1 50 11 https://highway89.org/files/original/967fe14489bf83f439ded681318c2c1c.pdf 8616dafff82f5e2e2ae38aacf0d5796c PDF Text Text LOGAN .CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY MINUTES OF ID TEAM MEETING March 9, 1987 Attendance: Gale Larson - Valley Engineering Clark Ostergarrd, USFS John Neil, UDOT Larry England, USFWS Jim Naegle, UDOT Duncan Silver, FHWA Cliff Forsgren, CH2M HILL Stan Nuffer, CH2M HILL Fred LaBar, USFS Lynn Zollinger, UDOT Steve Flint, Audobon Society Jack Spence, Sierra Club Howard Richardson, UDOT ITEM 1 - REVIEW OF MINUTES There was only one correction to the minutes of the previous \ meeting. Jack Spence had pointed out that a linear model of 1 0 the past trends traffic projection might be preferable to an exponential model because the standard deviation of the extrapolation was better in the linear model, not the r2 value as reported. ITEM 2 - JOHN L. ENGLAND, U. S. FTSH AND vlILDLIFE ' SERVICE COMMENTS John L. England (Larry) discussed the ~laguire Primrose and the FWS interest in Logan Canyon. In summary his comments inpluded: o The latest status report on the Maguire Primrose prepared by the Utah Native Plant Society is probably as good a source of current information as there is presently available. o The FWS has requested to be a cooperating agency in this study. o The Maguire Primrose exists only in the lower end of Logan Canyon, from Wood Camp to the mouth of the Canyon and it is currently on the "threatened" species list. A threatened species receives the same protection, under law, as does an endangered species. 1 I I~vf 7 c �MEETING NOTES Page 2 o It is possible that some of the alternatives could impact one or more known populations. o It will be necessary to prepare a biological assessment for FWS review. o The Maguire Primrose is apparently sensitive to temperature increases and soil type. Some types of improvements could alter cold air drainage pattern or remove trees that presently provide shelter. o The only population of Maguire Primrose the FWS is concerned about (based upon present alternatives) is near Wood Camp. o The basic alternative descriptions include a turnout near Wood Camp. Larry indicated that it might be better to consider some widening at that point and eliminate the turnout in order to keep the traffic moving and away from a sensitive population. o He would recommend preserving as much vegetation as possible. Steve Flint asked about two other species that had been listed in a letter to CH2M HILL. Larry indicated that there were two species presently under review in the Canyon. Stan Nuffer asked if there were guidlines for preparing biological assessments. Larry named some people who had prepared these assessments. They were Stanley Welsh, a botany professor at BYU and Leila Shultz, the Intermountain Herbarium Curator. ITEM 3 - DISCUSS RESULTS OF SCOPING MEETINGS Stan asked members of the ID Team to give their impressions of the scoping meetings that were held on March 3 and 4. o Duncan Silver felt that after the comment period there should be a "roundtable" meeting with government agencies. He did not feel that those representing agencies gave all of the input that they could or should. Overall Duncan did not feel that there were any new issues or alternatives brought out. o Lynn Zollinger did not feel that there were any new issues brought out, but he would like to review a copy of the transcript to be sure. 2 �, MEETING NOTES Page 3 a Jim Naegle feit that there were some alternatives brought out during the meetings but felt that they were probably covered in the general alternative descriptions. o Howard Richardson wondered if there was some value in one comment about getting a "true cross-section" of opinion from area citizens. After some discussion about the value (and purpose of) polls, it was decided that the purpose of scoping meetings were not to "take a vote" but to be sure the full range of issues and possible alternatives were addressed in the study. Those who are interested will generally make their views known. a Fred LaBar did not think that there were any new alternatives brought up in the meetings. However, he did pOlnt out that alternative routes had been brought up in two of the meetings and that a scientific survey (opinion) should be addressed in the EIS. Fred also asked if it was true that it is the law in Utah that slow moving vehicles with traffic behind them must pull off. Duncan Silver said that it is now the law in Utah and that he is , o'n a committee wi th UDOT that is working on a system to provide better advance warning of passing lanes and turnouts. There should be some information available in time to include in the report. '0 Clark Ostergarrd pointed out that the Citizens for the Preservation of Logan Canyon (CPLC) had presented eight specific recommendations for spot improvements and requested that they be given consideration in the study. The eight recommendationsappear to be included in the general list of spot improvements already identified. Steve Flint felt that it was important that people understand that each spot improvement is to be considered on its own merits and that it is not an "all or nothing" alternative. If this is the approach, the CPLC recommendations would be considered along with other spot improvements and the best would be included in the final "spot improvement" alternative. Clark also pointed out that some people had suggested that the highway be planned and designed as a "scenic highway". There was some discussion about standards for scenic highways. Jack Spence 3 �MEETING NOTES Page 4 asked if there is a separate standard for scenic highways. Duncan Silver indicated that there were none. "Standards" for a given scenic road have more or less evolved and generally just address the local situation. Using National Park Service standards was also discussed. Duncan Silver pointed out that truck routes have been designated throughout the US. This was mandated by Congress because of the number of states ~ that had placed limitations on through roads, that -C ~~~)r~eJ was adversely attecting interstate commerce. US-89 through Logan Canyon has apparently been designated /~ I as a truck route. Continued use of the Canyon by ---- ~ truck traffic should be addressed in the study. 0 o Jim Naegle pointed out that a "standard" for Logan Canyon will have to be one that will fit the conditions and still allow the traffic to flow as smoothly as possible. o Lynn Zollinger said that any "standard" less than the modified one may not give enough added capacity to the roadway to make it worthwhile. Any proposed "standard" for the Canyon should be evaluated on its ability to improve the flow of traffic as well as its impact on the environment. Lynn also asked if anyone was anticipating an increase in traffic because of the scenic highway designation. Stan pointed out that other states are being contacted in an effort to determine what, if any, impact a scenic highway designation might have on traffic volumes. Lynn also pointed out that UDOT has been approached by the local cattleman's association about the possibility of fencing the road in the area where cattle range. There is concern about the number of animals killed on the road. A fencing project would require both Forest Service and private participation. o Jack Spence indicated that some hunters had expressed concern to him that an increase in speed might also increase the number of deer killed on the road. Howard Richardson said that the experience of UDOT has been that, besides speed, it is important to keep the vegetation back away from the road so that motorists can better see deer as they approach the road. 4 �MEETING NOTES Page 5 o Steve Flint observed that there were still some people who did not understand the purpose of the scoping meetings and some still believed that a 4-lane roadway alternative was being considered. Steve also restated the need to have a mechanism for sorting out spot improvements and evaluating their impacts individually. o There was some general discussion on the notification of government agencies. Duncan suggested that a copy of the letter which was sent to agencies be attached to the minutes of this meeting when it is mailed to team members. ITEM 4 - EXPANSION OF THE l.D.TEAM Stan Nuffer told the team that there had been some suggestions made during the scoping meetings that interests from Rich County be included on the 1.0. Team. -The Mayor of Logan had also expressed some interest about having a broader representation on the team. After some discussion it was concluded that the team was primarily dealing with technical issues and that the "technical interests" were represented. - Fred LaBar thought that the biggest problem in Rich County was the lack of information. There · is n~ local newspaper and most people do not take the Herald Journal so there is no local vehicle for getting information out. It was decided to invite both the. Rich County people and Logan people to attend I. D. Team meetings t .O see how they operate, but there was not much to be gained by adding additional members to the team. There will be a work meeting with the Logan City Council (tentatively scheduled for March 19) and any team member who can attend is encourqged to do so. ITEM 5 - DAY-LONG SESSION IN THE CANYON TO DEFINE ALTERNATIVES There was some discussion on the value of spending some time in the Canyon and defining the alternatives on the ground. Most team members were supportive of the idea but felt that some time was needed to study what had been done on large scale maps. Stan will have the information put on 1"=200' maps and copies made for the next meeting. A session in the Canyon will be scheduled at that time. ITEM 6 - TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS There was some brief discussion on the traffic projections. Cliff Forsgren said that calculations, assumptions and methodologies for projecting traffic and estimating highway capacity were being double checked and more information would be forthcoming. SLC-STN/33 5 ·1 � 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/90">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/90</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 175515707 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 3520186 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 March 9, 1987 Interdisciplinary team meeting Description An account of the resource Review from previous meetings' minutes, discussion of Maguire Primrose and FWS interest in Logan Canyon, discussion of the results of the scoping meetings, expansion of I.D. team, discussion on the value of spending time in Logan Canyon to define alternatives, and discussion of traffic projections. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Spence, Jack England, Larry Flint, Steve Nuffer, Stanton S. Silver, Duncan Zollinger, Lynn Naegle, Jim Richardson, Howard Ostergard, Clark LaBar, Fred Subject The topic of the resource Traffic engineering Natural resources conservation areas Plant ecology--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 1987-03-09 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Utah) Cache County (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_007.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/6f955bf7e2d5232ceaff24de6b058560.pdf ff4c94fa95182f831fde328ba39e3f5f PDF Text Text CHMHlll l~EMORANDUM TO: Interdisciplinary Team FROt>1 : Stan Nuffer DATE: April 29, 1987 SUBJECT: Logan Canyon Environmental Study PROJECT: B21163.FO The twentieth Interdisciplinary Team Meeting was held on April 20, 1987, at 7:00 p.m. at the Forest Service District office in Logan, Utah. This meeting was followed by a daylong field trip in the canyon on April 21. Enclosed are the minutes for your review. Also attached 'for review is the Technical Memorandum on noise prepared by John Neil of UDOT. The next meeting will be held on Monday, May 4, 1987, at 3:00 p.m. at the UDOT District office in Ogden, Utah. The agenda will be as follows: 1. Review minutes of April 20 and 21 meetings. 2. Discussion of the existing conditions portion of the socio-economic technical memorandum. 