don't take a position to destroy the canyon."
And I said, "I think you know me better than
14
15
that."
But one thing I do take a position on, and that
16
17
is the safety of the canyon.
I don't know what you would
18
do to the canyon.
19
getting from here to Logan very much.
20
are a lot of things there that need to be done for the safety
21
of the canyon.
II)
N
"
en
1'1
<:
u
o
I don't think you'd speed up the time
But I do know there
Z
III
101
a:
...
I think I would be about B plus position on the
22
23
map, where I think there are a lot of those things, B, that
24
need to be done.
25
C.
Most of those things, and even some in
And I really feel they can be done without really being
25.
�a hazard to the ecology or to the wildlife.
2
I don't fish.
Never fished in my life.
But
3
I think there are ways that we can handle the river where
4
we're not going to be a detriment to that.
I would hope that we all get together, and I
5
6
think the mayor over here stated it best.
7
together and work hard on this, I think we can overcome
8
the problems that are here and really accomplish what we
9
want to accomplish.
Thank you.
MR. OWEN WAHLSTROM:
10
If we all get
My name is OWen Wahlstrom.
11
12
know how to express my feelings to you; but this winter
13
in the canyon, we were going through the canyon to Logan.
14
It was snowing so hard I had to stop and get the ice off
15
my windshield at Twin Bridges.
16
I watched three snow plows go across that bridge with their
17
blade jammed into the guardrail to miss a car coming the
18
other way. They were all three sliding.
19
)
I'm a resident here.
feet between them.
My family is from this area.
I don't
While we were stopped there,
There wasn't six
I definitely agree that the bridges have got
20
21
to be widened.
22
you'd call a modern day miracle.
23
wide body cars.
24
make it.
25
Somehow they missed the car.
It was what
One of those big full,
And we didn't think they were going to
If we don't do something, and if we go completely
)
26.
�with the esthetics, are we going to make up a road like
2
is going through Glacier National Park, where all trucks
3 are prohibited and large motorhomes are prohibited?
4
It
will eventually come to that if the traffic keeps up.
I, too, enjoy the canyon; but I do think some
5
6
7
there are probably lawsuits against the State in that canyon .
8
We're going to pay one way or the other.
9
..,
CII
o
.,.
improvements have to be made.
happening in there.
I don't know.
I imagine
~
a:
o
...
Accidents keep
It's been stated here, it's a
10
11
-
substandard road.
are many areas in there where if somebody wants to raise
. 12
problems for
I'm not an attorney, but I'm sure there
it can easily be done .
anybody,
I also rely on the economy over here very much.
13
14
I don't want this to be a two-bit tourist trap, but I think
15
we can accommodate more people than we're getting.
16
you.
17
18
<
u
MR. NUFFER:
MR. PAUL WEBB:
19
o
Thank
Yes, sir.
Can I just stand here?
is like driving through Logan Canyon.
The trip
(Laughter.)
Z
\II
20
W
a:
I/..
..:
\II
21
w
~
o
«
I just had a few thoughts I want to say.
taking any alternative--
22
MR. NUFFER:
23
z
"
MR. WEBB:
III
IL
By
Could you give your name?
Paul Webb.
I am a resident here in
24
Garden City.
By taking any alternative less than a major
25
resurfacing modification, we're only going to reduce the
)
27.
�Il
time between conflicts between people and also reduce the
2
time between disturbances of the environment.
We must
3
remember at this point in time we consider the canyon a
4
beautiful place, where wildlife thrives and brightens our
5
lives.
6
was butchered, and it has recovered.
7
the butchery.
8
can be improved and provide transportation to people.
9
we're doing the job, let's do it right.
But remember, at some time in the past the canyon
And it's beautiful.
10
MR. NUFFER:
11
MR. BILL PETERSON:
We are looking at
With caution, the canyon
While
Yes, sir.
Bill Peterson, Garden City.
12
13
20 years.
14
surveys and signs and studies go on in the canyon.
15
think it's time we get past the looking and the studying
16
)
I've been a resident of Garden City and the area for about
and do something to improve the canyon.
17
For 15 of those 20 years I think there have been
I'm in the real estate business.
.1 really
I have numerous
18
people coming through the canyon stopping in the office,
19
many of them upset.
20
21
22
23
24
25
"That's a beautiful canyon, but I would never
drive over it again."
I mean, I'm not kidding you.
That's what a number
of people say.
It's dangerous.
want to go over it.
It's beautiful.
But they don't
I really think even the first section
)
28.
�down towards Logan is out of date.
i
We've got you gentlemen
2
3
than your 1 to 2 percent you've predicted.
4
of major developments, at least
5
are major.
6
•
o
coming up here.
Our growth rate is going to be much more
every year.
tw~
We have a number
that will be here that
And we have building permits.
We're growing
7
I think if you go and improve to meet what you
8
had in the lower part of the canyon, as Paul said, you're
9
III
wasting your time.
III
~
a:
o
...
We should plan · now to have the facilities
10
for the future.
11
Canyon is not going to do us in 10 years from now.
MR. NUFFER:
12
)
13
That section in the first part of Logan
Thank .you.
Is there anyone else?
Ye s, rna' am.
MS. CATHY WEBB:
14
My name is Cathy Webb.
I'd
15
16
view.
17
to and from Logan probably at least once a week.
18
<
u
like to make .some comments from a woman's standpoint of
even more than that.
19
o
z
VI
....
a:
Everyone of us ladies - here in this community travels
Maybe
I'd like all of you executives and officials
20
that are in this room tonight to know that I have spoken
21
to each and everyone of you several times.
22
didn't get past Paul's ears.
23
And I've gone through that canyon a million times, and I've
24
remodeled it a dozen times.
25
...
to see what . would happen if somebody dug away some dirt
However, it
It didn't get past the car.
