25 50 1396 https://highway89.org/files/original/dfa981976f28267ccfd6ffa5232880e7.pdf 38b8834b8a8561e4a00bc75849639670 PDF Text Text MEETING NOTICE ~ public meeting regarding the improvement study for U.S. 89 through Logan Canyon will be held Monday Novem- ~ighway ber 3, at 7:30 p.m. in Garden City Hall in Garden City, Utah. The Utah Department of Transportation and its engi- neering consultant for the project, CH2M HILL, will present the data and findings from the first task of this study and the determination of transportation needs for the segment of the highway between Right Fork and Garden City. Preliminary findings of public concerns and environmental issues regarding road improvements in the Canyon and alternative alignments from the Bear Lake Summit to Garden City will also be reported. Questions and comments will be entertained. A fact sheet is being prepared for the public on the project mailing list. This meeting will cover essentially the same areas that were covered in the public meeting held on September 23 at the Logan City Hall. Contact: Cliff Forsgren CH2M HILL 363-0200 SLC88/06 � 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/2">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/2</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 3666797796 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 448226 Bytes Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound MEETING NOTICE ~ public meeting regarding the improvement study for U.S. Highway 89 through Logan Canyon will be held Monday November 3, at 7:30 p.m. in Garden City Hall in Garden City, Utah. The Utah Department of Transportation and its engiå_neering consultant for the project, CH2M HILL, will present the data and findings from the first task of this study and the determination of transportation needs for the segment of the highway between Right Fork and Garden City. Preliminary findings of public concerns and environmental issues regarding road improvements in the Canyon and alternative alignå_ments from the Bear Lake Summit to Garden City will also be reported. Questions and comments will be entertained. A fact sheet is being prepared for the public on the project mailing list. This meeting will cover essentially the same areas that were covered in the public meeting held on September 23 at the Logan City Hall. Contact: Cliff Forsgren CH2M HILL 363-0200 SLC88/06 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 Highway 89 improvement study meeting notice (1 of 2) Description An account of the resource Notice for a public meeting regarding Highway 89 improvements in Logan Canyon, 1980's Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Forsgren, Cliff Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah)--History Public lands--Utah--Logan Canyon--History Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon United States Highway 89 Logan Canyon (Utah) Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Press releases Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available CH2M HILL Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1985-1989 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan Canyon (Cache County, Utah, United States) Utah United States United States Highway 89 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, COLL MSS 133 Box 10, Folder 6 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/xv07669">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv07669</a> Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives 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 USU_MSS133Bx10_Item_1.pdf Highway 89 Improvement studies Meeting Notice Press release https://highway89.org/files/original/0f9a25b85877ee921aad39990f04bca7.pdf a41a39509bdd9a32c42ef0a39c914199 PDF Text Text MEETING NOTICE A public meeting regarding the u.s. Highway 89 through Logan Canyon improvement study will be held Tuesday, September 23, at 7:30 p.m. in Logan City Hall. The Utah Department of Transportation and its engineering consultant for the project , CH2M HILL, will present the data and findings from the first task of this study, the determination of transportation needs for the segment of the highway between Right Fork and Garden City. Preliminary findings of public concerns and environmental issues regarding road improvements in ' the canyon will also be reported. and comments will be entertained. Questions A fact sheet is being prepared for the public on the project mailing list. Contact: Cliff Forsgren or Margaret Johnson CH2M HILL 363-0200 � 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/43">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/43</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 2100321693 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 392203 Bytes Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound MEETING NOTICE A public meeting regarding the u.s. Highway 89 through Logan Canyon improvement study will be held Tuesday, September 23, at 7:30 p.m. in Logan City Hall. The Utah Department of Transportation and its engineering consultant for the project , CH2M HILL, will present the data and findings from the first task of this study, the determinaå_tion of transportation needs for the segment of the highway between Right Fork and Garden City. Preliminary findings of public concerns and environmental issues regarding road improvements in 'the canyon will also be reported. Questions and comments will be entertained. A fact sheet is being prepared for the public on the project mailing list. Contact: Cliff Forsgren or Margaret Johnson CH2M HILL 363-0200 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 Highway 89 improvement study meeting notice (2 of 2) Description An account of the resource Notice for a public meeting regarding Highway 89 improvements in Logan Canyon, 1980's Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Forsgren, Cliff Johnson, Margaret Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah)--History Public lands--Utah--Logan Canyon--History Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon United States Highway 89 Logan Canyon (Utah) Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Press releases Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available CH2M HILL Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1985-1989 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan Canyon (Cache County, Utah, United States) Utah United States United States Highway 89 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, COLL MSS 133 Box 10, Folder 7 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/xv07669">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv07669</a> Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives 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 USU_MSS133Bx10_Item_3.pdf Highway 89 Improvement studies Meeting Notice Press release https://highway89.org/files/original/78ba0c7298e32a197ba6ade52f55481a.pdf 5f4fa77c73dbb7faa06bb66e53ff31b7 PDF Text Text Meeting Format: o Introductions o Brief project history and background o Review of transportation needs Traffic volumes and characteristics Traffic projections Hi~h~ay capacities and levels of service Maintenance considerations Safety Deficient areas o Issues/Concerns Travel time/delays Safety Passing opportunities Slow vehicle turnouts Pedestrians and bicycles Roadside parking Maintenance Sr.l.O\\ removal Bridge replacement Roadway cuts and fills Scenic highway designation Visual Campground access Roadside turnouts Roadside trees (tree canapy) River protection/modification ~later quali ty Streams and vegetation Rare or endangered species Geology and soils Noise and air Historical and archaeological SLC85/l03 �I END STUDY j.~ 1 C',.. ~~ Me (fowville Valley '" LEGEND MILE POST_ 1365 ~ .~~~$J___iiiiZ2~~ei I ~ I MtLES FIGURE VICINITY MAP LOGAN CANYON STUDY j: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/37">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/37</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 810777790 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 2516129 Bytes Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound Meeting Format: Introductions Brief project history and background Review of transportation needs Traffic volumes and characteristics Traffic projections Highway capacities and levels of service Maintenance considerations Safety Deficient areas Issues/Concerns SLC85/l03 Travel time/delays Safety Passing opportunities Slow vehicle turnouts Pedestrians and bicycles Roadside parking Maintenance Snow removal Bridge replacement Roadway cuts and fills Scenic highway designation Visual Campground access Roadside turnouts Roadside trees (tree canapy) River protection/modification Water quality Streams and vegetation Rare or endangered species Geology and soils Noise and air Historical and archaeological SLC85/103 FIGURE VICINITY MAP LOGAN CANYON STUDY 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 Meeting agenda and map for Highway 89 in Logan Canyon, 1980's Description An account of the resource Meeting agenda and map of potential Highway 89 route through Logan Canyon, 1980's Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah)--History Public lands--Utah--Logan Canyon--History Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon United States Highway 89 Logan Canyon (Utah) Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Agendas (administrative records) Maps Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1985-1989 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan Canyon (Cache County, Utah, United States) Utah United States United States Highway 89 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, COLL MSS 133 Box 10, Folder 8 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/xv07669">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv07669</a> Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives 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 USU_MSS133Bx10_Item_4.pdf Highway 89 Impact studies Maps Meeting agenda https://highway89.org/files/original/02ed2591ea646071ff5d4f942eceb70e.pdf 05aa975c5f60a58da7ac898feeedc069 PDF Text Text MOTION MADE BEFORE THE LOGAN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL 5 January 1989 I move that this Council go on record in support of the Utah Department of Transportation(UDOT)and their consultants, and encourage them in their efforts to evaluate and upgrade all Logan City access and egress highways. � 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/23">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/23</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 765381464 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 310498 Bytes Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound MOTION MADE BEFORE THE LOGAN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL 5 January 1989 I move that this Council go on record in support of the Utah Department of Transportation(UDOT)and their consultants, and encourage them in their efforts to evaluate and upgrade all Logan City access and egress highways. 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 Motion to support UDOT upgrade of highways, January 5, 1989 Description An account of the resource Motion made before the Logan Municipal Council to support the Utah Department of Transportation in evaluating and upgrading Logan City highways, January 5, 1989. Subject The topic of the resource Logan (Utah)--History Logan Canyon (Utah)--History Public lands--Utah--Logan Canyon--History Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon United States Highway 89 Logan Canyon (Utah) Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Motions Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1989-01-05 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Cache County, Utah, United States) Logan Canyon (Cache County, Utah, United States) Utah United States United States Highway 89 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 COLL MSS 133, Box 45, Folder 8 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/xv07669">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv07669</a> Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives 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 MSS133Bx45Fd8_Item 2.pdf Highway 89 https://highway89.org/files/original/f98fa87296c1cc670f569a3e001cfc85.jpg a80995d45feb0d05e38886dce8bf9dc2 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 Dixie National Forest sign Description An account of the resource Southeast entrance portal to Dixie National Forest on Highway 89. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Dixie National Forest Subject The topic of the resource Signs and signboards--Dixie National Forest (Utah) Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Photographs; Black and white photographs Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Kane County (Utah) Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1937-1953 Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Southern Utah University Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource public domain Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Dixie National Forest Photograph Collection Type The nature or genre of the resource Image;StillImage Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context SUU_08b17i0654 Advertising and Marketing Highway 89 https://highway89.org/files/original/ab8ec5a614231d4efc83361565a1656b.jpg b1734f280a11ad309809006b1f9fe414 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Image Height 4204 Image Width Image Width in pixels 6581 Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by: Northern Arizona University. Cline Library. Scanning resolution Resolution in DPI 1200 Colorspace RGB or Grayscale, for example RGB Checksum A80D920B6DFC6CF98522282D130F2CFB File Size Size of the file in bytes. 189582588 Conversion Specs Scanned by Northern Arizona University. Cline Library using Epson Expression 10000XL scanner, display file is JPEG. Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2011-09-28 Purchasing Information Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item. To order a print or digital file of this item, please see Northern Arizona University. Cline Library's Reproduction Order Form at: <a>http://archive.library.nau.edu/cdm/ordering/#ordering</a> Local URL The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website <a href="http://cdm16748.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/cpa/id/93559">http://cdm16748.contentdm.oclc.org:80/cdm/ref/collection/cpa/id/93559</a> 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 Glen Canyon Subject The topic of the resource Dams--Arizona--Design and construction;Bridges, Iron and steel--Glen Canyon (Utah and Ariz.; Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Color transparency Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Northern Arizona University. Cline Library. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1963 ca. Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Glen Canyon Dam (Ariz.); Page (Ariz.); Navajo Bridge (Ariz.);United States Highway 89; Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1960-1969; 20th century; Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Northern Arizona University. Cline Library. Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. http://www.azarchivesonline.org/xtf/view?docId=ead/nau/Verkamp.xml Rights Holder A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource. Northern Arizona University. Cline Library. Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Digital surrogates are the property of the repository. Reproduction requires permission, please contact special.collections@nau.edu. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Verkamp family Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context NAU_145857.jpg https://highway89.org/files/original/4531572344a0a9cc2e745b1aa398801c.pdf f16a547d997c587b4cb942cd4cf2d35f PDF Text Text 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 written 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 "Friend~ 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 SLC102/32.1 �MEMORANDUM to Interdisciplinary Team Page 2 June 4, 1987 B21163.FO Future meeting schedule: Open - schedule as needed. NOTE: The review material outlined above will be sent to the team members by June 12, 1987. Because of the length of the agenda, we have scheduled a 5-hour meeting from 1:30 to 6:30 p.m. SLC102.d.301 " � 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/0">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/0</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 3408069427 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 995521 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. Reviewed minutes, discussed existing conditions, and reviewed technical memorandum addressing noise. Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 Roadside Improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1987-05-18 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 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_17.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/3669fe773d1da5a69efd43d9b278b632.pdf 38b8834b8a8561e4a00bc75849639670 PDF Text Text MEETING NOTICE ~ public meeting regarding the improvement study for U.S. 89 through Logan Canyon will be held Monday Novem- ~ighway ber 3, at 7:30 p.m. in Garden City Hall in Garden City, Utah. The Utah Department of Transportation and its engi- neering consultant for the project, CH2M HILL, will present the data and findings from the first task of this study and the determination of transportation needs for the segment of the highway between Right Fork and Garden City. Preliminary findings of public concerns and environmental issues regarding road improvements in the Canyon and alternative alignments from the Bear Lake Summit to Garden City will also be reported. Questions and comments will be entertained. A fact sheet is being prepared for the public on the project mailing list. This meeting will cover essentially the same areas that were covered in the public meeting held on September 23 at the Logan City Hall. Contact: Cliff Forsgren CH2M HILL 363-0200 SLC88/06 � 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/2">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/2</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 3666797796 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 448226 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 Garden City Highway 89 meeting notice Description An account of the resource Notice for a public meeting regarding Highway 89 improvements in Logan Canyon, 1980s. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Forsgren, Clifford Subject The topic of the resource Public lands--Utah--Logan Canyon Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon United States Highway 89 Logan Canyon (Utah) Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Press releases 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 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 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, Senator John P. Holmgren papers, 1985-1989, COLL MSS 133 Box 10 Folder 6 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/xv07669">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv07669</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 MSS133Bx10_Item_1.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/e9701891f7eb37342f32169e5673be6c.pdf e5a82b10c05843bf651f1ab69c9da36d PDF Text Text AGENDA INTERDISCIPLINARY STUDY TEAM JUNE- I0, 1986 1. Introduction 2. Review Scope of Work c General Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Task 5 Task 6 Task 7 An alysis ~-f Trq~s_portatio~ Need S--; Location Studies Geotechnical Considerations Public and Agency Involvement Coordination Environmental Assessment Documents 3. Schedule for Completion of Study 4. Interdisciplinary Team Schedule of Meetings 5. Public Information Meeting , ' Time Place J \)1\'( ~) + ~\ ..) " '~1~ \fJt!~) \(A(t\ '--\)\ 1\ v\ e..... SU.O;I\O'\!Y\" -\11\0\ \ J _ ) jvb· r -- BOT538/003 ) � 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/3">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/3</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 2201598742 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 412983 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 Agenda for interdisciplinary team June 10, 1986 Description An account of the resource A list of the agenda for interdisciplinary team meeting June 10, 1986. Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon United States Highway 89 Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1986-06-10 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. 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 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_Item_4.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/390efa1c5562c962da6d806f7c42bb38.pdf c806fc53a5620551340cf52392a9c7e7 PDF Text Text - LOGAN CANYON MINUTES OF ID TEAM MEETING September 8, 1986 ( Attendance: Stan Nuffer, CH2M HILL Cliff Forsgren,CH2M HILL Duncan Silver, FHWA Fred LaBar, USFS Mark Shaw, USFS Clark Ostergard, USFS Steve Flint, Audobon Society Gale Larson, Valley Engineering John Neil, UDOT Jim Naegle, UDOT Lynn Zollinger, UDOT Bill Helm Item 1 - Review of Minutes Duncan Silver suggested that the presentation of the roadway width data could be clearer. It is possible that someone could interpret it to mean an l8-foot pavement width, which is not the case. Item 2 - Draft Traffic Forecast Technical Memorandum A draft of the safety technical memorandum was distributed and Cliff Forsgren briefly explained the memorandum. The fundamental conclusion stated in the memorandum is that there are accidents occurring in Logan Canyon at a greater rate than the' average for similar roads in the state, but that the accidents are not generally serious. In the memorandum, it is recommended that during the alternative development portion of the study, safety related alternatives be considered at locations identified. Lynn Zollinger suggested that the original accident reports should be reviewed in order to better define the location and cause of the accidents. Duncan Silver suggested that it was probably not necessary to go into greater detail except for specific improvements. Duncan asked that a day/night breakdown of accidents be included in the memorandum. Bill Helm thought that it would be helpful to expand Table 6 to include the number of each type of accident (severity 1 through 5). Duncan also pointed out that roadway improvements to not often reduce the number of acci~e~ts, but will reduce the severity. 1 �( -Steve Flint asked what effect the latest safety improvements had on the accident rate. Duncan pointed out that since the safety project had been completed within the past few months, it -would not be possible to estimate the impact, with any degree of confidence, for 3 or 4 years. There was some discussion about the chevrons which had been placed to mark one particularly sharp curve, and whether they had improved the safety of that curve. No one was certain when the chevrons were installed so that question could not be answered at the meeting. Duncan also suggested that something be said about the number of accidents which may be occurring during peak traffic periods. Steve Flint asked for copies of the "quick list". Cliff will see that he gets copies. Item 3 - Review of Manual Traffic Counts The date of the first public information meeting was set for September 23, 1986. Duncan Silver suggested that we should take the opportunity at the meeting to ask questions. " "How long does it take you to get through the Canyon now?" "How much faster do you want to get through the Canyon?" "What are you willing to give up to get through that fast?" Bill Helm said that it might be helpful if there was an opportunity to discuss the types of improvements that might be necessary to upgrade the road or eliminate some problems. The public would then have an idea of what might happen if some types of improvements were implemented. The next ID team meeting was scheduled for September 22, 1986 at 3:00 p.m. at the District Office in Ogden. 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/4">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/4</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 3185562639 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 1217099 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 8, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource Minutes from September 8, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Review of minutes, draft traffic forecast technical memorandum, and manual traffic counts. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Silver, Duncan LaBar, Fred Shaw, Mark Ostergard, Clark Flint, Steve Larson, Gale Neil, John Naegle, Jim Zollinger, Lynn Helm, Bill Nuffer, Stanton S. Forsgren, Clifford 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 1986-09-08 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_8.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; 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/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/b970ed308bcc7e4a95a0522e3180277b.pdf 486468370315d658c3d043b6e3b7cf25 PDF Text Text MEMORANDUM TO: Interdisciplinary Team FROM: Stan Nuffer DATE: February 11, 1987 SUBJECT: Logan Canyon Environmental Study PROJECT: B21163.DO The Sixteenth Interdisciplinary Team Meeting was held on January 26, 1987 at 3:00 p.m. at the UDOT District Office in Ogden, Utah. Enclosed are the minutes for your review. The next meeting will be held on Monday, February 17, 1987 at 3:00 p.m. at the UDOT District Office in Ogden, Utah. The agenda will be as follows: 1. Review minutes of January 26 meeting. 2. Outline of public presentation for scoping meetings to be held March 3 and 4. 3. Revi~w 4. Continued discussion of alternatives. of notice of int~nt, legal notice, letter to agencies, and fact sheet. Future meeting schedule: March 9 March 30 April 20 SLC91/d.ll0l - 3:00 p.m., Brigham City Hall - 3:00 p.m., District Office - 7:00 p.m., District Office �LOGAN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY MINUTES OF ID TEAM MEETING :January 27; 1987 Attendance: Sheldon Barker, CH2M HILL Stan Nuffer, CH2M HILL Tom 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 conunents 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 (l.9S) 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 a.sked what process will be used in determining visual impacts, and if there are any rules or guidelines that can be followed. Clark Ostergaard said that the existing analysis shows what is · there and what should be preserved. 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/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/11">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/11</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 2279681717 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 2032325 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 26, 1987 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource A memo from Stan Nuffer detailing the minutes from the Interdisciplinary Team meeting from January 26, 1987. Reviewed previous meeting's minutes and discussed alternatives. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Nuffer, Stanton S. 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 1905-06-09 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_11.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/f58ea00558b0fdddfb2b0744c5cee141.pdf 041f793de58a725edf01b37f4d6568aa PDF Text Text LOGAN CANYON STUDY INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM Study Team Members Phone Office/Home Mailing Address Stan Nuffer CH2M HILL (801) 363-0200 (208) 375-4710 P.O. Box 2218 Salt Lake City, Utah Commission Representative Todd Weston Utah Dept. of Trans. (80l) 752-6625 (801) 752-5442 285 Temple View Drive Logan, Utah 84321 Highway Preconstruction Engineer Lynn Zollinger Utah Dept. of Trans. (801) 399-5921 P.O. Box 2747 Ogden, Utah 84404 Environmental Engineer John Neil Utah Dept. of Trans. (801) 965-4227 4501 South 2700 West Salt Lake City, Utah 84119 Stan Nuffer CH2M HILL (801) 363-0200 (208) 375-4710 P.O. Box 2218 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 Recreation Fred Labar USFS, Logan (801) 753-2772 P.O. Box 448 Logan, Utah 84321 Geotechnical Allan Stilley North. Engr. & Test. (801) 298-9314 P.O. Box 281 North Salt Lake, Utah Sheldon Barker CH2M HILL (801) 363-0200 . Representat1ve a 0 f t h e Environmental Community Jack Spence Sierra Club (801) 750-1626 P.O. Box 3580 ~ogan, Utah 84321 Landscape Architecture Clark Ostergaard Wasatch/Cache N.F. (801) 524-5030 125 South State Salt Lake City, Utah Fisheries Biologist Mark Shaw Wasatch/Cache N.F. (801) 524-5030 125 South State Salt Lake City, Utah Ex-Officio Duncan Silver FHWA (801) 524-5141 Federal Highway Administration P.O. Box 11563 Salt Lake City, Utah 84147 Team Leader Transportation Planning Public Involvement P.O. Box 2218 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 84054 84101 �aAlternate Environmental Cornmun~ty Representatives Sierra Club Rudy Lukez (801) 863-3702 (801) 753-5568 Utah Wilderness Association Torn Lyon (801) 750-1603 Bridgerland Audubon Assoc. StevF! Flint Unattached Bill Helm Other Key Members of Consultant Team Principal in Charge (801) 752-2667 -"- John D'Amico (303 ) 771-0900 ~~fV\ \ l\..'...:. Environmental Torn Haislip \::\4,~M Environmental Planning (801) 363-0200 \;ll'-.L Mark Hill C\~).fV\ \~ '\.L (801) 363-0200 Margaret Johnson (801) 363-0200 \:: 1:\").1'V\ P.O. Box 3580 Logan, Utah 84321 Bl\..L P. O. Box 22508 Denver, Colorado 80222 P. O. Box 2218 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 P. O. Box 2218 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 P. O. Box 2218 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 P.O. Box 2218 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 Cliff Forsgren U' LL (801) 363-0200 Gale Larson Valley Engineering Inc. (801) 753-0153 168 North 100 East Logan, Utah 84321 Walt Jones North. Engr. & Test. (801) 298-9314 P. O. Box 281 North Salt Lake, Utah Jim Kuenzli (801) 298-9314 C'~~JV\ Geotechnical '-~~N\.. ~'LL- Hydraulics BOT538/002 Arlo Waddups Valley Engineering Inc. (801) 753-0153 P.o. Box 2218 Salt Lake City, Utah 168 North 100 East Logan, Utah 84321 84054 84101 � 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/12">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/12</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 3930385018 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 1015325 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 Logan Canyon Study interdisciplinary team Description An account of the resource A list of the interdisciplinary team for the Logan Canyon study. Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 Logan Canyon (Utah) Roads 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 1970-1989 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Utah Logan Canyon (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 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_Item_2.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/345df334492263536d6e96ce9771db92.pdf b8f508c7b6cd0253b1219eb55ddbcce9 PDF Text Text MEMORANDUM TO: Interdi~ciplinary Team FROM: Stan Nuffer DATE: February 11, 1987 SUBJECT: Logan Canyon Environmental Study PROJECT: B21163.DO The Sixteenth Interdisciplinary Team Meeting was held on January 26, 1987 at 3:00 p.m. at the UDOT District Office in Ogden, Utah. Enclosed are the minutes for your review. The next meeting will be held on Monday, February· 17, 1987 at 3:00 p.m. at the UDOT District Office in Ogden, Utah. The agenda will be as follows: 1. Review minutes of January 26 meeting. 2. Outline of public presentation for scoping meetings to be held March 3 and 4. 3. Review of notice of intent, legal notice, letter to agencies, and fact sheet. 4. Continued discussion of alternatives. Future meeting schedule: March 9 March 30 April 20 SLC91/d.1101 - 3:00 p.m., Brigham City Hall 3:00 p.m., District Office - 7:00 p.m., District Office � 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/15">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/15</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 411790803 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 433553 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 Cover page for minutes of January 26, 1987 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource Cover page for minutes of January 26, 1987 Interdisciplinary Team meeting from Stan Nuffer. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource 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 1987-02-11 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. 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_14.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/1ae6806e3de179f10bbc0234fa823820.pdf 6ac516f039a32c7a923789718bf06c86 PDF Text Text LOGAN CANYON MINUTES OF ID TEAM MEETING August 25, 1986 Attendance: Stan Nuffer, CH2M HILL Duncan Silver, FHWA Fred LaBar, USFS Steve Flint, Audobon Society Jack Spence, Sierra Club Cliff Forsgren, CH2M HILL Gale Larson, Valley Engineering John Neil, UDOT Jim Naegle, UDOT Lynn Zollinger, UDOT Rudy Lukez, Cache Group Sierra Club Howard Richardson, UDOT Todd Weston, UDOT Item 1 - Review of Minutes Duncan Silver suggested that there be no more discussion on roadway maintenance and that the tech memo be written so that the team could go on to other items. Lynn Zollinger indicated that the material placed along the river was not bladed into the river but rather bladed to the side to establish a roadway shoulder. There was no other discussion on the minutes. Item 2 - Draft Traffic Forecast Technical Memorandum Steve Flint presented written comments on the draft memorandum and a copy was presented to each team member present. Jack Spence indicated that he had tried several methods to , try and establish a trend using annual and non-summer ADT's and found that the scatter of the points was too great to draw any conclusions. From a statistical standpoint a correlation was not found. However, given the data available, he could not recommend an approach which would be any better than those described in the memo. Duncan Silver felt that the methodology used was adequate and that the written comments received should be incorporated into the memo and this portion of the study concluded. There was agreement on use of the 2 percent compounded growth for making traffic projections. ( There was some discussion on how and when the design hour volume would be e?tablished. Cliff Forsgren explained that it was planned to select the design hour volume as part of the capacity evaluation. The 100 highest hour volumes for 1 �several of the past years are being plotted and will be available _ by the next meeting. -- The design hour volume will be determined at that time. Item 3 - Review of Manual Traffic Counts Stan Nuffer reviewed the manual traffic count data. The manual counts have been completed and the data will now be reduced. Duncan Silver asked how a traffic profile would be developed through the Canyon. Stan explained that the data from the permanent station and the manual counts would be correlated to establish a profile and directional split through the Canyon. Stan pointed out that the hourly directional split appears to follow an urban distribution. Item 4 - Review of Existing Roadway Features Stan Nuffer distributed illustrations of typical road crosssections at mile posts through the Canyon and explained that this information would be used to establish capacity and level of service. The discussion focused primarily on the design speed and how and when it would be established. Stan Nuffer indicated that it would be desirable to keep the speed as uniform as possible through the Canyon, but that may not be possible. It was explained that the design speed is usually a function of lane width and horizontal and vertical alignment. Lynn Zollinger asked when the alternate routes from the Summit to Garden C~ty would be considered.- Stan Nuffer explained that it would occur during the alternative development task which was yet to come. The 1 inch = 500 feet mapping will not be available until mid September. General Discussion Jack Spence expressed some concern ab6ut whether or not there would be enough information available to hold the first public involvement meeting in early September. It was decided that since the first meeting had not been officially scheduled to wait until the information was available to schedule the public involvement meeting. The next ID Team meeting will held in Brigham City. SLC76/07 2 � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Local URL The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website <a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/17">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/17</a> Purchasing Information Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item. To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a> Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2013 Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, at 800 dpi. Archival file is PDF (800 dpi), display file is JPEG2000. Checksum 1462470818 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 1345956 Bytes Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Minutes from August 25, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource Minutes from August 25, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Review of minutes, draft traffic forecast technical memorandum, manual traffic counts, existing roadway features, and general discussion. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Silver, Duncan LaBar, Fred Flint, Steve Spence, Jack Larson, Gale Neil, John Naegle, Jim Zollinger, Lynn Lukez, Rudy Richardson, Howard Weston, Todd Forsgren, Clifford Nuffer, Stanton S. Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 Roadside Improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon Traffic engineering Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1986-08-25 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Utah United States Logan Canyon (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1980-1989 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 27 Folder 2 Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Libraries Photograph Curator, phone (435) 797-0890. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Highway 89 Digital Collections Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context MSS148VIIIB27_Fd2_Page_7.pdf Highway 89; 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/e478b777f4fba0992742ca0dd63d25af.pdf 713db28c5e93332d64fbd27457cdeef7 PDF Text Text EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF WORK LOGAN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY GENERAL The work shall consist of preparation of a mental assessment, together with ancillary posed highway improvements to the existing way between Logan and Garden City in Cache in Northern Utah. draft environstudies, for pro40-mile-Iong roadand Rich Counties The consultant will act .as an arm of the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) and report directly to the UDOT Engineer for Location and Environmental Studies. Work will be performed in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), CEQ regulations, and appropriate directives from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS). The consultant will use an ~nterdisciplinary approach (CEQ 1502.6) to prepare the draft environmental document. UDOT will be continuously involved in interdiscipline discussions and activities. The consultant will organize study groups to include members as outlined below: Task No. 1,2,4,5,6,7 1,2,4,5,6,7 1,2,6 1,2,6 1 2,4,6 3 4 4,6 6 6 ! Discipline Specialty of Study Team Member Team Leader Commission Representative Highway Preconstruction Engineer Environmental Engineer Transportation Planning Recreation Geotechnical Public Involvement Representative of the "Environmental Community" Landscape Architecture Fisheries Biology A l~ ~ l~~=--::=--___ (E~-o f f icio) _ _ 7 Eoitor- 7 Writer 7 Graphics 7 (Reviewers) Provided By Consultant UDOT UDOT UDOT Consultant USFS Consultant Consultant Local Representative USFS USFS or Consultant FHWA Consultant Consultant Consultant ~/USFS/ OT Work required of the consultant will include applicable items as listed in the FHWA Technical Advisory T6640.8 (February 24, 1982 and subsequent revisions thereto). Document formatting shall also follow FHWA Technical Advisory T6640.8. The work to be performed has been broken down into the following seven tasks. �, ~". .." .. . . .. ......'