3. Discussion on spot improvement alternative. 4. Review of the noise technical memorandum by John Neil. 5. Wrap-up discussion of traffic projections. Future meeting schedule: May 27 June 27 SLC99/d.1901 - 3:00 p.m., District Office - 3:00 p.m., Brigham City �LOGAN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY MINUTES OF ID TEAM MEETING April 20, 1987 Attendance: Arlo Waddops- Valley Engineering Howard Richardson - UDOT Lynn Zollinger - UDOT Duncan Silver - FHWA Clark Ostergarrd - USFS Fred LaBar - USFS Mark Shaw - USFS John Wise, Herald Journal Steve Flint - Audobon Society Jack Spence - Utah Wilderness Society Bill Helm Cliff Forsgren, CH2M HILL Stan Nuffer, CH2M .HILL ITEM 2 - REVIEW OF TRAFFIC FORECASTS Cliff Forsgren reviewed a memo he had prepared that dis- . cussed . forecast traffic volumes using annual data from 1940 through 1985 and population data for the same period. Two forecasting methods were discussed, the "past trends" and "population correlation" methods. Jack Spence indicated, that based upon the data he had seen, a linear function describing past trends was. probably as good as we were going to get using that method. He suggested that population and traffic be compared to see what kind of correlation, if any, could be established. If there is a reasonable correlation between population and traffic volume, the forecast will be used with past trends forecast to establish a range that future traffic is expected to fall within. Cliff will prepare some correlation comparisons for the team to consider. ITEM 3 - REVIEW OF SCOPING COMMENTS Stan Nuffer distributed summaries of the comments made at the scoping meetings and a partial summary of the written comments received. Duncan Silver pointed out that the number of people who commented on a specific issue was not as important as the fact that the issue was raised. For that reason, the most important part of the summary was the table column headings that named the issues raised. Jack Spence pointed out that big game was an issue that had been raised 1 �MINUTES INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM FIELD TRIP APRIL 21, 1987 Attendance: Jim Naegle, UDOT John Neil, UDOT Howard Richardson, UDOT Lynn Zollinger, UDOT Fred LaBar, USFS Mark Shaw, USFS Richard Harris, USFS Duncan Silver FHWA Stan Nuffer, CH2M HILL Cliff Forsgren, CH2M HILL Arlo Waddups, Valley Engineers Jack Spence, Sierra Club Steve Flint, Audubon Bill Helm Tom Lyon John Ellsworth The team met at 8:00 a.m. at the F.S. District Ranger's office. Transportation for the field trip was in two vans provided by UDOT. Weather conditions for the trip were ideal. Stop No.1 was at Lower Canyon M.P. 382.8 to consider the possibility of a slow vehicle turnout prior to the beginning of the study area. A slow vehicle turnout in this location would be marginal due to the curvature in the roadway and the limited s~ght distance back along the roadway. Stop No.2 was at M.P. 384.0, or curve No.5 which is the first sharp curve encountered in the study section. Valley Engineering had previously marked the location of the centerline and the limit of the cut for both a 35 and 40 mph design. Red and white flagging marked the 35 mph centerline, yellow marked the 40 mph centerline, blue marked the 35 mph cut slope, and orange marked the 40 mph cut slope. The cut slopes had been staked for a 1/4:1 (horizontal to vertical) which assumed a rock cut. Both the 35 and 40 mph design results in the removal of the ' existing vegetation which would be difficult to re-establish on a 1/4:1 slope. A flatter slope could be considered to allow more revegetation. Stop No.3 was at China Row, M.P. 385.35 and curve No.7. China Row is the location of a picnic area and also the tree canopy over the roadway formed primarily be black willows. The trees immediately adjacent to the road would be removed by any roadway widening or alignment improvement and would also be more greatly impacted by the 40 mph than the 35 mph design. The black willows are advanced in age and no secondary or replacement growth is apparent. If the canopy effect is to be maintained, replacement growth should be started that would conform to whatever alignment is selected. Because of the existing limited size of the picnic area, the Forest 1 �Service would like to discourage its use. Curve No. 7 immediately upstream from China Row was marked for both 35 and 40 mph designs and a 1-1/2:1 cut slope. There was a difference of opinion regarding the relative significance of the visual impact between the 35 and 40 mph designs. Stop No.4 was at Logan Cave, M.P. 386.3 or curve No. 22. Any flattening of the curve to achieve 35 or 40 mph design speed would result in encroachment into the river. The existing channel is already confined with haphazard unattractive riprap protecting the roadway. Several options for flattening the curve was discussed including the following: 1. Place the roadway on a bridge-type structure that would cantilever out over the river. The structure would extend out to about the center of the channel and would apply only to the 35 mph design. The roadway profile would have to be considerably higher than the existing roadway to provide hydraulic clearance beneath the cantilevers that would support the structure girders.· Clark Ostergaard showed an artists rendering of what the cantilever structure would look like. 2. Move the channel of the river by cutting into the bank opposite the roadway. This would require a channel change up to 500 feet in length for the 35 mph design speed and up to 600 feet for the 40 mph ·design speed. A retaining wall along the roadway would be included£or both design speeds. 3. Retain the existing river channel and construct a bridge over the river for the roadway. This would require a structure up to 400 feet long for the 35 mph design speed and 550 feet long for the 40 mph design speed. The bridge would extend out to the center of the existing channel for the 35 mph design. For the 40 mph design the bridge would essentially cover the channel ~or about 300 feet. In both cases the roadway profile would be at least 4 feet higher than the existing roadway profile to provide for hydraulic clearance under the structure. 4. Switch the locations of the river and the roadway by constructing bridges at each end of the roadway curve. Due to the skew angle at which the roadway would cross the river, each of the bridges would be up to 200 feet in length. The bridges could be shortened by reducing the crossing skew angle by making some fairly sharp bends in the river at the structures. 2 �The advantages and disadvantages of each of the four options was discussed, but no clear consensus was reached. It was agreed that additional studies should be done in this area to better define the options described above. The Forest Service would like to discourage parking immediately adjacent to the cave and provide parking near Cottonwood Creek. Stop No.5 was - at Cottonwood Creek and curve No. 24 at M.P. 386.45. The narrow structure should be replaced. At curve No. 24, the relative impacts of both the 35 and 40 mph designs were discussed. Both would result in considerable excavation into the hillside with the difference being in the amount of cut. An additional option identified in the field was to cut through the ridge that separates the Logan River and Cottonwood Creek drainages which would probably involve no more earthwork than the other options. It was agreed that it should be evaluated. Stop No.6 was at M.P. 387.1 at curve No. 29. Both the 35 and 40 mph alignments were staked. The Hillside at this location is less vegetated and has no unusual or distinguishing features. Little difference is evident between the 30 and 40 mph designs. The field inspection showed that it would be des~rable to have the 40 mph design align with the tangent to the west to eliminate the reverse curve. Stop No. 7 wa~ at M.P. 387.6 just below the lower twin bridge. It was concluded that the existing alignment should be followed to eliminate the need for additional fill, and if possible to flatten the existing man-made rock fill slope so that it could be revegetated. Stop No.8 was at M.P. 387.9 just above the lower twin bridge in the dugway. Replacement of -the lower twin bridge was discussed and consensus was reached that the best option is to replace the bridge with a structure on new alignment upstream of the existing bridge. This would require a new cut through the hill next to the existing cut, which could be filled and shaped to a naturally appearing contour with material from the new cut. At the other abutment it would be desirable to flatten the fill slop- s, which would result in e encroachment into the flats at the base of the fill. In the dugway itself, the development of a climbing land was discussed which would require either a retaining wall on the downhill side or cutting further into the hillside. Clark Ostergaard showed an artists rendering of how a retaining wall would appear. Cutting into the hillside in the lower portion of the dugway does not appear feasible because the slope is less stable than the upper portion of the dugway where the existing rock cuts appear stable. The most feasible solution may be a combination of widening the rock cut 3 -I �in the upper portion of the dugway and constructing a retaining wall in the lower portion of the dugway. Stop No. 9 was at M.P. 388.4 at the upper twin bridge. The most feasible location for replacement of the upper twin bridge would be down stream and as close to the existing bridge as possible to avoid the riparian areas of the river. The new bridge location would result in less shading of the structure which should alleviate some of the icing problems experienced by the existing structure. Stop No. 10 was at M.P. 389.9 at Ricks Spring. There appeared to be consensus in shifting the alignment of the road as close to the river as possible to permit parking to be consolidated on the same side of the road as the spring. Stop No. 11 was at M.P. 393.8 at Tony Grove Creek. The existing narrow structure would need to be replaced. The roadway in this section could be widened to provide for a continuous climbing lane with essentially all of the widening being done on the roadside away from .the river. Stop No. 12 was at the M.P. 396.9 at the lower Beaver Creek bridge near the Franklin Basin Road intersection. The existing narrow structure would need · to be replaced on the existing alignment. The Franklin Road intersection would also be improved. Stop No. 13 was at M.P. 397.7 along Beaver Creek. DUe to the relatively narrow area between Beaver Creek and the hillside, it appeared to be difficult to develop a continuous climbing lane along Beaver Creek from just above the Franklin Road intersection to just below the Beaver Mountain Road intersection. Also the modified typical section should be considered for this 2.5 mile section. Stop No. 14 was at M.P. 405.1 or Curve No. 85. Both the 35 · and 40 mph designs would result in considerable new fill. The existing fill would need to be removed and used to restore the cuts on either side of the fill to a more natural contour. Stop No. 15 was at the Bear Lake Overlook at M.P. 405.8. The location of Alternative G-3 was pointed out, particularly the area where the deep cut through the ridge below the lookout would be located. Stop No. 16 was back down the canyon at the Burnt Bridge at M.P. 385.7. The options for replacement of this bridge were discussed with the consensus being that the bridge should be replaced at the present location with a temporary bridge located downstream to carry traffic during construction. 