I've checked out the mountains
)
29.
�and some shrubs.
I've put up fence along the dugway for
2
years, so that the rocks wouldn't bounce down on the road.
3
I just know I'm going to get hit by a boulder on the dugway
4
one of these years.
I just know it.
On top of the car.
I've taken four little children, tiny little
5
6
babies to the doctors, the hospitals, the groceries.
I
7
have spent probably a minimum of $500 a month, ·and that
8
probably is a minimum, over in Cache Valley.
I appreciate the comments of the Chamber of
9
10
Commerce.
We like to feel appreciated over here and the
11
fact that we do put a lot of money into Cache . Valley . .
I would also like to make a comment that last
12
13
year in August I packed up my car, took my 15-year-old
14
daughter at 10 o'clock at night.
15
My husband had already left.
16
with just my daughter and me, 10 o'clock at night.
.>
We were moving to Logan.
And I started out the journey
I climbed up the summit.
17
I had a car behind
18
me.
19
to get in front of me.
20
to the point that I had to pass him again.
21
him.
22
tell, I had a carload of screwballs following me.
23
I let him pass through Tony Grove, or through Beaver,
He slowed down.
And then he continued to tail me.
He slowed down
So I passed
As near as I could
Needless to say I was scared to death by the
24
time I got to Logan, because, you see, we passed no other
25
cars on the way.
There was no moon.
It wasn't bright.
)
30.
�')
There were no reflectors.
I couldn't tell if there was
2
a place for me to pullout on the road.
3
my tail.
4
on going.
5
But I couldn't tell.
I wanted him off
I had no choice but to keep
At that point, I told my daughter, "Hand me a
6
7
GI
o
traveling through the canyon, put a man's hat on, it will
8
•
..
baseball cap," because I had always read if you're a woman
protect you.
~
I[
o
a..
9
We're driving down the road, and I am scared
10
11
this hat on, and we went that way through the rest of the
12
canyon with these guys tailing me, turning their lights
13
off, harassing me through the canyon, and I not being able
14
to get off the road to make them pass me, until we got onto
15
the new part of the road again.
16
bugger, you go ahead, and I'll find somebody, and I ' l l get
17
)
to death.
"Hand me a hat."
I tucked my hair up and put
your number."
And then I thought:
"You
18
19
to the point, once we got to the turnoff, that he had to
20
pass.
21
<
u
And he had to pass me, because I slowed' down '
was my greeting into Cache Valley to be a resident there.
o
z
\I)
LII
I[
IL.
And that's the way we went on into Logan, and that
..:
\I)
LII
~
o
«
z
"
22
LII
Well, we lived there for nine months and then
CL
23
24
25
we ended up moving back to Garden City.
May I say to those of you that are here and
representing the environment, you'll find no one that
)
31.
�\
appreciat.e s the esthetic beauty of Cache Valley and of the
2
mountains more than those of us who choose .to live in them.
3
We talk about the drives.
4
single time we go through Logan, because every time you
5
go through Logan Canyon you see something different.
6
We talk about the beauty every
Improving that road is not going to change what
7
we see when we go through that canyon.
8
to say.
That's all I have
9
Oh, I do have one other comment.
10
who is in Logan, calls Logan Canyon a paved cow trail.
11
MR. NUFFER:
Thank you.
12
MR. RAY ELLIOTT:
My dentist,
Anyone else?
Yes.
My name is Ray Elliott.
I
13
know most of you here.
Some of you may know us from being
14
here in the summer.
15
So I wanted to speak just a little bit concerning all of
16
the interests involved.
I have interests here in Bear Lake.
This seems to be quite a polarizing issue.
17
I
'18
went to the meeting last night in Logan.
The meeting was
19
heavily represented there last night by environmental
20
interes~s,
21
towards development of the road.
22
different motives, different personal interests, some of
23
them personal, some of them environmental, some of them
24
concerned with safety.
25
from people who have specific monetary concerns in the canyon
and the interests seemed to be more slanted
Everyone seems to have
Some interests are monetary, either
)
32.
�I,
or on either side of the canyon, to see improvement made.
2
I feel that we really need to be responsible to
3
4
we need to be careful to protect the things that we all
7
.,
to be made in the canyon.
6
flII
improvement.
5
o
the future, both for the environment and safety and
feel are important.
....
But in making those improvements,
There is going to be increased traffic.
8
9
Improvements that are going to be made need
If we
want to see increased use here in Bear Lake, we need to
10
decide who we're trying to attract.
11
Lake is attracting tourists, we need to be careful.
12
we want the tourists to get through on a faster highway,
13
or do we want to attract people who are there to enjoy the
14
scenery?
15
If the economy of Bear
There are gives and takes there.
Do
In trying to
16
attract more people, if they declare
17
route and list it in the Federal Registry, you may attract
18
more tourists; but in doing so, you're going to have to
19
accommodate more people in that canyon, and the roads are
20
going to have to be improved.
21
both ways.
22
th~
highway a scenic
There are going to be trades
If we decide over here--and I have interests
23
here that I need--I would like to see tourist trade increase,
24
but I'm not sure that faster roads or scenic highway, either
25
one, there's a question that exists there.
Which is going .
)
33.
�to be in the best interests of Rich County in attracting
2
3
tourists?
We need to be careful that this type of forum
4
that we have in getting public opinion does not leave the
5
engineering firm, CH2M Hill, UDOT, with the impression that
6
what they have seen either in support of widening the road
7
or in support of saving the environment and doing nothing--
8
they're going to be left with an impression there, and then
9
they're going to take that
10
info~mation
home and decide what
they will do with it and do what they will.
