Comments on the improvements of Logan Canyon

              US 89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY 
comments are requested, can be provided below. 
Name Richard Bean 
Comments: I feel that Logan Canyon may needs to be widened & ??? for safety reasons & to improve traffic flow for Jackson Hole and Yellowstone bound traffic. Logan Canyon as it is now is a ??? bottleneck. It is dissicult to appreciate its beauty while negotiating tight turns and narrow lanes - for driver and passengers. The economic benefits that follow such improvement in the hwy are not determinable with accuracy , but I believe they ??? be substantial. Cache Valley is isolated by poor highway access no ??? So we need the best all weather highway possible -- to keept the area from further economic ??? 
SLC87/26
RECEIVED October 15, 1986 CH2M HILL/SLC
October 3, 1986 Valley Engineering
168 North 100 East
Logan, Utah 84321
To Whom It May Concern:
U.S. Highway 89 through Logan Canyon serves as a vital economic
link for the Bear Lake Valley. The canyon is a beautiful place,
however, I feel that with good common sense and concern for the
environment, greatly needed improvements such as bridge replacement,
pavement widening and passing lanes or turn-outs can be constructed.
I also urge CH2M Hill to conduct public meetings on this project
in the Bear Lake Valley.
Thank you for this opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
Lewis Pope
LOGAN CANYON ROAD STUDY Approx. 9:30AM 16, Oct. 1986 Phone call from ??? of Logan, UT (22 yr in Logan) works for the U.S.F.S. He was not able to attend the public meeting on the 23rd of Sept. Mr. DeByne listed two general concerns: 1. Bridges - the new guard railes place ??? are making the bridges (already to narrow) more narrow this more dangerous to traffic. The lower twin bridge needs to be realigned widened and made more safe. The bridge by wood camp hollow (probably burnt bridge) is too narrow and is dangerous. 2. Curves - too many sharp corners especially in the same area (by wood camp hollow, burnt bridge, and twin bridge) Those of us who ??? here yet to know them & learn how to negotiate them but took us for or tourist these sharp corners are dangerous and could cause them to land up the river or off the road the addition of the ??? directional signing has helped. 
US 89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY
Name Craig Floyd
Comments: Please remember that those who live in Bear Lake depend on the ability to reach Logan and points beyond for our very ??? When the road can be widened and straightened do so. Please keep us informed and include us in all meetings as you progress in your study. 
Name Karla Allen 
Comments: I have lived on the valley for six years and have come to dread my weekly trips through Logan Canyon. I feel there are improvements that could be made and still maintain the scenic beauty of the canyon. I am surprised that there are not more accidents than we have now. I would support any and all improvements. The time is now. I don't feel we have a decade to banter this back and forth. 
Name Rich County Commission Chairman Ken Brown
Comments: Having watched traffic increase for the past 10 yrs I feel the canyon road should definitely be improved. Minimum improvement should include 3 lanes for passing ie the lower canyon. Tourist flow to & from Bear Lake is important to our economy and Logan Canyon is becoming a bottleneck. Safety is a real concern and anyone who travels the canyon regularly would agrue it is becoming more & more cumbersome & time consuming. I feel no further study is necessary and we should commence with construction Allen Harrison ??? of Bear Lake ??? for Comm. Ken Brown
Name Bry Stringham 
Comments: The road to Logan is a ??? it was built from 1927 to 1933 and with little improvement except bottom section above Logan - There are 18' bridges. We can improve the raod we have for a less money than make a new road. The Bear Lake face as well as the Canyon West. Les Langford Hwy Patrol now in Roosevelt area did accident study in Logan Canyon 
US 89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY Received NOV 10 1986 CH2M HILL/SLC
Your comments are requested, and can be provided below.
Name Phyllis Smart - Montpelier, Idaho 83254
Comments: Unsafe driving conditions on Logan Canyon road are due to:
(1) narrow bridges, sharp curves, narrow road and little shoulder.
(2) when long lines of cars, trucks, trailers etc. exist, there always
seem to be one or two who take chances in passing. Not only does
this endanger lives but also causes mental stress to drivers and
passengers.
(3) narrow winding roads through the canyon makes it almost impossible to
try to avoid an accident by moving to another lane of traffic or to
the shoulder area. Deer and cattle on the road could be more easily
avoided if there was another lane of traffic or more shoulder room.
(there would be less dented fenders & broken head lights). Also
accidents due to winter conditions (vehicle sliding etc.) would be
less if another lane was available.
If one has an appointment etc. during the summer, at least one half hour
more time is needed due to slow traffic (sight seers, heavy loads, trailers,
tourists all travel at a slower speed than the posted speed limit. Drivers
who are not familar with the road or canyon driving tend to drive much
slower and use their brakes quickly upon coming to a curve).
Many Montpelier drivers use the road to Preston vs Logan canyon road due
to the unsafe conditions listed above. Mileage wise there is very little
difference.
I commend the Highway Department for their "being on the job"
during winter conditions as they do a good job in keeping the road passable.