4 �Stop No. 17 was at M.P. 384.8 in the area just abbve Wood Camp campground where the McGuire Primrose is located. The plant was not yet readily apparent but the known locations were pointed out which extend westerly down the rock outcrop to within about 40 feet of the existing road. Any proposed road improvements should avoid this area. The potential location for a slow vehicle turnout at 389.9 should be far enough upstream to not adversely affect this area. SLC99/d.1902 5 �LOGAN CANYON U.S. HIGHWAY 89 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM * * * N0 I S E * * * Prepared By John D.A. Neil, P.E. UDOT April 1987 �LOGAN CANYON TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM * * * NOISE * * * Introduction Acoustical Environment. Logan Canyon's acoustical environment has three parts - natural, human and mechanical. sounds come from birds and other (usually small) denizens of the rushing water, wind, and rustling leaves o~ trees. Human sounds canyon include .conversation, laughter and play, to name a few. (sound) Natural forest, in the These first two parts of the acoustical environment together can be called background' noise, background sounds, or just simply the background. Whether or not the background is "noise" (unwanted sound) is according to one's own likes and dislikes. Intruding into this background is a third part of the acoustical environment, namely noise from machinery. Included in this category for Logan Canyon are such things as highway vehicles , off-road recreational vehicles, , overhead aircraft (usually high altitude and not a very signi ficant part' of the soundscape), temporary construction acti vi ties and small power generators. Sources of intruding noise studied in this report are restricted to those sources under some ' jurisdiction of the Utah . Department of Transportation - namely, highway traffic and highway construction. Animals. It is common to assume for environmental reports that animals are not harmed, stressed, or annoyed any more than are humans by highway traffic noise and construction noise related to highway improvements. This same assumption is made here. Related to the above assumption is another - that animals are · as adaptable to intruding ' noise as are humans. To date, no experience of this author suggests the contrary. Scope of Study. No generally accepted research findings seem to be available that contradict the two assumptions just made. Consequently, the major task of this report is simplified to accomplish the following: to understand and mInImIze noise impacts of highway improvement alternatives affecting people using Logan Canyon. Methodology This noise study is consistent with Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) procedures and standards contained in its Federal-Aid Highway Program Manual, Vol. 7, Chapter 7, Section 3 (FHPM 7-7-3), 1982 revision. �, I Traffic noise calculations and predictions are based - upon FHWA's Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Nomographs. Noise levels used in this report are in terms of "Leq," representing "equivalent" (average) noise levels. Leq is a commonly used indicator of general human sensitivity to traffic noise. Spr. p (~h interference is particular ly vulnerable to noise, and speech relates well to the Leq parameter. Land Use and Sensitivity to Noise Classification. The FHWA has classified human sensitivity to traffic noise into the following broad outdoor land use or activity categories, and has set a corresponding upper noise limit (or standard) for each category. These upper limits are used as criteria to determine when measures need to be considered to reduce noise. Table 1: Activity Category FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria Leq Criteria Sensitivty Examples of Activities A High 57 Outdoor theater B tvloderate 67 Residences, libraries, parks, picnic and recreation areas C Low 72 Shopping mall, Service Station o None Undeveloped land .In the following table is a general catalog of land uses adjacent to US-89 through Logan Canyon. Land uses, quantities and percentages shown are estimates only; they are not intended to show an exact description of current usage, since change is expected as development continues in the canyon. Also shown in the table are corresponding FHWA activity categories and noise level criteria. 2 �Table 2: Section 1: Logan Canyon Land Use & Sensitivity to Noise Right Hand Fork to Twin Creek (Est.) (MP~ 383 . 5 to 391.6) % (est.) of FHWA Activity Leq Criteria AdJacent Land 97.1 Categor~ 2 1.3 B 67 Designated picnic areas 2 1.2 B 67 Scenic turnouts, parking 2 0.4 C 72 Land Use Undeveloped U.S. forest land Quantit~ Designated campgrounds D 100% Section 2: Twin Creek to Summit (MP~ 391.6 to 404.8) 96.6 Undeveloped u.s. forest land D Designated campgrounds 2 1.4 B 67 Cabins (seasonal homes) 13 1.2 B 67 4 0.8 B 67 Homes 100% Section 3: Summit to Garden City (MP+ 404.8 to 411.8) Undeveloped -private/ local land 59.0 D Undeveloped u.S. forest land 33.9 D Designated campgrounds I 2.0 B 67 Designated picnic areas 1 1.4 B 67 3 �,/ • I Section 3 Continued Cabins (seasonal homes) 10 1.4 8 67 Commercial 3 1.1 C 72 Cemetery 1 0.5 8 67 Scenic turnouts, rest area, parking 2 0.4 C 72 Homes, contiguous ranch land 4 0.3 8 67 100% Sensti ve Oevelopments. Acti vi ty category "8" developments are the land uses most likely to be sensitive to noise in Logan Canyon. Therefore, the remainder of this report only discusses " these "8'~ activities. Table 3 identi fies many speci fic developments near enough to the highway to be noise sensitive. It is possible that more sites have been developed than are included on the list, and it is very likely that more si tes will yet be developed. The noise criteria already discussed and the noise p~edyctions found later in this report may be generally applied. Consequently, it is hoped that architects and users of new developments utilize the results of this report to aid them in the design of new homes and recreation facilities in Logan Canyon. Sites likely to be impacted. From Table 3, only two sites are likely to have some detrimental noise impact, resulting from changes in highway alignment. "These are both in Section 1: * * China Row Campground Lower Twin Bridge Picnic Area Before studying these special sites, traffic noise in general will be analyzed. Traffic Noise in Logan Canyon Generally Affect of Level of Service and Volume. The combination of traffic volume and speed that give the most noise for Logan Canyon is not likely to occur during "the peak traffic hour, when the road is utilized to near capacity (or "Level 0 f Service E"). Instead, the worst noise situation usually occurs during periods of "Level of Service C" (LOS-C), which implies a situation of substantial traffic volume without severe restriction of speed and maneuverability. 4 " �~\ Table 3: Section M.P. Developments Likely to be Sensitive to Traffic Noise, and/or Construction Noise L/R Vicinit:i Oescri~tion Dist.+ to Exist.-Hw:i CL Dist.+ to Altern-:- CL's Impact by Change in Alignment Disbenefit No change Benefit Uncertain 1 384.4 384.6 386.7 387.8 R L R L China Row Wood Camp Cottonwood Canyon Lower Twin, Bridge Pic"nic Area (1 site) Campground (10 sites) 2 cabins , Picnic Area (6 sites) 70 90 110 160 60 90 115-200 135 2 393.2 393. 8 394.8 396.1 396.6 396.9 401.0 402.4 R L L R R L R L USU Forestry Station Tony Grove Red Banks Rigby Hollow Brash Canyon Franklin Basin Amazon Hollow ';Jillow Spring Cabins (seasonal) Home (guard station) Campground (16 units) Cabin 3 cabins Cabin 2 cabins UOOT tvlaint. c,amp 750 470 160 210 120 1,450 170 600 750 475 160 210 120 1,450 170 600 3 405.1 405.8 408.0 408.2 408.3 408.4 409.1 409.1 410.5 411.1 411.1 411.7 411.7 R R R L 700 430 500 130-800 250 170 350 520 420 230 200 100 170 900 630 600 125-800 250-310 170 350-900 520-1,000 420 230 200 100 170 Ul R L L L R L R R R Summit ' Summit Bridgerland Village Bridger land Village Bridger land Village Bridgerland Village Bridgerland Village Bridgerland Village S. of Garden City Garden City Canyon S. of Garden City Garden City Gard'en City Sunrise Campground Sunrise Picnic area Cabin 5 cabins Cabin Cabin Cabin Cabin Ranch home Ranch home Cemetery Home Home No No No No No No No No change change change change change change change change Benefit Benefit Benefit No change Benefit No change Benefit Benefit No change No change No change No change No change i 1 ! I 1 ! ! I �Intui ti vely, this assertion seems reasonable when one recalls these two facts (assuming a road of fixed capacity): (1) that traffic volumes exceeding LOS-C cause congestion with a corresponding decrease in average vehicle speed; and (2) that noise is related to both volume and speed. It follows that a gain in noise from more vehicles is compensated by a noise loss from speed reduction. Thus, the maximum volume at LOS-C (also called the maximum service flow C· or MSF -C) typically gives the worst noise scenario. If improvements are made to increase the capacity of the road, then the MSF-C and corresponding maximum noise level also increase. However, it would take a doubling of volume to increase noise only 3 decibels (a barely noticeable increase). MSF-C values for the three sections in Logan Canyon have been documented in CH2M Hill's _U_S_-8~9~,__L_o~g~a_n~_C_a_n~y~o_n__~S_t_u_d~y_:~__ T_e_ch_n_l_·c_a l __ Memorandum (Draft, December 1986), pp. 6-12 and 6-17. They are as follows: Table 4: Maximum Service Flow C (vph) Section 1 Existing conditions Maximum improvements* Section 2 Section 3 386 · 532 Roadway Geometrics 306 412 267 412 *(Include: 4' shoulders, 12' lane width, increased passing.) Affect of Vehicle Type. The summer average weekday traffic composi tion includes approximately 84% passenger cats and light trucks (IT), according to the CH2M Hill study previously cited, p. 5-15. This is the least noisy class of vehicles (on a per vehicle basis). Recreational vehicles (RV) and medium trucks (MT) are similar enough acoustically to be combined; these represent 13% of the traffic mix. The noise emission level of an average MT is about 11 decibels higher than the average car. The remaining 3% of the vehicles are heavy trucks (HT); they are the noisiest class because they are typically diesel powered. In the proportions indicated, the MT class as a whole contributes slightly more noise than ei ther the HT · or automobile class. This fact may have significance in the discussion of noise abatement. Table 5 uses the traffic composition just described to portion the MSF-C traffic volumes from Table 4 into flow rates per vehicle type. 6 �,--_..- _ .. . Table 5: Traffic Mi~ for Maximum Service Flow C (vph) Section 1 Existing Conditions Maximum Improvements Cars & LT MT & RV HT 324 50 12 447 69 16 257 40 9 346 54 12 224 35 8 346 54 12 Section 2 Cars & LT MT & RV HT Section 3 Cars & LT MT & RV HT (LT = Light Trucks, MT Recreational Vehicles.) = Medium Trucks, HT = Heavy trucks, RV = Affect of Speed. Noise is related to vehicle speed; and average vehicle speed is related to highway design (affecting level of service), vehicle type, and gradient. Table 6 (on the following page) gives the estimated average speeds for these three parameters. Although the effects of speed on traffic noise are somewhat different for various vehicle types, approximate general effects may be condensed into the following rule of thumb for Logan Canyon: for each 5 mph increment of average speed increase, the overall average noise level will increase about 2 decibels. Affect of Gradient. Climbing a' grade takes extra power, and a byproduct of power is noise. Published research findings have shown that at normal highway speeds, only heavy trucks have a signi ficantly higher noise level on grades. F:HWA' s Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-l08) suggests the following HT adjustments for uphill grades: Add dB 0 +2 +3 +5 Grade 0-2% 3-4% 5-6% 7+% The FHWA makes no adjustment for downgrade direction. However, heavy trucks frequently use engine brakes, particularly on the steep grades in 7 �Logan Canyon. Engine brake noise can vary considerably because of variations in engine and muffler design, load, speed, and driver. Consequently, the noise emission level for downhill trucks is not as predictable as is noise for uphill trucks. For simplicity in this report, it is assumed that heavy trucks in both directions emit noise that increase with gradient, according to the FHWA values given above. Table 6: Estimated Bidirectional Average Upgrade Speed for MSF-C Section 1 Cars/LT Generally 2% average grade 35 mph (or less) existing design, no passing 35 mph design improvements 40 mph design option 45 mph design option 50 mph design option Twin Bridges locality, 5.5% average grade 35 mph (or less) existing design, no passing 35 mph design improvements 40 mph design, option, climbing lane 45 mph design option, climbing lane 50 mph design option, climbing lane MT/RV HT 39 39 39 39 39 39 41 43 45 41 43 45 41 43 45 30 30 35 35 37 30 30 30 31 32 39 41 43 45 39 Section 2 Generally 2% average grade 55 mph existing design 60 mph design option Beaver MP-404 50 55 60 49 Mtn. Road to UDOT Maint. Camp and to Summit, 4-7% grade mph existing design mph design option mph design option 49 49 51 51 51 32 47 32 40 42 32 34 35 30 35 35 37 30 30 30 31 32 49 Section 3 Generally steep (to 7% grade) 35 mph (or less) existing design, no passing 35 mph design improvements, ample passing 40 mph design option 45 mph design option 50 mph design option 30 39 41 43 45 39 Affect of Road Widening. Adding shoulders or widening traffic lanes symmetrically in both directions from the centerline of the Logan Canyon highway will not significantly change the noise level heard by a receiver who is farther than 25 feet from the centerline. 