11
the two groups is because each group feels that one group
13
is trying to take advantage of the other group or that the
14
concerns of the environmentalists will be totally served by
15
whomever is going to make the decision, or the concerns
16
of improvements in the road are going to be served over
17
)
Now, some of the polarities that exist between
12
14.
the environment.
18
I have a suggestion that I'm not sure what could
19
be done there to insure that both sides are served; and
20
I feel that there is a middle ground that could be achieved
21
without destroying the environment and without changing
22
the canyon, and still improving the road.
23
responsible to the improvements that need to be made.
24
25
.
We have to be
I mean, I've driven a pregnant wife at 2 o'clock
in the morning over that highway from Bear Lake to Logan,
)
34.
�with labor pains and two minutes apart, and I know the
2
anxiety that accompanies that.
3
So there are safety concerns that we need to
4
5
forum like this leaves people with a few notions that they
7
will go ba.ck and, . again, as I said, do what they will.
8
there could be a committee put together of interest groups
9
.,
o
...
same time, I really love and appreciate that canyon.
6
III
be .concerned with, that we really need to address.
that each have their own interests that could be used as
At the
A
If
~
I[
o
"-
.
10
11
environmentalists, the Sierra Club may have a representative
12
at that meeting, the Rich Tourist Council should have a
13
representative on that advisory committee.
14
perhaps there should be a way to insure that everyone's
15
)
checks and balances for whatever is going to be done, the
interest there is served, and I feel that they can be.
16
17
MR. NUFFER:
18
<
u
That's all I had to say.
MR. LYNN HILLSMAN:
I think that
Thank you.
Yes, sir.
My name is Lynn Hillsman,
19
and I have one thing that's just a little bit different
20
than most people.
21
of others.
22
the middle of the road, and there are major problems with
23
the subgrade.
24
up the road just to even maintain it.
25
improvement and still try to maintain it?
o
Z
\/I
101
I[
"-
I drove that canyon today, like a bunch
...:
\/I
101
~
(;
«
z
"
a.
101
To my idea, there is water coming up through
To redo this, you're going to have to tear
So why not do some
\
)
35.
�But with the subgrade and the drainage the way
2
it is, there's something drastic has to be done with that
3
road to keep it to where you can drive on it.
4
you're doing it, do it right.
5
That's all I have to say.
6
MR. NUFFER:
7
MR. DON HUFFNER:
So while
Yes, sir.
I'm Don Huffner.
I wasn't
8
going to say anything tonight, but Ray reminded me of
9
something that happened to me.
I used to be on the Highway
10
Patrol.
11
in Logan Canyon, it was probably me that gave them to you.
12
In fact, 20 years ago if any of you got tickets
Ray said that he has driven Logan Canyon with
an expectant wife.
14
somebody else's expectant wife, and it's no easier when
15
it's somebody else's wife.
16
)
13
trying to tell the father how to deliver that baby.
17
Well, I've driven Logan Canyon with
It's hard to drive that canyon
I've got some recommendations here, or at least
18
things, as I look at the presentation and look
19
a little more specific
20
maybe Alternative C was all right.
21
looked at it, and Alternative D, they have changed the road
22
just below Ricks Spring and cut out an area there that in
23
my opinion, my experience, it is quite a bad area.
24
made a lot of other improvements here, too.
25
like the difference between C and D is this cut just below
On
at the maps
the first section I thought that
But then the more I
They
But this looked
)
36.
�1
,
)
1
Ricks Spring that eliminates an area where the banks are
2
very steep and in the winter time the sun never gets down
3
to the road--well, seldom gets down to the road--not because
4
of clouds, but because of the mountains shading it.
5
quite a dangerous area in my opinion.
Now, Alternative C I believe would be fine other
6
7
That's
than that.
On the next section, on Section 2, I thought
8
' 9
10
they would like to see the road brought right up to snuff,
11
put a brand new road in there, because in 15 or 20 years
12
)
Alternative B was satisfactory.
NOW, some have said that
we're going to need it, or maybe even sooner.
13
possible.
That's
But ' economically speaking, I don't know that--
14
15
I'm afraid we're going to choke the horse if we try to feed
16
it that much and that we need to be realistic on our needs
17
now.
18
<:
u
We've got other areas, other routes of getting
19
in and out of the valley.
20
too, to develop those along with this.
21
summer people that have cabins here on the lake that come
22
from Salt Lake, well over half of them--well over half of
23
o
I think we need to work on those,
them--from the Salt Lake area come through Evanston already.
Z
III
III
It:
IL
24
25
Already of the
Now, as more people learn of the Evanston route,
there will probably be more and more people come that way.
,. )
37.
�')
And that's not all bad to have several accesses into our
2
area.
The last section, again, there are some very
3
4
bad curves there, and I think that they need to be looked at.
I think Alternative D would be the one that I
5
6
would recommend.
It eliminates the bad curves without
7
realigning the road drastically, and I think we could get
8
along with that.
Thank you.
MR. NUFFER:
9
Is there anyone else here that would
10
care to testify?
11
want to that changed their mind?
Now is your chance.
Well, with that, do any of the UDOT people want
12
13
Anyone that came thinking they didn't
to say anything in closing?
MR. 'WESTON:
14
I was ready to go at 10 after 8: 00,
15
but since we've talked some more, let me make one thought
16
or two in conclusion.
17
through our previous meetings that Logan Canyon itself means
18
different things to different people.
19
all going to agree upon what Logan Canyon means to us.
20
think we've found out that it's a very sensitive area.
I think 'we've found out tonight and
I don't think we're
I
I think we already know that the Forest Service
21
22
desires to keep it a scenic highway, and I think that's
23
fine.
24
25
I think that can be done.
I think we need to remember a few things, and
I think I need to answer a question of Commissioner Brown's.
)
38.
�I think it deserves an answer.
That is, what's to be gained
2
3
study.
I don't think we've lost anything by
three times.