. . . .' '-, TASK DESCRIPTIONS TASK 1: ANALYSIS OF TRANSPORTATION NEEDS The following factors contributing to undesirable traveling conditions are to be reviewed. After obtaining relevant readily available information from the UDOT Statewide Planning Section, the UDOT Division of Safety and the Utah Department of Public Safety, the following five topics shall .be covered: o Safety - Locations within the project limits, considered to be unsafe, will be identified. Accidents will be evaluated as to type, time of occurrence, severity, and possible causes. The resulting evaluation will correlate accident characteristics and geometric features and determine which accidents were caused by rock, soil, or snow materials moving onto the highway. A comparative analysis using UDOT summary data will weigh accident rates with those of one to two other state highways of a similar nature. Raw data, consisting of specific accident reports for high accident locations provided by UDOT, may be used in the analysis. o Maintenance - A 3-year record of annual maintenance costs will be provided by the Maintenance Division of UDOT for the purposes of the consultant developing: Per mile costs for corridor, Specific locations with unusally high costs, Statewide costs for a comparative analysis. The locations of adverse conditions that contribute to high maintenance costs will be located on topographic alig?ment maps. Maintenance cost data available from UDOT will be complemented by subjective interviews with UDOT District One maintenance personnel. Substandard Geometrics - The consultant shall identify and appraise specific substandard geometric locations. '\ v~,(~ (V\oV1J\) 1 ~oC;· p~ UDOT shall make available to the consultant, a road log filmstrip of the existing highway and all ~ available "as built" plans covering the length of the project. ': .. , '- " . . "-. . . �I ' o / Congestion The intensity and regularity of congestion will be determined in terms of Level of Service. The analysis will be based on procedures described in TRB Special Report 209 and will include: ~C~ pi"~'L ~~ Highway Capacities: Levels of Service C, r(, ~ ndrE will be determined for the length of ~ N~kN - ~~ project. Vehicular Demand: Present demand will be established, based on data, from the permanent traffic counter No. 362, located west of Garden City and from on-project counts to be taken by the consultant. Two locations, Beay er Mountain Ski area and Ri t F k wi ii e surveyed in the winter months for 10-hour periods on 2 week days and 2 weekend days. Two additional locations will be surveyed in the summer months for 10-hour periods on 2 week days and 2 weekend days. These shall reflect hourly peaks, vehicular types, and intersection turning movements. Traffic Projections: Traffic demand for the year 2010 will be estimated from information supplied by . UDOT. (~\Js.-\ co\\~<-~l"'~") Levels of Service: Present and year 2010 levels will be determined and expressed in both peak and average hours. Other Observed Needs and Deficiencies: As the consultant becomes familiar with the highway section, other deficiencies may become evident and if so, they are to be noted in the environmental document. An Analysis of Transportation Needs will be included in the Technical Appendix (described in T6640.8, Attachment, page 25) and a summary of transportation problems will be included in the draft document under "Purpose of the Keen for p_ction" (see T6640.8, Attachment, pages 7-8). TASK 2: LOCATION STUDIES (tv\l"'lMV~' ) In this task the consultant, with assistance from UDOT, FHWA, and the USFS, will prepare a transportation plan for the corridor. In addi tion to the "No--A .ction II a J ternati ve, up tc iivF 2 ff i tiorRl alterna~~v0~ will be devel ope d th2t will iEcorrcr2tE= t ]~ ~ fc' ) J owing components: �Hand Fork to Garden City Spot improvements to existing roadway Resurfacing and resigning of existing roadway Widening along existing alignment, including slow moving vehicle lanes, passing lanes, and/or minor alignment changes. Reconstruction along existing alignment Summit to Garden City Two new routings, including routes to the south or north of the existing highway The ex~sting UDOT mapping at a scale of 1" = 100', with 2-foot contours, will be used for studies of the existing roadway. From the summit to Garden City, mapping at a scale of 1" = ~OO' with 10-foot contours will be used. The aerial photography obtained by UDOT in 1985 will be used as the basis for the mapping. If viable routings are identified, that UDOT determines to need more detailed mapping and studies, the scope, costs, and fee .of this work will be negotiated as additional work under this . agreement. Cost comparisons for each al ternati.vE' , in,cludin '} the "No-Action" alternativ~, will be developed for construction costs, user costs, and benefit/cost ratios adjusted to the present consumer price index. The recommended methodology found in A MANUAL OF USER BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF HIGHWAY AND BUS-TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS - AASHTO, 1977, will be used. This comparative analysis will consider the following: o Benefits from reduced travel time, o Benefits from reduced vehicle operation and road maintenance costs, o Benefits from reduced number of accidents, Benefits from scenic viewers (i.e., economic bene· fit from people driving to Logan Canyon to view fall colors, fish, hunt, etc., whose satisfaction comes from less development or a less-than-standard highway) . All alternatives will be developed to a level of detail, comparable to each other. The end product of Task 2 will be a transportation plan containing preliminary maps and profiles (1" = 200' on clear film) showing each alternative routing; a matrix of environmental trade-offs; comparisons of engineering details relative to each alternative routing; �and anticipated contrasts to the existing conditions. This plan will be included in a Technical Appendix, with a summary appearing in the environmental document under "Alternatives Including Proposed Action." TASK 3: GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS A geologic and topographic strip map (based on USGS 1:24,000-scale maps) of sufficient detail to show major geologic features of the entire study corridor, with particular emphasis on the east end will be prepared. For each geological formation or mappable unit depicted, a brief description of engineering characteristics, as they relate to construction and maintenance problems, will be made. Preliminary and soil investigations performed by the consultant will include test borings, slope stability and settlement analyses, soil and rock sampling, laboratory analyses, and examination of groundwater conditions. A brief summary of geotechnical analysis will be included in the Technical Appendix, with a summary of the findings incorporated into Task 6, as appropriate. ~~~\ \ eN\ ' \ IS~ <g The field investigations for this task are is based on use -of an all-terrain vehicle drill rig for 100 hours. In the ev~nt that UDOT determines that the geotechnical investigations require more field work, the scope costs and fee for this work will be negotiated as additional work under this Agreement. ~ ~\~~O~~ -p~ N~ \~~ 3cC'J~' \..rJ( ~"\)0I' "-1-l~\ -\'" fa.~~.j..~' S~~~ ~~~~ I TASK 4: PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT (s),dJ.r- f3"'rk~r ) This task effort will run concurrently with the other tasks. Government agencies, community organizations, and interested citizens are to be kept aware of project issues as they arise and their input is to be sought, acknowledged, and documented ~j by the consultant. This will be accomplished by small group ~~ ~hS fY\-" ,~~ discussions (up to 10 meetings), sco in meetin (in Logan), t ~ ~o moderate media coverage, and informational meetings (up to I~ 5 meetings for service clubs, etc.). One or more staff members of UDOT will accompany consultant personnel during introductory or initial contacts with all state and local agencies and community organizations. All press releases will be prepared and submitted to UDOT for distribution to ~~ the news media. The scoping session will follow the CEQ ~oS ~. guidelines given in the 1981 memorandum "Scoping Guidance." e."l-S \ ~ ClU' A ublic hearin on the draft environmental assessmept will rV~ be conducted in Logan. I ~V\ C~~ r f Requirements relative to cooperating agencies (CEQ 1501.6), the scoping process (CEQ 1501.7), and, if necessary, Notice of Intent (CEQ 1508.22) will be the responsibility of the consultant--except in instances where the federal agency must initiate requests and other correspondence. In these _ latter cases, the consultant will provide support services only. I �Meetings involving the general public will generally be held in the evening or on weekends. When agency participation is desired, meetings will generally be conducted during the workday. Each scoping endeavor will be tailored to the group involved. A video tape of approximately 20-minute duration will be prepared by the consultant at least 3 months prior to the formal public hearing (or advertisement for a hearing opportunity). Alternative proposals and environmental tradeoffs will be addressed in the tape. Twelve (12) copies will be submitted to UDOT. Until the work under this task is completed, the consultant team shall maintain a local office (in Logan). The office will be staffed and open for business during normal working hours, a minimum of 40 hours per week. Staff will be available (up to ten engineering man-days and ten additional support staff man-days) as a source of project information in the local community. A project fact sheet will be prepared for distribution from the local office, with up to three fact sheet updates during the course of the project. Documentation of public involvement efforts will be included -in the environmental document under various headings as appropriate (see FHWA REGION 8 ENVIRONMENTAL NOTEBOOK, Section 2). TASK 5 COORDINATION The first activity of this task will be to organize the interdisciplinary study team. Specific individual members will be identified and confirmed by discussions with each agency. The environmental community representative will be determined by the community. This will be done by first identifying the environmental groups with probable interest in the Logan Canyon project. Each will be contacted to inform them of the need for a representative and to arrange for a meeting of their leadership. At the leadership meeting, the groups will be asked to develop a procedure to select their representative. The consultant will monitor the process to see that a representative is appointed. The consultant will coordinate its efforts with the FHWA and the USFS and with the following State of Utah agencies: o o o o o Division of Wildlife Resources Geological and Mineral Survey Bureau of Air Quality Bureau .of .Water Quality Division of State History1 �Coordination efforts will include: 1) acquiring available information relevant to the project; 2) obtaining appropriate study permits; 3) conducting joint operations related directly to the project; and 4) providing the above-listed ?tgencies with duplicate copies of data and findings, (devel~ror ~ oped from the tasks described herein) pertinent to their ' \ riff> ~ct.. respective charges. The permits antici ated to be needed to c:;er~~ construct the project wli e ldentified. As of the date of this Agreement, it is not known if payments to agencies may be needed to assist in the project. Therefore, no effort or costs have been included in this scope to meet that potential need. If UDOT determines that payments are necessary, the scope and fee for this work will be negotiated as additional work under this Agreement. Information obtained through coordination efforts will be incorporated into Task 6, as appropriate. TASK 6: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT The task will involve two areas of activity. One is the meetings of the interdisciplinary study team and the other is the analysis of environmental resources. The interdisciplinary study team (see Task 5) will enerally meet twice each month (for a total of up to 20 meetings r.....--- . The interdisciplinary earn Wl provl e input for tne environmental analysis and make recommendations to the consultant and UDOT regarding engineering and environmental issues. The analysis of environmental re-sources will be a multistep process. It will begin with a review of the existing literature for the resources associated with the Logan Canyon project. ' This search will include literature from city, county, and state planning agencies, resource management agencies, universities, and scientific literature. In addition to the literature search, a field study will be conducted. This will be in with a one- to 2-da reconnaissa c visit of the ro ect area. 0 owing thlS, slte-speclfic field studies will be conducted, rinci all in the n oute corridors in Rich County. These studies will be one over a one week period an Wl I concentrate on an assessment of vegetation and wildlife habitat. Vegetation and habitat ~~ maps will be prepared and field verified. In addition, a ~~ pedestrian survey of cultural resources in the corridors " 0 will be conducted. The need for field studies of wildlife, . ~ fisheries, and other resources can only be determined after '~~ corridors are selected and the resource management agencies ~ ~ (7 .fJ consulted. If such studies are required, the effort ~ \ involved will be negotiated as additional work under this 0 ~v Agreemen t . ~~o" ""J>( ~\I' " ~' ~ / \(:\ // \( \ tf.'c:r 0' �Once the data are acquired, a description of the existing environment will be prepared. The resources to be assessed and the format of the analysis will follow the headings '\.~ required by FHWA for NEPA documents. Potential impacts will . ~~~ ~ be assessed by comparing existing environmental conditions A~~~~ ~. with the proposed project modifications. . Ie, c~~~ ~ ~ ~ miti ation measures will be develo ed to oJfset impacts. c Sucn measures will be submitted to UDOT for approval before ' ~ incorporating them in the environmental assessment. _ ~~ -~,,~ The final step in this task will be to pre are a technical ?p ~Q ~~~ memorandum that includes the data collection methodologies ~Qr ~~~ and t e resu s of t e ana ysis. epen lng on e vo ume of ~ , more than one memorandum may be produced. ~ J EPA has f~ I~; , TASK 7: DOCUMENTS ,~ - 'L . The draft environmental assessment will be -prepared by collecting and reviewing technical memoranda produced during earlier tasks and summarizing appropriate material from each to form the individual sections of the draft environmental assessment. The document will be formatted to follow the FHWA guidelines for NEPA compliance. -The - preliminary draft will be presented to the interdisciplinary study team and UDOT for review. co ies of the reIiminar ydraft will be roduced for this rev ~ . he intent of this process Wl l e o suomlt tne raft as individual chapters as soon as they are prepared. After comments have been received on each chapter, a complete revised preliminary draft will be resubmitted for final review by UDOT and the interdisciplinary study team. Upon completion of this review, the preliminary draft will be submitted to the cooperating agencies for their comments. Modifications to the preliminary draft will be made, as appropriate. We do not anticipate a second review by the cooperating agencies on the preliminary draft. The revised document will be submitted to UDOT for final approval. Further revisions will be made, as appropriate, and the following copies of the draft environmental assessment will be delivered to UDOT for distribution: ~ E~~~,~~~~~~~~~~t : ~. 100 bound copies and 40 copies Technical A endix: 50 bound copies and 50 copies unbound and uncollated One set of maps on film The final environmental assessment following the ubli view rocess is not included in this scope of work. SLC67/d.801 0-" • � 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/20">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/20</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 2529211565 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 5833913 Bytes Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Environmental Study, scope of work for Logan Canyon Description An account of the resource Exhibit A of the Logan Canyon environmental study scope of work that lists the numerous tasks to be completed for the project including an analysis of transportation needs such as safety, maintenance, and congestion location studies from specific areas in the canyon geotechnical considerations, public and agency involvement and an environmental assessment. Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Roadside Improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon United States Highway 89 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 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Utah United States Logan Canyon (Utah) Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 20th century 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 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_Itam_6.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/b3ecb49ba327f0abb2eca7980b40ab59.pdf f68aac7adf92ffd6535e610eee796306 PDF Text Text LOGAN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY MINUTES OF INTERDISCIPLINE TEAM MEETING June 23, 1986 Attending: Torn Haislip - CH2M HILL Sheldon Barker - CH2M HILL Gale Larson - Valley Engineering Lynn Zollinger - UDOT Bill Helm - Interested Party Jack Spence - Cache Group Sierra Club Rudy Lukez - Cache Group Sierra Club Steve Flint - Bridgerland Audobon Association John Neil - UDOT Cliff Forsgren - CH2M HILL Jim Naegle - UDOT Stan Nuffer - CH2M HILL Clark Ostergard - USFS Mark Shaw - USFS Fred LaBar - USFS Duncan Silver - FHWA Howard Richardson - UDOT ( ITEM 1 - Discussion of Minutes Stan Nuffer called the meeting to order and asked if anyone had comments on the minutes of the last meeting. There was a question raised about the review function of the ID Team which was described in the minutes. The role of the ID Team was an agenda item for this meeting and discussion of the function was postponed until later in the meeting. There was no further discussion of the minutes. ITEM 2 - Discussion of Role of Interdisciplinary Team A statement of the role of the interdisciplinary team was distributed and discussed. The major functions were: 1 ...I... • 2. ') ..J • Provide management input Provide technical input CH2M HILL will provide the primary input and the USFS would provide the technical input on environmental items. Other team members would add input as the need or opportunity arose. Review technical memoranda and draft Environmental Report - �4. The team members will review the technical memoranda and will also review the draft environmental report. Level of environmental action determinationRudy Lukez asked if this means that a decision will be made during the study on what the proposed project will be. He also wanted to know who would make the decision. It was explained that the final decision on what project, if any, will be proposed will be made by the three cooperating agencies, UDOT, USFS and FHWA. Prior to the decision on a project however, a decision must be made on the class of environmental action (EA or EIS) . Jack Spence was not sure who would make the recommendation on the class of environmental action to the cooperating agencies. It was determined that the ID Team would make the recommendation. Modifications to the statement of the role of the team were made. The revised statement is attached to these minutes. ITEM 3 - Level of Documentation Required by NEPA for Environmental Studies ( NEPA requirements for environmental studies were reviewed and discussed. A handout taken from the UDOT publication, Procedures for Project Development, described the basic categories. ITEM 4 - Public Involvement Program Outline Ap outline of the Public Involvement Program had previously been sent to ID Team members and was discussed at length. The principle topics of discussion were: 1. . The terms "projectlf and "study" were both used in the outline. To be consistent "study" should be used throughout when describing the ongoing activity. This will help to alleviate any fears of those who equate Ifproject" with actual construction. ?. Jack Spence wanted to know what the rational for the study was. Lynn Zollinger explained that whenever UDOT went into Logan Canyon, people asked the question If What is going to happen next?" After this study is complete UDOT can point to a plan which will address the transportation needs in the Canyon through the year 201rr. �3. The press release was discussed and Rudy Lukez suggested that the ID Team be described in it. John Neil stated that UDOT's community relations department would release the information as soon as it was prepared. 4. During the discussion of Milestone 2, it was recommended that the word "improvements be replaced with "action" so that both repair and improvements would be covered. Rudy Lukez asked where traffic forecasts would be used and how they would be developed. It was explained that the permanent traffic counter at Garden City, and spot traffic counts, would be used to establish the present tra f fic load in the Canyon. Population projections prepared by agencies having that responsibility would then be used to project traffic volume ahead to the year 2010. It was explained that there had already been spot traffic counts taken at two locations, on 2 different days this past winter and that more would be taken this summer. Jack Spence was not sure that the data gathered would be sufficient. He said that one of the problems with past studies was the lack of reliable traffic data from which to project future traffic flow. Jack asked to see the methodology and data when it was available. Rudy Lukez asked if sampling was an accepted means of gathering current traffic flow data. Duncan Silver answered that it was, provided the sample size was large enough and the sampling techniques were acceptable. He also suggested that the ID Team evaluate the sampling techniques. Stan Nuffer said that information on the methodology and sampling techniques would be ready for the next ID Team meeting. Rudy Lukez asked if they could be prepared far enough in advance to allow the team members a chance to review the information before the next meeting. Duncan Silver restated his belief that the key issue on this · item was the methodology used to gather the present traffic flow data. Duncan also wanted to know why a 2-day 10-hour sample period was selected, a period of this type would be acceptable for traffic classification but probably not for counts. Stan Nuffer said that information on the methodology and sampling techniques would be available before the next meeting. ll 5. Jack Spence expressed concern about having too many meetings during the summer vlhen many of the USU students and facility are out of town. Sheldon Barker indicated that the schedule of meetings was �flexible and that something could probably be worked out. 6. During the discussion of Milestone 3, Jack Spence asked if the Public Involvement Program was designed to meet the requirements for an EIS in case there was a need for one. Tom Haislip explained that the program was designed with an EIS in mind. Sheldon Barker also asked the team members for names of persons or organizations who should be added to the mailing list. Anyone who has a suggestion should either give Sheldon the information after the meeting or mail it to him. ITEM 5 - Schedule of Interdisciplinary Team Meetings Stan Nuffer presented a schedule of team meetings through September. It was suggested that 3:00 p.m. would be a better time for some team members than 10:00 a.m. It was agreed that all meetings scheduled for 10:00 a.m. would be held at 3:00 p.m. instead. Before the meeting adjourned, Duncan Silver again stated that he felt the traffic data must be good enough to satisfy the group before the study proceeded too much farther. Jim Naegle stated that standard accepted methods were used during the gathering of data. The next scheduled meeting is 3:00 p.m., July 14, 1986, in the District office in Ogden. SLC77/59 � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Local URL The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website <a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/21">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/21</a> Purchasing Information Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item. To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a> Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2013 Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, at 800 dpi. Archival file is PDF (800 dpi), display file is JPEG2000. Checksum 4097134252 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 2578459 Bytes Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Minutes of June 23, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource Minutes of June 23, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Review of minutes, discussion of role of Interdisciplinary Team, level of documentation required, public involvement program outline, and the schedule. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Haislip, Tom Barker, Sheldon Larson, Gale Zollinger, Lynn Helm, Bill Spence, Jack Lukez, Rudy Flint, Steve Neil, John Naegle, Jim Nuffer, Stan Ostergard, Clark Shaw, Mark LaBar, Fred Sliver, Duncan Richardson, Howard Forsgren, Clifford Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 Roadside Improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1986-06-23 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Utah United States Logan Canyon (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1980-1989 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS148 Series VIII Box 27 Folder 2 Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Libraries Photograph Curator, phone (435) 797-0890. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Highway 89 Digital Collections Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context MSS148VIIIB27_Fd2_Page_5.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/400306cf3a868f2975b319b7e49172d2.pdf 2bfa9b8b5fd9229013881ee474d123f1 PDF Text Text 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. �ROLE OF INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM LOGAN CANYON STUDY The interdisciplinary team (I.D. Team) is made up of representatives from Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT). The consultant (CH2M HILL) the United States Forest Service (USFS), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and a representative(s) of the environmental community. A roster of the proposed team members is attached. The functions of the interdisciplinary team are: 1. Pro ~ vide Management Input The I.D. Team will meet regularly to review areas of study, responsibility for execution, schedules of work, and public involvement. 2. Provide Technical Input Specialists from CH2M HILL with input from the USFS will prepare technical memorandums covering the required areas of work distributed at the June 10 I.D. Team meeting. 3. All members of the I.D. Team will review draft copies of technical memoranda and provide timely wri tten comments. ETS d'<"\ G-~~;~ ~ c..~c..... \.rs~S \ ® O~ 4. ".J Level of Environmental Action ?etermination . n~ \ T~o.1'(\ I'~(." l'/\U\tA~i-,o s. 01\ 1\", ~~Sl~l c1~s. eX Ol\~ ~ ~ ~~ will provide ~to UDOT and the cooperating ((i\~ agencies t:We approI?:r:iate d-oeUIt'l9I=l:t.s. -co- a '=£:e ~l . . V'J det~!m!:~: ian o f Lite da s~ at eo ~ em _ l \... 0~ ~Ii\ Review Technical Memoranda J\\ The ID Team will meet one to two times per month on the average to accomplish the functions outlined above. Proposed . schedule for the next 3 months . • , District Office July 14 " .J...O-HtO ~ . July 28LO I~~ ;0 f", District Office August 4 District Office 7:00 p.m. August 18 10:00 a.m. District Office Sept. 8 10:00 a.m. District Office Sept. 22 7:00 p.m. District Office SLC74/08 �LOGAN CANYON STUDY INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM Study Team Members Phone Office/Home Mailing Address Stan Nuffer CH2M HILL (801) 363-0200 (208) 375-4710 P.O. Box 2218 Salt Lake City, Utah Commission Representative Todd Weston Utah Dept. of Trans. (801) 752-6625 (801) 752-5442 285 Temple View Drive Logan, Utah 84321 Highway Preconstruction Engineer Lynn Zollinger Utah Dept. of Trans. (801) 399-5921 P.O. Box 2747 Ogden, Utah 84404 Environmental Engineer John Neil Utah Dept. of Trans. (801) 965-4227 4501 South 2700 West Salt Lake City, Utah 84119 Stan Nuffer CH2M HILL (801) 363-0200 (208) 375-4710 P.O. Box 2218 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 Recreation Fred Labar USFS, Logan (801) 753-2772 P.O. Box 448 Logan, Utah 84321 Geotechnical Allan Stilley North. Engr. & Test. (801) 298-9314 P.O. Box 281 North Salt Lake, Utah Sheldon Barker CH2M HILL (801) 363-0200 . Representat1ve a 0 f t h e Environmental Community Jack Spence Sierra Club (801) 750-1626 P.O. Box 3580 Logan, Utah 84321 Landscape Architecture Clark Ostergaard Wasatch/Cache N.F. (801) 524-5030 125 South State Salt Lake City, Utah Fisheries Biologist Mark Shaw Wasatch/Cache N.F. (801) 524-5030 125 South State Salt Lake City, Utah Ex-Officio Duncan Silver FHWA (801) 524-5141 Federal Highway Administration P.O. Box 11563 Salt Lake City, Utah 84147 Team Leader Transportation Planning Public Involvement P.O. Box 2218 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 84054 84101 �LOGAN CANYON STUDY INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM (Continued) Study Team Members Phone Office/Home Mailing Address aAlternate Environmental Community Representatives Sierra Club Rudy Lukez (801) 863-3702 (801) 753-5568 Utah Wilderness Association Tom Lyon (801) 750-1603 Bridgerland Audubon Assoc. Steve Flint (801) 750-2474 752-9102 Unattached Bill Helm (801) 752-2667 P.O. Box 3580 Logan, Utah 84321 Other Key Members of Consultant Team , Principal in Charge Environmental Environmental Planning Engineering John D'Amico Tom Haislip Mark Hill Margaret Johnson Cliff Forsgren (303 ) 771-0900 (801) 363-0200 (801) 363-0200 (801) 363-0200 (801) 363-0200 P.O. Box 22508 Denver, Colorado 80222 P.O. Box 2218 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 P.O. Box 2218 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 P.O. Box 2218 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 P.O. Box 2218 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 Logan Office Gale Larson Valley Engineering Inc. (801) 753-0153 168 North 100 East Logan, Utah 84321 Geotechnical Walt Jones North. Engr. & Test. (801) 298-9314 P.O. Box 281 North Salt Lake, Utah Jim Kuenzli (801) 363-0200 Geotechnical Hydraulics SLC76/d.701 Arlo Waddups Valley Engineering Inc. (801) 753-0153 P.O. Box 2218 Salt Lake City, Utah 168 North 100 East Logan, Utah 84321 84054 84101 �LEVEL OF DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED BY NEPA FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Projects are classified in accordance with NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) categories. Information on the project is collected and incorporated in the appropriate environmental documents. There are three classes of actions which prescribe the level of documentation required in the NEPA process: a. Class I full EIS (Environmental Impact Statement). Actions that may significantly affect the environment and require an EIS. b. Class II Categorical Exclusions. Actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the environment. c. Class III with EA's (Environmental Assessments). Actions in which the significance of the impact on the environment is not clearly established. When the project is placed in Class II Categorical Exclusion or Class III Environmental Assessment, UDOT's established procedure shall be followed. Individualized procedure will be used when the project is placed in Class I Environmental Impact Statement. Projects in Class II Categorical Exclusion may require, by FHWA (Federal Highway Administration) directive (See FHWA Memo dated November 21, 1980, Pages 7 & 8), an environmental study (ES). Also, projects in funding category of 4R (Resurface, Reno ate, Rehabilitate and O' s\o~ Reconstruct), which normally are classed as Categorical ~\~ Exclusion, shall require an Operational Safety Report (See FHWA Memo dated April 2, 1982, Page 9) to be attached to the Design Study Report. The environmental classification and public involvement decisions, and the task assignments, shall be documented by memorandum to the Engineer for Location and Environmental Studies. Evidence of controvers or unforeseen environmental impacts may prom t decision makers to redefine r j t ~ re uest full EIS. Evide nce of no s Ignif i cant impact will activate request to the Community Involvement Officer to schedule, advertise, and hold a public hearing, or give an opportunity for public hearing. SLC74/08 �LOGAN CANYON IMPROVEMENT STUDY PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN PURPOSE OF PLAN S-+\j~ To inform the public and interested agencies about the ~~ , ~ to obtain public input that can be incorporated into the decision-making process, and to comply with the National Environmental Protection Act and other regulations and policies calling for public involvement in Utah Department of Transportation projects. Stvdj The following public involvement plan is based on ~t milestones. Public involvement will take place shortly after the designated milestone in the ~t has occurred. ~=tv~ In addition to the program proposed upon reaching each project milestone, the following activities will occur continuously throughout the ~ t. ~-tv:b o · Maintenance of a Mailing List - all individuals and interest groups requesting mailings will be included on this list (attached to this plan) o Local Project Liaison - Valley Engineers in Logan will maintain copies of all informational material on the project in its Logan office, and will answer or refer questions to the appropriate person. CH2M HILL will also perform this service in its Salt Lake City office o Local repositories for £-\-v. ~ . ~ ct materials will be arranged at the Logan Public Library, Utah State University Library, Garden City municipal offices, 1 �and Salt Lake City Public Library. All informa- tional materials will also be available at Wasatch/ Cache National Forest offices in Ogden and at the Utah Department of Transportation offices in Salt Lake City *MILESTONE 18 - BEGINNING OF PROJECT Task 1, the analysis of transportation needs, is scheduled to begin in early June 1986. Objectives To explain to the public what the o entail N\~~ Av\o..f\~ '1 \ ' .::} ,<)", ~tvb pr ~ct VJo~' \' V\~~~ +~~~~ot'L ~-+v~ ~~\ ;~~ . \. or-K_ ~ ~+ To explain why the study is necessary o ~~ \.)J will > -- lY'\1f\ t1\c.. ',.~ To explain that UDOT has an obligation to the public to keep Highway 89 open, and therefore some level of r even to implement a no- action Techniques o Press Release to be submitted to all media included on mailing list - by July 1. o Project Introduction - a detailed written explanation of the history of this project, the reasons for conducting this project, and the tasks to be ~conducted, will be mailed to all groups/individuals ~ included on the mailing list - week of July 6 \~~\Yl~ o\~sc.~p-\"01'-- Q-\- 2 ()"\~QM • �o Written Summary of public involvement activities, responses, and issues will be prepared upon completing this phase of the public involvement program - week of July 28 *MILESTONE 26 - COMPLETION OF TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ANALYSIS The analysis and conclusions of this study should be close to completion by July 31. ~ Objectives o 0~ the findings of the study regarding safet maintenance problems and design factors that cause traffic flow problems n ; w and in future, at specific si tes in the canyon ~\\~,,~ To identify the need for ~~~s, general magnitude of the o ~ the~ ~ \\j"~v\ ~ s' ~~ and the lL.~ 0 en-ts needed to provide certain levels of service <kti-\:" Techniques o Press Release to be submitted to all media included on mailing list - week of August 4 Summary Report of Findings/Fact Sheet will be mailed to all groups/individuals on mailing list - week of August 11 o Town Meeting to discuss findings, answer questions to be held in Logan - week of August 25 o «1W~ Meetings With Interest Groups as requested - following town meeting through September 12 3 d' \~ \'0 e ll' �o Written Summary of activities, response, and issues will be prepared upon completion of the second phase of the public involvement program - week of September 15 *~1ILESTONE 3£\ - COMPLETION OF ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT (Prior to environmental impact analysis) - This should occur near the end of November. Objectives o To explain the proposed project alternatives the public and relate them to an approximate of service. Each project alternative will consist of specific improvement plans for a number of sites on the road where problems have been identified, which together will improve the road to a certain level of service. '--C\ \)L o 0 ~ D\:::... c E~K £.f\ or To identify specific concerns of individuals and interest groups regarding the proposed alternatives o To obtain consensus among interested parties on the issues to be analyzed in the environmental ' anQlysis of the project Techniques o Press Release, giving brief review of project findings to date, explaining proposed alternatives, and reviewing the proposed scoping activities, will be submitted to all media on the mailing list - week of November 24 4 ,f c~ L- ..- ? �o Fact Sheet giving detailed explanation of each alternative with graphic illustration, explanation of level of service provided by each, and general advantages and disadvantages, will be sent to each entry on mailing list - week of November 24 o Meetings With Interest/Service Groups expressing strong int.e rest in the project will be held during the first 3 weeks of December to discuss the alternatives and identify their concerns. A maximum of four such meeting are planned, and as a result some groups might be requested to meet together. Groups that request such a meeting might include: City and County Planning Departments/ Commissions Sierra Club Utah Wilderness Association Bridgerland Audubon Society Rich-Cache Tourist Council Cache County Chamber of Commerce Bear RlV€ r -Association of Governments ( Bear Lake Convention and Visitors Bureau Cache Economic Development Council Interest/Service Clubs December 1-19 o Town Meeting will be held in Logan to summarize alternatives, report on concerns voiced by groups/ individuals, receive testimony on other concerns. Issues to be addressed in environmental analysis will be summarized - week of January 5 5 �o Press Release reviewing scoping process activities and issues to be studied in environmental analysis will be submitted to all media included on mailing list - week of January 19 o Written Summary of all public involvement activities, response, and issues will be prepared after the activities of this phase have been conducted week of January 26 \:J 0cvf'I\E .r - *MILESTONE 4~ - COMPLETION OF DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ~T Approximately May 29 \~~ ~ Objectives o To report findings of environmental analysis o To answer questions regarding conclusions drawn in the document o To receive comments regarding the findings of the document Techniques o Videotape explaining the alternatives and discussing the environmental tradeoffs will be developed prior to Milestone 4 to be presented during this stage Months of February and March. o Summary Report reviewing findings of the draft analysis will be mailed to all groups/individuals included on mailing list - week of June 1, 1987 6 �o Press Release reporting findings of environmental analysis and schedule for public input/hearings to be submitted to all media listed in mailing list week of June 1, 1987 o Workshop Meeting to prevent videotape, discuss environmental analysis findings, allow questions and answers - Logan, week of June 15 o Public Hearing to present videotape and receive testimony on draft environmental anal sis - Logan, ~ ~ week of July 13, 1987; possible hearing in Ogden or Salt Lake City, week of July 13, 1987. Written testimony will be accepted for 30 days after last hearing o Written Summary of all public involvement activities, response, and issues will be prepared after the activities of Phase 4 have been conducted week of August 10 , %1 All aspects of the public involvement program will remain flexible since it must be responsive to the conduct of the project and the needs of the community. Public involvement activities will be announced in all press releases. SLC76/d.201 7 �LOGAN CANYON PROJECI MAILING LIST Group Contact Phone Jack Spence Rudy Lukez (801) 750-1626 (801) 863-3702 (W) (801) 753-5568 (H) Utah Wilderness Association 10m Lyon (801) 750- T603 Bridgerland Audubon Society Steve Flint Address (801) 752-9102 (H) (801) 750-2474 (W) Sierra Club P.O. Box 3580 Logan, Utah 84321 Sun City Travellers c/o Cache County Chamber of Commerce Rich-Cache Tourist Council Dean Smith Cache County Chamber of Commerce Paula Bell (801) 752-2161 Bear River Association of Governments Bruce King (801) 752-7242 Bear Lake Regional Commission Al Harrison (208) 945-2333 Bear Lake Convention and Visitors' Bureau Jenny Archer Cache Economic Development Council Bobbie Coray (801) 753-3631 Cache County Farm Bureau Lynn Meikle (801) 563-3633 Greater Bear Lake Chamber of Commerce Bear River Resource Conservation and Development Coordinator 170 North Main Logan, Utah 84321 Garden City, Utah 1305 Canyon Road Smithfield, Utah 84335 USDA Service Center, 1075~ North Main Street Logan, Utah 84321 Kent Hortin Utah State University Ci ty of Logan Newel G. Daines (801) 752-3060 City of Logan P. ·0. Box 527 Logan, Utah 84321 City of Smithfield Robert Chambers (801) 563-6226/ 6227/6228 City of Smithfield P. O. Box 96 Smithfield, Utah 84335 City of Hyrum Bruce Darley (801) 245-6033 City of Hyrum 83 West Main Hyrum, Utah 84319 City of Providence Gary Milburn (801) 752-9441 City of Providence 15 South Main Providence, Utah 84332 City of North Logan Boyd Stewart (801) 752-1310 City of North Logan 2053 North 1200 East North Logan, Utah 84321 SLC74/d.2 �LOGAN CANYON PROJECT MAILING LIST (Continued) Group Contact Phone City of Wellsville Jack Leatham City of Richmond Marvin Traveller (801) 258-2982 City of Richmond 6 West Main Richmond, Utah 84333 City of Hyde Park Robert Balls (801) 563-6507 City of Hyde Park 113 East Center Hyde Park, Utah 84318 City of Lewiston Garr Morrison (801) 258-2141 City of Lewiston 29 South Main Lewiston, Utah 84320 City of River Heights John Stewart (801) 752-5558 City of River Heights 662 South 600 East River Heights, Utah 84321 City of Nibley Darwin McPhie (801) 752-0431 City of Nibley 296 West 3200 South Nibley, Utah 84321 City of Millville Blake Petersen (801) 752-8943 City of Millville 420 East 300 South Millville, Utah 84326 City of Mendon W.Ross Shelton (801) 752-2439 City of Mendon Mendon, Utah 84325 City of Newton Gary Jorgensen (801) 563-5791 City of Newton Newton, Utah 84327 City of Clarkston Udell Gogfrey (801) 563-3353 City of Clarkston P. O. Box 181 Clarkston, Utah 84305 City of Paradise Jon White (801) 245-4212 €ity of Paradise Paradise, Utah 84328 City of Trenton Paul Jensen (801) 563-3553 City of Trenton 17 East Main Trenton, Utah 84338 City of Amalga Boyd Smith (801) 563-5289 City of Amalga 2775 West 5700 North Amalga, Utah 84335 City of Cornish VerI Buxton (801) 258-2505 City of Cornish P. O. Box 13 Cornish, Utah 84308 City of Randolph Rick Argyle (801) 793-3445 City of Randolph Box 127 Randolph, Utah 84064 City of Laketown Clayton Robinson (801) 946-3228 City of Laketown P. O. Box 85 Laketown, Utah 84038 SLC74/d.2 (801) 245-3686 Address City of Wellsville 75 South 100 East Wellsville, Utah 84339 �LOGAN CANYON PROJECT MAILING LIST (Continued) Contact Group Phone Address City of Garden City Bryce Nielson (801) 946-2901 City of Garden City P. O. Box 207 Garden City, Utah 84028 City of Woodruff Kim Mortensen (801) 793-4117 City of Woodruff P. O. Box 83 Woodruff, Utah 84086 MEDIA T,~ V\1o,\L Logan Herald Journal Hike Si:tnmtm-s (801) 752-2121 75 West 300 North Logan, Utah 84321 Uinta (Evanston) County Herald (bi-weekly: Wednesday and Friday) Mel Baldwin (307) 789-6560 P.O. Box B Evanston, Wyoming 82930 (801) 237-2045 P.O. Box 867 Salt Lake City, Utah (801) 237-2150 P.O. Box 1257 Salt Lake City, Utah 84110 KSL Television Channel 5 (801)237-2500 145 Social Hall Ave. Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 KIVX Television Channel 4 (801)972-1776 1760 S. Fremont Dr. Salt Lake City, Utah 84104 KUTV Television Channel 2 (801)973-3000 2185 S. 3600 W. West Valley City, Utah 84120 Salt Lake Tribune Salt Lake Deseret News 0 ~avl'l\~{\ SL€74/d.2 k\J~L - Ff'A. \< \)SlA.-f-l"'- L(~ SLC74/d.2 ~VS-t/"- � 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/22">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/22</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 600105869 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 7916405 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 Agenda for Logan Canyon Study interdisciplinary team, CH2M Hill, Forest Service, Utah Department of of Transportation, June 23, 1986 Description An account of the resource Agenda for the Logan Canyon Study interdisciplinary team, CH2M Hill, Forest Service, Utah Department of of Transportation meeting number 2 in Ogden, Utah on June 23, 1986 where they review the minutes from a pervious meeting on June 10, 1986, discuss of role of interdisciplinary team, dicuss the level of documentation required by NEPA for environmental studies, discuss public involvement program outline, and schedule interdisciplinary team meetings. Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1986-06-23 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Ogden (Utah) Utah United States Weber 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 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_1.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/27531de3977069750036e5fa0fe54479.pdf 6f806d2fe0aee220e103a14b6ed8a4ef PDF Text Text After reading local newspaper reports of the 1987 Logan Canyon Highway scoping meetings, I noticed assumptions were made on the part of some groups that the majority of local residents were opposed to any extensive modifications to the highway. In talking with a number of Logan City residents, I received conflicting reports and strong indications that many Logan City voters did not agree with those assumptions and that the scoping meetings were not a true barometer of local feelings. In fact, some felt that the scoping meetings reflected a stacked deck in favor of the opposing viewpoint. At the urging of a number of local residents, I decided to find out for myself by conducting a telephone opinion survey of Logan City voters who voted in the 1987 elections. draft of the ques~ionnaire Although it wasn't intended to be mailed out, the first was sent by Cache County Chamber of Commerce leaders to chamber members and returns were tabulated and results presented to that organization. After the questionnaire was criticized by the local newspaper(particularly one writer) as being biased, I contacted a former Utah State University Sociology Professor, Dr. William DeHart, who had considerable experience with survey questions and format, to review the questionnaire and assist me in eliminating or reducing possible bias. I spent a number of sessions with him in fine tuning the questionnaire before I conducted the telephone opinion survey. I also discussed the questionnaire with Dr. Steven Daniels, formerly of the Department of Forestry at USU, who offered some valuable suggestions. It seemed ironic to me that the local newspaper should accuse me of bias when they, themselves are guilty of incredible one-sided, biased reporting on the highway issue. I guess one should always first identify the color of the snake in the grass before striding too far. After obtaining a list of Logan City residents who voted in the 1987 elections, I randomly sampled 208 voters by personally telephoning them and asking the survey questions. I chose to personally telephone participants to reduce bias and to ensure consistency. I did not solicit any additional responses although many expressed appreciation for the contact and offered additional opinions. Of those who offered additional opinions, I asked if they had attended any of the Logan Canyon Highway scoping meetings. affirmative. Their reasons for not attending ranged from "I don't like to argue" to "a lack of time" or "conflict in schedule". would listen anyway". syndrome". Not one answered in the Some were concerned that "no one I consider this a clear example of "the silent majority In retrospect, they have only themselves to blame if the opposing viewpoint receives credibility. My feeling is that this group of people does not write letters to the editor, tends to avoid controversy and does not like to attend meetings, yet many have strong opinions about important issues and appear to exercise their voting privilege. Perhaps that's why politicians who consistently campaign door-to-door and contact this group of people tend to get elected. �-2Some of the more often expressed comments included: * I would like to see the road widened to include shoulders so that a vehicle could be stopped completely off the road in the event of an emergency(flat tire, stalled vehicle, etc.). This is especially a problem in the middle section of the canyon between Right Hand Fork and Ricks Springs where shoulders are extremely narrow or nonexistent. To increase enforcement of the current speed limit would create a safety hazard unless shoulders were widened to permit a vehicle to stop completely off the road. * Straightening some curves in the middle section of the canyon would not necessarily increase speed but would contribute to a more even speed and flow of traffic. * As important as the environment is, there are other issues of equal or greater importance including highway safety, snow removal, access to recreation areas (Beaver Mountain, Jackson Hole, Yellowstone Park, Bear Lake, etc.), maximum utilization of the canyon, emergency vehicle and hospital access for Bear Lake Valley residents, and economic development potential by providing Bear Lake Valley residents and beyond better access to local merchants. * There have been enough studies of Logan Canyon Highway. The money spent could be better utilized in making needed modifications. According to UDOT engineers, there have been two environmental studies of the highway since 1975 modifications were completed. Approximately $50,000 was funded in 1978 to conduct an environmental assessment to continue modifications from Right Hand Fork to Ricks Springs. The current study, started in 1986, is a full environmental impact statement and has cost approximately $620,000 to this point. Recently, an additional $86,000 was appropriated to finish the study. More money will have to be allocated to publish the final document. It's interesting to note that the reconstruction of a two-lane highway based on 1975 dollars would cost about $500,000/mile and about $l,OOO,OOO/mile using 1988 dollars. These figures are according to the March 88 issue of Engineering News Record(ENR). According to UDOT, the Summer average daily traffic(ADT)in the canyon is about 3500 vehicles and peaks at about 500 vehicles per hour. The Winter ADT is about 1800 vehicles. * I'm tired of a few pseudoexperts using strong-arm tactics to impose their will upon the majority. We have the organization and the structure in-place in the form of unOT and their consultants to consider all issues including the environment and highway safety and design. Let's use the existing structure and rely on the real experts who are being paid out of tax dollars and get out of their way so they can do their job. I took the time to examine the background and expertise of the UDOT personnel assigned to the Logan Canyon Highway project. Everyone of them have significant training and experience in environmental planning and highway safety and design. * Acceleration and deceleration lanes would be useful at major campgrounds and access roads such as Spring Hollow, Malibu/Guinavah, Temple Fork, Right Hand Fork, Wood Camp, etc. * All you need to do is drive Logan Canyon and you're immediately brought to the reality of the hazards and of taking your life in your own hands. * Let's fix the highway so it's safe to drive and quit worrying about having to transplant a few flowers and trees. While a four-lane highway through Logan Canyon is neither appropriate nor necessary, extensive modifications are needed. �-3- * Although a minority, Cache Valley groups opposed to highway modifications are a well organized and extremely vocal coalition. They are living proof that the squeeky wheel gets the grease. But in the same vein, let's not forget that the empty wagon rattles the most. I approached the CPA firm of Hancey, Jones and Wright and asked if they would compile the statistical information for the survey. They offered to do that as a public service and are here today to make the presentation to the Municipal Council. I also contacted Dan Jones who explained that he samples about 6% in his opinion polls with excellent results. I sampled about 6% of the population in my opinion survey. With that report, I'd like to ask Gary Jones and Carl Law of Hancey, Jones and Wright to give the summary report of the survey. � 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/23">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/23</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 765381464 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 310498 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 Motion made before the Logan Municipal Council Description An account of the resource The motion made before the Logan Municipal Council on January 5, 1989 supporting the Utah Department of Transportation and their consultants in the improvements on the Logan Canyon Highway 89 Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 Logan Canyon (Utah) Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1905-06-11 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan Canyon (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1980-1989 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Senator John P. Holmgren papers, 1985-1989, COLL MSS 133 Box 45 Folder 8 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/xv07669">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv07669</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 MSS133Bx45_Item_3.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/c418c82adb9c84052cf8bd4121c949a0.pdf 029b4dc1e74a22b4cdf6c6d6b5a3fc40 PDF Text Text MEMORANDUH TO: Interdisciplinary Team FROM: Stan Nuffer DATE: March 5, 1987 SUBJECT: Logan Canyon Environmental Study PROJECT: B21163.DO The seventeenth Interdisciplinary Team Meeting was held on February 17, 1987 at 3:00 p.m. at the UDOT District Office in Ogden, Utah. Enclosed are the minutes for your review. The next meeting will be held on Monday, March 9, 1987 at 3:00 p.m . . at the Brigham City Hall in Brigham City, Utah. The agenda will be as follows: 1. Review minutes of February 17 meeting. 2. Additional discussion on the Maguire Primrose by John L. England. 3. Discuss results of scoping meetings. 4. Discussion of possible Interdisciplinary Team membership expansion. 5. Discuss possible day-long work session in Canyon as next Interdisciplinary Team meeting. 6. Continued discussion of traffic projections. Future meeting schedule: March 30 April 20 SLC-STN/26 - 3:00 p.m., District Office (see item 5 above) - 7:00 p.m., District Office � 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/25">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/25</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 3364022553 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 471311 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 Cover letter for the minutes from February 17, 1987 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource A memo from Stan Nuffer detailing the minutes from the Interdisciplinary Team meeting from February 17, 1987. (See also Item 13 in folder). Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Nuffer, Stanton S. 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 1987-03-05 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_12.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/7907d0f640645118daad16ec547eb14c.pdf a70f5e36308c093cec084cfb9500c651 PDF Text Text CHMHlll MEMORANDUM TO: Interdisciplinary Team FROM: Stan Nuffer DATE: July 22, 1987 SUBJECT: Logan Canyon Environmental Study PROJECT: B21163.FO The 23rd Interdisciplinary Team meeting was held on June 22, 1987, at 1:30 p.m. at the Brigham City Hall in Brigham City, Utah. Enclosed are the minutes for your review. Also enclosed for review is the following: o Public and Agency Involvement Technical Memorandum including issues and concerns from scoping process o Technical Memoranda, Chapters 1 through 8--final draft, incorporating suggested changes from previous revie\v o Road user benefit/cost comparison--first draft, Chapter 9--bound with Chapters 1 through 8 o Spot Improvement memorandum The next meeting will be held on Friday July 31, at 1:30 p.m. at the UDOT district office in Ogden, Utah. The agenda will be as follo\vs: 1. Review minutes of May 18 and June 22 meetings. minutes 2. Visual Resources Technical Memorandum. 3. Issues and Concerns Technical Memorandum. 4. Spot improvements alternative discussion, including accident report summary for Logan Cave. Fifty minutes 5. Chapter 9, Road User Benefit--Costs Comparison. minutes 6. Supplement to the Noise Technical Memorandum. Neil--Ten minutes BOT600/026 Ten Fifty minutes Fifty minutes Thirty John �LOGAN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY ID TEAM MEETING MINUTES June 22, 1987 ATTENDANCE: Steve Flint, Audubon Society Rudy Lukes, Sierra Club Fred LaBar, USFS Torn Lyon, Utah Wilderness Association Bill Helm, Unattached Jim Naegle, UDOT Lynn Zollinger, UDOT Gale Larson, Valley Engineering Stan Nuffer, CH2M HILL Lynn Foster, CH2M HILL Larry Martin, CH2M HILL ITEM l--REVIEW OF MINUTES The minutes of the May 18 meeting were not reviewed. GENERAL DISCUSSION The first item of business discussed was a memorandum to the ID Team from "Conservation Representatives" appearing under the letterhead of the Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon. The memorandum was requested to be entered into the minutes of the meeting and was discussed at length as follo~vs : 1. Issues Identification--The main concern was that a list of issues, concerns, or alternatives developed from the scoping process has not yet been presented to the ID Team. Response--Summaries of the two scoping meetings and a partial summary of the written comments have been distributed previously. A tabular summary of the scoping meetings and written responses was distributed during the meeting; it will be used to provide a technical memorandum summarizing the scoping process. 2. Chapter 8, Alternatives--The main concern was that the various alternatives presented in Chapter 8 are not properly analyzed with regard to possible impacts and mitigations as presented in other technical memoranda and reports. 2 �Response--Chapter 8 as submitted was 'a description of the alternatives, and was not intended to be the complete presentation of impacts and mitigation. Any environmental conclusions included in the chapter were very general and it was agreed in the later detailed discussion of Chapter 8 to delete the summary sections, and let Chapter 8 stand as a description of the alternatives only. 3. Organization of Material From CH2M HILL--The main concern was how the technical memorandums and reports are to be used in an EIS. Response--From the beginning of the study, the T.M.s have been used as a means to organize and document the data and findings in a logical manner. The organization of the T.M.s has generally followed the outline presented at the December 22, 1986, ID meeting, and are to be used as resources for preparation of the DEIS. Since the T.M.s as a whole are much more voluminous than can be accommodated in a DEIS, the information is to be summarized, rearranged, and edited into the DEIS. A preliminary outline of the DEIS was shown on the blackboard by Larry Martin. The essential elements of that outline will be included in the format for the DEIS as follows: CONTENTS SUMMARY 1. PURPOSE AND NEED Project Purpose Project Need 2. ALTERNATIVES Introduction Alternatives Considered Alternatives Developed for Further Consideration Comparison of Alternatives 3. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT Regional Setting Land Use Transportation Environment Socioeconomics 3 �4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES AND MITIGATION Socioeconomic Land Use Recreation Transportation Visual Air Quality Noise Botanical Resources/Wildlife Aquatic Resources/Water Quality Historic and Archaeological Energy Hydrology Relationship Between Local Short-Term Uses of Man's Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term Productivity Irreversible or Irretrievable Commitments of Resources 5. DRAFT 4(f) STATEMENT 6. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AVAILABILITY, DISTRIBUTION, AND PREPARERS Contacts Regarding This Draft Environmental Impact Statement Review of the DEIS Availability of the DEIS DEIS Distribution List of Preparers 7. PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT Public Information Interdisciplinary Team Agency Consultations and Involvement Scoping Meetings 8. REFERENCES 9. INDEX 4. Study Timetable--The main concern was that the evaluation of alternatives based on impactsi mitigation and issues is being pushed through. Response--It appears that this concern was due largely to the misconception by some ID Team members that Chapter 8 of the transportation plan T.M.s represented the alternative analysis which as explained above, it does not. The ID Team will have the opportunity to review the sections of the DEIS outlined above. 4 �5. Spot Improvements Alternative--The main concern was the the spot improvements alternatives was expanded to include more actions. Response--The spot improvements outlined in Chapter 8 responded to the comments received in the scoping process from a wide range of perspectives, and need to be considered at this point in the study. Each spot improvement will be evaluated on its own merits, along with the environmental consequences, after which the preferred group of spot improvements will be selected. ITEM 2--DISCUSSION OF CHAPTER 8 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Detailed discussion of Chapter 8, the Alternatives Technical Memorandum, resulted in a number of wording changes that were suggested and will be incorporated into the chapter. The most significant suggestion was to eliminate value judgements and conclusions from this chapter and leave it as a description of the alternatives only. It was also suggested to take out the references to level of service and discuss them in a separate section. ITEM 3--AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM John Neil briefly reviewed the Air Quality Technical Memorandum. The only comment was on the basis for the average running speed used in Table 2. The low average running speeds were used because they are considered the worst case. Using these criteria showed no significant air quality problem. ITEM 4--LAND USE AND RECREATION TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM A number of suggestions on wording clarifications and corrections to maps and figures were made. ITEM 5--S0CIOECONOMIC TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM General comment that some sections seemed biased toward the Rich County needs. More mention of the Cache County/Logan users socioeconomic use of the Canyon needs to be made. ITEM 6--TERRESTRIAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Limited time was available for discussion of this memorandum. Reference to Oak Brush and Pinion juniper need to be removed. ITEM 7--AQUATIC RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM General comment was that this Technical Memorandum was in good shape. Suggested eliminating reference to China Row Creek and Ricks Spring as spawning tributaries. Bunch Grass 5 �Creek and White Pine Creek are considered spawning tributaries and should be mentioned. The value of fishing needs to be included in the Socioeconomic Technical Memorandum. ITEM 8--VISUAL TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Time was not available for discussion. BOT600/026 6 � 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/26">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/26</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 1403276816 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 3234983 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 22, 1987 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource Minutes from June 22, 1987 Interdisciplinary Team meeting from Stan Nuffer detailing the agenda from the 23rd ID Team meeting at Brigham City Hall. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Nuffer, Stanton S. 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 1987-07-22 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Utah United States Box Elder County (Utah) Brigham City (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_1.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/a2b04583817f1dfd842859c2794d84e7.pdf 737b249bd48ec39dae48c0e76df80acb PDF Text Text - II , - - - --- - --- -- ... - - - - -- - � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Local URL The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website <a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/31">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/31</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 846876083 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 575677 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 Logan Canyon interdisciplinary team attendance sheet Description An account of the resource Lined notebook paper with a list of those attending of the interdisciplinary team. Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 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 1970-1989 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan Canyon (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Rich 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 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_Item_3.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/3a2f16f3b6d2bdb2f7da522edaa0ea2d.pdf 7456444ca1c08c0520ab5cb10e4d946d PDF Text Text '" LOGAN CANYON MINUTES OF ID TEAM MEETING October 6, 1986 Attendance: Stan Nuffer, CH2M HILL John D'Amico, CH2M HILL Cliff Forsgren,CH2M HILL Sherril Pitkin, CH2M HILL Fred LaBar, USFS Mark Shaw, USFS Clark Ostergard, USFS Gale Larson, Valley Engineering Neal Stoeger, FHWA . John Neil, UDOT Jim Naegle, UDOT Bruce Swenson, UDOT Jack Spence Steve Flint Item 1 - Review of Minutes Steve Flint asked that in all tech memo's and minutes, traffic volumes be stated as either winter, summer or annual. Item 2 - Review of Public Information Meeting f Stan Nuffer led the discussion on the public information meeting. Steve Flint pointed out that the distance from Garden City to Montelier, Idaho was 31 miles and the distance between Logan and " Garden City is 40 plus miles. Steve also indicated that he had spoken with people in the emergency room at the Logan Hospital and they said that there were medical services available in Montpelier and that the decision _to come to Logan for medical treatment was a personal one. Steve was concerned that there may have been ~ arl impression created at the meeting that there were no medical services in Montpelier. Noone at the meeting was certain just what services were available in Montpelier~ It was generally concluded that since Logan is a regional medical facility and has a greater range of services and specialists than the other communities in the general area, Logan would be a more desireable place to go for medical attention. 1 There was also a question about an increase in RV traffic in the Canyon. RV traffic is expected to increase at the same rate as the overall traffic volume. There has been nothing to indicate that the percentage of RV traffic will increase. 1 �( Jim Naegel mentioned that during the public meeting Rudy Lukez had said that he had traffic flow data dating back to the 1930's. Jim wondered why that information had not been brought to the ID Team and if Rudy wanted it considered as part of this study. No one in attendance was certain what Rudy wanted to do with the data. There was some discussion on the problem with the accident rate calculations obtained from UDOT. Jack Spence and Steve Flint expressed concern that the safety analysis may not be as good as it might be because of uncertain data. After some discussion it was decided that a letter would be written to the appropriate UDOT officials pointing out the calculation problems and the fear that there may be problems with the data itself. Cliff Forsgren will write the letter. Further discussion of safety led to the conclusion that those O.Ol-mile highway sections which appeared to have a greater number of accidents/year (at 80 percent confidence) than the average for the Canyon would be included in the alternative development phase. If during the alternative development phase it was determined that more information was needed on a specific site, the original accident reports for that site would be examined. Item 3 - Visual Considerations Presentation by Clark Ostergard Clark Ostergard made a presentation which explained the Forest Services' approach to classifying visual aspects and impacts of a proposed project. In addition to a written presentation, there were slides illustrating the important features of the visual classification system. Clark also had some references on designing and/or mitigating visual impacts on scenic highways. Clark has also taken the time to classify the roadway between Right Hand Fork and Ricks Springs. This information • will be extremely helpful as alternatives are developed and evaluated. Fred LaBar also discussed the Forest Plan, in particular Logan Canyon. Fred pointed out the provision for classifica~ tion of the highway in Logan Canyon as a "scenic highway". f:l John D' Amico asked if the "scenic highway" designation would ~ t-A~f'/ . increase traffic in the Canyon. Fred said that it might, · v"( t#.JJ especially if the Forest Service could increase its camping J ~~\~ facilities. \5'" Item 4 - Garden City Meeting Gale Larson said that there was a lot of interest in a meeting in Garden City. A meeting was scheduled for Monday, ' November 3, 1986 at 7:30 p.m. in Garden City. 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/32">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/32</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 2200061202 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 1440976 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 6, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource Minutes from October 6, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Review of minutes, public information meeting, and visual considerations presentation by Clark Ostergard, Garden City meeting. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource D'Amico, John Pitkin, Sherril LaBar, Fred Shaw, Mark Ostergard, Clark Larson, Gale Stoeger, Neal Neil, John Naegle, Jim Swenson, Bruce Spence, Jack Flint, Steve Forsgren, Clifford Nuffer, Stanton S. Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 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 1986-10-06 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_10.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/b70b1b90e4e6ed0124697f11015190fd.pdf 65229b81282586e3e93b3018b7c6645d PDF Text Text LOGAN CANYON Minutes of ID Team Meeting July 28, 1986 Attendance: Clark Ostergaard - USFS Fred LaBar - USFS Todd Weston - UDOT Stan Nuffer - CH2M HILL John D'Amico - CH2M HILL Cliff Forsgren - CH2M HILL Bill Helm - Unattached Rudy Lukez - Sierra Club Howard Richardson - UDOT John Neil - UDOT ITEM 1 - REVIEW OF MINUTES The minutes were reviewed. There was some confusion about the sources of additional names for the mailing list which were listed in the minutes. It was noted that Fred LaBar and Bill Helm had mailed names and not turned them in at the last meeting. There was no other discussion on the minutes. ITEM 2 - TFAFFIC COUNT DATA The sources of traffic data were discussed. Permanent stations on US 89-91 at Webster Junction, on US 89 at Card Guard Station in Logan Canyon (later moved to Garden City), and on US 89 north of Garden City are being used in the preparation of the traffic forecast. ITEM 3 - PRESENTATION OF PROPOSED TPAFFIC FORECAST A past trends based forecast had been prepared using a least squares best fit linear function. This approach produced an annual increase in ADT which was less than one percent, a rate which was felt to be low. The Utah State, Office of Planning and Budget was prepared its forecast of economic and population growth through the year 2010. The overall rate of population increase for northern Utah was approximately 2 percent. If traffic in Logan Canyon were to increase at the same rate as the population, the summer ADT in Logan Canyon would reach approximately 6,000 vehicles per day in 2,010. Supporting data for this forecast is available and will be presented at the next ID Team (Team) meeting. There was also some Qlscussion on the traffic classification counts. The summer counts will begin on July 29, 1987. The counts will include a classification for recreational vehicles and record turning movements. �ITEM 4 - DISCUSSION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE DETERMINATION The roadway will be evaluated on the basis of the level of service which is possible at a given traffic volume. The Transportation Research Board describes a procedure for establishing levels of service (A through E) for rural roads. Copies of portions of the procedure description were distributed to team members to help them become familiar with the level of service concept. There was some discussion on which level of service would be planned for in the Canyon. UDOT would like to plan for a "C" level, but the actual level of service used will be determined by the Team. ITEM 5 - REVIEW OF ACCIDENT DATA The accident data for 6 years (1980 - 1985) has been tabulated using a UDOT computer program. The UDOT program was used because the program performs the types of analysis required for roadways and the accident data base was already on the UDOT computer. The computer runs had only recently been completed and there had not been sufficient time to review the results. Hopefully this will be completed by the next meeting. ITEM 6 - UPDATE ON STATUS OF BASE MAP PREPARATION ( An example of the base maps was shown to the of the set will be available, when they have to Team members who wish to have one. Clark requested a set to get started on the visual Team. Copies been completed, Ostergaard survey. MISCELLANEOUS The approved forest plan has a section on Logan Canyon which may be of · interest to Team members. Clark Ostergaard will bring a number of copies of that section to the next meeting. SLC81/11 � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Local URL The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website <a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/33">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/33</a> Purchasing Information Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item. To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a> Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2013 Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, at 800 dpi. Archival file is PDF (800 dpi), display file is JPEG2000. Checksum 2452721948 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 1269187 Bytes Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Minutes from July 28, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource Minutes from July 28, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Review of minutes, traffic count data, presentation of proposed traffic forecast, highway capacity and level of service determination, review of accident data, and an update on status of base map preparation. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Ostergard, Clark LaBar, Fred Weston, Todd D'Amico, John Helm, Bill Lukez, Rudy Richardson, Howard Neil, John Forsgren, Clifford Nuffer, Stanton S. Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 Utah Roadside Improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon Logan Canyon Study Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1986-07-28 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Utah United States Logan Canyon (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 20th century 1980-1989 Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 27 Folder 1 Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Libraries Photograph Curator, phone (435) 797-0890. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Highway 89 Digital Collections Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context MSS148VIIIB27_Fd1_Page_16.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/0d9d39033a34a89061062edbbfce32ae.pdf 499a8339e30a7783450d7680bded936d PDF Text Text LOGAN CANYON Minutes of ID Team Meeting July 28, 1986 Attendance: Clark Ostergaard - USFS Fred LaBar - USFS Todd Weston - UDOT Stan Nuffer - CH2M HILL John D'Amico - CH2M HILL Cliff Forsgren - CH2M HILL Bill Helm - Unattached Rudy Lukez - Sierra Club Howard Richardson - UDOT John Neil - UDOT ITEM 1 - REVIEW OF MINUTES The minutes were reviewed. There was some confusion about the sources of additional names for the mailing list which were listed in the minutes. It was noted that Fred LaBar and Bill Helm had mailed names and not turned them in at the last meeting. There was no other discussion on the minutes. ITEM 2 - TFAFFIC COUNT DATA ( The sources of traffic data were discussed. Permanent stations on US 89-91 at Webster Junction, on US 89 at Card Guard Station in Logan Canyon (later moved to Garden City), and on US 89 north of Garden City are being used in the preparation of the traffic forecast. ITEM 3 - PRESENTATION OF PROPOSED TRAFFIC FORECAST A past trends based forecast had been prepared using a least squares best fit linear function. This approach produced an annual increase in ADT which was less than one percent, a rate which was felt to be low. The Utah State, Office of Planning and Budget was prepared its forecast of economic and population growth through the year 2010. The overall rate of population increase for northern Utah was approximately 2 percent. If traffic in Logan Canyon were to increase at the same rate as the population, the summer ADT in Logan Canyon would reach approximately 6,000 vehicles per day in 2,010. Supporting data for this forecast is available and will be presented at the next ID Team (Team) meeting. There was also some discussion on the traffic classification counts. The summer counts will begin on July 29, 1987. The counts will include a classification for recreational vehicles and record turning movements. �r ( ITEM 4 - DISCUSSION OF HIGHWAY CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE DETERMINATION The roadway will be evaluated on the basis of the level of service which is possible at a given traffic volume. The Transportation Research Board describes a procedure for establishing levels of service (A through E) for rural roads. Copies of portions of the procedure description were distributed to team members to help them become familiar with the level of service concept. There was some discussion on which level of service would be planned for in the Canyon. UDOT would like to plan for a "C" level, but the actual level of service used will be determined by the Team. ITEM 5 - REVIEW OF ACCIDENT DATA The accident data for 6 years (1980 - 1985) has been tabulated using a UDOT computer program. The UDOT program was used because the program performs the types of analysis required for roadways and the accident data base was already on the UDOT computer. The computer runs had only recently been completed and there had not been sufficient time to review the results. Hopefully this will be completed by the next meeting. ITEM 6 - UPDATE ON STATUS OF BASE MAP PREPARATION An example of the base maps was shown to the of the set will be available, when they have to Team members who wish to have one. Clark requested a set to get started on the visual Team. Copies been completed, Ostergaard survey. MISCELLANEOUS The approved forest plan has a section on Logan Canyon which t may be of interest to Team members. Clark Ostergaard will bring a number of copies of that section to the next meeting. SLC8I/II � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Local URL The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website <a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/34">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/34</a> Purchasing Information Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item. To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a> Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2013 Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, at 800 dpi. Archival file is PDF (800 dpi), display file is JPEG2000. Checksum 3001645539 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 1261682 Bytes Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Minutes from July 28, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource Minutes from July 28, 1986 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Review minutes, traffic count data, presentation of proposed traffic forecast, discussion of highway capacity and level of service determination, review of accident data, and update on status of base map preparation. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Ostergard, Clark LaBar, Fred Weston, Todd D'Amico, John Helm, Bill Lukez, Rudy Richardson, Howard Neil, John Forsgren, Clifford Nuffer, Stanton S. Subject The topic of the resource Roadside Improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon United States Highway 89 Traffic engineering Logan Canyon Study Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1986-07-28 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan Canyon (Utah) Utah United States Cache County (Utah) Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1980-1989 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 27 Folder 2 Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Libraries Photograph Curator, phone (435) 797-0890. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Highway 89 Digital Collections Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context MSS148VIIIB27_Fd2_Page_17.pdf Highway 89; 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/8c7802b4b465e2dc379c5e8134bfc556.pdf f70633a612840f52f4efdbf0277a4051 PDF Text Text LOGAN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY Minutes of ID Team Meeting February 17, 1987 ATTENDANCE: Lynn Zollinger, UDOT Todd Weston, UDOT Commissioner Jack Spence, Sierra Club Steve Flint, Utah Audobon Society Duncan Silver, FHWA Fred LaBar, USFS Gale Larson, Valley Engineering Brian Dixon, BP~G Stan Nuffer, CH2M HILL Cliff Forsgren, CH2M HILL ITEM 1 - REVIEW OF MINUTES During the review of the minutes of the previous meeting, Stan Nuffer reported that the State of Wyoming is using a growth rate of 3.7 percent per year west of Sage Junction. Jack Spence reported that there had been some statistical tests run on the past trends method of forecasting future traffic volumes and that, from a past trends perspective, it may be better to project a linear growth 2ate than an exponential. Jack's reasoning was that the r value was higher using a linear model. , Duncan Silver suggested that it might be better to present a range of future traffic volumes with a corresponding range of consequences. Steve Flint asked for the r2 values for the past trends , calculations for the other counting stations observed during the study (north of Garden City for example). It was decided that a summary of all assumptions made to forecast further traffic and to estimate the traffic volume capacity at each level of service would be prepared. This information would allow the ID Team to see how sensitive the LOS determination is to the various factors which could have an influence. During the discussion of the basic alternative categories that were presented at the January 27 meeting, Jack Spence and Steve Flint both objected to including an alternative with a 40 mph design speed, that would widen and change the alignment in the middle Canyon section. Jack and Steve both felt that a 40 mph alternative had been examined and declared unacceptable by the Forest Service and that there was no point in considering it. Duncan Silver pointed out that the study team cannot assume to ignore established standards without some study. Duncan agreed that if the Forest Service has some specific information that would help the team to determine a 40 mph road is not feasible in the middle Canyon, then further study might not be necessary. �MEETING NOTES Page 2 ITEM 2 - OUTLINE OF PUBLIC PRESENTATION FOR SCOPING MEETINGS During the discussion of the presentation the question of advisory speeds versus design speeds arose. Jack Spence wanted to know what the difference was. Stan Nuffer explained that even though a road might have an overall design speed of 40 mph, individual curves could have design speeds of less than 40 mph. In cases where the design speed at a particular location is less than the overall roadway design speed an advisory speed sign is posted. Advising speed signs are black on yellow and are posted with a curve warning sign. Duncan asked for a list of the "spot" improvements. Stan indicated that there had only been a general list prepared and that they would be defined after the scoping meetings (a general list was reviewed in the draft fact sheet). ITEM 3 - REVIEW OF NOTICE OF INTENT, LEGAL NOTICE, LETTER TO AGENCIES, AND FACT SHEET During the review of the fact sheet, Duncan Silver advised the team that not studying an alternative that included current highway standards would significantly delay the approvals 9f any study. Duncan did say that it might be appropriate to state that current standards were given consideration and not examined in detail for the following reasons: (the reasons are then listed). Duncan also suggested that a technical memo on use of a modified standard be developed. Jack Spence pointed out that in the upper Canyon section there were some areas where the road is near the Beaver Creek and widening will be very difficult. Todd Weston asked if there was any information on how much traffic an improved roadway would attract. Stan Nuffer responded that general information was available but each project has its own unique characteristics. SLC-STN/25 � 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/36">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/36</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 3028432301 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 1370202 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 Feburary 17, 1987 meeting Description An account of the resource The minutes from the February 17, 1987 Interdisciplinary Team meeting (See also Item 12 in folder). Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Nuffer, Stanton S. Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 Utah Roadside Improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon Logan Canyon Study Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1987-02-17 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 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_13.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/221c6983fb2519a8b2990a4aea450bbc.pdf 5f4fa77c73dbb7faa06bb66e53ff31b7 PDF Text Text Meeting Format: o Introductions o Brief project history and background o Review of transportation needs Traffic volumes and characteristics Traffic projections Hi~h~ay capacities and levels of service Maintenance considerations Safety Deficient areas o Issues/Concerns Travel time/delays Safety Passing opportunities Slow vehicle turnouts Pedestrians and bicycles Roadside parking Maintenance Sr.l.O\\ removal Bridge replacement Roadway cuts and fills Scenic highway designation Visual Campground access Roadside turnouts Roadside trees (tree canapy) River protection/modification ~later quali ty Streams and vegetation Rare or endangered species Geology and soils Noise and air Historical and archaeological SLC85/l03 �I END STUDY j.~ 1 C',.. ~~ Me (fowville Valley '" LEGEND MILE POST_ 1365 ~ .~~~$J___iiiiZ2~~ei I ~ I MtLES FIGURE VICINITY MAP LOGAN CANYON STUDY j: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/37">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/37</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 810777790 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 2516129 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 Meeting agenda and map for Highway 89 meeting in Logan Canyon, 1980's Description An account of the resource Meeting agenda and map of potential Highway 89 route through Logan Canyon, 1980s. Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 Logan Canyon (Utah) Public lands--Utah--Logan Canyon Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon Logan Canyon (Utah) Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Agendas (administrative records) Maps Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan Canyon (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, Senator John P. Holmgren papers, 1985-1989, COLL MSS 133 Box 10 Folder 6 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/xv07669">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv07669</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 MSS133Bx10_Item_4.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/29dec4f48cd5d285cc31d4c4a1282326.pdf b4a49fae07c1f04a9e61f9c84bfaf3c0 PDF Text Text ClfMHILL MEMORANDUM TO: I nterdisciplinary Team FROM: Stan Nuffer DATE: ~~ SUBJECT: Logan Canyon Environmental Study PROJECT: B21163.DO The eighteenth Interdisciplinary Team Meeting was held on March 9, 1987 at 3:00 p.m. at the Brigham City Hall in Brigham City, Utah. Enclosed are the minutes for your review. Also attached for review is the Technical Memorandum on components of roadway improvement (Chapter 7). The next meeting will be held on Monday, March 30, 1987 at 3:00 p.m. at the UDOT District Office in Ogden, Utah. The agenda will be as follows: ,~J Review minutes of March 9 meeting. Discuss summaries of scoping meeting testimony (to be distributed at the meeting) . O/l~ <:~ 1q ~C.(~ m o.~or- :jr'-r:/.'P' 3. Distribution and discussion of Alternative CI, D1, D2, and D3. F~ ~:2 ~ 4. J . '0'::::> ~ f'l'o." ~ Q rd' S J Distribution a h d discussion of the existing conditions portions of the aquatic resources and the recreation/land use Techical Memorandum. / f'(I~" . .JfJC! Discuss possible day-long work session in Canyon as next Interdisciplinary Team meeting. 6. \'(7~ I~ II'! . ~'-5 ~ Continued discussion of traffic projections. 7. Iftl J Comments on Chapter 7. Future meeting schedule: L 7: 00 p. m., Dis tr ic l Of ace (s ee Item 5 a b o ve ) o~C\t\... - 3: 00 p.m., District Office DC 3:00 p.m., Brigham City ~' ~o n . - ,- ~ -\Mr- Tves&~~) fo~s\-~t-~ q.~ Q~' oS �t't'-~~\ c.. ~ t e~ ,,~,O~ . C \\\5\ '. \ /l~~<\ <;j.r •\~ J.Ao>-~ \dL N"'J~ we.; ,,0 � 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/38">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/38</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 1075880576 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 872796 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 Cover page of March 9, 1987 Interdisciplinary Team meeting minutes Description An account of the resource Cover page of March 9, 1987 Interdisciplinary Team meeting minutes includes handwritten notes in margins. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource 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 1987-03-25 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Utah United States Logan Canyon (Utah) Cache County (Utah) Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1980-1989 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 27 Folder 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_15.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/1c75141fdd65a92ec355ed19a8d46c0b.pdf b25ca9bf6be111a1809f89dfee21295c PDF Text Text -- - 1986 APR MAY JUN TASK 2 -LOCATION STUDIES/TRANSPORTATION PLAN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FORMULATION MAPPiNG AND SURVEYING COMPONENT IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED ACTION DETERMINATION TECHNICAL APPENDIX PREPARATION 4 - PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT _~... npINr. MEETINGS MEDIA COVERAGE - NFORMATION MEETINGS FEDERAL AGENCY ASSISTANCE LOCAL INFORMATION OFFICE ~ Vlnl'n TAPI' IV('A) PRODUCTION ~ PUBLIC HEARING ~ • TASK 5 - COORDINATION INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM ORGANIZATION DATA ACOUISITION PERMIT INVENTORY AND APPLICATIONS - TASK 6 - ENVIRONMENTAL ANAL YSIS •• INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM COORDINATION LITERATURE REVI EW FIELD STUDIES ANALYSIS OF AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTA L CONSEQUENCES DEVELOP MITIGATION MEASURES TECHNICAL APPENDIX PREPARATION TASK 7 - DOCUMENTS - 1987 NOV OEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUl = - -.- - ---- --I.:-:. - - --- - ..... _. .- GEOLOGICAL REFERENCE SEARCH FIELD INVESTIGATIONS LABORATORY TESTING GEOTECHNICAL ANAL YSIS TECHNICAL APPENOIX PREPARATION t SUMMARIZE TECHNICAL MEMORANDA ASSEMBLE PRELIMINARY DRAFT DOCUMENT SUBMIT TO COOPERATING AGENCIES RESPOND TO AGENCY REVIEWS FINAL REVIEW BY UDOT PRINT AND SUBMIT REQUIRED COPIES OCT ..... TASK 3 - G.EOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS "' SEP -- EXISTING DATA ACQUISITION SAFETY ANALYSIS MAINTENANCE ANAL YSIS SUBSTANDARD LOCATION IDENTIFICATION CONGESTION ANALYSIS TECHNICAL APPENDIX PREPARATION TA~ AUG ...... TASK 1 -ANALYSIS OF TRANSPORTATION NEED <IIIL JUL - I• • 1- III 1- • • • • •• --- i • • V;; '-- D -- -- --PRO~CT SCHEDULE � 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/39">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/39</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 2961868896 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 689193 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 Project schedule for 1986 through 1987 Description An account of the resource A task calendar and graph detailing the months in which tasks would be completed for the improvement of Logan Canyon's roads. Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon United States Highway 89 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 1986 1987 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. United States Utah 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 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_Item_5.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/f1ce3e4408575aec26f738701925906a.pdf a41a39509bdd9a32c42ef0a39c914199 PDF Text Text MEETING NOTICE A public meeting regarding the u.s. Highway 89 through Logan Canyon improvement study will be held Tuesday, September 23, at 7:30 p.m. in Logan City Hall. The Utah Department of Transportation and its engineering consultant for the project , CH2M HILL, will present the data and findings from the first task of this study, the determination of transportation needs for the segment of the highway between Right Fork and Garden City. Preliminary findings of public concerns and environmental issues regarding road improvements in ' the canyon will also be reported. and comments will be entertained. Questions A fact sheet is being prepared for the public on the project mailing list. Contact: Cliff Forsgren or Margaret Johnson CH2M HILL 363-0200 � 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/43">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/43</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 2100321693 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 392203 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 Logan City Hall Highway 89 meeting notice Description An account of the resource Notice for a public meeting regarding Highway 89 improvements in Logan Canyon, 1980s. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Johnson, Margaret Forsgren, Clifford Subject The topic of the resource Public lands--Utah--Logan Canyon--History Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon United States Highway 89 Logan Canyon (Utah) Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Press releases Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available CH2M HILL Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Utah Logan Canyon (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, Senator John P. Holmgren papers, 1985-1989, COLL MSS 133 Box 10 Folder 6 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/xv07669">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv07669</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 MSS133Bx10_Item_3.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/32d7a78c324a05b6b4bc5e35ae4a4e75.pdf 29c46baab7806eda681d280e2e244f2b PDF Text Text DRAFT #1 LOGAN CANYON Minutes of ID Team Meeting July 14, 1986 Attendance Cliff Forsgren - CH2M HILL Alan Steger - FHWA Stan Nuffer - CH2M HILL Jim Naegle - UDOT Lynn Zollinger - UDOT Gayle Larson - Valley Engineering Todd Weston - UDOT John Neil - UDOT Clark Ostergaard - USFS Dave Baumgartner - USFS Rudy Lukez - Sierra Club Carolyn Martineau - UDOT Jack Spence - Sierra Club Ken Riddle - UDOT ITEM 1 - REVIEW OF MINUTES The minutes of the last meeting were reviewed. There was some discussion on the roll of the ID team. Jack Spence asked whether or not the ID team would recommend a preferred alternative to the cooperating agencies. After some discussion it was decided to modify the role statement of the ID team to include a recommendation of the preferred alternatives. Dave Baumgartner " asked whether the ID team was going to be part of the evaluations or just provide review. Stan Nuffer explained that the Forest Service which has staff and expertise is environmental areas would be directly involved in the gathering and evaluation of data. They would also assist in identifying areas where more data is required and assist in the identification of impacts and mitigation measures. During the discussion of the Public Involvement Program, Dave Baumgartner asked when the scoping meetings were going to be held. Stan Nuffer explained that the purpose of the public information meetings was to give the public the opportunity to develop more informed opinions and also for the project team to gather information which would be used to identify the key issues. The official scoping meetings would then be held to obtain from the public more clearly defined concerns and key issues. A ~~ a suitable SLC79/16 __ e mailing list were received from The press release had been turned ffairs Department who would put it prior to release. ~_~- 1 �DRAFT #1 ITEM 2 - TRAFFIC COUNTING AND FORECASTING The discussion of traffic counting and forecasting centered around information on the subject which had been mailed to team members prior to the meeting. There will be manual counts which will serve two purposes, the first is to provide classification information and the second is to provide additional information on the distribution of flow within the canyon. Four or five counts in the canyon should provide some useable data on the traffic flow. \ ( There will be two coverage stations from which counts will be taken. The FHWA Traffic Counting Manual recommends manual counts at coverage stations 2 to 4 times per year. There was some discussion of the need to make manual counts on days that were representative of the general traffic flow for that period of the year. Rudy Lukez asked for the daily summary of traffic flow at the permanent station for the month of February, 1986 in order to see whether the February count represented "typical" February traffic. Rud al asked for traffic flow data on other roads in Cache CQUDty i l o ther Utah Canyon roads if possible. Jack Spence disnd c ussed~ he- importance of conducting manu al counts on representative days in order to obtain data that would be statistically sound. The schedule and location of the proposed summer traffic counts was presented and discussed. Four summer dates, July 29, August 2, August 13 and August 16 were proposed and approved. Three locations, Right Hand Fork, Tony Grove Intersection and Beaver Mountain Intersection were proposed. The Sinks turnoff near the summit was substituted for the Beaver Mountain intersection and the 3 sites approved. Cliff Forsgren said that standard methods of preparing traftfic forecasts do not adequately address the impact of a significant recreation area on " rural system. For this reason a 2 methods of preparing the forecast were presented and discussed. The first method assumed full development around Bear Lake with traffic increasing in some proportion to the increase in cabins and condominiums .. Using this method and data collected in 1981, an increase in traffic of nearly 300 percent could be expected by the year 1990. This method was not recommended for use in this study, due to the volatile and speculative nature of many of these recreational developments. The second method uses past trends as a means of forecasting future ADT. Using data for the past 5 years this method would provide a significantly lower estimate of future traffic flow. An average annual increase of approximately 3 percent was predicted. This method was generally viewed SLC79/16 2 �DRAFT . #1 ( as a better approach because there were more factors influencing traffic in the Canyon than just Bear Lake. Jack Spence said that he thought recreational traffic had increased close to 6 percent per year in recent years. Clark Ostergaard indicated that the Forest Service had experienced about a 5 percent per year increase in campground usage. It was decided that a past trends approach would be used, but that a longer period of data was needed. Permanent station records as far back as available will be used. The past trends approach would also be checked against economic trends and forecasts. ITEM 3 - OUTLINE OF TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ANALYSIS A brief outline of the transportation needs analysis was presented. This outline was present primarily for information and there was little discussion on it. SLC79/16 SLC79/16 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/48">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/48</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 236039513 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 2002586 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 Interdisciplinary Team meeting, July 14, 1986 Description An account of the resource Minutes from the interdisciplinary team meeting with a review of minutes, traffic counting and forecasting, and an outline of transportation needs analysis. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Ostergard, Clark Forsgren, Clifford Spence, Jack Lukez, Rudy Baumgartner, David Nuffer, Stanton S. Subject The topic of the resource Traffic engineering Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon Logan Canyon (Utah) Logan Canyon Study Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1986-07-14 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan Canyon (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1980-1989 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 27 Folder 3 Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Libraries Photograph Curator, phone (435) 797-0890. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Highway 89 Digital Collections Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context MSS148VIIIB27_Fd3_Page_3.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/523faf9a93af3eb93bcb17beb21022b3.pdf f47e63aa91e8caae6bcb28ecc74052e2 PDF Text Text MAY 1986 · THE UTAH WILDERNESS COALITION ~BLM I ~ "l Your testi ony is crucial to the future of Utah wild lands Utah wilderness supporters will get their first opportunity to comment on the Bureau of Land Management's statewide draft environmental impact statement May 7 in Vernal and three other communities as the public hearings on the document begin. The agency will cram 16 public hearings into five days in May, ending with two in Salt Lake City on May 15 (see full schedule in box below). ) \ Is tt worth your time to speak at one or more of the hearings? Absolutely ... if you care about protecting Utah's outstanding desert and canyon wildlands. Maggie Fox, Southwest regional representative for the Sierra Club, calls testimony at the hearings ~the most important conservation activity you can undertake this year. ~ "If you have time for only one conservation commitment this year, the wilderness hearings should be it," she added. The BLM is required by law to hold public hearings on the wilderness proposal embodied in its massive draft environmental continued to page 8 Hearing schedule (Unless otherwise noted. all hearing begin at 7 p.m.) May 7, 1986 Tooele Tooele County Courthouse Commissioners' Chambers. Third Floor 47 South Main Street Kane County Courthouse 70 North Main Street Moab Grand County Community Center (Old Legion Building) 500 East lOON orth Ogden Roland Perry Choral Room Browning Performing Arts Center Weber State College 3750 Harrison Blvd. Cedar City BLM District Office 1579 North Main Street Loa Community Center One block west of the courthouse Price Carbon County Courthouse 200 East Main Street Logan Mountain Fuel Supply Auditorium 45 East 200 North St. George Washmgton County Administrative BUIlding 197 East Tabernacle Delta HIgh School Auditorium 50 South 300 North Castledale (2 pm and 7 pm) High School Auditorium Kanab May 15, 1986 High School Lunchroom 70 North First West Monticello May 14, 1986 Utah County Building, Courtroom 310 51 South University Ave. Escalante May 13, 1986 BLM District Office, Conference Room 170 South 500 East Provo May 8, 1986 Vernal Emery County Courthouse Salt Lake City The Salt Palace Suite E 100 South West 1 emple tliin'Wirrorri;-tl'-H'.i&r.rlai:V 10 pari proposal. There are over 100 miles of canyons such as this one in the White Canyon complex. Narrow, winding canyons cut through the same formation [hat occurs in adjacent Natural Bridges Natural Park. The BLM dropped most of the White Canyon complex in the inventory and is recommending none of [he remainder for wilderness. v\yc~WJJ~f:O~~Ml~'~~t~Qh'~"~ wi~ Faced an appeal by the Utah Wilderness Coalition, the Utah Bureau of Land Management has agreed to restore the original boundary of the Mt. Ellen-Blue Hills Wilderness Study Area and to undertake "reasonable" reclamation efforts to restore an area illegally chained on the mountain. Jim Catlin, conservation chairman for the Utah Chapter of the Sierra Club, who wrvte the appeal on behalf of the Coalition. heralded the decision as a major victory for Utah conservationists. "It was especially good to win this one because of the way Mt. Ellen has been treated throughout the wilderness study process." said Catlin. "The treatment of Mt. Ellen may stand as the worst violation of interim management policy on BLM wildlands anywhere in the country. In addition to the chaining. the Bureau has allowed the Exxon drill rig and its six miles of new road. a trespass road near Mt. Ellen's summit, and a reservoir within the wilderness study area. And much of the land on Mt. Ellen that enjoys wilderness study status is only there because of conservationists' appeals." The chaining occurred in 1984 when the bureau contracted for the removal of pinyon juniper forest on Mt. Ellen's western slopes in the Henry Mountains of central Utah. Two bulldozers linked by heavy chain ripped through the forest. 300 acres of it within the published boundary of the 8L726-acre wilderness study area (WSA). continued to page 3 �2 THE UTAH" lOER ESS COALIT ION MAY 1 UWC wilderness and Utah's parks parts of a whole b} Terri Martin The l tah \\ ildernel>~ Coalition's 5 million-acre "ilderne!lll proposal renecb another theme: enhancement and protection of l tah's national parks. By designating orne I.e) areas adjacent to the parks a~ "ilderness the l ' \\ C proposals "ould remedy the arbitrariness of important park boundaries and better protect the natural and scenic \alues of ecOS) stems and vie,,sheds integral to our parks. Ho\\ often have you thought. as you gaJed across Utah's canyon country. that mmt of southern Utah could have been set aside as one huge national park? That many other state. almost any chunk of this "ordinar)" BLM land would probablj be a national park? Bndges l'.atlonal Monument. Too often, of course. those arbitrar) boundaries disregarded Imponant park-quality values on adjacent lands. The result? Areas with outstanding scenic, hIstone and natural values were excluded from Utah's parks and remain vulnerable. And many of those adjacent areas possess high wilderness values as well. The BLM wilderness review gives us another chance to speak out for protection of areas like these before it is too late. Some key wilderness areas adjacent to our parks include the following: Zion UWC wilderness proposals abut Zion National Park on all sides. Protection of these areas would enhance the park's ecological, recreation and scenic values. Southern Utah's canyon country is clearly Id wor class" - a unique and unparalleled Iand cape. And while pieces of this superlame regIOn have been preserved as national Parunuweap Canyon parks, crucial areas integral to the parks Parunuweap is increasingly popular for its superlative hiking opportunities. The were excluded in drawing their boundaries. Unfortunately, the boundaries of our UWCs Parunuweap proposal includes the natIonal parks were too often the result of upper half of Parunuweap Canyon, a deep arbitrary political compromises or timid canyon carved by the East Fork of the vision. Crucial areas were sometimes exVirgin River through Navajo sandstone. c1uded because of specUlation about potenThe lower portion of Parunuweap Canyon tial resource conflicts - fear that inclusion lies within the park, and protection of the WIthin a park would lock up the land, upper Parunuweap is critical to the longbarnng possible future development. Other term preservation of park water quality and park boundaries were drawn narrowly to recreational values. protect only specific scenic features _ the The BLM Wilderness DEIS admits that pmnacles at Bryce, the Waterpocket Fold at ~scenic values here are equivalent to those Capitol Reef, the rock ~bridges" at Natural present in the national park." The BLM calls }-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ I can't BEAR to be without my UWC T-Shirt!! - the hike through Parunuweap "superlauve backpacking quality." The Washington County Water Conservancy District. however. has proposed a 35,000-acre reservoir on the East Fork within the Parunuweap WSA. The dam would be located near Zion's boundary and back water up to 3 to 4 miles into the heart of the Parunuweap wilderness proposal. pines and salmon colored spIres that are in the national park Box Canyon forms an integral road less unit with Bryce Canyon. The unit contains many of the unique erosional features found in the park itself. Canaan Mountain Capitol Reef National Park was set aside primarily to protect the Waterpocket Fold - a 60-mile-long uplift of sandstone cliffs with highly colored sedimentary formations. Protection of and in the UWCs wilderness proposals next to Capitol Reef would greatly enhance park values by assuring protection of scenic views, adjacent watersheds and roadless areas. Immediately south of - and contiguous to - Zion National Park, Canaan Mountain is a spectacular plateau towering 2000 feet above the surrounding desert. I ts rugged slickrock plateau top is broken with pinnacles, cones, scours and natural arches and is partially covered with scattered stands of ponderosa pine and Douglas fir. Canaan Mountain offers impressive panoramic views of Zion National Park, the Pine Valley Mountains (designated forest wilderness), and the Pink Cliffs. Bryce UWC is proposing wilderness designation for 3 areas which would enhance the natural, scenic and recreational values of Bryce Canyon. BLM dropped all of these areas during its inventory process. Squaw and Willis Creek Visitors to Bryce Canyon's popular overlooks view the pinyon-juniper covered benchlands of the UWCs 21,OOO-acre Squaw and Willis Creek proposal when they look beyond the park's famed pinnacles and spires. Wilderness protection of this area would help assure protection of Bryce's scenic viewshed. Similarly, protection of the area's slickrock canyons and pinyon-juniper bench lands would significantly expand hiking and camping opportunities available to Bryce visitors. Conservationists also promote the expansion of the park to include the narrow strip of Forest Service lands which lie between Bryce and the Squaw-Willis Creek area. Capitol Reef Mt. Pennel The UWCs 143,OOO-acre Mt. Pennel proposal abuts Capitol Reefs eastern boundary for around 15 miles and comprises a major portion of the scenic panorama viewed by visitors to the park's impressive Strike Valley overlook. Wilderness protection would help to assure that coal strip mining --once proposed for Swap Mesa and Cave Flat - does not occur and scar this vista with the sights of industrial development. The BLM has recommended none of its 74,300-acre WSA for wilderness. Fremont Gorge The rolling benches and sandstone cliffs in the UWCs l8,OOO-acre Fremont Gorge wilderness proposal are a natural continuation of geologic features in Capitol Reef National park. The area also includes many deep, narrow canyons which drain into the Fremont River as well as four miles of the Fremont River Gorge itself. Colorful rock walls and seasonal waterfalls create high quality day hiking opportunities convenient to the Capitol Reef campground. Colt Mesa The UWCs 24,OOO-acre Colt Mesa proposal includes Deep Point, a small heartshaped mesa which extends westward from East-or-Bryce and Box Canyon the south end of Capitol Reefs Waterpocket East-of-Bryce is a small -- 887 acres F old. The mesa provides a bird's eye view of but logical extension of Bryce Canyon the park's amazing geologic features . It was National Park, located northwest of Tropic. probably only excluded from the park itself It features the same towering ponderosa • because of the congressional preference for straight-line boundaries. continued to page 7 THE UTAH WILDERNESS COALITION Legend on Reverse: 5 Million Acres of BLM Wilderness! 100% Cotton Color: Sand o XL (4648) 0 L (42-44) 0 M (38-40) 0 S (34-36) $11-50 (Includes postage and handling) ·ame ___________________________________________________________ ddr~s ______________________________________________________ Clly ________________________________ State ____________ Zip ________ Make Check To: Utah Wilderness Coalition P.O . Box 11446 alt Lake City, Utah 84147 Proceeds help save Utah's BLM wildlands The Ulah Wilderness News is a publication of the Utah Wilderness Coalition - 18 com.ervation organizations united in support of a proposal to designate 5 million acres of Utah BLM. wilderness: The News will appear once each month during the comment period on the BLM s draft envIronmental Impact statement and as often thereafter as needed in pursuit of the Coalition's goal. or information. contact the Utah Wilderness Coalition, P.O. Box 11446, Salt Lake City, Utah, 84147. or phone 801-363-9621. Escalante Wilderness Commitee Wasatch Mountain Club Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance Utntah Mountain Club Slickrock Country Council The WIlderness Sociely Sierra Club National Parks and Conservation As>ociation hiends of the Eanh Defenders of Wildlife Four Corners' Wilderness Workshop Friends of the River. Colorado Plaleau Arizona Wilderness Coalition Colorado Environmental Coalition Arizona Whitewater Association Nevada Outdoor Recreation Association New Mexico BLM Wilderness Coalition Desen Tonoise Council (supporting wilderness designation in Joshua Tree and Beaver Dam Wash Areas) rundtng for The Coah(lon Ne ....1 I~ provided in pan by RecreatIonal Equipment Inc. (REI). 1124 Brtckyard Road . Salt Lake City. tah 84106 �MAY 1986 Utahns oppose Burr Trail boondoggle by Kris Dangerfield In a whirlwind of activity in Washington April 7-10, Utah conservationists lobbied against Sen. Jake Garn's plans to pave the Burr Trail, a 66-mile dirt road from Boulder, Utah, to Bull Frog Marina on the shores of Lake Powell. The week-long lobbying effort culminated in testimony before Sen. Malcolm Wallop's Public Lands Subcommittee. Proponents of the bill claim that paving 9.5 miles of the road and gravelling the rest as Sen. Garn proposes would substantially increase tourism in the area and would link all five Utah national parks with the Lake Powell ferry boat system in the Glen Canyon National Recreation area. Utah conservationists disagree, opposing the bill over these critical major points: • The paving plan would damage the outstanding scenic, recreational and wilderness values of the area which draw The descent into Long Canyon along the Burr Trail, one ofseveral places that various proposals call for paving. Utah conservationists favor a minimum improvement alternative at a fraction of the cost of paving. people who want to preserve the rural character of the road and its somewhat different "get away from it all experience;" • Paving and gravelling are unnecessary. The Burr Trail is now a graded, twowheel-<irive road easily driven in passenger cars; the road is passable year-round except for 10 or so days a year during periods of heavy rain or snow. Plus, there are paved, highly scenic alternative routes to Bull Frog, the new Boulder Mountain road among them; • The Burr Trail cannot be paved without altering the existing horizontal and vertical alignment. To accommodate tour buses, as the Gam bill provides, the road would have to be widened from its present 12 to 16 feet to 24 to 30 feet. Major cuts and fills would be required in the scenic and sensitive switchbacks portion of the road through the Waterpocket Fold in Capitol Reef National Park; • The costs of paving and gravelling, as well as an estimated $435,000 for annual maintenance and operation afterwards, are excessive and unjustifiable, particularly in the face of the Gramm-Rudman deficit reduction act which is already taking its toll on established Utah parks. Those budget cuts have forced reductions in staff, services and operating hours for Utah parks and visitor centers; • Despite the fact that supporters of the bill claim that only a handful of environmentalists is blocking the bill, the facts show that a majority of people in Utah oppose paving the Burr Trail. The Deseret News/ KSL poll showed that 53 percent of those polled who knew of the Burr Trail opposed paving it. And editorials in Utah's three major daily newspapers have spoken against paving; and, • There are serious flaws in the bill as drafted. The legislation does not address the original concerns - many also cited by the National Park Service - the conservationists raised in their opposition to paving. Among them are cultural resources, habitat for the endangered peregrine falcon, the existence of two wilderness study areas adjacent to the road, the long-term impact of roadside development on the seven state sections that adjoin the road, the use of the road for commercial hauling and increased use of the backcountry with no increased protection. Much of the bill's intent would be accomplished not through the language of the bill itself but through a contract between the National Park Service and the State of Utah. That contract exists now only in draft form and some of the major provisions have not been drafted at all. Among them is a so-called "reverter clause" that would give the road back to the State of Utah if the Park Service C:id not maintain it. One of the most troubling features of the contract approach, according to Maggie Fox of the Sierra Club, is the fact that if the Congress passes a Garn bill incorporating a contract that may not yet exist, the public is denied any opportunity to participate in the process. The Utah group voiced precisely those concerns in visits with National Park Service Director William Penn Mott after the Senate hearings. Mott firmly reiterated his view that the road must follow the existing alignment and meet other standards he set out in his proposal of last fall or, "We won't sign the contract." Conservationists told the subcommittee that the Park Service estimates the true cost of doing what Sen. Gam wants done on the Burr Trail will be around $16.4 million. (That compares to the present annual operating budget for Utah's 13 existing park system units of only $11 million.) Sen. Gam's bill would authorize the expenditure of $7.7 million the Congress conditionally approved late last year, leaving the fiscally strapped State of Utah to come up with roughly another $6 million in addition to the $3.1 million it has already scraped together for the Burr Trail paving scheme. The Utah conservationists also visited a number of senators and representatives to explain their views on the Burr Trail issue and to seek help in defeating the measure. The testimony and the personal meetings Burr Trail story used without author's okay The article on the Burr Trail in our April issue was written by Ruth Frear, Salt Lake City, for Sierra Magazine. It was used. due to a misunderstanding, without her permission. We apologize to Ms. Frear for any inconvenience we may have caused her and thank her for her understanding in this matter. accomplished two very important things, said Del Smith, Springdale, associate director of the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA). "First, the extensive conflicts with the language in the bill and the draft contract, the environmental costs and the real costs to the people of Utah were added to the Senate record. Second, our testimony and our discussions give to members of Congress who are serious about balanced budgets and environmental common sense a stronger footing from which to oppose the measure." Others involved in the hearings were Clive Kincaid, Boulder, Utah, director ofSUW A; Dale Dockstader, Rockville; Christine Swanson, Boulder and Salt Lake City; Clay Puckett, Orem; and Tom Messenger, Arlington, Va., a frequent visitor to Utah. Also, Terri Martin, Salt Lake City, Rocky Mountain Regional Representative for the National Parks and Conservation Assn.; Darrell Knuffke, Denver, and Regional Director for The Wilderness Society; and Maggie Fox, Southwest Regional Representative for the Sierra Club. Kris Dangerfield is ajournalist who lives in Springdale. She also testified in the Burr Trail hearing. THE UTAH WILDERNESS COALITION BlM backs off - Mt. Ellen win • • • continued from cover Chaining is a common practice on public lands as a way to allegedly increase grazing for domestic livestock. Such activities, though, are illegal under the BLM's Interim Management Policy (I M P), regulations that are meant to ensure that the agency manages wilderness study lands in ways that do not impair their wilderness values. After conservationists, including members of the Utah Wilderness Coalition, protested the action, the agency announced in August 1985 that it was modifying the WSA boundary to remove the bulldozed area, suggesting that it was only correcting a "clerical error~ and that the ravaged land was never part of the WSA. The Coalition appealed both the chaining and the boundary change to the Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA), asking that the 300 chained acres be reclaimed and restored to the WSA. The IBLA notified Catlin on April 17 that it has dismissed the case because the BLM has agreed to the Coalition's requests. DISCOVER THE BEST OF UTAH IN THE UTAH GEOGRAPHIC SERIES BEAUTIFUL COLOR BOOKS ABOUT UTAH... Canyon country, mountain ranges, skiing, wildlife, rivers, deserts, pioneer trails and people-all are featured as separate titles i? t?e new Utah Geographic Series! Each title contains 120 pages of authontatlve text and approximately 175 color photographs by the West's finest photographers. UTAH CANYON COUNTRY, the first volume in the series, is now available. Written by Moab author F.A. Barnes with a foreword by Ted Wilson, UTAH CANYON COUNTRY is a comprehenSive portrayal of the unparalleled country of southeastern Utah. Proceeds help save Utah's BLM wildlands ........................................................... : : TO ORDER UTAH CANYON COUNTR Y, : send $14.95 plus 51.80 for sales tax and postage (S\6.75 per book) to: Utah Wilderness Coalition P.O . Box 11446. Suit Lake City. Uta h 84147 Address . " Zip : ~'~"',... .. , . . ..... . , ... ... SLue , . . . ...... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ....... .. . .. . 