8 �However, adding a passing lane to one side of the roadway will shift the noise in the direction of the passing lane. For receivers at a distance of 50 feet or less from the highway centerline, a passing lane (nearest the receiver) can add nearly 1 decibel to the overall Leq. This noise effect · rapidly diminishes at increasing distances from the highway. At 100 feet there is essentially no noise increase. According to Table 3, only one site is close enough to be affected by noise from a passing lane - China Row Campground. However, no passing lane is proposed for the vicinity of China Row; therefore road widening has no significant effect on noise for this project. Noise Level Predictions. Traffic noise is related to the distance that a receiver is from the highway, as shown by the following chart. Affects of Level of Service, vehicle type, speed and gradient (previously discussed) are included in the approximate generalizations on the chart. Sound decays at a predictably uniform rate with increasing distance. For Logan Canyon vicinity the rate is estimated to be about 4.5 dB loss for each doubling of distance. Unimproved road sections one and three are described best by Line C on the chart. Line C intersects the 67 dbA standard at a distance of 40 feet from the centerline. Any human activities farther than 40 feet will likely not exceed the standard if the ·adjacent road section does not exceed a 35 mph design. Although Section Two (unimproved) is a high speed design, other factors in general reduce the noise to that of Line B. Any improvements to Section Two will likely increase noise to Line A. Line A receivers need to be at least 75 feet away from the centerline in order to minimize speech interference. General Noise Impacts There are three criteria that determine the severity of noise impact: absolute level, relative increase, and fluctuation. All three are interrelated. Absolute Level. Interference with speech is the basis for the standard or criterion level of 67 dBA. This criterion affects many human · activities in the canyon. China Row campground is near enough to the highway to be impacted· by highway noise, especially if some highway improvement alternatives bring traffic somewhat closer to the campground. All other developments seem to be at sufficient distance (greater than 75 feet) to not be seriously impacted by the average traffic noise level. 9 �_10.!....:! • ...!.~~~..j, . ..! ....) ....... "J ..... _o....L." .. _ '"""-_ ... .. ·_ ............. ~_ v_ . . . ... ~ -..J .......... ' - ' ..... ~ . . .. . . ....... ~ ••••# . __ • • - - . - •• - - - - . _ _ - - , . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _•_ _ _- . -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .~---- - - .._-_ ~ ~ II",,,.,,,. I,'·· ...... '.~ 'IF ··11·' II ( " 'h / ...) .",.il iI ·I. Line A Line B Lin e C 50 40 35 to I :t.~. ~. to 60 mp h d e sign a lternatives. mph des i gn alter na t i ves. mph d e sign a lternatives or posted speed restricted 40 mph or le ss. ~ ,.Q ro tJ1 60 Q) H rl Q) :> Q) H Q) 50 til -.-; 0 z 40 100 Distance to Highway 10 1,000 CenterliI ~ e (ft) �Relative Increase in Noise. Long term residents would be more likely to notice a traffic noise increase resulting from a highway improvement than would seasonal residents, campers and other recreation oriented users of Logan Canyon. However, any change in traffic noise level in the vicinity of permanently occupied homes is not likely to be noticed by the residents. Many cabin .dwellers at Bridger land Village (Section 3) may notice a drop in traffic noise, if the alignment is shifted from its present location. Generally, cabin dwellers will benefit acoustically from either of the two most feasible alternative alignments (F-3 to the north of the village, or G-3 to the south). Fluctuation. Although the level of noise is higher in daytime than nighttime because of higher daytime use and daytime traffic in the canyon, heavy truck noise is more noticeable at night. This phenomenon is in part because there are less cars to partially mask the peak noise levels of the trucks. Consequently, the difference between highest noise peaks and background level are much more in contrast and therefore, noticeable at night. This type of noise impact will generally affect residents and campers more than day-use recreationalists. So the people to benefit most are the ones who ' can be farthest from the traffic. Again, Bridgerland Village is a beneficiary of a change in highway alignment. Special Problem Sites China Row Campground. A shift in alignment of about 10. feet closer to the campground is one option being considered for highway improvement. From the noise prediction chart on the preceding page, it can be seen that shortening the distanc~ to the highway centerline fro~ 70 feet to 60 feet will increase the noise level about 1 decibel to 64.5 dbA on Line C~ ·If highway improvements also ' cause the noise to raise from Line C to Line B (40 mph design), then the Leq will increase 2 additional decibels to approximately 66.5 dBA. Any highway improvements to a higher design speed than 40 mph (Line A) would have to consider noise abatement at this camp site. Lower Twin Bridge Picnic Area. A shift in alignment of approximately 25 or 30 feet closer to the picnic area is being considered as part of a new bridge and roadway alignment. From the noise prediction chart on the preceding page, it can be seen that shortening the distance to the highway center line from 160 feet to 130 feet will normally (at grade) increase the noise level nearly 1.5 decibels from 58 to about 59.5 decibels on Line C. However, the picnic area is at least 30 feet below the grade line of the highway. Thus, the picnic area is in an · acoustical shadow zone, causing an approximate 7.5 db reduction of the Leq on the existing alignment to about 50.5 dBA. 11 �Neglecting any vertical change in alignment, the horizontal shi ft will cause more of an acoustic shadow. The result would be a Leq of 59.5 . - 9 (shadow) dB = 50.5 dBA approximately, which is the same Leq as for the existing alignment. Thus, the Lower Twin Bridge Picnic Area will not be seriously impacted by tra ffic noise from any of the proposed improvements. Even with a change to Line A (worst noise situation), the predicted Leq will not exceed 63 dBA, which is below the 67 dBA standard. In summary of noise impacts, . only China Row Campground may need to consider noise abatement, and this will be only in the case of greater than 40 mph design. Noise Abatement Noise abatement will not need to be planned into the project design for any location, regardless of the highway improvement options under consideration, with one possible exception. China Row picnic area (one table) will need noise abatement consideration for a design speed of over 40 mph. The feasibility of physical noise . protection (wall or berm) at China Row is poor. A noise wall or berm would crowd the already very small picnic site, and would be likely out of character with the surrounding trees. The most effective noise control is speed control at this location. Therefore, it is recommended that the d~sign speed not exceed 40 mph at this location. Construction Noise Construction is likely to occur on a piecemeal si te-speci fic basis, beginning with bridge replacements and detour roads. Perhaps as early as summer of 1988 if funds are available, a specific site improvement could get underway. Acoustically, there is an advantage of this pattern of construction. People can still use the canyon in general for its diversified recreation and avoid noise from specific sites under construction. Construction · noise will probably be quite localized for two reasons. Sloped terrain and canyon walls will reflect the sound vertically and away from sensitive activities. · A few sites do have vertical cuts through rock which tend to channel sound horizontally; however, these sites are only found occasionally in the canyon, and fairly restricted to Section One. The second reason why construction noise will probably be very localized is that there is an adequate amount of shielding from vegetation and natural topographic features to impede sound transmission. 12 �Equipment used for construction will be very diversified to meet the needs of the various types of construction acti vi ties and in various types of terrain~ Explosives and rock drills are expected to be used in various places. Standard precautions will be implemented to protect people from shock _waves and noise. All construction activities are subject to UDOT amended standard speci fication Iil07. 25' "Noise and Vibration Control." Summary Noise Abatement will not need to be planned into the project design for any location, regardless of the highway improvement options under consideration, with one possible exception. China Row picnic area will need noise abatement consideration for a design speed of over 40 mph. Because of the impracticality of physical noise barriers at China Row, it is recommended that the design speed not exceed 40 mph at this location. No serious noise problem is expected from construction activities. 13 �TYPICAL SOURCES Gunfire (to mark8man) NOISE LEVEL (dBA) HU~IAN RESPONSE CONVERSATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS at 3 feet 140 Painfully loud Noise loudness or intensity is measured in units called decibels, abbreviated dB or db. It is logarithmically based, so 10 decibels increase in sound intensity level means 10 times the acoustic energy from the source(s). I-bwever, human ears perceive the increase 0 f 10 db as a doubling of loudness. The db scale covers the range of human hearing from 0 (the bottom limit of hearing ability for an average person with good hearing) to 130 (when sound energy causes pain to the ears). The following table relates noise levels associated with typical noise sources. Typical human response and conversational problems are also given. Just as the human eye sees the color yellow best because it is in the center of the visible spectrum, so the human ear hears sounds better that are in the center of the human audio range of musical notes or pitches. Consequently" a weighting scale has been devised, and is internationally used in many sound measurements that tries to take this unequal human pitch perception into account. It is called the "A-weighted decibel scale" abbreviated "dbA," "dBA" or sometimes "dB(A)." 