6
that this better be the last study before we do something
7
CIO
And I've told you previously that this is my third
5
.
asked.
4
o
...
by an additional study?
I think that's the question he
in Logan Canyon .
study~ng
it
But I do think that the time has come now
l:
II:
I say that from the standpoint that we now have
8
o
"-
9
-got some structures up there in the canyon that have got
10
to be repaired or replaced quite drastically.
I can see
11
some problems if we don't repair those bridges; and if we
12
try to do it on the existing alignment, on the existing
13
bridge, we're going to have to build a route around those
14
bridges for the traffic to go through that may be more
15
detrimental to - the highway than some of the things we're
16
talking about.
I just want to say this much, that we have got
17
18
19
do something on the bridges is quite obvious to most of
20
you here.
21
of our study.
22
Transportation is not flush
23
the Legislature recently passed a 5 cent gas tax increase,
24
the needs that we have, I've got to say in all honesty that
25
<:
u
to do something on the bridges. - The reason we've got to
5 cents more gas tax is a drop in the bucket to our needs.
o
z
II)
101
II:
...
What we do over and beyond that is the purpose
But I do know this.
The Department of
with dollars.
Even though
)
39.
�We have to rely on the federal highway people
2
to help us fund primary road systems.
Logan Canyon Highway,
3
Highway 89, is more than just a road for Cache County.
4
more than just a road for Rich County.
5
federal highway; and as long as we're going to have a primary
6
federal highway going through that canyon, we've got to
7
keep it up to certain standards.
It's
It's a primary
8
Now, if the time comes that there are enough
9
feelings that that shouldn't be a primary highway, then
10
I guess we'll address that at that time; but it presently
11
is, and we're required and obligated in our responsibility
12
to the highway system of the State of Utah' to do certain
13
things on that highway to make it reasonably safe and usable
14
for the traveling public.
15
to do it.
16
it's our judgment as a Department of Transportation, that
17
there will be no money spent up there, even on bridges,
18
until we complete an environmental impact study in depth,
19
like we're doing now, and there will be a chance to have
20
you come to a hearing on our draft environmental impact
21
study, which will be ready sometime this fall, hopefully;
22
and at that time you can make the decision, help us make
23
the decision, on what we're going to do with Logan Canyon.
24
But I do know that the study has got to be done.
25
We need federal highway dollars
The federal highways, I can tell you now, and
When I first came on the Commission, ·1 was the
)
40.
�\
i
first one to go to the rest of the Commissioners and say,
2
"Why are we spending half a million dollars up there to
3
study something we already know?"
4
statement as Commissioner Brown made.
You know, the same
5
6
.,
I since have become a little older and a little
wiser, and I know that we've got to complete this document
. 7
and consider every option and consider everybody's feelings
8
and examine every portion of it and now do anything in that
9
ell
o
canyon until we're satisfied that we're doing the right
III
~
II:
o
...
10
thing.
11
to release any money and Dave Baumgartner and the Forest
12
Service are not going to support us if we don't do the job
13
And I know the federal highway people are not going
-and do it right.
14
Now, that's the reason for the study.
You have an opportunity to give us input.
You
15
16
consulting team up until April 6.
17
has the address you can mail those to, if you have things
18
<
u
will have written comments that can be written to our
to say that you didn't say tonight.
19
if you want to get your name on the record, you send that
20
in to the people and express yourself.
o
You have - a handout that
Even if it's repetitive,
Z
III
W
II:
...
I don't think numbers are going to be things
21
22
that make the determination.
I don't think numbers ever
23
was the determining decision-making process in any valid
24
decision.
25
good solid concrete suggestions on what you think we ought
But we do want your input, and we want to have
41.
�to do.
Thank you.
MR. NUFFER:
2
3
Jess, did you have a follow-up on
that?
MR. JESS ANDERSON:
4
I just have a question.
Can
5
you do anything with the area around Logan Cave?
6
make that parking or something?
7
in a snowstorm in the middle of the night, and there's not
8
much room on that corner.
That's what these experts are going
MR. NUFFER:
That's one of the areas we're going
to tell us.
11
12
You come through there
MR. WESTON:
9
10
Can you
to take a good close look at.
A VOICE:
13
Just on the time frame fot the
14
environmental impact study, how long does that need to
15
proceed?
MR. NUFFER:
16
Well, if all things go reasonably
17
well, we hope to complete the draft environmental impact
18
statement this summer, which will give you the environmental
19
datq to accompany these alternatives that we have identified
where.
21
One more question.
22
A VOICE:
I'm a little uncomfortable with the
23
monologue type input.
I feel a little better with the more
24
dialogue type input.
25
says something, another person says something, and it's
What's been happening is one person
)
42.
�tough for both parties to get together.
What my question
2
is, ultimately who makes the decision, and how is that
3
decision going to be made on what is actually done in the
4
canyon?
5
6
'"
III
o
7
MR. NUFFER:
Does Howard or Todd care to answer
that question?
MR. HOWARD RICHARDSON:
This draft environmental
N
~
II:
8
impact statement will contain an inventory of all of the
9
o
"-
resources and the values that all parties have identified
10
in the canyon; and a recommended design will be recommended
11
or proposed, considering all of those things; and where
12
impacts or problems are perceived to take place, mitigations
13
and recommendations will be supplied in the environmental
14
impact statement containing what will happen.
15
There will be a public hearing that will be held
16
17
<
o
on that proposal and on those recommendations and on the
18
U
that will contain the comments of people who wish to comment
proposed mitigation.
19
U. S. Forest Service and the Federal Highway Administration
20
will make a determination of whether the environmental issues
21
and safety issues have been properly addressed and whether
22
that represents a reasonable and proper and prudent solution
23
to the problem at hand.