3 �4 THE UTAH WILDER NESS CO ALI TION MAY 1986 In Defense of Five Million Acres The Coalition's Proposal in Brief In this issue we summarize our wilderness proposals in the Zion-H ot Desert, Cedar Mesa, and Canyonlands regions of Utah. We give a synopsis of each area's status, the relationship to nearby wilderness lands such as national parks, a description of some of the remarkable features, an~ t~e BLM's rationale for its recommendation. This is the third part of the senes m Utah WiJderne5S News describing the Coalition's 141-area, five-million-acre BLM wilderness proposal. (Note: Map areas in black are BLM's recommendation; grey areas are the UWCs proposal.) Cougar Canyon Zion and Hot Desert ' The BLM gives no reasons for their nonwilderness recommendations in their EIS. (Mojave) Region Why! Perhaps because their proposal is so Southwestern Utah i'i a mosaic of diversity: the upper Sonoran desert meets the Great Basin and the canyonlands of Utah's Colorado Plateau. Here, ponderosa forests nest in coral pink sand dunes. Clear mountain streams descend through rugged cougar country. Many of the important wilderness candidates are logical parts of Utah's most vi'iited National Park, Zion. Bear Trap ZIO N and HOT D ESERT R E GION Existing WSA Unit Na me Beartrap Canyon Beaver Dam Wash Black Ridge Canaan Mountain Cottonwood Canyon Cougar Canyon & Doc's Pass Deep Creek Goose Creek Canyon J os hua Tree Nat. Area La Verkin Creek Canyon Moquith Mountain ;-'; orth Fork Virgin River Orderville Ca nyon Parunuweap Canyon Red M ountain Red Butte S hunesburg Spring Ca nyon Taylor Creek Canyon T he Watchma n Ka na b Creek Totals 40 0 0 53,600 11 ,330 23,768 3,320 89 1,040 567 14,830 1.040 1,750 30.800 18,250 804 0 4,433 35 600 0 166,296 Ut a h W ild ern ess Coalition P ro posal BLM D E IS Pro posal 40 0 0 32,800 9,853 0 3,320 89 0 567 0 1,040 1,750 14,100 17,450 804 0 4,433 35 600 0 86,881 40 38,221 12,500 62,400 11 ,000 28,600 7,070 89 13,500 567 14,830 1,040 1,750 30,800 18,000 804 80 4,433 35 160 25,750 271,669 ZION & MOJAVE DESERT REGION T he head of Bear Trap Canyon just lies outside of the Kolob part of Zion National Park. Secretary Watt dropped this area from wilderness study, but legal action by members of the Utah Wilderness Coalition forced the BLM to reinstate it. This small40-acre area is now supported by the BLM for wilderness designation. Deeply incised and capped with pine forests, Bear Trap Canyon warrants a visit. Beaver Dam Wash This large 38,22I-acre area laps into Arizona, Nevada, and Utah. A large part of the desert tortoise popUlation depends on the Beaver Dam Slopes which form most of this wilderness proposal. Brigham Young University conducts scientific studies and education programs within this area. BLM dropped this area from wilderness study without publicly giving any reason. The Coalition proposal deletes the few developments in this area; no known conflicts block wilderness designation. Black Ridge La Verkin Creek exits from the Kolob part of Zion National Park through this road less area - a popular route into the park. The black volcanic mesa to the west of LaVerkin Creek forms the rugged Black Ridge. Incredibly, the BLM dropped this area from wilderness review, claiming that neither hiking the ridgetop nor sightseeing and photography of the scenic geological features such as the adjacent Zion National Park "are individually of outstanding quality." Canaan Mountain L aVer kin Creek LOCATION MAP T ay lor Can y o n Spr in g Ca n yon Red Mounta in Black Ridg Cre ek . Virgin River rderville C. -- Cottonwood Canyon S hu nesburg Joshua T r e N at ural A rea Cr e ek Long protected from off-road vehicle use, Canaan Mountain abuts the southwest side of Zion National Park and the north side of Colorado City, Utah. The masthead of the Utah Wilderness News is an 1872 drawing of this mountain by W .H. Holmes from Dutton's classic Tertiary History of the Grand Canyon District. Although BLM supports the core for wilderness, sigrtificant parts of the cliff base, including those just south of Rockville at the mouth of Zion Canyon, are not recommended. Access is limited to just a few routes to the top. The views of the Arizona Strip and Zion Park from this area are superlative. Pa runuweap C ana an M oun tain Public comments ('ount! BLM now supports this area for wilderness designation because of your comments. Exposed Navajo Sandstone canyons lie northeast of St. George, Utah on the south slopes of the Pine Valley Mountains. Hiking access via the Red Cliffs Recreation Area is popular. Drilling wells for water poses a conflict with a few acres on the south side of the area. Protection of sensitive wildlife species including the gila monster and chuckwalla make wilderness designation needed. Several thousand acres of adjacent National Forest road less lands need consideration in the DEIS. hard to defend: witness Cougar Canyon, where clear streams flow into Nevada's Beaver Dam State Park. BLM states that the area has "extremely narrow and dense riparian zones that are practically inaccessible." Earlier, BLM argued the area was too rugged to be a wilderness area! No conflicts exist in this area. The Coalition proposal includes the Forest Service part of this area near Pine Park on the north, a good starting point for hikes. Deep Creek Hiking up the one of Zion's deeper canyons, you reach the unmarked boundary of the National Park and wonder why the park doesn't continue for another ten miles? Access from outside Zion is from the Lava Point area northeast of the park. The BLM proposal includes only the lower half of Deep Creek: the upper half was dropped in order to put in a developed mechanized recreation facility. The Coalition proposal includes that upper part of the canyon to preclude such unwarranted uses. Goose Creek Canyon Tucked against a comer of Zion National Park, this 89-acre area is recommended by BLM for wilderness designation. To their credit, the BLM is also trying to acquire nearby land on Kolob Creek. Goose Creek Canyon was dropped by Secretary Watt from wilderness study but was reinstated by our legal efforts. BLM states, "Mountain lion activity in the vicinity is heavy. The Utah Division of Wildlife Resources considers mountain lion herd 58 (which includes this WSA) as the state's best kill record for cougar hunting." Joshua Tree Natural Area You won't fmd Joshua Tree Natural Area or the surrounding 12,460-acre roadless area mentioned in the Utah DEIS. The BLM recommended against wilderness for this area without environmental review or a chance for the public to comment. In addition to one of the most remarkable Joshua tree communities, this area is critical habitat for the desert tortoise. The BLM dropped a majority of the area from wilderness study by exaggerating the sigrtificance of a few impacts on the edge of the area The Coalition redrew the boundary excluding those impacts. LaVerkin Creek Canyon One of the special canyons in the Kolob (northeast) section of Zion National Park is upper LaVerkin Creek. The BLM recommends adding 1.5 miles of the upper canyon to the Zion Park wilderness proposal. Douglas fIr, white fIr, aspen and juniper grace the tops of the nearly vertical 900-foot-high canyon walls. Moquith Mountain West of Kanab, Utah, and southwest of Zion National Park, Moquith Mountain abuts Coral Pink Sand Dunes State Reserve. Several deep canyons incise the Verrnillion Cliffs offering hanging gardens and archeological ruins. The most amazing value is the pockets of ponderosa pine nested in sand dunes, a unique biologic community containing endangered plants. The BLM recommends nonwilderness, leaving the area open to jeeps and motorbikes. �MAY 1986 TH E UTAH WILDERNESS COALITION CANYONLANDS REGION Existing WSA Unit Name heir ns. I so Ion, aa's Ithe hse ces- t~~ ~ mg n 0 12,635 0 54,290 22,030 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,870 59,300 Beaver Creek Behind the Rocks Hunter Canyon Black Ridge Butler Wash Fisher Towers Goldbar Canyon Goose Neck, NOIth & South Granite Creek Hatch Wash Harts Point Indian Creek Labyrinth Canyon & Horseshoe Canyon Duma Point Spring Canyon Point Hell & Roaring Canyon Lost Spring Canyon Mill Creek Negro Bill Canyon Six Shooter Peaks Little Bridger Jack Bridger Jack Mesa Shaffer Canyon Westwater Canyon Utah Wilderness Coalition Proposal BLM DEIS Proposal 25,500 20,000 3,800 52,290 25,780 13,300 8,790 5,800 4,400 7,920 13,800 42,000 26,920 135,420 0 12,635 0 * 24,190 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,870 56,500 Adjacent areas 3,880 9,780 7,620 5,290 0 31,160 212,855 3,880 0 0 5,290 11,600 14,570 13,500 32,640 Adjacent areas 2,800 31,160 481,990 0 26,000 135,365 ch al by Red Mountain Sandwiched between Snow Canyon State Park and Gunlock State Beach, Red Mountain offers hunting, backpacking, and horseback riding for the St. George area, six miles to the southwest. In 1984 the BLM recommended non wilderness for this study area. They now recommend wilderness - largely because of effective public testimony. Shunesburg Totals itat Red Butte Locals call it ~the most beautiful drive in North America~ - the road from Virgin. Utah, that crosses the middle of Zion heading north to the Upper Kolob Plateau. Its beauty owes partly to Red Butte - a 2,OOO-foothigh sandstone massif abutting the park east of LaVerkin Creek. Supported by BLM for wilderness, this is another example of legislators drawing straight lines for a park boundary, ignoring the pleading of the land. Secretary Watt dropped this area and - you guessed it - we sued and won. CANYONLANDS REGION Goldbar Canyon -Black Ridge Westwater Canyon ranite Creek Hikers exiting Zion National Park in the Parunuweap canyon pass the vertical cliffs of this area, just north of the Virgin River. The BLM ignored the presence of the adjacent National Park and dropped this area from wilderness study. This is another logical extension of Zion's wild country. Spring Canyon Visitors to Zion notice the deep-red sandstone canyons just north of the Kolob Canyon turnoff from 1-15 to the northern part of Zion. This is Spring Canyon - rival to the Kolob area itself. Secretary Watt dropped this area from study but members of the Coalition sued, reinstating the study. Now the BLM recommends wilderness partly a result of the lawsuit but also because of public comment. Kanab Creek Bill Canyon --"nill Creek the Rocks (>-----+--.\-1 a t c h Wash Neck ew Six Shoote Peaks Bridger Point Monticello o ob is LOCATION MAP North Fork Virgin River of The North Fork of the Virgin River flows into the northeast corner of Zion National Park and is clearly of park caliber, yet was excluded by the ruler-straight boundary. Many hikers walk this canyon unaware of the mistake the boundary makers made. BLM supports wilderness for this area - but only as a result of strong public support. Orderville Canyon oen The classic Virgin Narrows hike through Zion National Park begins by passing through this canyon east of the park. The area includes several important side canyons: Esplin Gulch, Englestead Hollow, Walker Gulch, and Birch Hollow. Initially, the BLM recommended nonwilderness but as a result of your comments, the BLM reversed itself and recommended wilderness. This area is a logical component of Zion National Park. Parunuweap Canyon East of Zion National Park, this area is the scene of one of the most protracted wilderness battles in the state. The BLM tried to drop all this area from wilderness review and lost. Then they recommended nonwilderness, but changed their recommendation thanks to your comments. Local government proposes dewatering Parunuweap - a classic "wet narrows" hike - with a dam. At this time the BLM recommends wilderness for much of the area, but excludes the forestcovered top of the White Cliffs and scenic Elephant Cove, and Harris Mountain. streams offer excellent hikes with a spectacular white sandstone backdrop. The Coalition's 25,750-acre proposal includes unimpacted lands the BLM dropped from wilderness study. The Allen-Warner Valley Energy Project, now dead, proposed a coal slurry pipeline across this area. The Watchman Zion is the fIfth most visited National Park in the country. The fIrst impression most visitors have of the park is The Watchman, the huge buttress just above Springdale that is partly on BLM land. The BLM recommends wilderness for a portion of the cliff; the Coalition includes the natural lands down to the river. Another "Watt drop~ that is being studied only because of conservationists' legal vigilance. Canyonlands Region slickrock maze The Green, Colorado and Dolores Rivers all meet in Utah's Canyonlands. Abutting these rivers are numerous BLM side canyons with wilderness equal to those found in Canyonlands and Arches National Parks. Beaver Creek East of Moab, the Dolores River crosses the Colorado state line passing Beaver Creek. A l3-mile crystal-clear stream flows down the thousand foot deep canyon. This area includes the wild and scenic river proposal for the Dolores River in Utah including numerous side canyons down to Ridge Canyon. The BLM dropped this area from wilderness inventory, claiming that impacts high on the edges of the road less area impacted the core. The Coalition proposal excludes those impacts, protecting a major portion of the Dolores River in Utah. Taylor Creek Canyon This logical extension of the park's northern wilderness flows into the Kolob Canyon area. The BLM proposes wilderness - but only after conservationists appealed yet another ~Watt drop.~ North of Kanab, Utah, the White Cliffs wrap around the headwaters of Kanab Creek. Several deep canyons with clear Behind the Rocks and Hunter Canyon Just west of Moab, an 1,800-foot cliff announces the edge of the multifluted petrifIed sand dunes in Behind the Rocks. The BLM supports wilderness designation for much of the area, excluding the northern tip near the Colorado River Portal and the western third including Hunter Canyon. continued to page 6 CEDAR MESA REGION Existing WSA Unit Name Arch Canyon Comb Ridge Cheese Box Canyon & Deer Canyon Cross Canyon Dark Canyon & Beef Basin Sweet Alice Canyon Fable Valley Bowdie Canyon Plateau Youngs Canyon Lower Horse Flats Black Steer Canyon Fish Creek Fortknocker Canyon Grand Gulch Gravel & Long Canyon Harmony Flat Mancos Mesa Mule Canyon Nokai Dome & Mikes Canyon Road Canyon Sheep Canyon Squaw & Papoose Canyon 0 0 15,410 12,000 68,030 Utah Wilderness Coalition Proposal 8,800 14,460 25,000 Adjoining area 12,000 119,300 BLM DEIS Proposal 0 0 0 * 68,030 Adjoining areas 46,440 0 105,520 0 0 51,440 5,990 0 Totals *Arcas being studied by the Colorado BLM 5 65,000 7,680 136.120 37,200 10,470 108,700 5,900 80,000 35,220 0 105,520 0 0 46,120 5,990 0 52,420 0 6,580 363,830 52,000 4.500 6,580 693,710 45,720 0 * 306,600 �6 THE UTAH WILDERNESS COALITION MAY 1986 dropped this area from wilderness study using the presence of a few impacts to exclude a larger natural area. continued from page 5 Congressman Hansen, R-UT, has proposed that these two canyons be added to Canyonlands National Park. Shaffer Canyon LOCATION MAP Dark Canyon Sheep Canyon CEDAR MESA REGION N.P. Wash ravel & Long Canyon Squaw & Papoo e Glen Canyon Box Canyon N.R.A. -----Mule Canyon omb Ridge ish & Owl Canyons Road Canyon Cross Cany Flat Recognizing the significance of Pritchett Canyon to ORV users and mountain bicycles, the Coalition has excluded this canyon from its proposal. Rather than consider land exchange, the BLM excluded the Hunter Canyon portion of this area from wilderness study because of the presence of state lands. Black Ridge Stretching from Westwater to Colorado National Monument along the Colorado River, Black Ridge is recommended for wilderness designation by the Colorado BLM. This area is not discussed in the Utah BLM wilderness DEIS. Butler Wash Again, praise for public comments: the BLM added several hundred acres to this wilderness study area to enlarge the agency's wilderness recommendation. Located on the south side of Canyonlands National Park, this wilderness proposal matches the quality of the adjoining park. Fisher Towers One of the best known geologic formations in southern Utah, the Fisher Towers is well-known for rock climbing. Unknown to many is the pristine 5·rnile Waring Canyon which begins just behind the Towers and drains into the Dolores River. This area, located south of the Dewey Bridge on the Colorado River, was dropped from study by the BLM with the claim that ~the natural character of the unit has been compromised." The Coalition proposal excludes the peripheral impacts and includes the imposing towers, cliffs, and Waring Canyon with its stream. These impacts were used by the BLM as reasons to drop a larger natural area from wilderness study. Goose Neck, North and South Many float trips down the Colorado begin near Pyramid Butte. The first 13 miles wind through the Gooseneck road less area. This 600-foot-deep canyon is a logical extension of Canyonlands National Park. River users question the BLM's assertion that ~Iandforms in the unit consist of open flats" and lack wilderness solitude and recreation. The BLM dropped this area from wilderness study. Granite Creek North and east of the Dolores River crossing the Colorado state line, Granite Creek offers impressive hikes along lush green-lined streams. The BLM dropped this area from wilderness study, arguing that wildlife habitat does not offer significant wilderness values. Again the BLM claimed the hundred-foot-deep canyon lacked adequate topographic screening for solitude. Hatch Wash East of Canyonlands National Park and west of the LaSal Junction on U.S. 163, Hatch Wash carries the major sources for Kane Springs Creek. Impressive 500-foot cliffs like those of Canyonlands line the wash as side canyons join this natural area. By drawing a boundary including the natural canyons and excluding the impacted mesa tops, the Coalition developed a sizable wilderness proposal. The BLM used these boundary impacts to conclude the canyon was impacted and not deserving of wilderness study. Goldbar Canyon Hart Point The north side of the Colorado River Portal west of Moab, Utah, has several excellent short day hikes. Two examples include a trail beginning at the portal itself, ascending the cliff beside the Colorado. A second hike begins near Bootleg Canyon and leads to Little Rainbow Ridge. The Coalition boundary excludes any wilderness impacts from the potash rail line and roads. Newspaper Rock abuts the Hart Point cliff face which runs for nearly 20 miles. Originally proposed as part of Canyonlands National Park, Hart Point and Draw are logical components of this park. Views from the point catch Six Shooter Peaks and DaVIS Canyon. For a sampler hike, explore Bobby's Hole behind Wind Whistle Rock, six miles west of U.S. 163. The BLM Indian Creek Abutting Canyonlands just west and north of the Needles District in the Park, Indian Creek has some of the area's most remarkable Indian ruins. The numerous canyons are the east bank of the Colorado River's equivalent of the Maze. The BLM moved the boundary, excluding two-thirds of the qualifying natural area from its wilderness proposal. Most of Indian Creek was excluded. A rarely visited area, excellent hikes start where the Hurrah Pass road crosses Indian Creek. Labyrinth Canyon After leaving the Book Cliffs, the Green River flows south, entering Labryinth Canyon and eventually Canyonlands National Park - one of the few rivers on which you can canoe for several days in deep slickrock canyons without rapids. The BLM dropped most of Labyrinth Canyon from wilderness study leaving only Horseshoe Canyon in its recommendation. River travellers cannot understand how the west bank is wilderness while the BLM claims the equally natural east bank ~clearly and obviously lacks wilderness characteristics." Lost Spring Canyon Behind Arches National Park are some wonderful canyons rarely visited. The National Park Service has openly campaigned to have these canyons protected and perhaps added to the park. Secretary Watt dropped this area, but our lawsuit forced the BLM to reinstate the study area. Now the BLM recommends wilderness for about one-fourth of the deserving area. Mill Creek Mill Creek flows through the center of Moab after leaving a BLM wilderness study area. This is one of Utah's finest canyons, with petroglyphs, swimming pools, numerous drops, and trees covering the perennial stream. BLM dropped this area in the inventory and we got it reinstated though administrative appeals. Now the BLM says this area is unsuitable. (This is an area for which Grand County opposed wilderness designation using a county bulldozer to plow a lOO-yard track near the area boundary. The BLM capitulated to this political threat and recommends nonwilderness.) Negro Bill Canyon A bout 2.5 miles east of Moab along Utah 128, Negro Bill Canyon Creek flows out of its deep canyon to meet the Colorado River. Grand County staged a second demonstration against wilderness here, reconstructing a road up the canyon. Under conservationists' pressure, the BLM sued the county for trespass. The suit was settled when the county agreed to stop bulldozing the canyon while the BLM agreed to drop the area from wilderness recommendation. Our administrative a ppeal of that decision was the first in the country to restore wilderness to the study process. Today the BLM continues recommending nonwilderness. Six Shooter Peak Two impressive canyons, separated by Bridger Jack Mesa (a relict plant community), Little Bridger Jack and Six Shooter Peaks abut the Needles District in Canyonlands National Park. Only the top of Bridger Jack Mesa (a sixth of the area) is being recommended for wilderness. To assist the Department of Energy in siting high-level nuclear wastes next to Canyonlands. the BLM dropped Davis and Lavender Canyons from the wilderness review. The BLM incorrectly claimed that these areas lack wilderness-grade solitude and recreation. The northeastern corner of Canyonlands National Park and Dead Horse State Park are sep?rated by the BLM roadless area called Shaffer Canyon. Totally ignoring the magnificent view this canyon gives park visitors, the BLM astonishingly found, ~the irregular configuration of the unit which wraps about the state park would severely limit opportunities for solitude." This area is a clear choice as an addition to the national park. Westwater Canyon The Colorado River first travels through Utah in this ca:nyon, strongly favored by river runners. The BLM supports wilderness designation for a majority of the area. The BLM recommends nonwilderness on the southern area in order to encourage off-road vehicle use. Cedar Mesa, Land of the Anasazi The most important evidence of walled Utah's ancient peoples lies in the Cedar Mesa region - an unmatched reference collection for understanding early Americans. Unless key parts of Cedar Mesa are designated wilderness, new roads will expand vehicle access - and expand the range of the "pothunters" that destroy priceless archaeological sites. Arch Canyon West of Comb Ridge, just north of Utah 95, Arch Canyon contains cottonwoodlined creeks that tumble from the Abajo Mountains to the north. Despite a 63-1 record of public comment in favor of wilder- ness study, the BLM dropped the area claiming that State-owned land somehow "divided" this natural area. (In similar areas where the BLM supported wilderness, State land was not a problem.) Comb Ridge One of the most memorable views in driving Utah 95 is crossing Comb Ridge, a dramatic, uplifted reef 15 miles long and over 1,000 feet high. The BLM dropped this area in the initial inventory, concluding that the area "clearly and obviously lacked . wilderness character." Citing a few impacts on the edge of the area, the BLM claimed the area was ~heavily impacted by human activities." Cheesebox and Deer Canyons These serpentine canyons flow into White Canyon, which parallels Utah 95 north of Natural Bridges National Monument. The BLM opposes wilderness for Cheese box and is not even studying the roadless areas surrounding the Monument - Harmony Flat and Deer Canyon. Their claim of significant human impacts is exaggerated, given the very real wilderness values of the area. Cross Canyon About four miles north of Cutthroat Castle in Hovenweep National Monument, Cross Canyon lies mostly in Colorado and is being studied by the BLM in that state. Utah's portion contains badland formations next to a pinyon-juniper forest. Dark Canyon Only half of the BLM land in this popular backpacking area is proposed for wilderness. A BLM wilderness recommendation is needed to complement designated National Forest wilderness in the upper canyon and recommended Park Service wilderness in contin ued to page 8 �MAY 1986 THE UTAH WILDERNESS COALITION 7 Parks and wilderness • • • continued from page 2 Red Desert Arches Abutting Capitol Reef for several miles on its northeast border is the UWCs 28,800acre Red DeseI1 proposal. This area includes an unusual and colorful basin of deep pink badlands and fluted mud columns. Protection of this area would enhance the scenic and recreational experience of visitors to Capitol Reefs North District, as the park access road forms the Red Desert boundary for several miles. Abutting Arches' northeast boundary, Lost Spring Canyon offers diverse hiking opportunities in conjunction with Arches National Park. The unit includes the upper reaches of Arches' Salt Wash and the entire Lost Spring Canyon system. The area is characterized by deeply eroded side canyons and colorful rock formations, including fins, domes and several arches. Canyonlands Natural Bridges Canyonlands National Park lies within a large, cliff-edged basin of highly eroded slickrock formations - canyons, buttes, spires and needles. The original proposed park boundary would have included this entire basin - rim-to-rim - from the Orange Cliffs on the east to the Hatch Point Cliffs on the west. This proposal was whittled down until only a heart-shaped portion of the Canyonlands basin was established as a national park. The UWCs wilderness proposals adjacent to Canyonlands would help provide needed protection to deserving lands excluded from park protection. Six-Shooter Peaks The UWCs Six-Shooter Peaks 32,640acre proposal would protect the lower ends of Lavender and Davis Canyons (the upper ends are in Canyonlands National Park) as well as Bridger Jack Mesa. Scenically and geographically, this area is an inseparable part of Canyonlands National Park. Protection of this area has become particularly critical because of the U.S. Department of Energy's consideration of Davis and Lavender Canyons for high-level nuclear waste disposal. Indian Creek Fourteen miles of Indian Creek Canyon - a narrow, twisting canyon draining into Canyonlands National Park and the Colorado River - would be protected in UWCs 26,920-acre Indian Creek proposal. Indian creek is a major feature in the Canyonlands basin west of the park. When viewed from BLM's Needles Overlook, it is frequently perceived as part of Canyonlands National Park. The Canyon offers an unforgettable hiking experience because of unusual rock formations and rich color combinations in the rock. Wilderness designation would also enhance protection of the many Indian rock art sites amateur archeologists have documented. Shaffer Canyon and the Goosenecks Just north of Indian Creek are these two units the BLM dropped during its inventory process. The UWC's 2,800-acre Schaffer Canyon proposal lies directly below Deadhorse Point and would protect the Point's scenic breaks as wilderness. The Colorado River winds back and forth through the U WC's 1O,200-acre Goosenecks proposal. Boaters in Canyonland's Cataract Canyon float through this stretch of river on their way into the park. Butler Wash Abutting the park on the south, UWCs 25,780-acre Butler Wash proposal includes the upper end of Salt Creek, a major canyon and hiking corridor in Canyonland's Needles District. Hikers seeking remoteness and solitude in the Needles frequently make the Butler Wash area their destination. The BLM recommends 24,190 acres of wilderness for Butler Wash. Lost Spring Canyon Natural Bridges National Monument is literally surrounded by UWCs wilderness proposals - and for good reason. This small monument was set aside primarily to protect 3 natural rock bridges, but it is surrounded by outstanding wilderness lands. These wildlands are part of what the UWC calls the "White Canyon Complex" - a series of canyons dissecting the Cedar Mesa plateau and draining into the White River. With its maze of deeply incised canyons and pinyon-juniper covered benchlands, the White Canyon Complex includes tens of miles of outstanding hiking and backpacking opportunities. Designation of the White Canyon Complex would make Natural Bridges National Monument the heart of one of the most impressive wilderness complexes in southern Utah. Glen Canyon National Recreation Area Geographically, the Glen Canyon NRA forms the heart of the UWCs 5-million-acre wilderness proposal. The NRA itself is not included in the proposal because it is under national Park Service jurisdiction. UWC wilderness areas abut virtually the entire perimeter of the NRA, one of the nation's largest. Thirteen UWC wilderness proposals adjoin NPS-recommended wilderness within the NRA. Although Glen Canyon NRA was established primarily to administer the recreational values of Lake Powell, it includes - and abuts - some of the most remote, pristine and impressive wilderness in the state. The NRA contains, for example, the lower stretches of the Escalante River Canyons, and abuts the UWCs North Escalante Canyons wilderness proposal. The UWCs Lillie Egypt, Scorpion, Dance Hall Rock and Sooner Bench proposals all would protect the upper ends of canyons draining into the NRA's portion of the Escalante Canyon. The Coalition's French Spring/ Happy Canyon-Dirt)' Devil and Fiddler Butte proposals meet the western boundary of, and are natural extensions of, the wild and remote Orange Cliffs section of Glen Canyon NRA. The San Juan Arm of Glen Canyon NRA forms the southern boundary for UWCs Nokai Dome, Castle Creek, Mike's Canyon, and Grand Gulch/ Johns/ Slickrock Canyon wilderness proposals. These areas would protect the deeply incised narrow canyons draining Cedar Mesa's pinyonjuniper covered plateau lands which flow into the San Juan River. Protection of these areas in conjunction with the San Juan River would form an outstanding river and canyon wilderness. Terri Martin lives in Salt Lake City and is the Rocky Mountain Regional Representatives/or the National Parks and Conservation Association. This spectacular spot in Parunuweap Canyon is the site 0/ a proposed site 0/ a dam the Washington County Water Conservancy District would like to build within the Parunuweap Wilderness Study Area. Wilderness designation would protect it. Photo copyright Ray Wheeler Help UWC New Books To Focus On Utah Ulah Canyon Countfr. the first volume in the new Utah Geographic Series, will be released April 14. Written by Moab author Fran Barnes, with a foreword by Ted Wilson, former Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah Canl'on Country contains 120 pages of text, maps, and charts and nearly 200 color photographs of southeastern Utah. Rick Reese, President of the Salt Lake City - based Utah Geographic Series, Inc. said that his company is unique in that it will publish more than a dozen books which focus exclusively on Utah. Each title in the series will contain 120 pages of text, maps, charts, and a large number of color photographs. The beautifully illustrated series will portray in words and photographs the unique diversity of Utah ... its astounding landforms, abundant wildlife, colorful history and vigorous people. Other titles currently in production or planning include Utah Ski Country, Ulah Wildlands, Pioneer Trails, The Wasatch Front, Utah Wildlife, Ulah's Great Basin. and Ulah Mountain Ranges. Utah Call1'on CountrI' has sections on natural hist~ry, human ' history. national parks and special areas, and recreational opportunities in southeastcrn Utah. The informative text is supplemented by the work of more than three dozen photographers including John Telford. Tom Til\. David Muench, Rod Millar. Paul Logsdon, Tom Bean, John George, JeffGnass, Larry Ulrich and Pat O'Hara. In his foreword to Utah Call1'on Country, Wilson writes: The Utah Geographic Series is a celebration of all that is Utah: its vast space, its matchless beauty, its absolutely unique diversity and its peopie . . . Utahns and visitors alike will welcome the knowledge and understanding this series brings. The accompanying sensitivity to and appreciation of our special province of the West will make it a better place for all of us. Ulah Canyon Country is being sold through the Utah Wilderness Coalition (see ad, page 3) and the proceeds from the sale of each book will go directly to the Coalition. Send $14.95 plus $1.80 for sales tax and postage ($16.75 total for each book) to the Utah Wilderness Coalition, P.O. Box 11446, Salt Lake City, Utah 84147. The Utah Geographic Series guarantees your money back if you are not pleased with their books. �8 THE UTAH WILDERNESS COALITION MAY 1986 _ __ __ __ BlM Hearings continued from cover impact statement. But the agency is not going out of its way to make it easy for conservationists to register their comments either through the hearing schedule or the hearing procedure, said Darrell Knuffke, Central Rockies Regional Director for The Wilderness Society. Signing up to testify is easy enough: the bureau will have sign-up cards available at each hearing location starting one hour before the hearing. Individuals who want to testify need only fill out a card. Jim Catlin. Utah Chapter Sierra Club, said the latest information from the BLM indicates that people will be permitted to speak in the following order: elected officials will go first. followed by governmental representatives, organizations and companies. The _ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ general public comes last. Catlin said that the bureau has told him the individual signup cards will be shuffled after they are collected and individuals called in the resulting order. There will be no first-come, firstserved order. Catlin has asked the agency to at least announce the final order of witnesses so people will know when their turn is likely to come. So far, though, the BLM has made no such commitment. All speakers will be under the same time limit, probably from three to five minutes - not long, but long enough to enter persuasive comments into the hearing record. It is impossible to detail in three or five minutes all the areas you support for wilderness protection or all the reasons why you support them. By stating your support for the Utah Wilderness Coalition's 5 million acre proposal. you go on record as opposed Five million acres of Utah wildlands _ _ __ __ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ to the BLM's small recommendation and you amplify the need to support many areas in addition to the ones you specifically In writing your testimony, it is important to stress the personal aspects - who you are, what you do, how and why you use wilderness. Other points to cover include: support for specific BLM areas you know personally; - support for the Coalition's 5 million acre proposal; - brief discussion of your wilderness experiences on Utah's public lands and why they are important to you; - a recognition that we need not - and cannot afford to - choose between the equally important directions of economic development and wilderness protection. We can have both if we plan carefully. I n Defense of • • • continued from page 6 the lower canyon. Most of this huge natural area is BLM land, but they would slice off its edges with exaggerated claims of impacts in Beef Basin, Youngs Canyon, and Fable Valley, The BLM understated wilderness values in Sweet Alice Canyon which abuts the Forest Service road less area, Ruin Canyon, More than 60,000 acres should be added to the BLM recommendation. Fish Creek Located south of Utah 95, west of Comb Ridge and southeast of Natural Bridges Natural Monument, Fish and Owl Creek are popular backpacking areas. BLM supports wilderness designation for the canyon bottoms and mesas on the west but not on the east. The BLM plans expensive bulldozing of the forest and reseeding for cattle - money better spent on less sensitive areas, One of the most important canyons missing from wilderness study is lower Mule Canyon which Utah 95 crosses in its middle. Fortknocker Canyon FaclOr .. BUlle in Ihe Mudd .. Creek Vnil. PhOIO by Eldon Briand THAT'S WHAT THE UTAH WILDERNESS COALITION IS FIGHTING TO PROTECT WITH WILDERNESS DESIGNATION. We need your moral, political and financial help to save that land from destructive development and the BLM's poor stewardship. Just before White Canyon flows into Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, it is joined by F ortknocker and several unnamed side canyons, Access is from Utah 95. The area has nearly 20 miles of deeply entrenched white sandstone canyons, The BLM dropped this area with claims of impacts that "caused this unit to lose its natural character." The Coalition redrafted the unit boundary to exclude the mere 10 percent of the area that has significant impacts. Yes. I want to help the grassroots and national organizations fighting for 5 million acres of wilderness on the Colorado Plateau. Enclosed is my donation. 0$15 o $25 o $35 o $50 0$150 0$250 Name Address _________________________________________________ City, State, Zip _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Make Check To: Utah Wilderness Coalition P.O. Box 11446 Salt Lake City, Utah 84147 Members of Ihe Vlah Wilderness Coalilion are: The Escalame Wilderness Com millee, The WasQ[ch Moumain Club, Ihe Sowhern V/ah Wilderness Alliance, Ihe Slick Rock Coumrl' Couneil, The Wilderness Societ)", The V/ah Chapler Sierra Club, The NQ[ional Parks and Conservalion Assorialion, Friends oflhe Eanh. Defenders of Wildlife, Four Corners Wilderness Workshop, Friends oflhe River - Colorado Plaleau, The Ari=ona Wilderness Coalilion, The Colorado Environmel1lal Coalilion, The Arizona WhilewQ[er AssociQ[ion, The Ne\'{}da Ow door Recrealion Associalion, The New Mexico BLM Wilderness Coalillon, and The Deserl Tonoise Counul (suppomng Ihe Joshua Tree and Beaver Dalll unils). I """"""""""""""'1"'1 Grand Gulch One of the biggest - and most popular - road less areas in Utah, Grand Gulch meanders 53 miles over a straight-line distance of 21 miles, BLM divided this single road less area into many smaller parts, just as they did with Dark Canyon. Unlike Dark Canyon, they only dropped one: Steer Gulch. The rest were joined as they should have been with the Grand Gulch Primitive Area, Numerous natural arches, rincons, and pinnacles line the Gulch and its side canyons: Bullet, Kane, Polly's, Collins, Step, and Pine. Gravel & Long Canyons The most prominent sandstone tower between Hite and Natural Bridges along Utah 95 is Jacobs Chair, sadly scarred by uranium exploration. Alongside this tower are two magnificent unimpacted canyons: Gravel on the east and Long on the west, both flowing into White Canyon. The BLM used mining impacts - which totaled a mere 1,800 acres - as reason to delete the remaining 37,200-acre road less area. The Coalition's proposal simply excludes the impacted area. _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ , Harmony Flats The south side of Natural Bridges National Monument is bordered by Harmony Flats, The name is a misnomer, since a deep canyon and several tributaries fill the area. The BLM dropped this area in the initial wilderness review, leaving the door open for yet another proposed roadside tourist attraction. Mancos Mesa Scene of one of the ftrst confrontations with the BLM over protection of wilderness study areas, Mancos Mesa has a stormy history, Just after Congress passed legislation requiring a BLM wilderness review, Gulf Minerals punched in almost 30 miles of new roads for uranium exploration in the middle of Mancos Mesa. The BLM granted access under the condition that the roads be reclaimed. Now the BLM has relented, recommending nonwilderness for the impacted area. Our proposal differs from the BLM's by including all of Moqui Canyon on the southern part of the area, The BLM ignored the pristine perennial stream and canyon, Mule Canyon Just north of Utah 95, a few miles from the turnoff to Natural Bridges, is Mule Canyon Ruins - a reconstructed Anasazi village that borders the Mule Canyon Wilderness Study Area, BLM recommends wilderness for this area, which offers excellent day hikes through "Class A scenery characterized by smooth red sandstone and contrasting ponderosa pine and Douglas ftr." Nokai Dome This huge area lies south of Utah 263 to Halls Crossing, north of the Sanjuan River, and west of the river takeout at Clay Hills. The historic Mormon Trail crosses the western portion. Numerous canyons drain into the San Juan River. The BLM cut the 80,OOO-acre area into ftve pieces, citing impacts, and then dropped them all. The impacts occupy less than a square mile in a road less area three times larger than Salt Lake City, Road Canyon Road Canyon is north of Mexican Hat, Utah, east of Grand Gulch, and south of Fish & Owl Canyons. In 1984, the BLM proposed half the area for wilderness. Now the BLM has enlarged its proposal, adding the cliffs that face the Valley of the Gods on the southern part of the area. The Coalition proposal includes the rugged canyons that reach Comb Wash in the east, outside the BLM study area. Lime Creek and Road Canyon are favored hiking areas, Sheep Canyon Abutting a National Park Service wilderness proposal in Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, Sheep Canyon represents a logical extension of the NRA wilderness proposaL The area is west of Dark Canyon; Sheep Canyon reaches the Colorado River at Mille Crag Bend. The BLM said that the few impacts near the edge of the road less area affected "the entire unit" and "caused a significant loss of natural character.~ The facts argue otherwise; the Coalition's 4,500 acre proposal simply excludes those few impacts. Squaw & Papoose Canyons The Colorado BLM is taking the lead in studying this area east of Blanding and north of Hovenweep National Monument. This area abuts Cross Canyon Wilderness Study Area just to the south. � 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/52">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/52</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 3289444056 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 7032201 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 Utah Wilderness News, May 1986 Description An account of the resource A publication of the Utah Wilderness Coalition published in May 1986. Summary of wilderness in Zion-Hot Desert, Cedar Mesa, and Canyonlands regions of Utah, giving a synopsis of each area's status, the relationship to nearby wilderness lands such as national parks, a description of remarkable features, and the Bureau of Land Management's rationale for recommendations. Also includes a hearing schedule to discuss the future of Utah's wild lands. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Martin, Terri Dangerfield, Chris Subject The topic of the resource Natural resources conservation areas Wilderness areas Utah Wilderness Coalition Wilderness conservation Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Press releases Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Utah Wilderness Coalition Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1986-05 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Utah United States Zion National Park (Utah) Bryce Canyon National Park (Utah) Capitol Reef National Park (Utah) Arches National Park (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 9 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_Fd9_Page_8.