130 120 , Di8cotbeque Auto Horn (3') Hearin/Z Damage (leu than IS min/day exposure) 110 100 Hearing Damage (l-hr/day exposure) 90 Rearing Damage (S-brs/day exposure) SO Food Blender Annoying Sbouting Heavy Truck (50') Very Loud Car 40 mph (20') 70 Telepbone Use Difficult Railt'd Voice Normal Voice Office 60 Low Voice Ligbt Auto Traffic (100') 50 Quiet Whisper 40 All sound measurements and predictions in this report use the standardized dBA. Very Soft Wbisper Library 30 Broadc8Stin/! Studio Very Quiet 20 10 0 Just Audible Thre~hold of Hearing �APPENDIX TO LOGAN CANYON NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM * * * * * * SPEED ANALYSIS This Appendix is to determine approximate vehicle speeds throughout thp canyon for various scenarios. The results are for use in Table 6 (on page 8) of the ·oise Technical Memorandum. Advisory speed signs for specific curves are ignored for thee noise analysis. Average speed for sections of roarlway under LeveJ of Service C maximum flow is the target of thjs Appendix. highl-lay can he Each of the three main sections of a nontypical subclassified into a typical gradient type and gradient type as follows: a. h . Section 1: Mountainous terrain Generally 2% average grade. T\,J i 11 B rid g e s ] 0 C 8.1 i t .Y 5. 5 % (a. p pro x . ) a v e rag e g r ad P. 1 • Sectio~: Nostly roll ing terra in some mounta inous Generally 2% average grade. Beaver Mtn. Road to UDOT Maintenance Camp, and MP-404 to summit· 1 4 -7% grade (4.5% average) 1 a. h. a. b. Section 3-: Mountainous terrain Generally steep, to 7% (5.5% avg.). Base of mountain to Garden City, 2% average grade, restricted speed. This is a relatively short section and can be jgnored. Existing Conditions Since passing lanes are not provided anywhere in Logan Canyon above Right Hand Fork, it follows that cars must fall into gueues behind heavy trucks and slow recreational vehiclesa (RV's) on uphill gradients. Since heavy trucks (HT) are the slowest class of vehicles on uphill grades, HT speed also is the limiting factor for all other vehicles on uphill grades. The AASHTO Green Book" (A Po 1 icv.~~1.~Geo~.~ r ic___~ s ig_ of. n Highways and St.reets, 1984, p. 255) sho\.;rs that. H1' on long grades steeper than 2% will travel about 20 mph. 1/ For downhill and on grades less than 2%, it is assumed that all vehicles can go the speed consistent with level of service C, as det.ermpned by TAble 8-] and footnot.e b of the Hi d"hwav~aci ty f"] a !!.y a 1 ~ T R B S .~ cia l_y e J2 0 r t , #: 2 0 9, p . 8 - 5 : �Cars/LT Section 1 3f> mph de9, j gn MT/RV 50 mph design opt>ion 8 . 39 41 43 45 41 43 45 3f> mph design 39 35 41 35 ~~ 7 39 improvements 40 mph design option 45 mph desjgn opt, j on b. improvement,s 40 mph design opt. ion 45 mph design opt. i on 50 mph design option Se c tion 43 45 39 HT 39 41 4 :i .:If> 30 30 31 32 OJ L., a. 60 mph design option . b. 55 mph design option 60 mph design opt. ion 51 51 49 40 42 34 35 39 41 43 45 35 35 37 39 47 Sect/ - -- -- - - - - ion :3 35 40 45 50 mph design opt. ion mph def i gn option s mph design option mph design option 30 30 31 32 Conclusion and Summary For acousticaJ evaluation, speed nf vehicle classes have been calculated at JJoS-C condi~jons for various riesign options . These speeds are compiled int.o Table 6 (p. 8) of the Technical Memorandum for Noise. �Design Speed Level nO 55 52 50 50 4:1 48 46 40 35 44 40* 30 35* Rolling Mountainous 51 -1-9 49 ,~ 'I 47 45 43 43 40 35* :39 45 -ll :35* * Hi"I C 's Average speed has been c hanged from directions given 1n t.han footnote b i n order to not exceed the design speed by more 5 mph. Average speed of both directions of traffic for each section or subsectjon of roadway is sufficiently accurate to estimate noise levels. Co nsequently, the didirectional average speeds for pxisting conditions are calculated to be as follows: Sect jon 1 a b 39 30 Section 2 a 49 b 32 Sect jon 3 all 30 It is assumed for the noise study that all design jmprovemen t options will include at least som e li mited passing opportunities in all sections of the c anyon . Co nsequently, heavy trucks no long e r "'Tould Ijmit the speerJ of fast.er vehicles totally . The AASHTO Green Book, p. 258 shows that for long steep RV's (and medium trucks as s umed) cannot maintain a speed greater than 40 mph. grades~ In t he following table, as done for existing co nditions, a hidirec tjo na] average speed is estimatpd for the given de s ign speeds . Medium trucks and recreational vehicles are assumeed to have speeds betwee n those o f cars an d heavy trucks . � 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/84">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/84</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 2337523283 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 14625351 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 Memorandum from Stan Nuffer, April 29, 1987 Description An account of the resource Memorandum from Stan Nuffer with the review of traffic forecasts, scoping comments, dates for meetings, technical memorandum on noise and speed analysis. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Neil, John D.A. Nuffer, Stanton S. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Forsgren, Clifford Nuffer, Stanton S. Silver, Duncan Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Roads--Design and construction Traffic engineering Logan Canyon Environmental Study Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Correspondence Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available CH2M Hill (Firm : Salt Lake City, Utah) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1987-04-20 1987-04-29 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan Canyon (Utah) Utah United States Cache County (Utah) Rich 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 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_010.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/2af4e42beaecdeaf61c9374e230e3eef.pdf 7beae6f3d27e14514fcaba6889b8de7a PDF Text Text ClfMHILl MEMORANDUM c.. TO: Interdisciplinary Team FROM: Stan Nuffer DATE: June 11, 1987 SUBJECT: Logan Canyon Environmental Study PROJECT: ~kev(~~( t2/~ UQA) B21163.FO The following items are submitted for your review in preparation for the next Interdisciplinary Team meeting scheduled for June 22 at 1:30 p.m. in Brigham City. Your support and cooperation are appreciated. We realize the agenda for the meeting is a very ambitious one. 1. Minutes of May 18 meeting (page 2 was missing from the June 4 mailing) Alternatives Technical Memorandum (Chapter 8) 3. Air Quality Technical Memorandum 4. Land Use and Recreation Technical Memorandum 5. Terrestrial Resources Technical Memorandum 6. Aquatic Resources Technical Memorandum 7. Biological Assessment by Stanley L. Welsh The Socia-Economic and Visual Resources Technical Memoranda ......... will be sent as soon as possible. BOT538/063 �LOGAN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY ID TEAM MEETING MINUTES May 18, 1987 ATTENDANCE: Jack Spence, Sierra Club Clark Ostergaard~ USFS Fred LaBar, USFS Mark Shaw, USFS Don Duff, USFS Bill Helm, Unattached John Neil, UDOT Lynn Zollinger, UDOT Duncan Silver, FHWA Gale Larson, Valley Engineering Cliff Forsgren, CH2M HILL Margaret Johnson, CH2M HILL Sheldon Barker, CH2M HILL ITEM 1 - REVIEW OF MINUTES The minutes of the May 4 meeting were reviewed. ITEM 2 - DISCUSSION OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS PORTION OF THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Margaret Johnson led the discussion of the socio-economic technical memorandum. Margaret ' distributed an updated draft of the memorandum which addressed the vlri tten comments received from Steve Flint. Jack Spence had a number of additional comments which were discussed. One of the primary items to come out of the discussion was the need to provide information on driving times, using alternate routes, from various locations on the Wasatch Front to Bear Lake. This is not information that is generally available. It was suggested that the "Friends of Bear Lake" a property owners association with many members in Weber, Davis, and Salt Lake Counties be contacted to see if they could provide some information. The Friends of Bear Lake may also be able to provide information on the number of recreational homes in the area which are owned by people along the Wasatch Front. ITEM 3 - REVIEW OF THE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM ADDRESSING NOISE John Neil led the discussion. The memorandum focused primarily on picnic and camping areas. John indicated that the only problem area would be at China Rowand that it would be impossible to mitigate above 40 mph because the picnic area SLCI02/32.1 �l MEETING NOTES Page 2 was so close to the road. He also expressed an interest in locating areas of the river near the road where there might be some fishing. The memorandum does not address fisherman, because John does not know specifically where they are likely to be. It is also not known if the background noise from the river is great enough to· muffle roadway noises. There was some discussion of dispersed recreation (hiking, crosscountry skiing, etc). Jack Spence was not sure that it had been addressed. Duncan Silver pointed out that there were enough sites evaluated and enough information presented to allow someone to estimate the noise level at a particular location where someone might be hiking or skiing. ITEM 4 - REVIEW OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS PORTION OF THE TERRESTRIAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANQUM Jack Spence indicated that bald eagles used Logan Canyon (as well as Blacksmith Fork) and that he had seen Peregrine Falcons in Tab Hollow. It was also reported that Stan Welch from the BYU Herbarium had been in the Canyon and had located two additional sites with Maquire Primrose. He will finish his report within the next 2 or 3 weeks. Mr. Welch has indicated to UDOT that his primary concern would be during construction. Increased dust during the pollination season could cause problems. More detailed information will be in his report. ITEM 5 - TRAFFIC FORECASTS Cliff Forsgren and Jack Spence will review the traffic projections and Cliff will report at the next meeting. OTHER ITEMS OF DISCUSSION Duncan Silver asked for a list of uncompleted items. There have been a number of things discussed in meetings and no record kept ot their completion. (Note: the list will be distributed at the next ID Team meeting) . Duncan Silver also told the ID Team that FHWA was going to require FHWA visual resource criteria be used in the study. A copy of the criteria had been provided to UDOT. BOX16/D.501 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/74">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/74</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 1390690475 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 1732213 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 May 18, 1987 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource Minutes from May 18, 1987 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Review of minutes, discussion of the existing conditions portion of the socio-economic technical memorandum, review of the technical memorandum addressing noise, review of the existing conditions portion of the terrestrial resources technical memorandum, traffic forecasts, and other items of discussion. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Nuffer, Stanton S. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Johnson, Margaret Spence, Jack Neil, John Silver, Duncan Welch, Stan Forsgren, Clifford Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 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 1987-06-11 1987-05-18 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan Canyon (Cache County, Utah, United States) 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 4 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_Fd4_004.