After that has been heard, then the
Z
VI
101
II:
"-
..:
VI
101
~
o
0{
I!)
Z
101
II.
24
25
So the agencies, the sponsoring agencies are
the ones who will make the final decision.
It will be made
43.
�only after a tremendous amount of input, of which these
2
meetings last night and tonight are only a part of.
MR. ELLIOTT:
3
Another question.
Is there a
4
possibLlity of having a citizens' advisory to that decision?
5
Has that been done?
MR. RICHARDSON:
6
Well, I don't think that's--it's
7
possible to have that done on an informal basis.
8
would be simply a measure to help structure and make sure
9
that the problems are identified and the concerns were
10
properly put into the environmental document.
MR. ELLIOTT:
11
12
But that
Could you take that into
consideration?
MR. RICHARDSON:
13
Yes, I'm sure that will be taken
14
into consideration.
15
that.
16
meeting for several months, there has been 12 to 15 meetings
17
by the interdisciplinary team.
18
of varied interests of the resources and the values in the
19
canyon.
20
place.
21
22
23
On the
The team and I were thinking about
interd~sciplinary , team
that has now been
That represents a composite
So there already is a type of that thing taking
Yes, there is.
MR. ELLIOTT:
Is there any way of getting a record
of what transpires next?
MR. RICHARDSON:
Well, those minutes are public
24
information, and minutes have been kept of all of those
25
meetings, and CH2M Hill are the guardians of those things.
,)
44.
�~)
They manufacture them and make them and circulate them for
2
each of the meetings, so that everybody knows what was done
3
last time, and they are reviewed and approved and discussed.
4
And, yes, those things are not secret.
5
for everybody who wants to look at them.
6
III
o
7
MR. NUFFER:
8
.,
.
MR. ELLIOTT:
MR. DAVE BAUMGARTNER:
9
They are available
Thank you.
Dave Baumgartner.
As a suggestion to us
all--and I haven't talked to Howard nor to Stan nor the
10
CM2H folks about this, the original design of that
11
environmental study is unique, and it really didn't operate
12
like we had thought it was going to at . the beginning.
13
had invited some members of the environmental community
14
to sit on that, because they had the major concerns with
15
the program.
We
16
17
o
needs that legitimately ought to be done on the highway.
18
<
u
I think most people recognize that there were
'And our thought in the beginning was to bring in those people
19
who had adverse views to that and help us work through the
20
process, so that that would go a little bit smoother.
Z
'II
W
II:
...
~
'II
W
~
21
But it's changed a little bit in its organization.
o
0(
z
"
22
I would suggest to us who were on that team that we do what
23
he suggests and invite a responsible member from either
24
this side of the hill or however we want to do that, in
25
order to provide that balance that not only he, but several
W
IL
45.
�others have suggested.
I think we ought to consider that.
2
That's more of a statement to these guys than the crowd,
3
but I think it's a legitimate thing to bring up.
4
MR. NUFFER:
5
(At 8:43 p.m., Wednesday, March 4, 1987, the .
6
7
Thank you.
meeting ended.)
-000-
8
9
10
11
12
)
13
14
15
16
17
18
.1
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
)
46.
�r - - - - - - - - - - - -- ------- - -..-_
.
C L
! -~
r
'T' I
2
3
State of Utah
county of Salt Lake
5
I, Ronald r . Llul.1.;;trd, 01 0 here!.. '.' certify that I ,un
a certified shorthand reporter in ano [or the ~~t() te of Utal'lt
7
8
proceedings, and that tlLi : ;
9
correct record of said proceedinqs.
10
11
Dated a t
of
12
()~r~
Sal t
Lr -· ll l~i cr..i.pt
L.'1J:(~
C ity,
..i. :.~
,l
Lull,
true,
Utah,
tlnd
day
1986.
(R~&.~..2__
13
'~ '.
!lon.:lld F .
14
IIubbilrd
-
7.30 LTudCJ(~ J1.ui lc1in'J
Salt L ~lk.C City, Utah
(301) 355-1611
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
::-)
L___ _
�. . .- ....'
()
LOGAN · CANYON STUDY - PUBLIC SeOPING MEETTNGS
.
3« 1987
~o§aD
Utah
4, 1981 - Gar-en city, Ut~
March
~rch
)
\~
/V2)
�,
I
LOGAN·CANYON STUDY - PUBLIC SCOPING -MEETTNGS
I
March 3, 1987 - Logan, Utah
March 4, 1987 - Garden City, Utah
NAME
REPRESENTING
r/\~
t>-Av
DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK?
j!cJ~
}
r.
I
�LOGAN · CANYON STUDY - PUBLIC SCOPING
. . - "\
1
I
~
\
....J
.
~NGS
March 3, 1987 - Logan, Utah
March 4, 1987 - Garden ' City, Utah
I
;
NAME
REPRESENTING
DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK?
�••
I
LOGAN · CANYON STUDY - PUBLIC SCOPING MEETINGS
March 3, 1987 - Logan, Utah
March 4, 19~7 - Garden City, Utah
DO YOU WISH TO
-
).