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/5a694471328c25ebb7aa4aab03285e46.pdf c4faf9002cc30e3115224e2f250799ca PDF Text Text Sa fety Highway safety in Logan Canyon has been a concern of previous highway projects, and has been raised in the current project. Safety for any highway involves two major issues: (i) accident rates and (ii) severity of accidents. UDOT has provided data for the period 19801985 (6 years) for accident rates in the canyon. These rates were compared with the accident rate for Rural Arterial Federal Highways in Utah (the standard), and stattistical analysis indicated 3 or 4 sections ~ the highway (of 13 sections) had accident rates significantly higher than those of the standard. The other sections of the canyon had rates insignificantly differerent or significantly lower than the standard. Subsequent analysis of the UDOT rates, however, revealed many were in error, casting serious doubt on the validity of the data. This also cast doubt on the validity of the standard: if many of the calculated accident rates for Logan Canyon are wrong, what about the reliability of the standard, presumably arrived at by the same methods? Requests for UDOT data upon which these c~lculations are based were made, but no data has been furnished. In order to make meaningful comparisons of accident rates, Logan Canyon should be compared with similar canyon highways, such as Sardine Canyon, Ogden Canyon, Little Cottonwood Canyon, Provo Canyon and Spanish Fork Canyon. No such comparisons have been made by UDOT or CH2M, and the necessary data 'has not been provided. Faced with this serious question concerning accident rates, CH2M chose instead to compare total accidents over a 6 year period (1980-85) for 0.1 mile sections of the canyon with the average for 0.1 mile sections to determine the location of the highest accident numbers. This has led to identification of 16 0.1 mile sections (out of 374 0.1 mile sections total) as having significantly higher numbers of accidents .(4 or more accidents in 6 years, 80 % conficdence level) than the average 0.1 mile section. Such results would occur for any highway, and it is important to note none of these 16 sections had accident numbers greatly in excess of the expected number. Many sections of the highway, by the same analysis, have significantly lower numbers of accidents. At this point, there are no data to support a conclusion that Logan Canyon has a significantly higher accident rate than any comparable highway in Utah. With respect to severity of accidents, by far the most common accident is sliding off the road in Winter, involving only one car. Deaths and serious injury have been rar~, and the numbers are too low for any valid statistical analysis. As many deaths have occurred in the lower improved sections (mouth to Right Fork) as on the ~ of the highway from Right Fork to Beaver Mountain turn off. 5ec7JOns As the CH2M report concludes, the chances of being involved in a serious accident in Logan Canyon are small at any time. Safety is not a current issue in Logan Canyon and, in the absence of valid supporting data, cannot be used as a justification for major highway modifications. � 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/54">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/54</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 531811683 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 768468 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 Safety of Logan Canyon Description An account of the resource Paper stating the importance of highway safety which involves two major issues: accident ratesa and the severity of accidents. Analysis of the Utah Department of Transportation statistical accident data show that the number of accidents in Logan Canyon do not justify major modifications of the highway due to the fact that accidents included cars sliding off the road in winter which involved only one vehicle. The paper concludes that safety is not a current issue in Logan Canyon. Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) United States Highway 89 Safety 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 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 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 9 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_Fd9_Page_9.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/ce14ddcc14199fc8f19712cb8a148039.pdf c4faf9002cc30e3115224e2f250799ca PDF Text Text Sa fety Highway safety in Logan Canyon has been a concern of previous highway projects, and has been raised in the current project. Safety for any highway involves two major issues: (i) accident rates and (ii) severity of accidents. UDOT has provided data for the period 19801985 (6 years) for accident rates in the canyon. These rates were compared with the accident rate for Rural Arterial Federal Highways in Utah (the standard), and stattistical analysis indicated 3 or 4 sections ~ the highway (of 13 sections) had accident rates significantly higher than those of the standard. The other sections of the canyon had rates insignificantly differerent or significantly lower than the standard. Subsequent analysis of the UDOT rates, however, revealed many were in error, casting serious doubt on the validity of the data. This also cast doubt on the validity of the standard: if many of the calculated accident rates for Logan Canyon are wrong, what about the reliability of the standard, presumably arrived at by the same methods? Requests for UDOT data upon which these c~lculations are based were made, but no data has been furnished. In order to make meaningful comparisons of accident rates, Logan Canyon should be compared with similar canyon highways, such as Sardine Canyon, Ogden Canyon, Little Cottonwood Canyon, Provo Canyon and Spanish Fork Canyon. No such comparisons have been made by UDOT or CH2M, and the necessary data 'has not been provided. Faced with this serious question concerning accident rates, CH2M chose instead to compare total accidents over a 6 year period (1980-85) for 0.1 mile sections of the canyon with the average for 0.1 mile sections to determine the location of the highest accident numbers. This has led to identification of 16 0.1 mile sections (out of 374 0.1 mile sections total) as having significantly higher numbers of accidents .(4 or more accidents in 6 years, 80 % conficdence level) than the average 0.1 mile section. Such results would occur for any highway, and it is important to note none of these 16 sections had accident numbers greatly in excess of the expected number. Many sections of the highway, by the same analysis, have significantly lower numbers of accidents. At this point, there are no data to support a conclusion that Logan Canyon has a significantly higher accident rate than any comparable highway in Utah. With respect to severity of accidents, by far the most common accident is sliding off the road in Winter, involving only one car. Deaths and serious injury have been rar~, and the numbers are too low for any valid statistical analysis. As many deaths have occurred in the lower improved sections (mouth to Right Fork) as on the ~ of the highway from Right Fork to Beaver Mountain turn off. 5ec7JOns As the CH2M report concludes, the chances of being involved in a serious accident in Logan Canyon are small at any time. Safety is not a current issue in Logan Canyon and, in the absence of valid supporting data, cannot be used as a justification for major highway modifications. � 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/57">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/57</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 3097680673 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 1133965 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 Graphs of Traffic Flow Description An account of the resource Bar and dot graphs showing the summer daily traffic at the highest hourly volumes (1979, 1982, 1984, 1985), the average daily traffic by day and by month from 1984-1985. Subject The topic of the resource 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 1984 1985 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan Canyon (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 9 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_Fd9_019.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/607f9e0aa669bbf32ba04003c3770414.pdf 1abebd82dd16fa4cfb0e4eac1cd71a88 PDF Text Text LOGAN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT MINUTES OF INTERDISCIPLINE TEAM MEETING June 10, 1986 ( ATTENDANCE: Lynn Zollinger - UDOT Jim Naegle - UDOT John Ne ~ l - UDOT Gale Larson - Valley Engineering Rudy Lukez - Cache Group Sierra Club Todd G. Weston - UDOT Al Stilley - Northern Engineering & Testing Dave Baumgartner - USFS-Logan Stan Nuffer - CH2M HILL Cliff Forsgren - CH2M HILL Duncan Silver - FHWA Howard Richardson - UDOT Sheldon Barker - CH2M HILL Tom Haislip - CH2M HILL John D'Amico - CH2M HILL Frank Grover - USFS-SLC Steve Flint - Bridgerland Audobon Association Stan Nuffer called the meeting to order and asked members of the group to introduce themselves. Following the introductions, some of the members were asked to briefly describe their views of the project and its objectives. Jim Naegle indicated that UDOT wants a thorough investigation and has no preconceived idea as to what, if anything, should be done in the canyon. He expressed appreciation for the interest of the environmental community and the public in general. He also wants members of the 1.0. Team to have full input into all phases of the project. The most serious problems in the canyon presently are narrow and obsolete bridges which are in need of repair or replacement. Lynn Zollinger explained that UDOT has a responsibility to the traveling public to provide safe, efficient transportation. UDOT wants to satisfy the needs of the traveling public and the environmental community. He expects an openminded study with adequate input from all of the interested public. Dave Baumgartner said that the rules of the environmental "ball game" have changed since the '70's. A successful study is dependant upon public support and understanding. This project will be a challenging one and standard solutions will probably not work in every instance. I 1 �( Todd Weston stated that he does not have any notion that there will ever be a freeway or a 4-lane highway through the canyon. He feels that there are more problems in the canyon than old bridges and the study must address those problems without being locked into one concept. He does expect ideas to improve transportation can be implemented. Rudy Lukez stated that there are many personal feelings about the canyon and that some people will be upset if there is a large construction project in it. The canyon is an environmentally sensitive area and there is a need for careful study and analysis before any work can begin. The environmental community desires to be kept informed. Rudy also expressed concern that meetings held during the day may be difficult for those who work elsewhere to attend. Steve Flint stated that there were many people who questioned the transportation needs in the canyon. Stan Nuffer then explained the I.D. Team and the role of each I.D. Team member. The I.D. Team is to function as the group which reviews scope, data, methodology and conclusions of the study and determines whether each stage of the study adequately addresses the 'critical issues and meets the objectives of the study. Gale Larson said that Valley Engineering's office in Logan will be the local contact point and someone will be available for questions at least 10 hours per week. Valley Engineering will also perform the field surveys and traffic counts. Some traffic counts were conducted during the ski season in order to have the information available for the study this summer. Gale expects to work closely with Sheldon Barker with the public involvement task work. Stan Nuffer then introduced the Scope of Work, as included in the consulting agreement between UDOT and CH2M HILL, and led the discussion on the tasks outlined in the agreement. Task 1 - ANALYSIS OF TRANSPORTATION NEEDS The discussion covered the major areas of potential need covered in the agreement; safety, maintenance, substandard geometrics, and congestion. If areas with substandard geometrics are identified, options to correct the problems will be identified, these may include road re-alignment. During the discussion of congestion, Rudy Lukez asked what was meant by levels of service c,d,e. Stan Nuffer gave a brief description and said that detailed descriptions will be provided to members of the I.D. Team in a Technical Memo. Rudy Lukez also asked how traffic projections were determined. Stan Nuffer said that UDOT uses projections of population 2 �( prepared by local councils of governments and other agencies who are charged with the task of preparing proiections of that type. TASK 2 - LOCATION STUDIES The study area will include the roadway between Right Hand Fork and Garden City. The alternatives listed in the contract scope will be evaluated as well as others identified during the course of the study. New roadway alignments may also be considered from the summit to Garden City. John Neal asked what the termini of the project were. FHWA must approve the termini in order for the project to be eligible for funding. Lynn Zollinger said that Logan City to Garden City had been proposed to the FWHA and he expects approval shortly. Since Logan to Right Hand Fork has already been improved there would be no action considered on that stretch of road. Tom Haislip said that the development of the alternatives will be one of the biggest phases of the project. Mapping was also discussed. Existing mapping available through UDOT will be used on the project wherever possible, however adequate mapping is · not available over the entire route. As the mapping is completed, maps will be made available to members of the 1.0. Team. TASK 3 - GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS ( The extent of the geotechnical investigations will be determined as alternatives are developed. It is expected that they will be needed primarily in areas where re-alignment is considered. Dave Baumgartner expressed concern about the role of the I.D. ream in this study. If the team is to be advisory only, he does not think a satisfactory solution to identified problems can be found. To be successful, the I.D. Team should have a role in establishing study criteria and in formulating recommendations. Other team members expressed their views on the subject, and expressed their belief that the 1.0. Team would function in a manner that would lead to a successful resolution of the transportation problems identified in the study. TASK4 - PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT Sheldon Barker said that CH2M HILL would make three promises in the public involvement program; (1) to be a good listener, (2) to get input from all interested individuals and groups and to treat each with respect, 3) when the report is prepared, it would contain no surprises because everyone had been involved in the process. 3 �. ( ( The scoping process was also discussed. It will include the development of the project objective, holding informationai meetings to educate the public, meetings with small groups as well as large, preparation of a video tape, and maintaining a project office in Logan where interested parties could come to obtain information on the project. Rudy Lukez suggested that information also be made available at the USU Library and the Logan Public Library so that it would be available during evening hours. Sheldon Barker said that the suggestion was a good one and it will be implemented. There was considerable discussion on the number and scheduling of meetings. Rudy Lukez did not feel that a lot of meetings was necessarily a good thing. He used as an example the recent meetings held by the Division of Water Resources on the proposal to build a dam on the Bear River. Meetings should be proceeded by 2 or 3 weeks of media coverage and should be well prepared. Rudy was also not certain if there would be any value to meeting with small groups because it would not' give people with differing views an opportunity to hear the opinions of others. Sheldon Barker indicated that the different views would come out in the larger public meetings and that meeting with small groups would give the project team the opportunity to better prepare for the larger meetings. Rudy Lukez said that fall would be the best time to hold the scoping meetings because more people would be able to attend. ( . TASK 5 - COORDINATION Tom Haislip discussed the 1.0. Team and its organization and the need to have each member involved. TASK 6 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS~lENT Tom Haislip said that the 1.0. Team would playa key role in the project by providing input and direction to the study team. Tom also asked for help from the environmental community. If there were any data or studies that are available and not in UDOT files, they may be of great help in the study. Rudy Lukez said that there was a study underway at USU investigating the impact that high speed traffic has on deer. Tom Haislip indicated that field studies were not planned because there is extensive information available. Tom also explained that it is intended that Technical Memos be prepared presenting in detail the findings of each phase of the study. After the 1.0. Team has reviewed, discussed, and revised the Technical Memos, the information would be summarized and placed in the report. 4 �( There was more discussion on the role of the 1.0. Team. Dave Baumgartner again expressed his concern that 1.0. Team members be in a position to do more than simply review conclusions and give their comments. Stan Nuffer said that study data, methodology, and conclusions would all be presented to the I.D. Team and discussed before incorporating anything into the report. Tom Haislip said that CH2M HILL's job would be to the "doers" who would gather information, review data and prepare Technical Memos for the I.D. Team. The I.D. Team would then review and discuss the memos and hopefully resolve any differences. Dave Baumgartner said that it may be necessary for superiors in each agency to resolve conflicts if they could not be handled on the I.D. Team level. He also indicated that the whole process would work much better if each alternative developed offered a real solution to the problems so that the alternative evaluation would be believable. Todd Weston pointed out that the Forest Service, UDOT, and rHWA must all agree to whatever solutions are presented in the report. If any of the three agencies disagree with the findings, the project will never be completed. ( In discussions at the end of the meeting, there was no agreement as to when the first public information meeting should be held, or what purpose it should serve. After further discussion, it was decided that the date of the first meeting should be set after the next I.D. Team meeting. It was recommended that a feature article on "the project be prepared for the Logan paper. This should be published prior to the Logan public information meeting. The next meeting will be held on Monday June 23, at 7:00 p.m. at District 1 headquarters in Ogden. SLC73/39 ( 5 � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Local URL The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website <a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/59">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/59</a> Purchasing Information Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item. To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a> Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2013 Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, at 800 dpi. Archival file is PDF (800 dpi), display file is JPEG2000. Checksum 2735761469 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 3942259 Bytes Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Environmental assessment minutes of interdiscipline team meeting, June 10, 1986 Description An account of the resource Minutes from the environmental assessment meeting of the interdisciplinary meeting including a summary of the scope of work, analysis of transportation needs, location studies, geotechnical investigations, public and agency involvement, agency coordination, and environmental assessment. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Nuffer, Stanton S. Naegle, Jim Zollinger, Lynn Baumgartner, David Weston, Todd Lukez, Rudy Flint, Steve Larson, Gale Neal, John Barker, Sheldon Haislip, Thomas Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Traffic engineering Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1986-06-10 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan Canyon (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1980-1989 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 27 Folder 3 Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Libraries Photograph Curator, phone (435) 797-0890. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Highway 89 Digital Collections Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context MSS148VIIIB27_Fd3_Page_4.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/461a00ecb8b00630f131a52025799e52.pdf 29ff9516e01b982c156872e12e9a5007 PDF Text Text INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM MEETING March 30, 1987 Additional Data for Agenda Items Agenda Item No: 1. Distribution of copy of scoping meeting letter and list of agencies sent to public agencies (March 9, 1987 minutes p.s.) 2. Distribution of copies of scoping meeting testi~ony. Summaries to be mailed later. 3. Distribution of Alternatives Dl, D2, and D3. 4. Distribution of the Aquatic Resources and Land Use Technical Memorandums (existing conditions sections only) . 5. Distribution of additional traffic projection data. SLC-STAN/14 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/61">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/61</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 2142525986 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 403385 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 Additional data for agenda items March 30, 1987 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource Additional data for agenda items March 30, 1987 Interdisciplinary Team meeting. Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Utah United States Highway 89 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 1987-03-30 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. 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 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_007.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/051632ff6e154cc43de6d32204759671.pdf 64700169ced87d90f3558986e3f6f0d8 PDF Text Text . Q ~ t~ ted States epartment of Agriculture Forest Service Logan Ranger District 860 N. 1200 E. Logan, UT 84321 Reply to: 2300 Date: October 4, 1988 Steve Flint 45 North 400 West Logan, Utah 84321 Dear Steve: Since Logan Canyon Highway became part ot the National Forest Scenic Byway Program, not much new water has gone under the bridge. To be honest, I am not sure what the designation means. 1 We have a title, but not much else yet; it seems as if we get to chart our own course. W are willing to do that, but to e date we haven't had time to do much. I have heard the State plans to include t~e designation on their maps. ; own idea is to tell the story with appropriate signs, improve the condition of our campgrounds and picnic grounds so they complement our visitors experience, and set esthetic and other standards for the highway by more clearly defining the standards and guidelines contained in the Forest Plan. ' I see a very carefully managed highway, designed to enhance the esthetic quality of the canyon, and perhaps an information station or two. M~ If we do get to chart our own course, then I would like to organize a small committee of interested, participative citizens to help us define the standards." I'll keep you posted. ~inCerelY' _ ~ Xlb MawmJ} J DAVE BAUMGARTNER District Ranger Caring for the Land and Serving People FS-6200-28(7 -82) � 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/64">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/64</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 1226344580 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 668303 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 Proposal from Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon Description An account of the resource Citizens for the Protection of Logan Canyon proposal for modifications of Logan Canyon emphasizing the protection of the canyon's scenic beauty and recreational uses. Subject The topic of the resource Natural resources conservation areas 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 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 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 9 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_Fd9_015.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/67bfed02120d7b5ae8bc992c802a873c.pdf f6cfc455b4e57f71be4c96544230e2fc PDF Text Text FINAL 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 Clark Ostergaard, 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 Forest Service District Ranger's office. Transportation for the field trip was in two vans provided by UDOT. Weather conditions for the trip were ideal. The primary purpose of the trip was to get an idea of the magnitude of the changes that would be required for Alternates C and D. Some spot improvement locations (slow vehicle turnouts) were observed but generally the "no action" and "spot improvement" alternatives were not the subject of this trip. 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 sight 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 nearly impossible to re-establish on a 1/4:1 slope. 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 by black willows. The trees immediately adjacent to the road would be removed by any roadway widening or alignment improvement. The black willows are advanced in age and no secondary or replacement growth is apparent. If the canopy effect is to be maintained, I �replacement growth should be started that would conform to whatever aljgnment is selected. Because of the existing limited size of the picnic area, the Forest 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. 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 were 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 artist's rendering of what the cantilever structure may 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 for 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-Iong for the 35 mph design speed and ssO-feet-Iong 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 for 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 �5. Horizontal alignment change downstream from Logan Canyon. This would require a cut into the hillside. It was agreed that additional studies be done in this area to better define the options. 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 suggested 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 desirable to have the 40 mph design align with the tangent to the west to eliminate the reverse curve. Stop No.7 was at M.P. 387.6 just below the lower twin bridge. It was concluded that the existing alignment 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 an option is to replace the bridge with a structure on a 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 slopes resulting in 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 artist's rendering of how a rock-faced retaining wall may appear. Cutting into the hillside in the lower portion of the -dugway may require retaining walls or other stabilization, because the slope is less stable than the upper portion of the dugway where the existing rock cuts 3 �appear stable. The most feasible solution may be a combination of widening the rock cut in the upper portion of the dug~ay 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 downstream and as close to the existing bridge as possible to avoid the riparian areas of the river. Stop No. 10 was at M.P. 389.9 at Ricks Spring. There was some discussion about 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 passing 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 climbing lane along Beaver Creek from just above the Franklin Road intersection to just below the Beaver Mountain Road intersection. 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. Another alignment was also discussed. 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. The problem of flattening the hairpin curves beyond 35 mph which would result in too steep of a grade. 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. The consensus was 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 above Wood Camp campground where ·the McGuire Primrose is located. The Primrose was not yet readily apparent but the known locations were pointed out extending westerly down the rock outcrop to within about 40 feet of the existing road. Any proposed road improvements should avoid this area. SLC-STN/d.502 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/65">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/65</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 24101711 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 3347494 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 Logan Canyon field trip Description An account of the resource Minutes from Interdisciplinary Team field trip on April 21, 1987 where the primary purpose was to get an idea of the magnitude of the changes required, spot improvements were observed but were not the subject of this trip. Subject The topic of the resource Roads--Design and construction United States Highway 89 Logan Canyon (Utah) 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 1987-04-21 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan Canyon (Utah) United States Utah Cache County (Utah) Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1980-1989 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 27 Folder 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_Page_1.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/70a9a4b6cf23afc5955b9386167e1234.pdf 28d88e031483fc49eb9991e60095e9cf PDF Text Text INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM MEETING January 26, 1987 Additional Data for Agenda Items Agenda Item No: 2. Distribution of Revised Environmental Report Schedule Distribution of Outline for Scoping Meeting Distribution of Final Draft of Notice of Intent Sent to FHWA. 3. Distribution of Draft of Legal Notice of Seoping Meeting 4. Distribution of Selected Crossections Showing Effect of 35 to 40 mph Design Speed . in the Lower Canyon. Distribution of Figure Showing Retaining Wall Conceptual Plan. Distribution of Revised Matrix of Component and Alternative Development Dated January 26, 1987. SLC-STAN/14 1 �z u.s. 89 LOGAN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT SCHEDULE (Revised January 26, 1987) Task Due Date Notice of Intent for EIS to FHWA January 8, 1987 Scoping Meeting Legal Notices to Media January 28, 1987 Preliminary Alternatives Technical Memo February 2, 1987 Official Notices to Government Agencies Inviting Participation in Scoping Meetings February 2; 1987 News Release to Media February 9, 1987 Fact Sheet to Media and Complete Mailing List February la, 1987 Scoping Meeting - Logan March. 3, 1987 Scoping Meeting - Logan and Garden City March 4, 1987 Technical Memo Drafts (to UDOT & ID Team) March 23, 1987 Complete Review of Tech Memos April 20, 1987 Preliminary Draft EIS (To UDOT & ID Team) April 27, 1987 Complete Review of Preliminary Draft EIS May 26, 1987 Draft EIS Submittal to UDOT for distribution to FHWA & USFS SLC-STN/16a June 8, 1987 1 �OUTLINE FOR SCOPING MEETING U.S. 89 - LOGAN CANYON EIS I. Introduction A. Welcome to UDOT-FHWA-USFS Scoping Meeting on U.S. 89 Logan Canyon EIS B. Introduction of speaker (others?) C. Purpose of meeting - formal scoping meeting in accordance with NEPA - NEPA requires scoping meeting to be held after publishing notice o f intent, before preparing EIS 1. 2. Obtain input on issues that should be considered in the EIS and suggestions for project alternatives 3. ' D. - Share results of study to present, project alternatives developed Answer questions on the alternatives and the EIS process UDOT contracted with CH2M HILL to carry out three major study efforts 1. 2. Development of transportation plan (alternatives) 3. E. Analysis of traffic constraints and needs Preparation of environmental document (EIS) Previous public information meetings have been held from which input will be used for scoping EIS, along with this input; this meeting will 1. 2. Explain project alternatives developed to the present 3. II. Quickly recap results of study to present Receive comments and suggestions, perhaps more specific to alternatives Project Setting and Objectives A. Relation of U.S. 89 to Region 1 �1. Most of project area lies within Cache National Forest, therefore, USFS and FHWA are cooperating agencies on EIS 2. Logan Canyon is scenic and recreational resource 3. U.S. 89 serves traffic a. Utilizing canyon for recreation b. From regional communities accessing the regional trade center of Logan or recreational opportunities around Bear Lake c. Through traffic "from the accessing recreational areas of Yellowstone and Teton National Parks 4. U.s. 89 classified as a "rural minor arterial" 5. · Classifications carry standards to be ·met; U.S. 89 does not presently conform to standards of a rural minor arterial 6. Primary objective of study is to achieve compromise between "rural minor arterial" standards and scenic and recreational resources of canyon a. Resources of canyon and population increase will increase the traffic volume on U.S. 89 in future b. Cross-section elements of road are significantly substandard throughout most of project area; gradient and curves add to problems c. Frequency of accidents is significantly greater in 16 areas than the average for the Canyon d. Explain level of service - quality measure of operating conditions e. At present volumes, road falls into Level of Service D f. By 2000, the level of service will drop to E in some places, by 2005 will generally be E throughout project area 2 �7. Results of traffic needs study presented at previous meetings; fact sheet is available III. Alternatives Development A. Study area can be . divided into three sections based on terrain and road design characteristics 1. Right Fork to 1.8 miles above Ricks Spring 2. 1.8 miles above Ricks Spring to Bear Lake Summit 3. Bear Lake Summit to Garden City B. Different alternatives are appropriate to each section C. Alternatives not yet final; may be increased/ decreased as a result of input from scoping meetings D. Alternatives generally cover wide range of options to provide good comparison of pros and cons of each E. Section 1 - ·Right Fork to 1.8 miles above Ricks Springs 1. 2. Spot improvements - replace bridges; slow vehicle turnouts; recreational turnouts and parking; signing and marking improvements 3. Widen along existing alignment - widen lanes, shoulders, and ditches, raise grade in potential flood areas, plus other spot improvements 4. F. No action - maintain existing road Widen and improve existing alignment to design speed of 35 mph to 40 mph - improve (straighten) alignment; passing lanes; particularly in areas of sustained grades; improvements listed in 2 and 3 Section 2 - 1.8 miles above Ricks Spring to Bear Lake Summit 1. No action - maintain existing road 3 �2. G. Widen and improve existing alignment to design speed of 55 to 60 mph, widen lanes, shoulders, and ditches, improve (straighten) alignment, provide passing lanes, particularly in areas of steep grades; raise grade in potential flood areas; bridge replacement; signing and marking improvements Section 3 - Bear Lake Summit to Garden City 1. 2. IV. Widen and improve along existing alignment to design speed of 35 to 40 mph - widen lanes, shoulders, and ditches; improve (straighten) alignment; provide passing lanes, particularly in areas of steep grades, raise grade in potential flood areas; bridge replacement; signing and marking improvements 3. H. No action - maintain existing road Construct road along new alignment to north Use of alternate canyon for new road for through traffic has been suggested as alternative by many in the past. Has been determined economically infeasible. Therefore, must do best we can to balance local recreation/through traffic needs on existing U.S. 89 Procedures to Submit Comments 1. Sign up 2. Step to microphone 3. Give name, representing what group 4. Want to give everyone chance · to speak before allowing anyone second opportunity 5. Not looking for whether you favor project or not, but what issues should be examined in ErS, or other alternatives or mitigation that should be considered 6. vlri tten comments will be accepted through Monday, April 6. Address is on hand-out at back of room. - - - - ----- SLC94/d.ll0l 4 �LIST OF FIGURES FOR SLIDE PRESENTATION FOR SCOPING MEETING Slide No 1. US-89 - Logan Canyon Environmental Impact Statement Scoping Meeting Utah Department of Transportation In cooperation with United States Forest Service and Federal Highway Administration Consultant: CH2M HILL 2• Purpose of Scoping Meeting o o o o o o Comply with National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) Review study approach Review public involvement program Review results of study Review alternatives developed to date Obtain input on additional alternatives 3. Vicinity Map ( Figure 1 - T.M.) 4• Site Map (Figure 2 - T.M.) 5. Function of US-89 through Logan Canyon o o o o o 6. Roadway Characteristics o o o o 7. 1 2 3 SLC-STN/18 Substandard cross-section Low design/travel speed Low level of service - delays Traffic volumes will increase Study Area - Three Sections Section 8• Recreational access within canyon Regional recreational traffic Regional business and service Serves interstate through traffic Classification "Rural Minor Arterial" Description Right Fork to 1.8 miles above Ricks Spring 1.8 miles above Ricks Spring to Bear Lake Summit Bear Lake Summit to Garden City Site Map (Showing three sections) 1 �Alternatives 9. No Action Maintain Existing Road Alternatives 10. Spot Improvements Replace bridges Slow vehicle turnouts Recreational turnouts and parking Signing and pavement marking improvements Alternatives 11. Widen Along Existing Alignment Widen lanes and shoulders Widen ditches - improve drainage Replace bridges Climbing lanes Recreational turnouts and ' parking Signing and pavement marking improvements Alternatives l2~ Widen and Improve existing alignment Improve alignment - 35-40 mph Improve alignment - 55-60 mph Widen lanes and shoulders Widen ditches - improve drainage Replace bridges Climbing lanes Recreational turnouts and parking Signing and pavement marking improvements . Alternatives Summary 13. Section 1 (Middle Canyon) No Action Spot Improvements Widen Exist. Road Widen and Improve: 35-40 mph 55-60 mph New Alignment SLC-STN/18 X X X Section 2 (Upper Canyon) X Section 3 (Rich County) X X X X X X 2 �s-e~1 6:; L./dClT F#~~ OA/ ~ec /3~ hna/ ro (49] ()-22) //,Ia// DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION -Federal Highway Administration ENVIRor~ENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT; CACHE AND RICH COUNTIES, U1AH AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) , DOT. ACTION: Notice of intent. SUMMARY: The FHWA is issuing this notice to advise the public that at this time it is the St3ternent (LIS) for to prepare an Environmental Impact intenf~ ~ proposed a highway project in _ r".:lrhD / ':I ~r~ ....... - , , ...... , . -- - , . ... .,..<!~ Counties, Utah. the If study and analysis conclude that all appropriate FHWA/UDOT criteria for a Finding of No Significant Impact are met then the document may be converted from an EIS to a FONSI. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Duncan Silver, u.S. Department. of . , Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, P.O. Box 1J563, Salt Lake City, . Utah Baumgartner, U.S. Telephone 84147, Department of Agriculture, North 1200 East, Logan, Utah James Naegle, West, (801) 84321, 524-5143, Utah 84119, uave Forest Service, 860 Telephone (801) 753-2772, or Utah Department of Transportation, Salt Lake City, or Telephone 4501 (801) So~th L700 965-416C. or Howard Richardson, Utah Department of Transportation, District One Office, P.q. Box 2747, Ogden, Utah SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 84404, Telephone (801) 399-5921. The proposed action would improve U.S. Highway 89 through Logan Canyon, Utah, from Right Fork, about 9 miles east of Logan, to Garden City, a distance of approximately 28 mjles. This road passes through the Wasatch-:-Cache National Forest, provides scenic and recreational resources. which Portions of the highway are a narrow two-lane road with numerous gradient. The highway is umber of �-' -' r ecreation(Jl and other large vehicles, which, along with the road constrain~:ten r~n delays of traffic .. Improvements to be considered include widening of the roadway and shoulders; flattening of curves, gradient, replacing and widening of improvement bridges, signing, adjustment of provision of road additional recreational turn-outs, and/or constructing a new road along a new alignment in selected areas, . ~tc. ~ ~ The project"" can be divided intG three sectioi,S 1 characteristics. These sections are: above Ricks Spring; (2) Bear Summit; (1) ba~eu Widen ~nd alignment. I 1.8 miles above Ricks Spring to Bear Lake Lake spot improvements; ~01J . H.-5 ueslgr Right Fork to 1.8 miles Summit to Garden (3) Alternatives City. currently being consi.dered for the project include: (2) on (1) no action; widen along existing alignment; . .improve existing alignment; (5) (4) Construct road along new Different alternatives might be selected for each of the road sections. Several . public meetings discussing the project have already been held. Formal scoping meetings for the public will be held on March 3, at 7:00 p.m. at the Mountain Fuel Supply Auditorium ! 