SLC87/26
Some tourists who have stopped at the place I work do not like that road
and if you mention the beauty of the canyon, river etc. they have failed
to notice it as they were so busy with just driving the canyon road!
Beauty cannot be enjoyed under stress.
Logan Canyon Road causes stress !!!!
US 89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY
Your comments are requested, and can be provided below.
Name Allen Harrison/Director Bear Lake Rec. Commission 
Comments: We appreciate the D.O.T coming to Garden City for our input. Logan Canyon is an important link for Bear Lake for services & tourism, with traffic on the increase Logan Canyon is becoming more & more a bottleneck. Periodic passing lanes & pulloffs for tourists would be a good start. Area such as Rick Springs widening has been an improvement & helps eleviate the problems. If the study/construction is going to be a long time coming - the Rick Springs alternative in the name of maintenance would be a good start. P.S. All 3 lane highways in Utah should be signed left lane for passing only & enforced. Oregon has been very successful with 3 lane higheays - I feel due to lack of good signing Utah's 3rd lane is a safety problem (please consider) Thank you -- 
US 89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY
Your comments are requested, and can be provided below.
Name Kathlyn Collins
Comments: I am commenting as a user of HWY 89 as a previous tourist and a new resident of Logan. I have driven the road as a travelway from Jackson to Logan & also as destination for recreation use in summer & winter. My most recent trip was 4 days ago at dusk. I though the canyon was in the best condition I 've seen. I encountered no slowdown traffic but there were animals, cows & deer on the road. I felt that there was no problem going the correct speed and being cautious because of lighting conditions. The problem of slow traffic could be corrected by pull offs - (it works in Oregon which have many windy, scenic roads). If bridges need to be strengthened, by all means do But major changes such as adding lanes is not necessary. I seriously doubt reparian and fish habitat could maintain a firm presence. Scenic values would be compromised. Again, pull offs at appropriate place could allow people to slow down and look on parking space available to get out and look or take off on foot or ski. This is just a preliminary comment more wil lbe coming I hope to see this process work. 
Improving the flow of traffic in the canyon makes some sense, but people's expectations of what this flow can be must be realistic. People should relax a bit, if they want fast paced traffic they should move to L.A. In Logan Canyon the environment must not be sacrificed to expediency. Sincerely, Bruce Pendery 39 1/2 W 100 N Logan, UT 84321 RECEIVED NOV 17 1986 CH2M HILL 
US 89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY
Your comments are requested, and can be provided below.
Name Craig Pettigrew Division of State Lands & Forestry 55 East 100 North Logan 84321
Comments: With the understanding that the Logan Canyon Highway (US 89) has been ??? as a scenic highway, minimal improvements to the overall roadway from Right Hand Fork to Garden City would be recommended This includes bridge replacement and some curve improvements. to improve traffic flows, turnouts should be provided and regulations requiring vehicles with greater than 3 vehicles behind it pulling into the turnouts to let held up cehicles pass. Any major realignment would definiely reduce the aesthetic quality of the canyon and probably increase traffic speed, resulting in a greater hazard. Major improvements with guard rails have been made this past summer. Further study is needed to determine if these improvements reduce traffic problems. Data collected indicates heavy truck traffic is not a major volume, requiring no super-highway improvements. Examine the animal hitting problem, and determine where this problem exists (which segment) and what species of animal is involved (elk, cow, deer, etc.) Need for projected road kills (deer, elk, etc.)  One final comment you will need a ??? in determining a preferred alternative.  
US 89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY
Your comments are requested, and can be provided below.
Name Craig Thomas
Comments: US 89 is a highway of major importace to the residence of Bear Lake Valley. I sincerely request therefor that you hold as many public meetings as possible in the Bear Lake Area. US 89 plays a major role in the local economy of the Bear Lake Valley. Improvments to US 89 should have a strengthening effect of the local economy. The Logan Canyon highway is also used by many as a travel route to health care services. The safety of all travelers on US 89 is important and improvements to improve the safety should be undertaken. The highway is thru a very beautiful and unique environment so care must be taken and common sense used in providing improvements. 
SLC87/26
September 20, 1986 Mr. Allen Harrison
Bear Lake Regional Commission
Executive Director
Fish Haven, Idaho 83267
Friend Allen:
We read the articles in the News Examiner about the Logan Canyon
road. We travel the road once or twice a week in the summer
months to take care of the 40 acres in Fish Haven and down to Ogden
to take care of our home there.
The traffic is real heavy most of the time and at times it is very
dangerous to drive in mornings and evenings, when the sun is in
your eyes.
We would appreciate having the road widened and improved not only
for our selves but family, friends and others who travel Highway
89.
We appreciate your interest, concern and energy in trying to get
improvements made on roads and the Bear Lake area.
As you know Highway 89 extends from Canada to Mexico and we thank
you for the effort you put forth to get improvements made.
Respectfully Yours,
Glen & Doris Stock
Your neighbors over the hill in
Fish Haven Canyon
November 12, 1986 RECEIVED NOV 17 1986 CH2M HILL/SLC
Mr. Clifford R. Forsgren, P.E.