�
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/55">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/55</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
372804673
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
29603450 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
Public scoping meeting for the Logan Canyon environmental study
Description
An account of the resource
Transcript from the public scoping meeting for the Logan Canyon environmental study held at City Hall in Garden City, Utah on March 10, 1986 where several spoke and answered questions.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Hubbard, Ronald F.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Mattson, Otto
Brown, Ken
Johnson, Dee
Negus, Barry
Peterson, Val
Nielson, Bryce
Seeholtzer, Ted
Stringham, Bryce
Flannery, John
Preston, George
Currel, Russ
Wahlstrom, Owen
Webb, Cathy
Elliot, Ray
Hillsman, Lynn
Huffner, Don
Weston, Todd
Anderson, Jess
Richardson, Howard
Baumgartner, David
Subject
The topic of the resource
United States Highway 89
Logan Canyon (Utah)--History
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
1986-03-10
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Garden City (Utah)
United States
Rich County (Utah)
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 11
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_Fd11_Page_1.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/ad2dfd06c834dcc5b681696fb5778063.pdf
bf8eab2799e6cee5305789a759dd6897
PDF Text
Text
LOGAN CANYON
MINUTES OF ID TEAM MEETING
August 11, 1986
Attendance:
Gale Larson, Valley Engineering
Jack Spence, Cache Group Sierra Club
Steve Flint, Bridgerland Audobon Society
Rudy Lukez, Cache Group Sierra Club
Duncan Silver, FHWA
Todd Weston, UDOT
John Neil, UDOT
Jim Naegle, UDOT
Lynn Zollinger, UDOT
Howard Richardson, UDOT
Fred Labar, USFS
Stan Nuffer, CH2M HILL
Cliff Forsgren, CH2M HILL
Item 1 - Review of Minutes
A new name was added to the mailing list:
Randy Nielsen, Utah Wildlife Federation
160 Layton Drive
Salt Lake City, Utah 84115
(draft copy of the study only)
Item i-Review of Draft Traffic Tech Memo
The draft of the traffic forecast technical memorandum was
discussed.
Those committee members who had received the
memo had not had sufficient time to thoroughly review the
information it contained so the discussion was fairly
general.
Jack Spence thought that all of the data points needed to be
plotted and that the standard deviation and correlation coefficient should be shown also. Duncan Silver asked about
the design hour volume (DHV) and the directional split of
the traffic.
If the DHV and directional split are to be addressed in the capacity/level of service analysis, it should
be stated in this technical memorandum so that readers would
know where to find that information. Duncan also suggested
plotting the 100 highest hour volumes to see if 30th highest
hour (which is presently being used by UDOT), is the best
one to use as the basis for the DHV. Written comments on
the draft memorandum were requested by the next meeting.
1
�(
Todd Weston asked if it would be possible to get the information out sooner so that team members had a chance to
review it.
Item 3 - Review of Manual Traffic Counts
Gale Larson reported on the manual traffic counts taken on
July 19 and August 2. Summaries of the counts were given to
team members for their review.
Item 4 - Review of Maintenance Information
(
Cliff Forsgren presented a summary of the evaluation of the
maintenance in the Canyon. The largest maintenance related
problem in the Canyon is snow removal. Portions of the Canyon are narrow with steep walls and the river is adjacent to
the road. The roadway in those areas has no shoulder and
there is nowhere to store or place the snow. Present practice is to plow all of the snow to one side of the road and
into the river. This procedure requires plows to move snow
across the traffic lanes. There was some discussion about
the desirability of this practice. Duncan Silver said that
there should be two criteria used in evaluating these procedures; 1) how is the public served and 2) how safe is the
procedure. Howard Richardson told a bit about the procedures and about the District's "bare road" snow removal
policy. Jack Spence asked how many times per year snowplows
would be moving snow across traffic lanes. The number will
vary depending upon the number of snow storms. Sometimes a
snow blower will be used to keep the road clear also. Snow
plow operators consider the present practice unsafe. Howard
Richardson invited any team members who would be interested
in a first hand evaluation to come and ride on one of the
plows this winter. Jack Spence asked how many accidents
have been caused by this procedure? It was not known if
there had been any. The options for alleviating the snow
removal problems would be to construct wider shoulders.
Flooding of the road was also discussed. Finding and disposing of suitable berm material is the biggest problem associated with protecting the road during high runoff. Fred
LaBar said that anchor ice above Ricks Springs had been responsible for flooding a number of years ago and that anchor
ice is a continuing problem in the river. Todd Weston asked
if plowing snow into the river could contribute to the buildup of anchor ice. Fred did not know for sure but thought
that it might.
S
Item % - Review of Accident Data
John Neil reported that the Safety Section had not released
the accident analysis runs yet. Jack Spence indicated that
the accident data needed to be analyzed for as many years as
2
�possible if
Silver said
that number
severity of
it was to be a meaningful evaluation. Duncan
that a goal should be statistical reliance and
of accidents was not as important as the
accidents.
SLC82/07
3
�
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/35">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/35</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
2183608344
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
1709828 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 August 11, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting
Description
An account of the resource
Minutes from August 11, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Randy Nielsen's name added to mailing list. Review of minutes, draft traffic tech memo, manual traffic counts, maintenance information, and accident data.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Larson, Gale
Spence, Jack
Flint, Steve
Lukez, Rudy
Silver, Duncan
Weston, Todd
Neil, John
Naegle, Jim
Zollinger, Lynn
Richardson, Howard
LaBar, Fred
Forsgren, Clifford
Nuffer, Stanton S.
Subject
The topic of the resource
United States Highway 89
Roads Improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon
Traffic engineering
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
1986-08-11
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 MSS 148 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_6.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/0d9d39033a34a89061062edbbfce32ae.pdf
499a8339e30a7783450d7680bded936d
PDF Text
Text
LOGAN CANYON
Minutes of ID Team Meeting
July 28, 1986
Attendance:
Clark Ostergaard - USFS
Fred LaBar - USFS
Todd Weston - UDOT
Stan Nuffer - CH2M HILL
John D'Amico - CH2M HILL
Cliff Forsgren - CH2M HILL
Bill Helm - Unattached
Rudy Lukez - Sierra Club
Howard Richardson - UDOT
John Neil - UDOT
ITEM 1 - REVIEW OF MINUTES
The minutes were reviewed. There was some confusion about
the sources of additional names for the mailing list which
were listed in the minutes.
It was noted that Fred LaBar
and Bill Helm had mailed names and not turned them in at the
last meeting.