45 East 200 North in Logan, and on March 4, at 7:00 p.m.- in Garden City Hall. A meeting for governmental agencies and public officials will be held March 4, at 10:00 a.m. in the Logan City Hall. other scoping meetings will be held as determined necessary, . . and information on S II:: 1 . . time and place will be provided through the local news media. _ . .to-........---. j..c ......~~-.J"a ~. A,...".:" . ....... J..... ._ ~.. ..... KI~~-. :.~~~~ ........~,... . ......... _fo: ..... ... =.. ....:!:J" "...~ . --"..... ~J'r.~-~•. --..I.-..:. -...., ..'"Io- ~ ~ _ • _ To ensure that the full range of issues related to this" proposed action are addressed and all significant issues identified, comments and suggestions are invited from all interested parties. questions concerning the proposed action and Comments or the EIS should be �directed to the FHWA at the address provided above. r / J. /' . ~ i , { "_ J ! ~ J! ; (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance High\'!ClY Research Planning and Construction. Cir(~ ular Program Number 20.205, The provisions of OM8 No. A-95 regarding state and local clearinghouse review of Federal ana federally assistea programs and projects apply to this program.) Issued on: · "!"~aniel Dake Division Administrator Salt Lake City, Utah 1. �NOTICE OF PUBLIC SCOPING MEETINGS US-89 Logan Canyon The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), U. S. Forest Service (USFS), and Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) will jointly hold public scoping meetings for the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) being prepared for U.S. Highway 89 through Logan Canyon in Cache and Rich Counties, Utah, on March 3, at 7:00 p.m. at the Mountain Fuel Supply Auditorium, 45 East 200 North in Logan, and on March 4, at 7:00 p.m. in Garden City Hall. A meeting for governmental agencies and public officials will be held March 4, at 10:00 a.m. in the Logan City Hall. The general public, interest groups, and governmental agency personnel are invited to attend to provide input regarding their concerns about impacts of road improvements on the environment of the Canyon and issues which should be addressed. Comments and suggestions are invited from all interested parties. UDOT has contracted with CH2M HILL, an environmental engineering consulting firm in Salt Lake City, to analyze · transportation needs in Logan Canyon, develop alternative plans for improvements, and evaluate the impact · of those plans on the environment in an EIS. The FHWA and the USFS will be cooperating agencies on the EIS, which will · be developed in conformance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) . NEPA requires that a scoping process take place prior to the conduct of an EIS. It is the purpose of the scoping meetings to de·t ermine from the interested communi ty what are perceived to be the sensitive resources of the pr6ject area and what environmental factors should be studied most closely in the EIS. Several public meetings discussing the project have been held . previously. Other scoping meetings will be held a~ determined necessary, and information on time and place will be provided through the local news media. Public meetings will also be held when the draft EIS is completed to obtain comments on its contents. The proposed action would improve US-89 through Logan Canyon from Right Fork about 9 miles east of Logan, to Garden City, a distance of approximately 28 miles. This road passes through the Wasatch-Cache National Forest, which provides scenic and recreational resources. Portions· of the highway are a narrow two-lane road with numerous curves and considerable gradient. The highway is traveled by .a significant number of recreational and other large vehicles, which, along the the road constraints, often results in delays of traffic. Improvements to be considered include widening of the roadway and shoulders, flattening of curves, replacing and widening of bridges, adjustment of road gradient, improvement of signing, provision of additional recreational turn- �.---...... ".--... ESD ".- ..-/ EXJJT .tt40 3s ,/' /' ---- ~ ~ , ,/ / /' / -- ---... - - ---,. ':./ "l/ . .~ ( i ; /' ( -;0/'(;" ) .\~ -J / \ C; ,"c I' I 5320 I ,/ 1111 ~ /' 1 I I 1 II en C CD t... m n -i 1 I'" I 1\\ S50 ~ ~ 0 1 ~ ). ~ ~ f. . .·o ~ I I 5':2& 0 1 1 I "'0 JJ o t... ~ -i 2 P (" I '" en J: m m -< 1 I Z P I 1 I -i N . ~\ I I 'f) \ ~ CD 0 I I 1 ~ ~ '" ~ I i .~ N '\J ~ I II I I '01 ~ d 0 I 1 I 1 1 �·1111 kW5 I I I I I 'II I I I ,I -- -- 1 I 1 . ---- 1 1/6)" .Jf LYI I " I I jV III .I I I I I I I <; 3] / 1 l' ,1111/ , I~ .I / 1 h' I III III ." r--------- / (/) co :0 I I I o m m t.. ~ -I -I Z Z -< P I P ~I Cu '\;: (4 f, y I, U ~\(;2.0 ,. y. ~ ) ~/ I ~I I I I ~ i &oO ;F I ~ I I I I I I 0 I I •~ I I I :I ,I I I �~. en C ;£ OJ '- m () -1 I 1 1\\ I" I~ I~ 1 (LID) ~ I~ I 'Yb '+ ! A-------=----=~--_+ C /1d"1/1 d /to,/, I ~ I~ c3s7 I I 1 1 I ..... - - -- - -"" - --- - -,-- I " en ;0 I o m '- m m -1 () 5'tYO -1 Z -=- . l AI/ It\ ~ Wa/I ('3 ~) ~ \ ~ ~ CO W ~ ~ p OJ -< I Z I P I I I I~I I I I ~ , I I 1 I I 0 1 I .. m ~ I I I ., I 1 1 1 1 �1I11 en C CD t... m (") ~ 1 ~ 1<.\ ~ ... ~I - -- 1 ~ ~ ~ I 1 I I 1 I I I " ;0 en I CD m ~ I -< 2 ~ I " \ ~ ~I ~ ~I I I I I 0 "Tl I I I I I I • I I I I I I I 0 ~ m �1111 U) c 1 " eX'lsr , ·1 I 1 1 1 .1 1 1 1 t.... m (") -1 1 1 , OJ 1 I I 1 1 1 I~ I~ 1 (,\ ~ 1 1 1 1 [\ I 1 , I ! 1 . I 1 , I ~ ~ ~ ~ , I I I 1 1 I 1 I -0 )'. U) OJ t.... m n -1 z 9 :c ~ -< I I JJ 0 1 ~i ~ ---- / L ,-"- 1-1 - 1 I , , , I i . 0 l> -1 m �~ 1111 I I I 351,yo -- --'--... - - --- ...... 1 en co c... I (") c 1 -1 $XI.Jr : I £ tt : 57 2 D I 1 I 1 I --- m I I 1 I I~ I~ IG\ ~ 1 1 , I , 1 5 700 I 1 1 1\ \ 1 --- -=-- 1 I , II \. ~ 1 I . ; ,' ' ~ , /\ I ' '< ~ 1 , I ,~ 1 I I I , I I I , I ,~ I , I '\ , , \ s ~(, o ' 1 I / I \ "'0 JJ " 1 2 m (") -; ---\J\~ ~ ~ ~ OJ ~ ~ ~ ~ z 9 en OJ ~ -; I o I -< I I ~: II I I I I 1 I I 0 • :> -1 m <: I 'I ~ 1 It r C/ I 1 I �"~ ,.-.,.. r-----. 1111 I I I I 35~~6 I £y/Jr £. ~ I S' 7~O I I I ~. I ! I I ?q(; I I I I I I I I /' / / J / I I / I -- ./ &~/U/7 tCb'c;// ~ <':'-79-0 I ! I I S 70 t:" ./ / IJ lJ I 1 1 I I 1 I t.... m -l I I~ I· I~ IG\ :~ I 1 1 1 I I 1 ! ! I I I I I~ i~ ~ ~ I I I I I I I I I ! I I 1 CJ) I I I OJ -< () -l I o ." ! I I I I m y -;- I("L ~~t? f ~L.C(::5 @ -1 z ~ ~ "'"6 ~' ~ /' "'- -. " ,/ L1 / S~~ O / -/ \t7 ~ r G\ V1 "! / ./ I OJ () m m 0 ..,r / I I OJ c I- / ./ /" I .~ ~ () //{=26' r/~V ~ 8 "-1 " ~ t ~ ~ ~ .. 0 I I ~! I I . I I I I I I I I I I I I ! . I 0 }> -l m I ! I I I I d I ,! ~ J �1111 , < I I , , 2: ~ ~ ~ : ~ l~ _ I' .------ -------- - : I I I ~ I I" , ~ : : ~ I , , , , i' /-- / , , / , I , I I I I I I , I I I I / I I I , I , I ""0 JJ 0 I- m (') ~ C/) I m m OJ ,-< I~ iI I I I o z 9 ! I I I I I I II _----~-----i---___!/'. I ~) r 'J", ...J \S) W ~ :ti I .~ ~ .. 0 l> ~ m �GUARD RAIL CONCRETE RETAINING WALL EXISTING PLANT GROWTH TO BE RETAINED AND PROTECTED C PLANTINGS REQUIRED ---....- TOPSOIL REQUIRED l' - 6" "'"""----, A / EXCAVATION LINE (APPROXJ ( RIVER FIGURE RETAINING WALL AND LANDSCAPING CONCEPTUAL PLAN LOGAN CANYON STUDY ,.::tlum., �(1) 5:1 SLOPE 29' MIN 55 MPH 23' TO 2S' S'+ 24' MIN 50 MPH 18' MIN 40 MPH 16' MIN 35 MPH (2) SLOPE VARIES 1 0: 1 TO 5: 1 (A) EXISTING 24-29' 55 MPH 20 -24' 50 MPH 15 -18' 40 MPH 13 -16' 35 MPH 40' ( 2') 12' 12' ~~--~~--------~~--------~~----~ ~~ RECOVERY AREA ____________________________________________________ '0~:, ~ ~-y -<-~ <' -y~ (B) STANDARD ~ ~~ 0..-0 (HOURLY VOLUME OVER 250> - - ..... - - RECOVERY AREA _6' MIN_ CUT DITCH --_S'_ 34' 12' -~ ~ ~ RECOVERY AREA - ..... 12' - -- _S'_ ~ 5' "\ ~ 10:1 (C) MODIFIED STANDARD FIGURE 1 TYPICAL SECTIONS LOGAN CANYON STUDY �11' MIN 17' 17' 2' MIN RETAINING STRUCTURE/GUARD RAIL POSSIBLY REQUIRED. MODIFIED STANDARD (CENTERED ON EXISTING ALIGNMENT) 17' 5' MIN OFFSET 17' 10' MIN-(40 MPH, 10:1) 8' MIN-( 35 MPH, 10: 1) EXISTING RETAIN RIVERBANK MODIFIED STANDARD (NEW CENTERLINE OFFSET AWAY FROM RIVER) ,;r FIGURE 2 TYPICAL SECTIONS WIDENING ON EXISTING ALIGNMENT :::f,~cn'. LOGAN CANYON STUDY � 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/68">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/68</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 221797090 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 10632364 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 Additional data for agenda items from January 26, 1987 Interdisciplinary Team meeting Description An account of the resource Additional data for agenda items from January 26, 1987 Interdisciplinary Team meeting includes an environmental report schedule, outline for scoping meeting, list of figures for slide presentation for scoping meeting, environmental impact statement for Cache and Rich counties, notice of public scoping meetings, mulitple diagrams (for speed limits), figure of retaining wall and landscaping conceptual plan, figure of typical sections, and widening on existing alignment. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource CH2M Hill (Firm : Salt Lake City, Utah) Utah. Department of Transportation Dake, Daniel Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Traffic engineering Roadside improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon Roads--Design and construction 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 1987-01-26 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 Folder 9 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_Fd9_Page_11.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/9df15fee1b62048a0db38c6f5a5ee6b4.pdf 1a18d841f44852d756943df04bf3fd33 PDF Text Text LOGAN CANYON PUBLIC MEETING November 3, 1986 COMMENTS FOLLOWING CH2M HILL PRESENTATION: ( With that information we are here to listen, so we would invite you to make your comments. We are recording the meeting so we would like you to identify who you are for our record. This is not a formal hearing, we are here to get ·your input. We want to know what your concerns are, what you see as the issues and we invite you to star~. You can address your comments to the consulting team, the Highway Dept, so let's be brave and lead off. Bryce Nielson: . 1 was wondering what the original decision or reason was to have three alternative routes come from the summit down. What is the specific problems associated with the existing route? Stan: Well, as you know, there are several hairpin curves on that alignment. We will be looking at that alignment, we are not discarding it, but we are saying, Is there another way? There is some unstable ground in that alignment that the Highway Dept. has had to deal with over the years. And it is now being built up along this portion of the road. We were just asked by the Highway Dept. to look at the ~ossibilities, to review the whole route. If therp is not a better way, we'll find out, if there is, maybe it is worth looking at· in more detail. Price: I have a question for Commissioner Weston. What kind of priority is. the Highway Department assigning to this project? Todd Weston: Well, very low. I've got to answer that honestly. The problem we are in with money right now, we can't separate funds from the north part, south part, or Wasatch Front and with the problems we've got on the Wasatch Front right now, funding for this project is considerably down the road a ways. That is as honest an answer as I can give you. It is not a high priority. If we had all this decid.ed today, ~t wouldn't be the most high priority, JoJut it is something we have to go through, irregardless. It is still a long ways down the road. .,.. . / I'm Brian Stringham 'and I've been travelling that road for a long time, and that is a deplorable situation to have seven 18 foot bridges on ~ US highway. That ~s uncalled for. This is 1986. That road was started back in ~he late 20's and finished up in 1932, and there has been little improvement on that road except for th~ lowe~ end that was improved 20 years ago. But, I travel that road as much ~S anyLody in this room for a lot of years ana the~ is one of the biggest beefs I've got when I talk to anybody, that lousy road that we have to travel on. So if we can do something with those bridges, and I'm glad this summer that they finally put in a few guard rails, but half of the places they put guard rails in they didn't need them. Up the street here there is about 600 feet of guard rail that drops over 10 feet. A mile· above that where you come around the curve where you need it and it drops 100 feet or 150 feet, there is no guard rail. Now why is that? I think what has happened is that the contractor come up here and missed the place where he was suppose to put it. Those are some of the 7 �· , gripes I've got. , We've got to change those bridges. I've drive a big truck down there and I go down there and a woman was coming up in a big car and she stopped in the middle of the bridge and I was coming down at 40 miles an hour and she was just petrified, and finally we worked it out so we got through, but I was afraid I was going to push her off into the river. These 18 foot bridges have got to be changed and we are not going to accept anything. less. That's the main thing I'm unhappy with, those lousy bridges we've got. I'm Alan Harri~on, Director of Bear Lake Regional Commission. Ken Brown, County Commission Chairman of Rich County asked me to read a statement. "Having watched traffic increase for the past ten years, I feel the canyon road should definitely be improved. Minimum improvement should include three lane passing such as in the lower canyon. Tourist flow to and from Bear Lake is important to our economy and Logan Canyon is a problem. Safety is a real COllcern, and anyone who travels the road regularly w')uld agree that it is becoming more and more cumbersome and time consuming. I feel no more studies are necessary and we should commence with construction. Stan: Would you please give us a copy of that? Alan Harrison: Yes sir. Paul Webb: I understand that this study has ' been in progress since June of this year. One question is how much longer is the study going to continue and the other question is, if this is a low priority on the UDOT budget, what is the time frame for any kind 0:: improvements rather it be the status quo approach or the whole ball of wax? Stan: We will be completing our work in June of next year. We were given a year to do the ,study, and we are about halfway through with our efforts right now. As far &s the priority listing, there is a number of funding programs that the state has ' access to, things such as the br~dge repla~ement, maybe, could be a different priority than improving the whole road. I'll. let the UDOT answer that more fully. ~.,,- UDOT: If we 10 any work at all in the canyon, it will have to ~e documented quite well from an environmental approach, that is to justify the expenditure of fedelal funds on this project, and that it will not harm the environment. One purpose of this study is to identify various ways in which projects may be staged in the canyon. It is our opinion that the structures are an important issue and should be addressed as soon as possible. ~ut even if we had the money right now to replace the structures, we couldn't do it until we complete the _environmental study that is underway now. So the first step in this process is to evaluate the alternatives and to also evaluate them on an environmental basis to justify the 8 �, ( , expenditure of funds, and then funds could be awarded. Portions of this project will go sooner 'than other parts. But if we are going to do any work at all we must complete this long process. Question: Who has the final say, the UDOT or the environmentalists? UDOT: Both. What we are doing through this environmental study is coming to a mutual understanding as to what we can realistically do in the canyon. Question: Okay my other question is, environmentally, which is more important, to lose a life, even if an ambulance has to go through any kind of weather through this canyon, which is more impor~~nt saving the environment or saving a life? Lynn Zollinger: Those questions are hard to answer. (There was an uproar in the crowd). Let me say what we intend to do is to design a facility that will be the best facility we can build within the constraints we are given. And it is not going to be a super route or 60 mph he~e ... Comment: I'll bet if you ask any person in this room which is more important they would say it is a person's life. Question: I'm a citizen here in town. Didn't you have funds approved for the entire Logan Canyon before the environmentalists shot it down? Isn't that why the improvements were shut down before? Lynn Zollinger: There was a construction scheduled to begin at Right Fork and continue to Ricks Spring. That was following closely on the heels of the one completed on up to Right Hand Fork. In the early seventies is when that was slated to go to construction and the funds werp. completed and I believe we were almost ryady to advertise. Then the environmental issues surfaced and the momentum at that time was stopped to this date. Comment: I can't believe with all the rocks and trees we've got around here there is anything so particular in that canyon. Lynn Zollinger: There is, bel~eve me. . There are very many issues that are sensitive from an environmental standpoint. Question: !~:>w mar.Y lawsuits do we have to file to get this standard road improved? Lynn Zollinger: . .-/ s"o- I can't answer that. Question: What has 'happened to all those funds that they have from the 5% tax in the whole U.S., there was supposed to be 60 million dollars in the State of Utah to take care of substandard roads, such as bridges. This was going to make employment, upgrade the roads in the secondary and third grade roads in the whole u.S. and 9 �-( ( each state was going to get their share. any of the pie back, did we? I don't think we even got Commissioner Weston:· I thought I was in a friendly area here. I think in all fairness, · and I know your concerns, I travel that road quite often myself, and I know that there are some things that ought to be done, and I don't think there is anybody that doesn't agree with that. How far to go is the problem. We know that we have to replace some bridges. We've got some bridges up there that are too narrow and besides that they are structurally unsound, so that if we don't do something pretty quick, we may have to do something more drastic. As far as why we have to do these studies, I think I have the same position you have. I was County Commissioner in Cache County for seve~al years, and we went through several exercises trying to make improvements up the canyon and we never could satisfy enough people on what we needed to do and to get enough unity in what to do in order to have the federal government release funds. NOw, that is a pure and honest statement. We have some bridge replacement right now. These funds rollover and each year and what funds aren't used rollover to another year. Th~ priority for our funds in Logan Canyon may be better next year than this year, we don't know. We know that highway funds are badly depleted right now. We are at least 40 million dollars behind our funding of state highways right now. We actually got far enough along in the last year- to program points for Logan Canyon on three bridges, two of them are close to being funded, and we decided that we needed to go through the necessary requirements to get the ·federal dollars. Remember that 95% of the money that wo~ld be spent on this canyon is coming out of Washington. I appreciate that it is your money, but it still has to be released by the Federal Highway Dept. and when we requested to move ahead with just the tridges we were told there would be no money given to us by Federal Highways ~ntil a complete and indepth environmental study fo~ the whole canyon was complete. So, that's why these peopile are hired. ·1 sat on the commission over there and we had $500,000 allocated one year to go from Right Hand Fork to Ricks Spring, which would have in those days, built the thing. But we couldn't move. We didn't have our homework done. Of course, I wasn't in the highways then, but I was on the county commission and I sat in the position you are in - frustration wondering why can't we go. Well, it is even more complicated now than it was then. We've got a terrible shortage of money for highways. We've got SOhle ter.;:ible problems. This isn't the only bad strotch ooC highway we hdve in Utah. I've been over a lot of it in ~~e la!c year and · I want to tell you this is not· the worse stretch of road. It is maybe, from your standpoint becc..use you have to travel it, but if you go from across the state you'll find many roads in pretty bad shape. We are doing the best we can with the money we have. As soon as the environmental study is complete, then we will go back to the federal government and say, "Here's our plans, here is what we can justify from a reasonable standpoint, here is what the people think we need, and here is what we can do with the dollars we've got, and not impact the canyon to the point that we are foolish, and yet build a road that we need and will supply our 10 �( needs to the year 2010 and if we can hit that happy medium, then we'll get approval. Of course, we've got to work with the Fo~est Service. They own the land. You people need to understand that. Comment: They work for the people. Todd Weston: Yes, but they administrate it. Dave Baumgarner: land. ( , Forest Service doesn't own the land it is public Todd Weston: You people own the land, but the forest ser,ice administrates it. ' And we are going to build improvements to that highway. When I say "improvements" I sometimes get a gun pointed at my throat. Some people consider that anything we do up there is not improving. You need to know we have a lot of people that feel that way. I'm not saying that they are right, or that you are right. I know that somewhere in the middle we are going to find some mutual ground that we can satisfy our needs with and that is what we are ~rying to do. There are some places up in that ca~yon that I don't want to see destroyed and I've got the same concerns you have, but we are going to do the best job we can. We've got make sure that it meets with their plans in their management process for the canyon. Dave Baumgarner is charge with his office to see that anything that is done in · that canyon is the proper thing to do for what the people need and want . . Question: I enjoy driving through the canyon as much as anybody else does at anytime of the year. I really enjoy it. I don't think anybody in this room would like to see the beauty of that canyon destroyed. It would be ludicrous on our part to assume that. It is a great calling card for us to bring people over here. However, when you drive through it and you realize how o~d the road is an~_ the fact that a lot of improvements can be made, , ~. hen wilCn . ' you've got to go through all these agencies you are talking abol1t and all the red tape and bureaucracy you are talking about, I don't see why these entities, public and environmental, forest service, ' can not sit down and give a little bit so that this road can be improved whereby the flow of traffic will be safer for all concerned going both ways. NOW, the last two years there have been a great flow of traffic throug~ the canyon. The truck traffic flow has increased considerable from Millers over there. And · that is fi~e, we"d like to see them come over here, but when you gpt in c~rtain places in that road, those trucks take up 3/4s of the highway and that leaves you with very little. As far as arguing about the road, we need the road and ~e deserve the road. And we need to have all the.s e entities sIt down and say, "Alright, these are the pr~blems, 'but let's get on with the program. Let's find out what has to be done, let's take and ~ive a little. ( .. ,./ 11 �( Sheldon: I appreciate all your concerns, they are great. Wet~lked earlier about the length of our study. I think it might be appropriate to answer why it-takes a year to do the study. We are trying to do the study correctly. If you read your newspaper you can see what happened in Provo Canyon. I'm not saying that will happen here, but, by gosh, we are going to do everything we can to keep that from happening. But there are some lawsuits in Provo that have been filed against UDOT and we do want to make sure that we take time to get everything documented well enough, · so that when our recommendations are accepted, or UDOT makes the recommendation and they and the Fore's t Service agree, we've got the proper framework to support any potential lawsuit that might come down. That takes time and I apologize for that. Question: I have a question for Mr. Baumgarner. I think everybody has preconceived notions about this entity out there called an environmentalist, that they are instantly going to battle with the residents over here. Since you are with the Forest Service and you are going to represent the federal government's interest and proba- . bly a lot of the biological and ecological interest in the can~on, I'm interested in your comments as to do you really think the envi~ ronmentalists and the citizens are that far apart? / Dave Baumgarner: No, they are not. I don't have an answer any different than that. There are some legitimate concerns on both sides. But other than argue about statistical data that justifies, or unjustifies the project, when it comes right down to it, the issues aren't really that strong. Almost down to the point of talking about a specific corner as to whether or not for a fishery or an environmental issue, there aren't very many serious issues about bridges. If we had this to do allover again, to be quite frank, and the state had the money to build bridges without having to qo to the federal government for funds, we would categorically exclude brid~~~. What that means in our process is that with a half page d~cision signed by my boss, the project would not have to go through the entire environmental process on the specific bridge replacement. In talking about individual corners, we are almost in the same box, but not quite, depending on the issue on the specific corner. From the Forest Service perspective, we are a lot closer than people realize. However, there are some processes involved that are giving us some troubl~, timewise. St ~ ~: S! ~eldon : why don't you identify where we go from herp with t:le public involvement process. Sheldon: This meeting was really only intended as a public information meeting. Certain:y to solicit your comment, but this is just the first of several opportunities that will come up over this whole period of this study for people to have input. This is an information meeting; we are just getting started. As we get into the environmental assessment we will have what we call a Scoping Meeting where we identify issues. We'll go from there with public hearings and you will have plenty of opportunity to speak up and frankly, I think it is great, and please keep doing it. 12 �Bill Peterson: I am questioning your statistics on your growth rate. We've been in a down trend in our economy in this area, but in the last year there have been a number of major projects express interest in building motels and hotels here and 'I think that your 2% growth rate is going to be way short of the actual growth rate of the traffic on the highway. I think we will get that 2% just from our locals. If there is any other increase, it will go way over that. Stan: We shar~ that concern. Cliff Forsgren did that study for us and it was reviewed very carefully by UDOT and by the interdisciplinary team we work with on a fairly regular basis. Cliff, why don't you cover the background on that. Cliff: The approach to putting together projections requires a great deal of knowledge, experience and skill, and computers and everything else and when you are done? Frankly, we look at it from a couple of different perspectives. We look at it from what has occurred over the past 10 or 12 years as long as we have the cata from a counter station. We also took the State of Utah's projection for economic growth in northern Utah and we came up with numbers that were very close to the same. From the standpoint of those of us that were preparing this projections, 2% is a bit uncomfortable. But based on the information we had, it was difficult to come up with anything higher. Believe me, I tried. Looking at the average daily flow in the summer in one year you may have a significant increase from one year to the next, but the next year then it will drop off some, and it averages out. If someone could give us some data or some information that would show that it needs to be higher, but based on what we have got, that's all we could justify. Ted wilson: Doesn't I-IS plan to finished off further past Tremo~ton? UDOT: That is correct. Ted Wilson: into Logan? Are they planning to improve the Valley View highway UDOT: We haven't got any engineering done on Valley View. o~ our hJpe list. It is Ted Wilson: At present, I'm sure everybody would agree that the canyon is beautiful, but we wou ..d also becoming a deterrent to traffic coming this way. An improved highway may bring as many as 10% higher flow rate almost immediately. People are getting scared of Logan Canyon. It is getting bad. The shoulders are horrible. They washed out really bad this last year. People don't like to travel it once they have seen it. If they want to get some place, they·are starting to go around. Other communities are advertising to draw the traffic away from Logan to Soda Springs, to Randolph, that type of thing. As for looking to the past, we have had a 13 �( falling off of percentage and that 2% may look that way, but if you have an improved highway, business wise and traffic flow wise, I think you'll see a tremendous higher use, and especially if 1-15 is finished and good access to Logan, to Tremonton. We still are the major route to Jackson Hole and Yellowstone areas, but Logan Canyon is a mess. Question: I have a couple of questions for Mr. Weston. First, how much do you project it will cost to fix the existing substandard bridges and how much did it cost to hire CH2M Hill? Westo~~ I'll turn those questions . over to the engineers; they've got the exact figures. Lynn Zollinger: The cost to build a structure cost about $45.00 per square foot. The new bridges I expect will be 40' wide, give or take a few feet, and the length is about 150'. That is a preliminary guess, so whatever 40 times 45 times 150 would be the structure cost. Question: How many substandard bridges? Todd Weston: .I / Seven. Lynn Zollinger: Some are longer than others, like at Tony Grove where they are relatively short span, but others sucn as Lower Twin Bridge and Burnt Bridge and Red Bank Bridge that are considerably larger. So the way I look at it, there are four major structures and at least three minor structures. Question: What about hiring a construction firm for a year? Lynn Zollinger: The fe~ for hiring the consultants is around $50(\.1)00. It is a very expeasive study. I . think it shows the UDOT'::; commitment to solve the problems at Logan Canyon. Kathy Webb: If you have two other options here you are thinking about for alternate routes through the canyon, how realistic is it that you are going to do something with the existing canyon? Are you plauning on doing any funding anyway? Stan: ~~a thy Yes, that's all part of the study. Webb: And the other two options are Stan: The other two options are only from the summit to G.lrden City, so they don't rea_Iy impact the canyon at all. Kathy Webb: The other question I have is I have to know what the logic· is behind the passing lane at Ricks Springs. I just have to know that. That is the craziest passing lane I have ever been on! Is that what it is? (Lots of laughter) Lynn, do you want to handle that? 14 �( Lynn.: There was a passing lane built at Ricks Springs. That was done as a desperation move. There is no other term for it, by the UDOT to provide some improvement in the canyon. (more laughter). In a lot of ways we had our hands tied as to spending money to make improvements in Logan Canyon. One group says improve it, do this, do that, and the other group says you can't do anything without the appropriate studies. And I guess the best .way to look at ·the passing lane is that while it did offer some relief and some improvement for that section, is that we wanted to make an improvement and go out and do something. · Question: meetings. You mentioned here tonight that there will be other Where are they going to be? Stan: We will have another Scoping Meeting when we get very specific about what are the alternatives we are going to be looking at. There will be one of those held in Logan and one held here in this valley. Question: Another question I have is how much weight does this meeting we are having here hold? Is Logan going to be able to override us . again? Stan: ' I don't know if that is ' a fair assessment. There are a lot of people in Logan that feel the same as you do. But they are unfortunately, the silent majority. So we are going to make these studies and identify some alternatives and there will be reports produced that will show what the benefits and non-benefits of each alternative are. The final result of this will be the recommended alternative, but the agencies will select, those being the UDOT and the Forest Service. They will select the recommended alternative and a hearing will be held that will discuss that. Paul Webb: I think it was commissioner Weston that mentioned that our project was a low priority project. I assume he W·: l,S talking about expenditure of money. I would like to know whose list we are on. Is that the UDOT's priority list and how will this study affect that priority? Todd Weston: Paul, I guess I've got to say that everyboGy -is on a low priority until we get more money. We just have some many projects ahead of us that we ~re ju .~t putting out fires, is what we are doing. We know that if we don't do some~hing ~;n 1-15 within the next three years, we are going to have a big parking lot between Brigham -:ity and Salt I·ake, and I'm talking about that lit ~rally. And we are talking about a major part of the population living in that part of the state. We have to put things in the perspective. I think our preconstruction engineer put it as well as I can. We are going to do what we can. See, there are different funds; there are bridge funds that are ready to go. We had some that were ready to go, but we were stopped by Federal Highways to do any bridgework until we completed this exercise we are going through now. Had Dave Baumgarner and I been able to sit down together as the Forest 15 �Service and UDOT we probably could have built those bridges and had Federal Highway release the dollars, and they probably will now. But in defense of the environmental study with CH2M Hill, why we are hiring these people, is that we are hiring to gain some time. We simply do not have staff to put them on this project and do· it in the time frame we are trying to do and get on with the construction. They are hired to do the job we didn't have staff to do it in the time frame we need. Question: I remember going to a meeting several years ago with the UDOT and talking about a problem we had in Laketown Canyon. That priority was very low, and then suddenly it jumped up to where it was partially completed. You mentioned that ·95% of the funds can't be approved until this study is done. If this study is done to their satisfaction and application is made and they approve 95% funding, what chance do we have to have that priority jump? Todd Weston: Of course, after that is done we have to go to preconstruction plans. You know, we could start on some bridges rather rapidly. But you see, when you start on some bridges, well, take the bridge at the bottom of the dugway, a tall bridge, an expensive structure, needs to be widened. Now, when you widen it, do you just widen the bridge, or do you go down .stream a ways and take that big sharp curve off from it and make a decent curve at the bottom of it? One thing leads to another to where -you start impacting further down the road. So we've got to do it in an orderly fashion, and frankly, I'm glad we are doing it this way because once and for all, we will have a document in our hands that says, "This is what we can reasonably do. to improve the canyon." Now, well you say the environmentalists stopped the other projects. Well, maybe yes, and maybe no, maybe we didn't have our homework done. We just got two lawsuits slapped on us on Provo Canyon, which is a similar project, with more traffic and more people, bu~ sim;1ar. We got slapped with two lawsuits, and neither one of them are €:nvironmentalists, typical qualified environmentalist groups ' like the Sierra Club, and others. They were not recog~ized as environmentalists g:roups. The person who stopped us was an economics professor at BYU. He is the one that filed the suit. I don't know if he has any other money behind him or not, but he is the one who stopped us. And he stopped us because he sain they didn't need the type or road we were putting through tha~ canyon. Pure and simple. And the judge decided he had better hear more about it and ·so there is an j.njunction on it. That is the kind of problem we run into. Comment: I appreciate all that you have to go through, but I still wonder if that low priority is all we are going to get. ) Todd Weston: -'Well, I guess we are a little bit like a squeaky wheel. If the demand is there strong enough and we can justify it then we are going to move faster where we can. But when I say 16 �( Logan Canyon has low priority, I've got to say it has low priority compared to 1-15, it has low priority compared to probably a dozen other projects in District 1 and we are only one District in the state. Don Huffener: You mentioned the squeaky wheel. I was at the meeting you had in Logan, too and you mentioned it again here, that in the summertime is the big volume of traffic and 80% of that traffic is through traffic all the way through the canyon. Most of those people never get heard because they are not from Logan or here, so Todd Weston: Don Huffener: picked it up. I think we have some better figures than that. Well, I stopped down at Valley Engineering and Todd Weston to CH2M Hill: Is that your statement? Sheldon: The people who start through the canyon, 80% go all the way through the canyon rather th~n stop in the canyon to recreate. , Don Huffener: So the majority of the people who use the canyon aren't getting a hearing on this. The other thing is at the other meeting your spokesperson said that the ID committee was unanimous in their desire to keep Logan Canyon .as a destination. Your spokeswoman said that. I'm sure I am right. So, the pass through traffic, how much consideration are they getting? That was a statement from your office. Stan Nuffer: I think she might have been misunderstood. COffirr;ent: She was implying that they want to make Logan Canyon a and recreational :area, where people come into the canyon, recreate and then go home. de~~ination Cliff: That is the desire of many people to make it that way. I guess the way to answer that is that you really have two views, and I don't see anything that is going to keep both of these from being answered. John Murphy: When I first cam~ to tr~ valley about 15 years ago I was looking for a place to buy some suppli~s and I soon found another route to Ogden and on through. Going on a dirt road in the south ena of the valley down there, which is called Canyon, which is 500 feet lower than your Logan Pass; it doesn't have any environmental problems, there is no river to fight, you can go down into Ogden and · it is 15 minutes longer than using your superhighway through Logan Canyon •. So if the people in Logan are so upset about the environmental impact of us people who live and drive the canyon, rather than those that stop and turn around and go home, why don't they build us a road into Ogden? We could get to Ogden in the same time it takes to get to Logan. Re-route 17 �Highway 89 up through Cottonwood, up through the flats up there, no river, basic road is facing south, so the sun does most of the clearing for you rather than snow plowing; it goes to the area of Monte Cristo, we can go on down there and get our supplies, route the tourists through there, and Logan can have their canyon and go up there and recreate and turn around and go home. (Applause) My name is Ernest Henry, with the Bridgerland Audobon Society in Logan, and I would like to second what was mentioned earlier. Environmental groups aren't out to stop everything and anything, but we do have distinct and definite concerns about Logan Canyon. That is why I am here tonight. There is nothing I'd rather be doing that be home tonight, but I'm here because I'm very concerned about the quality of the environment in Logan Canyon. So, we will work with you, and compromise, but I do have one concern. Something that has been repeatedly stated and stated here tonight and often times stated in the paper and that is that a big impediment to your economic development and the economic development of Bear Lake is the Logan Canyon road, that if it was somehow improved, the economy would be better. That may be true, I don't know, but one thing I have yet to see is any facts on that. Comment: MOVE OVER HERE. Try driving the canyon twice a week and you would change your mind. .