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/915af361a8c48ff09aa639eb706c566e.pdf 1de2ef4eaf6e9e963be28c17bf74447e PDF Text Text LOGAN CANYON MINUTES OF ID TEAM MEETING October 20, 1986 Attendance: Stan Nuffer, CH2M HILL Cliff Forsgren,CH2M HILL Fred LaBar, USFS Gale Larson, Valley Engineering Duncan Silver, FHWA John Neil, UDOT Lynn Zollinger, UDOT Rudy Lukez, Sierra Club Al Stilley, Northern Engineering Item 1 - Review of Minutes Stan Nuffer led the discussion of the minutes of the previous ID team meeting. Rudy Lukez referred to the questions on the 1930's traffic data that had been discussed during the last ID team meeting. Rudy said that his interest in the data was curiosity only and he did not think that it would be of any value in the present work. ( Duncan Silver asked for some clarification of the visual criteria. He also felt that there should be some discussion on how the criteria , were developed and used. Clark Ostergaard, who prepared the information on visual criteria, was not present and the question was deferred until the next meeting. Rudy Lukez asked Fred LaBar if the Forest Service wanted to have more camping spaces in the Canyon? Fred said that there is a proposed group camping site in the Beaver Creek area. The camp site will hold between 200 and 300 campers. If the money was available, the site would be constructed as soon as they could get someone on site to build it. Fred also said that the Beaver Mountain Ski Area had plans to increase their camping sites. Lynn Zollinger asked if there was information available on the expected increase in camping and skiing. Fred said that he would get the information for Lynn. Duncan Silver asked if the increase in skiing would impact the DHV. Since skiing occurs during the low traffic volume period, there would be no impact on the DHV. There was also some discussion of the possibility of electric power reaching some private land in Stump Hollow and Utah State University's plans to expand some University facilities in the Canyon. 1 �Item 2 - Discussion of Safety Analysis Technical Memo ( The Safety Analysis Technical Memo was discussed. Duncan Silver asked if it would be necessary to look at individual sites if the entire road was brought up to standard. Cliff Forsgren answered that in most cases it would probably not be necessary to look at individual sites'. Duncan then suggested that individual sites be given a detailed examination only if spot improvements were considered in a given area. Item 3 - Study Goals and Objectives Stan Nuffer introduced the subject and led the discussion. A handout listing goals and objectives for component and alternative development was distributed. This included illustrations of existing, standard and modified standard cross sections. An outline of possible alternate components was also distributed. Duncan Silver was not certain how the environmental constraints would fit into the development of alternates. It was pointed out that the visual criteria was nearly completed and the environmental constraints would be developed concurrently with the component and alternative development. ( There was a lot of discussion on how alternates should be developed and what the overall goal should be. It was pointed out that if significant improvements were to be constructed, the goal would be to achieve a level of service C for the year 2010, realizing that it would probably not be possible in every case. Duncan Silver suggested that a "standard" roadway be designed, with LOS C throughout the Canyon. Where that was not environmentally possible, alternates could be developed to improve the road as much as possible without damaging the environment. Stan Nuffer suggested that the "modified standard" which was used in the lower part of the canyon be used to prepare a • "baseline" alternate. Duncan Silver pointed out that the modified standard did not allow the drainage and other maintenance features needed to protect the road base. Lynn Zollinger said that UDOT would accept the modified standard in order to maintain continuity along the roadway. Rudy Lukez made a motion that CH2M HILL develop a baseline alternate using the modified standard. Duncan Silver wanted to be certain that UDOT understood that using a modified standard meant sacrificing maintenance standards which might impact the road. He also said that the decision to use a modified standard as the baseline must be well documented. Dismissing highway standards without adequately addressing them can be challenged just as easily as dismissing environmental problems without adequate study. 2 �( There was also some discussion of the design speed. Stan Nuffer suggested a minimum design speed of 40 mph except in the first 7 or 8 miles where Fred LaBar said the Forest Service has already evaluated a 40 mph speed limit and found it unacceptable. It was finally determined that a modified standard section, with a design speed of between 35 and .40 mph, depending upon conditions within the Canyon, be used as the baseline alternate. Item 4 - Discussion of Geotechnical Investigations Al Stilley, from Northern Engineering and Testing, gave a report on the geologic mapping and the drilling program which was just getting underway on the alternative alignments from Bear Lake Summit to Garden City. Areas along the existing alignment where improvements could be made will also be investigated. Item 5 - Alternate Routes to Logan Canyon John Neil reported that he had been given the assignment to look at alternate routes to Logan Canyon. John said that he was just beginning his study. Rudy Lukez suggested that John contact a Mr. Wendall Anderson in Logan. Mr. Anderson is apparently familiar with some previous studies investigating a route through Blacksmith Fork Canyon ( The next meeting will be held at the Ranger District office in Logan at 3:00 p.m., prior to the public meeting in Garden City at 7:00 p.m. SLC-STN/03 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/41">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/41</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 1272711171 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 2030189 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 October 20, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource Minutes from October 20, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Review of minutes, discussion of satety analysis technical memo, study of goals and objectives, discussion of geotechnical investigations, and alternate routes to Logan Canyon. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource LaBar, Fred Larson, Gale Silver, Duncan Neil, John Zollinger, Lynn Lukez, Rudy Stilley, Al Forsgren, Clifford Nuffer, Stanton S. Subject The topic of the resource 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 1986-10-22 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_11.pdf Highway 89; https://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; https://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; https://highway89.org/files/original/b6b02807fd9c8b69467ca7c15d49c978.pdf 5e1973b65d6dae49dbd6e6c9d8d76b24 PDF Text Text LOGAN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY MINUTES OF ID TEAM MEETING November 17, 1986 ( Attendance: Cliff Forsgren, CH2M HILL Fred LaBar, USFS Clark Ostergarrd, USFS Gale Larson, Valley Engineering Duncan Silver, FHWA John Neil, UDOT Lynn Zollinger, UDOT Jim Naegle, UDOT Steve Flint, Audubon Assoc. Item 1 - Review of Minutes Two typographical errors were identified and Mark Shaw pointed out that he was in attendance at the last meeting, but was left off of the attendance list for the minutes. Item 2 - Alternate Route Technical Memo John Neil led the discussion of this item. There was some confusion about how the alternatives were defined. The text did not agree with the figure. It was determined that the most logical alternative was a combination of Alternate A and Alternate B. If an alternate route through Blacksmith Fork Canyon were to be considered, a route from Hyrum to Laketown through Hardware Ranch and Cottonwood Canyon would appear to have the most promise. It was agreed that the study of alternate routes should be postponed until the fu~l transportation potential of Logan Canyon (consistent with environmental constraints) was developed. John Neil made the motion to accept the memo, with the alterations made in the meeting, and its recommendations. Gale Larson seconded the motion and the voting was unanimous. John will modify the memo to reflect the teams comments. Item 3 - Public Involvement Summary Memorandum Cliff Forsgren led the discussion of the memo which had been prepared to summarize the public involvement program to date. Ducan Silver suggested that the verbal comments received during public meetings be summarized also. Stan Nuffer asked what sort of documentation the Forest Service would need in order to be satisfied that there had been adequate public participation. Fred LaBar said that the results of the scoping meetings would be required before the Forest Service 1 �( could do much to evaluate the progress of a public participation program. Clark Ostergarrd suggested that there be some provision in the memo to identify those comments directed towards preserving threatened and endangered species and maintaining the River. Duncan Silver pointed out that there were not a lot of differences in some of the column headings, for example the two columns dealing with traffic flow ("Flow is Problem" and "Improve Flow") and the two columns dealing with safety. He also suggested showing the total number of responses in each column. Item 4 - Public Involvement/Scoping Meetings Duncan Silver asked for a status report on the technical memorandums which have been prepared to date. The status report should indicate if they have been finaled and approved. This report will be prepared for the next meeting. John Neil asked if a notice of intent was required for a scoping meeting. If a notice of intent is required, it should be prepared as soon as possible if a meeting is to be held in early January. Stan will report to the team at the next meeting on what the legal requirements are for notification of a scoping meeting. Jim Naegle suggested holding the information sheet on "Issues and Concerns" until after the scoping meetings. Steve Flint pointed out some items that needed attention on the fact sheet that had already been mailed. Table 1 needed some clarification on how averages were determined during periods when the counter was not in service and Table 2 had a mislabled footnote. Steve was also concerned that some people would not understand that a level of service D or E was not for low or even average flow conditions, but represented some percentage of time when flows were above the projected average. More explanation of this concept will be included in the next fact sheet. Item 5 - Review of Existing Roadside Parking Stan Nuffer presented an inventory of existing roadside parking areas. The parking areas were identified by milepost and included both planned parking and "\vide spots" which appeared to have been used for parking. This list of parking areas was compiled in the summer and mayor may not represent winter parking patterns. Fred LaBar said that the Forest Service has an inventory of winter parking areas which he will provide to the team members. 2 �( Clark Ostergarrd said that it would be important to know whether the parking areas were near the recreational feature and which side of the road, relative to the River, they were on. There are also areas that the Forest Service considers problem areas and would just as soon not have parking nearby. When alternates are developed, the information on location of existing parking and need for planned parking will be used to define the alternates. ITEM 5 - Areas Meeting Criteria For Climbing Lanes Stan Nuffer presented the results of an analysis of the need for climbing lanes in the Canyon. AASHTO standards were used as the evaluation criteria. If AASHTO standards are met, there would be a climbing lane the entire length of the Canyon. There was some discussion on the improvement in LOS that might be expected with the placement of new climbing lanes. Lynn Zollinger asked if there was anything in the standards that addresseed the distance between the lanes. Jim Naegle indicated that he thought that was dictated by the conditions at the particular site. ( Duncan Silver pointed out that climbing lanes are used to improve the LOS and minimize speed reduction on upgrades. If a climbing lane were constructed, the LOS would be raised to C in that particular stretch of road. However, when the end of the lane was reached, the LOS would go back to D or E. It does not appear that the capacity problem can be solved for the entire Canyon and that minimizing the speed reduction where possible should be the priority. Stan will prepare a speed profile for the Canyon. It was concluded that the team members do not believe that LOS C can be attained through the entire Canyon. If it were possible to construct a climbing lane everywhere the climbing lane criteria were met, LOS C would be possible, however there are places where a third lane is unacceptable. ITEM 7 - Introduction of Layout of Roadway Widening and Alignment Improvement Component Stan Nuffer discussed the widening and straightening component that will eventually be used, along with other components, to define alternatives. Lynn Zollinger asked if the requirements for vertical sight distance had been checked. Stan indicated that it was underway. SLC-STN/03 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/30">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/30</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 2880054969 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 2120731 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 November 17, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource Minutes from November 17, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Review of minutes, alternate route technical memo, public involvement summary memorandum, public involvement/scoping meeting, review of existing roadside parking, areas meeting critera for climbing lanes, and introduction of layout of roadway widening and alignment improvement component. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource LaBar, Fred Ostergard, Clark Larson, Gale Silver, Duncan Neil, John Zollinger, Lynn Naegle, Jim Flint, Steve Forsgren, Clifford Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon Roads--Design and construction 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 1986-11-17 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_13.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/851e91620b9c3bbf3d51ce77f805d748.pdf 40d1e76dd05e8c4b86582fa13941bcf2 PDF Text Text LOGAN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY MINUTES OF ID TEAM MEETING December 8, 1986 ( Attendance: Cliff Forsgren, CH2M HILL Stan Nuffer, CH2M HILL Fred LaBar, USFS Clark Ostergaard, USFS Mark Shaw, USFS Gale Larson, Valley Engineering Duncan Silver, FHWA John Neil, UDOT Lynn Zollinger, UDOT Jim Naegle, UDOT Rudy Lukez, Sierra Club Jack Spence, Sierra Club Item I - Review of Minutes Stan Nuffer conducted a revi~w of the minutes of the previous meeting. Items that were not included in the minutes and should have been were: o Item 5. The Forest Service is going to provide the team members with a copy of the _ parking and recreation master plan . . o Item 6. The first time "LOS" is used, it should ' be proceeded by Level of __ Service. o Item 6. The last sentence was changed to more accurately reflect the fact that much of the Canyon will not accommodate a climbing lane. ( In addition to the corrections, Duncan Silver clarified his request .for a status report on the Technical Memorandums. What he had in mind was a "scorecard" which simply listed the subject and status (draft, received, approved, final). Jack Spence also asked for some clarification from the Forest Service on their desire to reduce parking in some areas of the Canyon. Fred LaBar indicated that there was a need to maintain adequate parking for fishing and other recreational purposes, but some types of parking, (hunters for example) need to be better controlled. Item 2 - Discussion of Issues and Concerns Copies of written comments received to date were distributed as were copies of the transcripts of the two public meetings. Cliff Forsgren explained the way the comments are being tabulated. There is some difficulty in tabulating the verbal 1 �( comments received at the public meetings because not all speakers identified themselves. It is possible that some persons, who were not identified, spoke up at more than one time and those views were tabulated on each occasion. Another difficulty is the best way to handle questions from people who did not express a view. The 1.0. Team members were asked to review the transcripts and tabulations and make any suggestions they might have. Item 3 - Discussion of Schedule for Completion of the Scoping Process Stan Nuffer explained that the scoping requirements are different for the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) than for an Environmental Assessment (EA). There is a lengthy notification process for an EIS. Stan suggested that, if the I.D. Team felt that an EIS would ultimately be required, the EIS scoping process should be started. Duncan Silver did not feel that there was enough environmental information available to make any kind of preliminary determination on the need for an EIS. Clark Ostergaard indicated that he would like to know if there was critical spawning habitat in the River that might be impacted by some alternatives. Jack Spence pointed out that in maintaining the Forest Service visual standards, the· improvements that were possible may not be significant enough to require an EIS. After considerable discussion it was decided that the environmental inventories describing the affected environment need to be reviewed in a manner similar to the previous, techn~cal ,~~morandums. ~fter there memorandums have been reviewed, a determination of the appropriate scoping process could be made. During the discussion, Duncan Silver also indicated that tFHWA would probably review the final document (EA of EIS) as if it were as EIS. Jim Naegle said that information would be helpful to UDOT because it appeared that there would be 'a . lengthy review period regardless of the type of final report. Item 4 - Update of Final Visual Classification Clark Ostergaard presented some updated information on visual classifications in the Canyon. He brought his latest mapping effort that showed the visual classifications between Right Fork and Ricks Springs. Duncan Silver asked if the visual retention criteria allowed for "upgrades" in one area to offset "downgrades" in another. For example, if as a result of the roadway improvements, a portion of road that had a classification of 2 was raised to 3, would it be possible at another location to allow a 5 before construction to be a 4 after. Clark was not sure how to address that and would have an answer for the next meeting. 2 �( Item 5 - Layouts for Component Widening and Alignment Improv.ement from Ricks Springs to Garden City Stan Nuffer reviewed the plan and profile of the widening and alignment improvement component from Ricks Springs to Garden City. Much of this component has a climbing lane. Lynn Zollinger said that if a climbing lane were to be constructed, intersections would also require special attention. NOTE: Prior to the beginning of the meeting John Ellsworth from Utah State University made a presentation of a computer simulation technique for depicting topographic modifications. SLC-STN/03 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/18">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/18</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 1780284587 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 1806274 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 December 8, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource Minutes from December 8, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Review of minutes, discussion of issues and concerns, discussion of schedule for completion of the scoping process, update of final visual classification, and layouts for component widening and alignment improvement from Ricks Springs to Garden City. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource LaBar, Fred Ostergard, Clark Shaw, Mark Larson, Gale Silver, Duncan Neil, John Zollinger, Lynn Naegle, Jim Lukez, Rudy Spence, Jack Ellsworth, John 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 1986-12-08 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_14.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/8f968d60cdc9d53a78511f0453e5060c.pdf 17519abc26a00f45a2595f956e6385f6 PDF Text Text LOGAN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY . MINUTES OF ID TEAM MEETING January 27, 1987 ( Attendance: Sheldon Barker, CH2M HILL Stan Nuffer, CH2M HILL Torn Haislip, CH2M HILL Fred LaBar, USFS Mark Shaw, USFS Clark Ostergaard, USFS Gale Larson, Valley Engineering Duncan Silver, FHWA Jim Naegle, UDOT Lynn Zollinger, UDOT Howard Richardson, UDOT Steve Flint, Audobon Assoc. Bill Helm, Item 1 - Review of Minutes There were no cornnlents on the minutes of the previous meeting. ( Steve Flint expressed concern over the traffic forecast and felt that an exponential forecast is not statistically supportable from the traffic data for the Logan Canyon stations shown in the technical memorandum. He was also concerned that level of service projections based on that growth rate would be misleading. He suggested a time series analysis and using data as far back as available. Stan Nuffer reviewed the methods and assumptions used when the technical memorandum was presented and accepted by the I.D. Team in August 1986. In the original analysis, we had looked at a number of areas to forecast growth including traffic data for a number of highways including stations on U.S. 89 outside of the Canyon. Also data from regional economic and local land use forecasting was used, which forecast a growth rate in the 2 percent range. All of these sources of data were used to arrive at the proposed rate. Concern has been expressed that the 2 percent rate was too low when compared against projections made by UDOT in the past. After considerable discussion, a motion was passed with one negative vote to retain at 2 percent (1.95) experimental growth rate. Stan agreed to look at what effect differences in the projected ADT would have in capacity determinations. Steve also suggested that Section 2 be broken into two subsections, for capacity analysis which will be considered. The assumption for one percent buses in the traffic needs to be supported by data or dropped. Lynn Zollinger suggested we check with Idaho and Wyoming on what projections they are using. 1 �( Duncan Silver asked what process will be used in determining visual impacts, and if there are any rules or guidelines that can be followed. Clark Qstergaard ·said that the · existing analysis shows what is there and what should be preserv~d. Each area will have to be handled on a case-by-case basis for each of the alternatives. Mitigation measures may be possible in some areas. Due to the length of discussion on the above items, agenda items 2 and 3 were passed over. Items 2 and 3 Time was not available to review in the meeting. bers encouraged to read the material. Team mem- Item 4 - Continued Discussion of Alternatives Stan distributed a revised copy of the component and alternative development matrix showing the elimination of some alternates and modification of components in other. After considerable discussion the following alternates were agreed upon: Middle Canyon ( Alt Alt Alt Alt 1 2 3 4 No build Spot improvements Widen along existing alignment Widen and. improve align to 40 mph with advising 35 mph design where necessary Upper Canyon Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 4 No build Spot improvements Widen and improve existing alignment to 60 mph with lower advisory design speed where necessary Rich County Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 4 Alt 6 No build Spot improvements Widen and improve existing alignment to 40 mph with lower advisory design speed where necessary New north alignment with 40 mph basic but look at 50 mph if possible Spot improvements should be defined by location and improvement. ( 2 �( Fred LaBar was skeptical that a uniform 40 mph design in the middle Canyon would ever be acceptable to the Forest Service. SLC-STN/03i ( 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/9">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/9</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 2858595943 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 1585773 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 January 27, 1987 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource Minutes from January 27, 1987 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Review of minutes and continued discussion on alternatives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Barker, Sheldon Haislip, Tom LaBar, Fred Shaw, Mark Ostergard, Clark Larson, Gale Silver, Duncan Naegle, Jim Zollinger, Lynn Richardson, Howard Flint, Steve Helm, Bill Nuffer, Stanton S. Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 Roadside Improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon 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 1987-01-27 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_15.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/8e54cde9a729b8bcbee7bbf269c14697.pdf 78fd32fdb85006ad28f271c80d121feb PDF Text Text LOGAN CANYON MINUTES OF ID TEAM MEETING November 3, 1986 ( Attendance " : Stan Nuffer, CH2M HILL Cliff Forsgren,CH2M HILL Fred LaBar, USFS Clark Ostergarrd, USFS Dave Baumgartner, USFS Gale Larson, Valley Engineering Duncan Silver, FHWA John Neil, UDOT Lynn Zollinger, UDOT Jim Naegle, UDOT Steve Flint, Audubon Assoc. Jack Spence, Sierra Club Rudy Lukez, Sierra Club Wendell Anderson - Visitor Willis Tingey - Visitor Item 1 - Review of Minutes ( Stan Nuffer lead the discussion on the minutes of the last team meeting. The only item brought up related to the Safety Tech memo. Jack Spence suggested that it would be better to state that some locations along the highway had higher than average accident rates rather than higher than expected accident rates, since there was really no way of determining expected accident rates. Jack also had a suggestion on Table 10. If the level of confidence was going to be included as part of the table, there should be some explanation of what it meant. Steve Flint asked that the number of fatalities be included on Table 8, along with the number of fatal accidents. There was no other discussion on the minutes of the previous meeting. Item 2 - Discussion of Alternate Routes (to Logan Canyon) John Neil reported on his study of alternate routes from Logan to Bear Lake. He had invited Mr. Wendell Anderson and Mr. Willis Tingey to report on a study that they had made on the possibility of a route through Blacksmith Fork Canyon. The study was conducted at the request of former Governor Clyde. It was pointed out that a route from Logan to Sage Junction through Blacksmith Fork Canyon was 8 to 10 miles shorter and the maximum elevation was 500 feet lower than the existing route through Logan Canyon. Both Mr. Anderson and Mr. Tingey felt that Logan Canyon would not be able to handle all of the traffic that it would be asked to handle and that an alternate route should be considered. 1 �John Neil reported that UDOT planners had told him that the simplest way to develop an alternate route would be to develop some additional recreational areas that needed the access. The construction cost of an alternate route was estimated at $1.5 to $2.0 million per mile. Lynn Zollinger agreed that Logan Canyon will not be able to carryall of the traffic that will ultimately travel between Bear Lake and the Wasatch Front. However it has not been determined how much more, if any, traffic Logan Canyon can handle before the impacts become unacceptable. Lynn suggested that there not be any more consideration of alternate routes, at least until it has been determined that there will be need for more capacity than Logan Canyon can carry. Jack Spence agreed with Lynn, there did not seem to be the need for additional capacity at the present and that study of alternate routes was not warranted. If it was determined that there was major action of the same scale required in Logan Canyon then the examination of alternate routes would be warranted. Other discussion about the Blacksmith Fork alternate involved possible environmental problems with the River, Hardware Ranch and the lack of room in Left Hand Fork. It was decided that this discussion would be summarized for the record in a memo and action to be taken at the next meeting. ( Item 3 - Discussion of Goals and Objectives Tech Memo Stan Nuffer lead the discussion of the overall goals and objectives that had been presented in a draft technical memorandum at the last ID team meeting. The first topic · was the minimum speed that the "baseline" alternative would be designed for. There was some question about a 35 mph mini, mum in the lower part of the canyon. Fred LaBar said that a 40 mph minimum speed had been considered before in that section and had been found to be acceptable. Jim Naegle asked if the modified standard section had been used in the previous study. Some thought that it had but none were certain. Duncan Silver suggested that copies of the 1979 proposal and analysis be distributed to members of the ID team so that the team had an opportunity to review the past work and decide whether the past study was still valid. This approach would be better than just rubber stamping a study that most on the team were not familiar with. It was also suggested that the AASHTO recommended minimums be included in the table on page 3 of the memo. Rudy Lukes asked where there would be minimum speeds greater than 40 mgh. Stan Nuffer said that in some areas the posted speed is currently 55 mph and that he thought we could maintain that speed in those areas. 2 �( There was also some discussion on what "minimum" meant. Some expressed concern that the minimum set now would be absolute regardless of other consequences. Stan explained that in order to establish roadway features (curves, etc.) minimum speeds needed to be set. If the impacts of designing a roadway for one "minimum" are unacceptable then a new "minimum" speed would be required. Minimum speeds are not meant to be fixed at the beginning of the study and then not redefined if needed. The technical memo illustrated standard sections and modified standard sections for 40 mph. It was suggested that sections for 35 and 55 mph also be included. Steve Flint expressed concern that delineators would make parking areas unuseable. Duncan Silver said that the need for parking should be evaluated and planned for where needed. Rudy Lukes wondered if the dugway was really a good place to consider a climbing lane. Duncan Silver said that there should be an inventory of the needs for climbing lanes before looking at possible locations. To conduct the inventory the team should: 1. Establish criteria for the selection of possible locations. 2. Identify those sections which may meet the criteria. 3. Identify the possible environmental constraints at those sites. Slow vehicle turnouts were also discussed. Lynn Zollinger indicated that the turnouts need to be placed where those using the turnouts will have a good view of the roadway in order to safely get out of and back into the traffic. The final item on the goals and objectives memo was a suggestion to add a section on the need for recreational parking. Fred LaBar said that the Forest Service could help identify where recreational parking was needed. Item 4 - Alternate Alignments from the Summit to Garden City Stan Nuffer said that the Archeologist was preparing an alternate alignments survey. 3 �- Item 5 - Preview of Garden City Public Meeting Presentation ( Cliff Forsgren previewed the slide presentation which was to be used to introduce the project to those who attended the meeting in Garden City. SLC-STN/03 4 � 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/7">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/7</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 773442565 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 2464336 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 November 3, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource Minutes from November 3, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Review of minutes, discussion of alternate routes to Logan Canyon, discussion of goals and objectives tech memo, alternate alignments from the summit to Garden City, and a preview of Garden City public meeting presentation. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource LaBar, Fred Ostergard, Clark Baumgartner, Dave Larson, Gale Silver, Duncan Neil, John Zollinger, Lynn Naegle, Jim Flint, Steve Spence, Jack Lukez, Rudy Anderson, Wendell Tingey, Willis Forsgren, Clifford Nuffer, Stanton S. Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 Roads--Design and construction 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 1986-11-03 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_12.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/88b5488d478636205e8ce14e01579f45.pdf 19011acafaa7164f953244e00c6aff32 PDF Text Text L0~AN CANYON MINUTES OF ID TEAM MEETING September 22, 1986 ( Attendance: Stan Nuffer, CH2M HILL John D'Amico, CH~M HILL Cliff Forsgren,CH2M HILL Duncan Silver, FHWA Fred LaBar, USFS Mark Shaw, USFS Clark Ostergard, USFS Gale Larson, Valley Engineering John Neil, UDOT Jim Naegle, UDOT Howard Richardson, UDOT Rudy Lukez, Sierra Club Item 1 - Review of Minutes Cliff Forsgren indicated that there had been some inconsistencies discovered in the accident rate calculations and that it would be better to hold off on presenting any information to the public until the questions were answered. ( Item 2 - Traffic Characteristics Stan Nuffer lead the discussion of the Traffic Characteristics Technical Memorandum. During the discussion Rudy Lukez questioned the statement about the winter traffic count representing a "background" traffic flow. After some discussion, Duncan Silver wondered if the issues of background flow was really relevant to the study. Duncan asked that it be made clearer in the memorandum which flows were winter, which were summer and which were annual. It was concluded in the memorandum that the Design Hourly Volume (DHV) would be 14 percent of the average daily summer traffic. It was also noted that the 14 percent figure tracks very closely with other recreational roads. Item 3 - Traffic Capacity Cliff Forsgren presented the results of the traffic capacity analysis. It was pointed out that the primary purpose of the analysis was to try to describe the conditions that exist in the Canyon under various traffic volumes. To do this, a Level of Service approach was used. Levels of service from A to E were examined. It was determined that all sections of the road offer a level of service D at the present time and that by the year 2010 level E would be 1 �experienced in most of the Canyon. Rudy Lukez asked if level of service D was really undesireable. Cliff indicated that a desired level of service would need to be established as a goal and that this had not been done. Before alternatives can be developed this must be accomplished. Item 4 - Miscellaneous Duncan Silver felt that there needed to be a list developed of general environmental factors. This should be completed before the development of alternatives begins. Stan Nuffer indicated that the environmental team is gathering information and there should be some basic understanding before serious alternative development began. SLC-STN/03 ( 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/5">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/5</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 3868173708 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 1034056 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 September 22, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource Minutes from September 22, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Review of minutes, traffic characteristics, traffic capacity, and general environmental factors. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource D'Amico, John Silver, Duncan LaBar, Fred Shaw, Mark Ostergard, Clark Larson, Gale Neil, John Naegle, Jim Richardson, Howard Lukez, Rudy Nuffer, Stanton S. Forsgren, Clifford Subject The topic of the resource Signs and signboards 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 1986-09-22 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_9.pdf Highway 89;