There was no other discussion on the minutes.
ITEM 2 - TFAFFIC COUNT DATA
(
The sources of traffic data were discussed. Permanent
stations on US 89-91 at Webster Junction, on US 89 at Card
Guard Station in Logan Canyon (later moved to Garden City),
and on US 89 north of Garden City are being used in the
preparation of the traffic forecast.
ITEM 3 - PRESENTATION OF PROPOSED TRAFFIC FORECAST
A past trends based forecast had been prepared using a least
squares best fit linear function.
This approach produced an
annual increase in ADT which was less than one percent, a
rate which was felt to be low.
The Utah State, Office of
Planning and Budget was prepared its forecast of economic
and population growth through the year 2010. The overall
rate of population increase for northern Utah was approximately 2 percent.
If traffic in Logan Canyon were to increase at the same rate as the population, the summer ADT in
Logan Canyon would reach approximately 6,000 vehicles per
day in 2,010. Supporting data for this forecast is available
and will be presented at the next ID Team (Team) meeting.
There was also some discussion on the traffic classification
counts. The summer counts will begin on July 29, 1987. The
counts will include a classification for recreational vehicles
and record turning movements.
�r
(
ITEM 4 - DISCUSSION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE
DETERMINATION
The roadway will be evaluated on the basis of the level of
service which is possible at a given traffic volume. The
Transportation Research Board describes a procedure for establishing levels of service (A through E) for rural roads.
Copies of portions of the procedure description were distributed to team members to help them become familiar with
the level of service concept. There was some discussion on
which level of service would be planned for in the Canyon.
UDOT would like to plan for a "C" level, but the actual level
of service used will be determined by the Team.
ITEM 5 - REVIEW OF ACCIDENT DATA
The accident data for 6 years (1980 - 1985) has been
tabulated using a UDOT computer program. The UDOT program
was used because the program performs the types of analysis
required for roadways and the accident data base was already
on the UDOT computer.
The computer runs had only recently
been completed and there had not been sufficient time to
review the results.
Hopefully this will be completed by the
next meeting.
ITEM 6 - UPDATE ON STATUS OF BASE MAP PREPARATION
An example of the base maps was shown to the
of the set will be available, when they have
to Team members who wish to have one. Clark
requested a set to get started on the visual
Team. Copies
been completed,
Ostergaard
survey.
MISCELLANEOUS
The approved forest plan has a section on Logan Canyon which
t may be of interest to Team members.
Clark Ostergaard will
bring a number of copies of that section to the next meeting.
SLC8I/II
�
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/34">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/34</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
3001645539
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
1261682 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 July 28, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting
Description
An account of the resource
Minutes from July 28, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Review minutes, traffic count data, presentation of proposed traffic forecast, discussion of highway capacity and level of service determination, review of accident data, and update on status of base map preparation.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Ostergard, Clark
LaBar, Fred
Weston, Todd
D'Amico, John
Helm, Bill
Lukez, Rudy
Richardson, Howard
Neil, John
Forsgren, Clifford
Nuffer, Stanton S.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Roadside Improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon
United States Highway 89
Traffic engineering
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
1986-07-28
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Utah
United States
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 MSS 148 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_17.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/b70b1b90e4e6ed0124697f11015190fd.pdf
65229b81282586e3e93b3018b7c6645d
PDF Text
Text
LOGAN CANYON
Minutes of ID Team Meeting
July 28, 1986
Attendance:
Clark Ostergaard - USFS
Fred LaBar - USFS
Todd Weston - UDOT
Stan Nuffer - CH2M HILL
John D'Amico - CH2M HILL
Cliff Forsgren - CH2M HILL
Bill Helm - Unattached
Rudy Lukez - Sierra Club
Howard Richardson - UDOT
John Neil - UDOT
ITEM 1 - REVIEW OF MINUTES
The minutes were reviewed.
There was some confusion about
the sources of additional names for the mailing list which
were listed in the minutes.
It was noted that Fred LaBar
and Bill Helm had mailed names and not turned them in at the
last meeting.
There was no other discussion on the minutes.
ITEM 2 - TFAFFIC COUNT DATA
The sources of traffic data were discussed.
Permanent
stations on US 89-91 at Webster Junction, on US 89 at Card
Guard Station in Logan Canyon (later moved to Garden City),
and on US 89 north of Garden City are being used in the
preparation of the traffic forecast.
ITEM 3 - PRESENTATION OF PROPOSED TPAFFIC FORECAST
A past trends based forecast had been prepared using a least
squares best fit linear function.
This approach produced an
annual increase in ADT which was less than one percent, a
rate which was felt to be low. The Utah State, Office of
Planning and Budget was prepared its forecast of economic
and population growth through the year 2010.
The overall
rate of population increase for northern Utah was approximately 2 percent.
If traffic in Logan Canyon were to increase at the same rate as the population, the summer ADT in
Logan Canyon would reach approximately 6,000 vehicles per
day in 2,010. Supporting data for this forecast is available
and will be presented at the next ID Team (Team) meeting.
There was also some Qlscussion on the traffic classification
counts.
The summer counts will begin on July 29, 1987. The
counts will include a classification for recreational vehicles
and record turning movements.
�ITEM 4 - DISCUSSION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE
DETERMINATION
The roadway will be evaluated on the basis of the level of
service which is possible at a given traffic volume.
The
Transportation Research Board describes a procedure for establishing levels of service (A through E) for rural roads.
Copies of portions of the procedure description were distributed to team members to help them become familiar with
the level of service concept. There was some discussion on
which level of service would be planned for in the Canyon.
UDOT would like to plan for a "C" level, but the actual level
of service used will be determined by the Team.