CH2M Hill, Consulting Engineers
P.O. Box 2218
Salt Lake City, Utah 84101
Re: Highway U.S. 89 - Logan Canyon Study
Dear Mr. Forsgren:
NOV 1 ? 198B
I've just read the November, 1986 Summary Fact Sheet concerning
the referenced project study. One statenent in particular causes
ne considerable alarm.
On the last page, paragraph three states, "During the tour, it
was suggested by some present that the Canyon should be treated
as a recreational corridor (a destination) rather than as a
transp::>rtation link (a conduit for traffic). Recreational use
of the corridor should be given priority over transp::>rtation use
whenever a decision involving trade-offs is to be made in the
study. "
No one disputes the recreational value of Logan Canyon. People
skiing, camping, picnicing, haul ing f irev.DOd., etc. go to the
canyon for a specific purpose. I use the canyon for these
activities myself. But to categorically give priority to
recreational use over transp::>rtation needs borders on the
absurd, in my opinion.
A native of Bear Lake County, and still owning property there, I
strongly protest the idea of recreational priority. Perhaps
residents of cache and Box Elder Counties consider the canyon a
destination rrore than a transp::>rtation link, but residents of
, other areas rrost certainly do not. I submit that rrost weekend
traffic from OJden, Salt Lake, and Provo in the sumrrertine ends
up in Bear Lake, not in Logan Canyon.
Ask the people in Bear Lake and Rich Counties and beyond, even
into Wyoming, how many stop in the canyon as opp::>sed to those who
use the route for access to Logan, OJden, or Salt Lake. I assure
you, that canyon exists as a vital link connecting them to these
other areas. I repeat, to consider other priorities ahead of
transp::>rtation demonstrates seriously faulty thinking. Certainly
only a fanatical environnentalist who would have us all back­packing
through the canyon could seriously suggest such a thing.
let's be reasonable, Mr. Forsgren. Certainly recreation has its
place and deserves consideration, but not at the expense of those
who depend on that highway for transportation. I was born in
lDgan. As a youth, I traveled through the canyon for lTUSic
lessons, medical care, shopping, etc. alnnst ~kly. Now I drive
it dozens of times each year for business and pleasure. Sometines
2
I stop for recreational purposes, too. But I believe those people
on the other side of the mountain deserve better than to stand in
jeopardy because of special interests groups whose access to the world is provided by a six-lane freeway and see lA>gan Canyon only
in terms of their limited, selfish needs.
Sincerely, D. Brent Jensen 
107 East Main
Hyrum, Utah 84319
cc: Gale Larson, Valley Engineering, Inc.
US 89 - LOGAN CANYON STUDY
Your comments are requested, and can be provided below.
Name Thorras C. Jensen, 1750 Foothill Drive, lDgan, UT 84321
Comments: I have lived and operated my business in Logan for the past
10 years. One of the prime reasons for selecting Logan was the natural
beauty and adjacent wilderness areas.
However, I feel that there needs to be a reasonable and balanced
approach to the natural beauty and wilderness in regards to highway
design and maintenance and access through these areas.
1) Safety - The nurrerous accidents in the Logan Canyon area
testify to the need for proper passing and slow lanes. I
have personally witnessed or experienced many "near-misses"
as a result of blind corners, ice build-up from cross drainage
in late spring, narrow bridges, and limited passing lanes
causing backups and "daredevil passes."
2) Access Route: Logan Canyon is not only a scenic drive, it is
the major artery to Logan from Rich County. The highway must
be travelled in dangerous conditions by service and delivery
agents, professional services, truck traffic, temple visitors,
tourists, and shopping excursions for the citizens of Rich
County. Travel in the canyon becomes a very serious considera-tion
in winter and spring due to very hazardous conditions, and
summer due to slow moving R.V. traffic. Commerce is drastically
hampered.
No one is askingfolr a super-highway, or for commercial development that
would seriously reduce the natural attractiveness of the canyon. It is
of questionable value however, if the canyon highway is left in its
current dangerous condition. If this artery of commerce and tourism becomes increasingly choked, it will cost both lives and livlihoods. These are serious matters.
HYDE PARK CITY CORPORATION P O. BOX 489 HYDE PARK, UTAH 84318 November 21, 1986 RECEIVED NOV 24 1986 CH2M HILL/SLC
Mr. Stanton S. Nuffer
CH2M HILL
Associated Plaza, Suite 500
349 South 200 East
PO Box 2218
Salt Lake City, Utah 84101
Dear Mr. Nuffer:
We as the Hyde Park City Council feel additional construction in
Logan canyon will ultimately benefit not only Cache County residents,
but also Rich County residents. We also feel that if it is done in
an orderly fashion, it wouldn't adversely affect the environment in
Logan canyon.
We would like to see improvements done in this part of the State to
enhance tourism and possibly generate additional revenues for our
community.
Sincerely,
Hyde Park City Council
Leslie A. Balls
David M. Cheney
Marilyn P. Grunig
Michael T. Kirby
John A. Rich
Robert J . Balls
Mayor