~ UDOT: I'd like to make a comment on the alternate route. We have looked at it and an alternate route would cost about 1.2 to 2 million per mile. We don't have that kind of money right now. We do feel that two decades from now that will be a realistic alternative to look at. Right now the money we have available is to improve the facility we have built. I hope you are right about the environmental situation. When we get there I'm afraid there might be more problems that we anticipate, but alternate ro~tes have been lQ~l~~d at but at this time we don't feel the availability of funds makes it a viable alternate. We need to be upgrading what we have here. Comment: Just one comment about alternate routes. Someone must be sniffing glue if they tried an alternate route through Hodges Canyon. It is almost impossible to get through. You would never see a snow plow out. So the studies you are doing on alternate routes are not very well done. The other route that original pioneers used which is pretty ,:"lose ' : 0 your yellow route is a much better route. NOw, I talked to some of the old timers who worked on the route that we've got now and they said those crazy guys from Salt Lake City don't know how to build a road, but since tht.~y are paying us, we'll build it anyhow. The y~llow route does look like it is . ~ better route. .j UDOT: The yellow route is the principal route at this point, but we did indicate to the consultant that we wanted to look at some alternatives. We they took some geotechnical data and they have indicated that the green route is not desirable, but that the yellow one is, again we are going to have to look at that when it �comes time to getting the property and alignment, which will be in the latter stages of the whole study. But we will probably be working with the county people and if we can establish that that is a desirable route, and the local people are in agreement, then we will work with the county commission in reserving the rights of way so we don't have to come in unprepared. But that is the principal route at this time. CH2M Hill: Comment: my eyes. We share your conclusions about the green route. Do you? I saw what you were doing and I couldn't believe Comment: I was wondering, the lower part of the canyon that has been improved, was there any data before so that you can compare the impact that it has had on the lower route so you might have some information to apply to the higher route? Is that being considered? Stan: We have looked at all the data we can get. Unfortunately, the safety data, the basis has changed, so it is kind of hard to draw conclusions. We just have to go along with what is nationally accepted approaches to these kinds of problems. / Barry Negus: One. concern I have is if you change to an alternate route on the lower portion here, what are the people going to do? What is going to happen to the existing road there now and what is going to have to be done for the people that are living along that route to get out in the winter? Lynn Zollinger: If we realign the highway to another locations, it doesn't mean the other one will be clos~d, we'd probably say we would turn it over to Rich County to maintain and plow. Comment: Don't do ~~at. (laughter) Lynn Zollinger: The UDOT is not likely to maintain two routes. disposition of the old route would have to be resolved. The Comment: I would like to ask the gentleman from the Audobon Society if he is a native of the area, is hea student at ~he college, do you live in Logan as a temporary position the~e, what is your impact personally on improvements in the canyon or is this just an assignment you have f::.-:>m thE: college or Audobon Society? ... .,- Ernest Henry: No, I was born in Cincinna~i, Ohio; my parents moved to Albuqu~rque in 1969. I got a bachelors degree from Colc.rado State in Wildlife Biology in 1979. I lJoved to Logan to attend graduate school and I have a masters degree in Range Science there and I now work with the USDA in the agricultural research service doing research in alfalfa growth and I am a member of the Audobon Society because it is something I believe -in and am interested in • So, anyway, I live and work in Logan right now and I intend to stay there for the foreseeable future. 19 �Comment: What do you think about the problems on the road? Ernest Henry: I think there are two major environmental problems I see with road construction. One is the river itself, water quality, quantity, diverting it, changing it from something that is rather free flowing with biological integrity to something that is riprapped and has little biologica~ integrity, and also I think the scenic value of the canyon is important. If your only interest is in economic development, I don't think you can deny that something that is going to bring people to this area is the scenic quality of Logan Canyon. It is an important aspect to this area. It is a recreational resource, granted more in Logan's favor than in Bear Lake's favor. But it is a recreational resource of significance and that shouldn't be overlooked. Comment: I'm just glad to know a transplant from the Sierra Club in Oklahoma. Comment: I don't think it matters wher~ we are from, but I think the thing that this gentleman is stating and what the residents from this side of the hill are willing to work with them. We don't want to change the whole canyon. We think there are improvements that can and should be made and as a community we all feel that way. Comment: We all love the canyon. We don't want it spoiled. We do. We want it preserved. Comment: And I think we are all saying the same thing allover again. We want quality, but we also want some improvements and I think it is possible to work with them if we can just get on with it. Let's work together and get it done. Richard Mills: Have you as the state studied the other road coming in from Salt Lake and Evanston in the summer as far as ~oad counters? Stan Nuffer: proposed? Are you talking about the existing highway or those Richard Mills: The existing highway. You have a traffic study, right? You have two counters .. one Q....)ing north and one coming into Garden C.ity. : . .ave they done anything coming in from Evan~.~on UF over Laketown Canyon? Stan Nuffer: We are somewhat familia~ with the state procedures. They have permanent traffic counters allover the state. UDOT: We no longer have a permanent counter in Laketown Canyon, but they do annual studies. Sometimes they vary from a week or a day. But because of lesser volumes they don't go to the expense of a full time permanent counter there, but they use statistic projection methods to get a short count and project it. to a longer count. 20 �Stan Nuffer: They have a guide that is called "Traffic on Utah Highways that is published biannually that lists all this traffic information and I'm sure you could get a copy of that. Richard Mills: My point is if you would study that information you would probably f.ind out that as people get more scared of Logan Canyon, they are probably coming around the other way. A good share of the people that come in are from Salt Lake and Ogden. Stan Nuffer: I don't know if you can draw tha~ kind of conclusion from the data that is there, but it could be looked at. Joe West: I'm wondering how bad the lower end of the canyon looks now. I remember when that was rebuilt; realigned and they were fighting on that, and that was what stopped them from going on up into the canyon. I'd be interested in knowing how that looks 'now that the growth is back up. I can see that when construction goes on you are going to have a problem for a year or two, but growth comes back. I heard one man say that th~t was the first time he went down Logan Canyon and saw anything but the yellow line. You know, before the rest of this canyon gets built, the lower end of the canyon is going to be obsolete. J stan: We hope to get at least the same standard throughout the whole canyon. Beyond that, if traffic continues to increase, there might need to be alternate routes looked at to take some of the pressure. Joe West: I'd like to ask the Audobon Society how the lower end of the canyon looks to him. Ernest Henry: My general reaction is that it doesn't look that bad. Nevertheles~ . I don't think you, call just say, "Okay, there it t worked." We don't want to take any chances. I guarantee you that. We arc not out just to slow things up but we want it to stay a recreational resource second to none. I'd like to make another comment and this is strictly factual. As I mentioned I lived in Colorado for a while and if you think this battle over a road was somethin<3', Glenwood was an a\'lesome battle. That was on interstate 70 that went on for years and years and years. And they finally worked something out. I think Ch2M Hill would do well to look at some of the approaches that we~e use~ there. Stan Nuffer: We were involved in that process. Jim Naegle: Two months ago we visited Glenwood Canyon, and we built the Interstate 15 through the River by St. George at $1,000,000 per mile and we thought that was a great cost for building a road. The 12 miles of Glenwood Canyon now cost 14 million to put a bike path through, and 235 million dollars to build the road and it is because of tradeoffs with the envizonmental organizations. I want to add just this. That UDOT is more environmentally sensitive than we have ever been as a Highway Department; some of 21 �it from need and some of it from desire. The lower part of the canyon wasn't as environmentally sensitive as the middle portion of the canyon. We are intent on building a facility that will accommodate as much as possible. We are willing to make tradeoffs. We are looking for tradeoffs with the environmental people, the forest service and the Highway Dept. We want to get in and build the best highway with the least amount of impact that can be done. And we will be keeping you people appraised as to our progress on that, but we need your input and your support as to how you feel and that is why we appreciate your 'coming tonight. It is our intent to build something that will serve us as best as possible and to minimize the impacts. ~hat's the tradeoffs we are looking for. Cliff: Maybe as a summary comment, we can still have more questions, but I would carry it a step further than what Jim said. Other than the time that it takes to complete the study, which I 'would agree with is intolerable from your perspective, but other than. the time I'm not pessimistic as to how this will turn out. In fact I'm rather optimistic as Dave Baumgarner and others have stated that we are going to be able ~o f~nd some common ground that satisfies the environmental needs and still gives you a good road through the canyon that you all deserve. So, I wouldn't be pessimistic about it, but I would be careful to take the time to make your presence known, even if it takes going to Logan to do it. We need toe input and we need a balanced input. J Comment: I'm been on a committee representing this area for a number of years when we first started these studies, and I know when we got the information on this study we requested you come here and we do appreciate your coming here because it is cumbersome to travel that road in the wintertime. We want you to know we do appreciate your coming here and we hope you appreciate the impact the canyon has on the people on this side of the mountain. There are a lot of peop'~ from Bear Lake County . that have some concerns. We . would strongly ·~ncourage you to continue to hold some meetings over here and not to look at sheer numbers, but you are talking about real users and real business people, not an organized group by any means like you might find in Logan, because I listened to them and I've seen their tables etc. but please continue to come over here and keep us informed. I would suggest you may even explore the idea of holding a meeting in Salt Lake City, because that affects a lot of those people Don Huffener was talking about that travel through here const::!.ntly ~. nd a majority of those people are in ~he ' Wa3atch Front. CH2M Hill: We spoke with them today and they let it be kno\7n that they expect to see us. Comment: Good. Also you might consider that the next time you have a meeting in here if you hold it on a summer night and a Friday night you'll get some of those same types of people and you'll get a good cross section •. Stan Nuffer: That is a good idea, thank you. 22 I �I'm Cliff Brown and I'm a member of the town council in Laketown and I just think that the beauty of the canyon is out of this world at time, nobody disagrees with that. I'm also an EMT and I've driven the ambulance through there through all kinds of weather. I think we need to keep in mind that that road is our lifeline to the outside world. We are up here isolate otherwise. There are a couple of other places we can travel, but this is our main lifeline, between here and Logan and I think that is what we need to keep in mind. Question: Are there any preliminary plans as far as re-routing the existing road in places? Do you have any plans there at all? Stan Nuffer: We are just getting started in that ·process. We want to get your input first and then we will get into that process. ( ) Comment: As you drive through the canyon, in reference to the gentleman's comments about riprapping the river, as I drive through the canyon I see very few places where th0se kinds of places are going to exist and where the road possibly could be moved completely away from the river and actually add to the quality of the river instead of pushing the snow (I'm sure you are concerned about the salts that come off into the river and environmentally impact it that way.) But just driving through and seeing where some improvements can be made I don't see where there is that much that will impact the river, just by doing a few minor things. Comments: Along . with your accident statistics have you ever thought about having almosts? You should request people to send in and report how many times they have "almost" been wiped out. (lots of laughter) . Comment: That wOllld affect aL~ost everyL~J.y, wouldn't it? Commen~: Gale Larson went up there traffic counting and almost got hit himself. Comment: If any of you would like to write your comments I've got some busin=ss cards here that you can pick up on your way out. Stan Nuffer: If we have no more comments, some of you who felt to shy to speak in public, we'll be here for a while. Come up and look a~ the raps and drawings. : Is there anyone else that: want'"'d to make a comment? Comment: I'm John Hansen, and I don't think it has been brought up that We all do a lot of business on the other side of the hill and I'm very much concerned about the safety and while we talk a lot about the environment, but I wonder, since when do we place a higher value on plant and animal life than we do on human life? That is what has crossed my mind quite a bit. It looks to me like we are here tonight as a community to express this. 23 � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Local URL The URL of the local directory containing all assets of the website <a href="http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/71">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/71</a> Purchasing Information Describe or link to information about purchasing copies of this item. To order photocopies, scans, or prints of this item for fair use purposes, please see Utah State University's Reproduction Order Form at: <a href="https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php">https://library.usu.edu/specol/using/copies.php</a> Digital Publisher List the name of the entity that digitized and published this item online. Digitized by: Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library Date Digital Record the date the item was digitized. 2013 Conversion Specs Scanned by Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library using Epson Expression 10000 scanner, at 800 dpi. Archival file is PDF (800 dpi), display file is JPEG2000. Checksum 1803649205 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 14577551 Bytes Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Comments on the Logan Canyon CH2M HILL presentation Description An account of the resource Answers to questions from the public about proposed changes to Logan Canyon. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Nielson, Bryce Weston, Todd Stringham, Brian Harrison, Alan Webb, Paul Zollinger, Lynn Peterson, William Wilson, Ted Webb, Kathy Huffner, Don Murphy, John Henry, Ernest Negus, Barry Mills, Richard West, Joesph Brown, Cliff Hansen, John Nuffer, Stanton S. Baumgartner, David Utah. Department of Transportation CH2M Hill (Firm : Salt Lake City, Utah) Subject The topic of the resource United States Highway 89 Logan Canyon (Utah) Roadside Improvement--Utah--Logan Canyon Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1986-11-03 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Utah) United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1980-1989 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 27 Folder 10 Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Libraries Photograph Curator, phone (435) 797-0890. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Highway 89 Digital Collections Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context MSS148VIIIB27_Fd10_Page_2.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/4c57fcb956bc84df61ba6e04c681dff3.pdf 8deb4538a67b79ae4939e5bc8318213e PDF Text Text LOGAN CANYON ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY ID TEAM MEETING MINUTES May 4, 1987 Attendance: Jim Naegle, UDOT Howard Richardson, UDOT Lynn Zollinger, UDOT Stan Nuffer, CH2M HILL Cliff Forsgren, CH2M HILL Clark Ostergaard, USFS Fred Labar, USFS Jack Spence, Utah Wilderness Association Duncan Silver, FHWA Gale Larson, Valley Engineers Bill Helm, Unattached Item 1 - Review of Minutes April 20, 1987 Meeting During the review of the minutes of the April 20 meeting, Stan Nuffer told the ID Team that he felt that input from the regulatory agencies could be obtained just as· effectively on a one-on-one basis as it could in another meeting. Duncan Silver had discussed this with Stan Nuffer and Stan is goLng to follow up on it. Bill Helm indicated that he had gathered some additional information on fish counts and spawning habitat and would bring it to the next meeting. Lynn Zollinger asked about a rare disease which occurred in some varieties of trees in Logan Canyon. Fred LaBar indicated that he knew what Lynn was referring to and that he would get some information on the disease to Lynn. April 21, 1987 Meeting There was considerable discussion on the minutes of the tour of the Canyon and there were a number of changes made. Most of those present asked for revised copies of the minutes when they were completed. After the review of the minutes, Jack Spence reported that the environmental groups had met and reviewed the project to date and had some concerns. They had looked at all of the alternatives and none are acceptable, except spot improvements on a case-by-case basis. Jack reported the environmental community felt that the size of the project was growing beyond the original scope and that it appeared that FHWA was driving this increase. Jack explained that the existing forest plan, which has been approved, left little room for improvements of any size in the Canyon. There is some concern that the study is progressing without regard to �MEETING MINUTES Page 2 the forest plan and its limitations. If the study results in recommended improvements requiring a change in the forest plan, that change would be appealed and the entire process delayed indefinitely. The belief of · the environmental community is that the forest plan allows only spot improvements and that all environmental sections of the report must address how each alternative would affect the plan. Item 2 - Discussion of the Existing Conditions Portion of the Socio-Economic Technical Memorandum (Due to the lack of time discussion of this item was postponed) Item 3 - Discussion of Spot Improvement Alternative Specific spot improvements were identified. These include: 1. A nominal deceleration and turn-lane at Right Fork 2. An improved intersection at Wood Camp 3. Flattening the first sharp curve above Right Fork 4. Slow vehicle turnout above Wood Carnp and just beyond the area where the Maquire Primrose is located 5. Replacing Burnt Bridge 6. Improvements to allow parking near Logan Cave, raising the grade along the river at the cave and possibly doing a better job of placing riprap. Options for flattening the curve are to be evaluated. 7. Replacing Lower Twin Bridge, possibly on a new alignment 8. Passing lane in the Lower Twin Bridge and Dugway area 9. Intersection improvements at the Temple Fork intersection. 10. Shift the alignment of the road at Ricks Springs to allow parking on one side of the road only. 11. Intersection improvements at Tony Grove 12. Intersection improvements at Red Banks �MEETING MINUTES Page 3 13. A climbing lane beginning approximately 2 miles above Ricks Springs 14. Intersection improvements at Franklin Basin 15. Replace the drainage structure at Beaver Creek 16. Intersection improvements at Beaver Mountain 17. Climbing lane between Beaver Mountain and the state maintenance shed 18. Climbing lane in the Sinks area 19. Intersection improvements at Sunrise Campground 20. Some curve flattening in Rich County 21. Intersection improvement in Rich County Each spot improvement will be evaluated individually to determine its impact and benefit. There was not enough time to address the other agenda items and they will be discussed at a later date. SLC-STN/51 � 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/73">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/73</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 1647843634 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 1759223 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 4, 1987 Interdisciplinary team meeting Description An account of the resource Review of April 20, 1987 meeting minutes, recommendations of spot improvments with a specific list of locations. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Nuffer, Stanton S. Helm, William LaBar, Fred Zollinger, Lynn Spence, Jack Subject The topic of the resource 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 1987-05-04 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Utah) Utah United States Temporal Coverage Temporal characteristics of the resource. 1980-1989 20th century Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Utah State University, Merrill-Cazier Library, Special Collections and Archives, Sierra Club, Utah Chapter Archives, 1972-1986, COLL MSS 148 Series VIII Box 27 Folder 3 Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Libraries Photograph Curator, phone (435) 797-0890. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Highway 89 Digital Collections Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context MSS148VIIIB27_Fd3_Page_5.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/9a63f9ddcadd9a924228c4b92154118e.pdf e711cc54ec0dd456383f57dab4b7ede2 PDF Text Text REVISED ROLE OF INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM LOGAN CANYON STUDY The interdisciplinary team (1.0. Team) is made up of representatives from Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT), the consultant (CH2M HILL) the United States Forest Service (USFS), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and a , representative(s) of the environmental community. A roster of the proposed team members is attached. The functions of the I.D. Team are: 1. Provide Management Input The I.D. Team will meet regularly to review areas of study, responsibility for execution, schedules of work, and public involvement. 2. Provide Technical Input Specialists from CH2M HILL with input from the USFS will prepare technical memorandums covering the required areas of work distributed at the June 10 1.0. Team meeting. t ~ ~~~ i'~ Review Technical Memoranda and Draft Environmental Report . All members of the 1.0. Team will review draft copies of technical memoranda and provide timely written comments. ~~)\... r <:J Level of Environmental Action Determination The I .D. Team will provide a recommendation on the appropriate class of envi 0 tal actio to be made t q UDOT and the cooperating agencies. t:-.""'lS ,"ti The 10 Team will meet one to two times per month on the average to accomplish the functions outlined above. Proposed schedule for the next 3 months. ~ 14 July 28 August 4 August 18 Sept. 8 Sept. 22 SLC74/08 3:00 3:00 7:00 3:00 3:00 7:00 p.m. p.m. p.m. p.m. p.m. p.m. District District District District District District Office Office Office Office Office Office �6-26-86 REVISED LOGAN CANYON IMPROVEMENT STUDY PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN PURPOSE OF PLAN To inform the public and interested agencies about the study, to obtain public input that can be incorporated into the decision-making process, and to comply with the National Environmental Protection Act and other regulations and policies calling for public involvement in Utah Department of Transportation projects. The following public involvement plan is based on four study milestones. Public involvement will take place shortly after the designated milestone in the study has occurred. In addition to the program proposed upon reaching each study milestone, the following activities will occur continuously throughout the study. o Maintenance of a Mailing List - all individuals and interest groups requesting mailings will be included on this list (attached to this plan) o Local Study Liaison - Valley Engineers in Logan will maintain copies of all informational material on the study in its Logan office, and will answer or refer questions to the appropriate person. CH2M HILL will also perform this service in its Salt Lake City office o Local repositories for study materials will be arranged at the Logan Public Library, Utah State University Library, Garden City municipal offices, and Salt Lake City Public Library. All informational materials will also be available at Wasatch/ Cache National Forest offices in Ogden and at the Utah Department of Transportation offices in Salt Lake City MILESTONE 1 - BEGINNING OF STUDY Task 1, the analysis of transportation needs, is scheduled to begin in early June 1986. Objectives o To explain to the public what the study will entail o To explain why the study is necessary 1 �o To explain that UDOT has an obligation to the public to keep Highway 89 open, and therefore some level of improvement is needed even to implement a no-action alternative Techniques o Press Release to be submitted to all media included on mailing list - week of July 6 o Project Introduction - a detailed written explanation of the history of this study, the reasons for conducting this study, and the tasks to be conducted, will be mailed to all groups/individuals included on the mailing list - week of July 13 o Written Summary of public involvement activities, responses, and issues will be prepared upon completing this phase of the public involvement program - week of July 28 MILESTONE 2 - COMPLETION OF TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ANALYSIS The analysis and conclusions of this study should be close to completion by July 31. Objectives o To report the findings of the study regarding safety problems, maintenance problems and design factors that cause traffic flow problems now and in the future, at specific sites in the canyon o To identify the need for actions, and the general magnitude of the actions needed to provide certain levels of service Techniques o Press Release to be submitted to all media included on mailing list - week of August 4 o Summary Report of Findings/Fact Sheet will be mailed to all groups/individuals on mailing list - week of August 11 o Town Meeting to discuss findings, answer questions to be held in Logan - week of August 25 o Meetings With Interest Groups as requested - following town meeting through September 12 2 �o Written Summary of activities, response, and issues will . be prepared upon completion of the second phase of the public involvement program week of September 15 MILESTONE 3 - COMPLETION OF ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT (Prior to environmental impact analysis) - This should occur near the end of November. Objectives o To explain the proposed project alternatives to the public and relate them to an approximate level of service. Each project alternative will consist of action plans for a number of sites on the road where problems have been identified, which together will maintain or improve the road to a certain level of service. o To identify specific concerns of individuals and interest groups regarding the proposed alternatives o To obtain consensus among interested parties on the issues to be analyzed in the environmental analysis of the proposed project Techniques o Press Release giving brief review of study findings to date, explaining proposed alternatives, and reviewing the proposed scoping activities will be submitted to all media on the mailing list week of November 24 o Fact Sheet giving detailed explanation of each alternative with graphic . illustration, explanation of level of service provided by each, and general advantages and disadvantages, will be sent to each entry on mailing list - week of November 24 o Meetings With Interest/Service Groups expressing strong interest in the study will be held during the first 3 weeks of December to discuss the alternatives and identify their concerns. A maximum of four such meeting are planned, and as a result some groups might be requested to meet together. Groups that request such a meeting might include: Sierra Club Utah Wilderness Association Bridgerland Audubon Society 3 �Rich-Cache Tourist Council Cache County Chamber of Commerce Bear River Association of Governments Bear Lake Convention and Visitors Bureau Cache Economic Development Council ( December 1-19 o Town Meeting will be held in Logan to summarize alternatives, report on concerns voiced by groups/ individuals, receive testimony on other concerns. Issues to be addressed in environmental analysis will be summarized - week of January 5 o Press Release reviewing scoping process activities and is~ues to be studied in environmental analysis will be submitted to all media included on mailing list - week of January 19 o Written Summary of all public involvement activities, response, and issues will be prepared after the activities of this phase have been conducted week of January 26 MILESTONE 4 - COMPLETION OF DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT Approximately May 29. Objectives o To report findings of environmental analysis o To answer questions regarding conclusions drawn in the document o To receive comments regarding the findings of the document Technigues o Videotape explaining the alternatives and discussing the environmental tradeoffs will be developed prior to Milestone 4 to be presented during this stage Months of February and March. o Summary Report reviewing findings of the draft analysis will be mailed to all groups/individuals included on mailing list - week of June 1, 1987 o Press Release reporting findings of environmental analysis and schedule for public input/hearings to be submitted to all media listed in mailing list week of June 1, 1987 4 �o Workshop Meeting to present videotape, discuss environmental analysis findings, allow questions and answers ' - Logan, week of June 15 o Public Hearing to present videotape and Feceive testimony on draft environmental analysis - Logan, week of July 13, 1987; possible hearing in Ogden or Salt Lake City, week of July 13, 1987. Written testimony will be accepted for 30 days after last hearing o Written Summary of all public involvement activities, response, and issues will be prepared after the activities of Phase 4 have been conducted week of August 10 All aspects of the public involvement program will remain flexible since it must be responsive to the conduct of the project and the needs of the community. Public involvement activities will be announced in all press releases. SLC78/d.401 ( 5 �LOGAN CANYON PROJECT MAILING LIST Group Sierra Club Phone Contact Jack Spence Rudy Lukez (801)750-1626 (801)863-3702 (W) (801)753-5568 (H) Utah Wilderness Association Tom Lyon (801)750-1603 Bridgerland Audubon Society Steve Flint Address (801)752-9102 (H) (801)750-2474 (W) P.O. Box 3580 Logan, Utah 84321 Sun City Travellers Rich-Cache Tourist Council Dean Smith Cache County Chamber of Commerce Paula Bell (801)752-2161 Bear River Association of Governments Bruce King (801) 752-7242 Bear Lake Regional Commission Al Harrison (208)945-2333 Bear Lake Convention and Visitors' Bureau Jenny Archer Cache Economic Development Council Bobbie Coray (801)753-3631 Cache County Farm Bureau Lynn Meikle (801)563-3633 c/o Cache County Chamber of Commerce Greater Bear Lake Chamber of Commerce Bear River Resource, Conservation, and Development Coordinator 170 North Main Logan, Utah 84321 Garden City, Utah Kent Hortin 1305 Canyon Road Smithfield, Utah 84335 USDA Service Center 1075~ North Main Street Logan, Utah 84321 Raymond N. Malouf Malouf Law Offices 150 East 200 North Suite D Logan, Utah 84321 Cache County Commissioners J. Owen Yeates Dean H. Parker Jay A. Monson Rich County Commissioners Kenneth R. Brown Blair Francis Dee Johnson Utah Travel Council Barbara Fjelsted Local Legislative Delegation Stephen Bodily c/o The Sportsman Logan, Utah 84321 (208)258-2844 L. Keith Gates (801)752-7335 (H) (801)752-7445 (W) 1 810 S. Main Lewiston, Idaho 84320 665 N. 200 E. Logan, Utah 84321 �LOGAN CANYON PROJECT MAILING LIST (Continued) Group Phone Contact (801)752-4304 Evan L. Olsen Address 2009 S. 3200 W. Route 1 Young Ward, Utah 84339 Lyle Hilliard (801)753-0043 (H) (801)752-2610 (W) 175 E. First N. Logan, Utah 84321 John Holmgren (801)279-8679 (H) (801)753-5229 (W) 4570 W. 5400 N. Bear River City, Utah 84301 Utah State University City of Logan City of Smithfield City of Hyrum City of Providence City of North Logan City of Wellsville City of Richmond City of Hyde Park ( City of Lewiston City of River Heights City of Nibley City of Millville City of Mindon City of Newton City of Clarkston City of Paradise City of Trenton City of Amalga City of Cornish City of Randolph City of Laketown City of Garden City City of Woodruff 2 �LOGAN CANYON PROJECT MAILING LIST (Continued) Group Contact Phone Address MEDIA Logan Herald Journal Tim Vitale (801)752-2121 75 West 300 North Logan, Utah 84321 Mel Baldwin (307) 789-6560 P.O. Box B Evanston, Wyoming 82930 (801)237-2045 P.O. Box 867 Salt Lake City, Utah (801)237-2150 P.O. Box 1257 Salt Lake City, Utah 84110 KSL Television Channel 5 (801)237-2500 145 Social Hall Ave. Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 KTVX Television Channel 4 (801)972-1776 1760 S. Fremont Dr. Salt Lake City, Utah 84104 KUTV Television Channel 2 (801)973-3000 2185 S. 3600 W. West Valley City, Utah 84120 Cache Citizen Uinta (Evanston) County Herald (bi-weekly: Wednesday and Friday) Salt Lake Tribune Utah State University Statesman Salt Lake Deseret News Joe Bauman Ogden Standard-Examiner KVNU Radio KUEZ Radio KUSU Radio Lee Austin SLC78/d.402 3 �LOGAN CANYON TRAFFIC COUNTING AND FORECASTING OBJECTIVE 1. To determine the volume and type of traffic currently using Highway 89 between Logan and Garden City. 2. To develop an estimate of traffic volume in the year 2010. DATA SOURCES The primary source of traffic volume data is the permanent counting station located west of Garden City. The information available from data gathered at this station includes: ~ Daily and hourly traffic totals for 1974 through 1985 (see attachment 1 for month of June 1985). ~ A ranking of the 100 highest traffic flow hours for 1974 through 1985 (see attachment 2 for 1985). ~ Authomatic recorder data by months (see attachment 3 for 1985). METHODOLOGY FOR COLLECTING ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC DATA Three coverage stations have been established in the Canyon. Traffic counts will be taken at these stations up to 4 days during the course of this study. These stations are at Right Hand Fork, Terry Grove Intersection and Beaver Mountain Intersection. The Federal Highway Administration, Volume Counting Manual, recommends counts at coverage stations be taken 2 to 4 days per year. The primary function of the coverage station counts will be vehicle classification. The data gathered at these coverage stations will be used to establish the volume and classification of traffic at points along the road and to supplement the data provided by the permanent counting station. See attachments 3 and 4 for the results of the February 22 counts at the Beaver Mountain Junction. METHODOLOGY FOR FORECASTING FUTURE TRAFFIC LOADS There is apparently no universally accepted methodology for forecasting future traffic volumes. When forecasts have been required by other state or federal agencies (the Federal Highway Administration for example) UDOT has provided the forecast and a description of the methodology used. The 1 �current methodology used within the State of Utah to forecast traffic volume is not totally applicable to a situation like Logan Canyon. This methodology assumes traffic into and out of, a major employment center. The traffic between Logan and Garden City is heavily influenced by the summer recreational development on the south and west shores of Bear Lake. The average daily traffic (ADT) recorded in 1985 by the permanent station was 1240. However the ADT for the months June through September was 2374 and for the remainder of the year 673 vehicles per day. In preparing previous forecasts for S-89, two methodologies have been used. One methodology assumes full development of the proposed Bear Lake recreational facilities by the end of the planning period. The second methodology uses past trends to forecast future changes in traffic volume. Both methodologies will be briefly discussed below. FULL DEVELOPMENT The full development approach to forecasting the future traffic volume assumes that all planned or proposed cabin lots or condominium units in the Bear Lake area will be completed within the planning period. Traffic is then expected to increase in some proportion to the increase in cabins or condominiums. In 1981 surve'_ showed 1011 develq2ed _ca in lots or condominlums units along the south and west shores At that time there were 17,420 planned units. Using a full development senario the estimated ADT for 1990 was 4489, with 8360 vehicles per day forecast for the summer months. PAST TRENDS Using past trends as a means of forecasting future ADT provides a significantly lower estimate of traffic volume. Using this ~ method, the trends ears are used to estimate future AmT. A recent UDOT study forecasting ADT \_ throu gh the C . amy ou-rn the year 2005 shqwed ~ tO , a 3 percent ~ ~er vear increase. U$ing this metfiod, the estimated .2 ~T ~ would be 2400. This is approximately double the volume today. For this study, a past-trends approach appears to be most realistic for preparing a forecast of the future traffic volume. The ADT will also be determined for the summer months in addition to the annual. The ratio between the summer ADT and the annual ADT would then be used to forecast the summer ADT at the end of the planning period. SLC77/61 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/79">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/79</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 2238679222 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 6790578 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 Information about interdisciplinary team and Logan Canyon study Description An account of the resource Information about interdisciplinary team including contact information and mailing lists and Logan Canyon study with traffic counting and forecasting, purpose of Logan Canyon improvement study and public involvement plan, and the revised role of intersiciplinary team. Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Government agencies 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 1986-06-26 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Logan (Utah) Cache 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 3 Is Referenced By A related resource that references, cites, or otherwise points to the described resource. View the inventory for this collection at: <a href="http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390">http://uda-db.orbiscascade.org/findaid/ark:/80444/xv03390</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Reproduction for publication, exhibition, web display or commercial use is only permissible with the consent of the USU Libraries Photograph Curator, phone (435) 797-0890. Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Highway 89 Digital Collections Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context MSS148VIIIB27_Fd3_Page_1.pdf Highway 89; https://highway89.org/files/original/bbda7abb9beb439a9bca613a17110918.pdf 183d90065d65b401b008aca5e1719868 PDF Text Text TRAFFIC IN GOGAn C NYON - Is i t increasing? The answer depends on the time of year. If you talk about the entire year, there is no suggestion of an increase in traffic %xk through the canyon. Over the past 13 years, the annual traffic flow has fluctuated a bit from year to year, but without any pattern of increase. Slli~er traffic (June, July, and August) is a different situation . There is more traffic in the canyon during these months, and it is increasing slightly from year to year. Based on past trends o£ traffic and estimates of~pulation growth, the most optimistic predictions of summer traffic growth do not exceed 2 percent per year. .~ � 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/88">http://digital.lib.usu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/highway89/id/88</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 4712046 File Size Size of the file in bytes. 401396 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 Traffic in Logan Canyon Description An account of the resource Paper attempts to answer the question of traffic increase in Logan Canyon. Subject The topic of the resource Logan Canyon (Utah) Traffic engineering Medium The material or physical carrier of the resource. Administrative records Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Spatial Coverage Spatial characteristics of the resource. Utah Logan Canyon (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 9 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_Fd9_Page_12.pdf Highway 89; 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;