ITEM 5 - REVIEW OF ACCIDENT DATA
The accident data for 6 years (1980 - 1985) has been
tabulated using a UDOT computer program.
The UDOT program
was used because the program performs the types of analysis
required for roadways and the accident data base was already
on the UDOT computer. The computer runs had only recently
been completed and there had not been sufficient time to
review the results.
Hopefully this will be completed by the
next meeting.
ITEM 6 - UPDATE ON STATUS OF BASE MAP PREPARATION
(
An example of the base maps was shown to the
of the set will be available, when they have
to Team members who wish to have one.
Clark
requested a set to get started on the visual
Team. Copies
been completed,
Ostergaard
survey.
MISCELLANEOUS
The approved forest plan has a section on Logan Canyon which
may be of · interest to Team members.
Clark Ostergaard will
bring a number of copies of that section to the next meeting.
SLC81/11
�
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/33">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/33</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
2452721948
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
1269187 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 July 28, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting
Description
An account of the resource
Minutes from July 28, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Review of minutes, traffic count data, presentation of proposed traffic forecast, highway capacity and level of service determination, review of accident data, and an update on status of base map preparation.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Ostergard, Clark
LaBar, Fred
Weston, Todd
D'Amico, John
Helm, Bill
Lukez, Rudy
Richardson, Howard
Neil, John
Forsgren, Clifford
Nuffer, Stanton S.
Subject
The topic of the resource
United States Highway 89
Utah
Roadside Improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon
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
1986-07-28
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
Utah
United States
Logan Canyon (Utah)
Cache County (Utah)
Temporal Coverage
Temporal characteristics of the resource.
20th century
1980-1989
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_16.pdf
Highway 89;
-
http://highway89.org/files/original/1ae6806e3de179f10bbc0234fa823820.pdf
6ac516f039a32c7a923789718bf06c86
PDF Text
Text
LOGAN CANYON
MINUTES OF ID TEAM MEETING
August 25, 1986
Attendance:
Stan Nuffer, CH2M HILL
Duncan Silver, FHWA
Fred LaBar, USFS
Steve Flint, Audobon Society
Jack Spence, Sierra Club
Cliff Forsgren, CH2M HILL
Gale Larson, Valley Engineering
John Neil, UDOT
Jim Naegle, UDOT
Lynn Zollinger, UDOT
Rudy Lukez, Cache Group Sierra Club
Howard Richardson, UDOT
Todd Weston, UDOT
Item 1 - Review of Minutes
Duncan Silver suggested that there be no more discussion on
roadway maintenance and that the tech memo be written so
that the team could go on to other items. Lynn Zollinger
indicated that the material placed along the river was not
bladed into the river but rather bladed to the side to
establish a roadway shoulder.
There was no other discussion on the minutes.
Item 2 - Draft Traffic Forecast Technical Memorandum
Steve Flint presented written comments on the draft memorandum and a copy was presented to each team member present.
Jack Spence indicated that he had tried several methods to
, try and establish a trend using annual and non-summer ADT's
and found that the scatter of the points was too great to
draw any conclusions. From a statistical standpoint a correlation was not found.
However, given the data available,
he could not recommend an approach which would be any better
than those described in the memo.
Duncan Silver felt that the methodology used was adequate
and that the written comments received should be incorporated
into the memo and this portion of the study concluded. There
was agreement on use of the 2 percent compounded growth for
making traffic projections.
(
There was some discussion on how and when the design hour
volume would be e?tablished. Cliff Forsgren explained that
it was planned to select the design hour volume as part of
the capacity evaluation. The 100 highest hour volumes for
1
�several of the past years are being plotted and will be available _ by the next meeting. -- The design hour volume will be
determined at that time.
Item 3 - Review of Manual Traffic Counts
Stan Nuffer reviewed the manual traffic count data.
The
manual counts have been completed and the data will now be
reduced.
Duncan Silver asked how a traffic profile would be
developed through the Canyon. Stan explained that the data
from the permanent station and the manual counts would be
correlated to establish a profile and directional split
through the Canyon. Stan pointed out that the hourly directional split appears to follow an urban distribution.
Item 4 - Review of Existing Roadway Features
Stan Nuffer distributed illustrations of typical road crosssections at mile posts through the Canyon and explained that
this information would be used to establish capacity and
level of service.
The discussion focused primarily on the design speed and how
and when it would be established.
Stan Nuffer indicated
that it would be desirable to keep the speed as uniform as
possible through the Canyon, but that may not be possible.
It was explained that the design speed is usually a function
of lane width and horizontal and vertical alignment.
Lynn Zollinger asked when the alternate routes from the Summit
to Garden C~ty would be considered.- Stan Nuffer explained
that it would occur during the alternative development task
which was yet to come. The 1 inch = 500 feet mapping will
not be available until mid September.
General Discussion
Jack Spence expressed some concern ab6ut whether or not
there would be enough information available to hold the
first public involvement meeting in early September.
It was
decided that since the first meeting had not been officially
scheduled to wait until the information was available to
schedule the public involvement meeting.
The next ID Team meeting will held in Brigham City.
SLC76/07
2
�
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/17">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/17</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
1462470818
File Size
Size of the file in bytes.
1345956 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 August 25, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting
Description
An account of the resource
Minutes from August 25, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Review of minutes, draft traffic forecast technical memorandum, manual traffic counts, existing roadway features, and general discussion.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Silver, Duncan
LaBar, Fred
Flint, Steve
Spence, Jack
Larson, Gale
Neil, John
Naegle, Jim
Zollinger, Lynn
Lukez, Rudy
Richardson, Howard
Weston, Todd
Forsgren, Clifford
Nuffer, Stanton S.
Subject
The topic of the resource
United States Highway 89
Roadside Improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon
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
1986-08-25
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 MSS 148 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_7.pdf
Highway 89;