Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Roads And Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Daggett County reviews Browns Park and State Line road plans, wetlands mitigation and funding; staff to pursue mitigation planning while seeking permits
Summary
Daggett County commissioners and staff spent the June 3 meeting reviewing Browns Park Road and State Line Road funding options, environmental permitting for wetlands near Flaming Gorge, and next steps for mitigation and bidding.
Get email alerts on the Roads And Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Daggett County commissioners and staff spent an extended portion of the June 3 meeting examining options and funding for Browns Park Road and the State Line Road project, environmental compliance steps tied to wetlands near Flaming Gorge, and bridge and bike-path items.
Staff told commissioners the county has a $2,000,000 joint-highways award for the State Line project and a required local match of about $147,000; after engineering, inspection and a contingency allowance the preliminary construction budget is about $1.6 million, the presenter said. The highway district provided preliminary option cost estimates and asked the county to indicate priorities so the district can decide whether to seek additional funds from the Utah Office of the Capital Improvement Board (CIB) or other sources.
On environmental compliance, staff discussed a March 21 memo from state regulators clarifying what wetlands are jurisdictional. The county said the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have been involved in past discussions, and Utah Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) input will also be needed. Staff advised taking a two-pronged approach: begin mitigation planning now while simultaneously pursuing a formal jurisdictional determination. Staff warned that if project impacts exceed 0.1 acre of jurisdictional wetlands, mitigation (and monitoring) will likely be required.
Possible mitigation approaches discussed included acquiring or securing conservation easements on adjacent properties with wetlands, coordinating with federal/state land managers (Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service), or designing applicant-proposed avoidance measures and submitting those to regulators for approval. Staff emphasized the county should obtain an approved mitigation plan before issuing a construction contract; commissioners and staff agreed they do not want a contractor to retain long-term responsibility for a multi-year mitigation monitoring obligation.
On project scope, the highway district presented several options for Browns Park Road work. Staff described one high-priority safety work item as a blind hill near Red Creek that would be graded back to meet standards; doing the hill correction but avoiding extensive guardrail work in the Jesse Ewing slide area was presented as a way to keep costs down. Staff and the district explained that touching the slide-area guardrail could trigger a requirement to replace large sections of guardrail countywide and sharply increase costs.
The presenter broke out soft-spot repairs and identified an $82,000 figure associated with combining two soft-spot repairs (the transcript notes this number during the preliminary cost discussion). Commissioners and staff discussed using contingency funds if bid prices are high and the possibility of returning to CIB for additional funds later. Staff said bid results will determine whether additional items can be reinserted into the contract.
On the bike path, staff said the USDA prepared a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) and that publication of the decision and prior posting documentation must be completed; staff said they would publish the FONSI and related notices in the paper as required.
After discussion the county's presenter reported that the highway district would proceed consistent with the county's priorities and that the commission appeared supportive of option 4 or 5 for Browns Park and of moving forward with the current State Line plan. No formal vote was taken; staff will report decisions back to the highway district and proceed with mitigation planning and permit coordination with the Army Corps, Utah DEQ and USDA as appropriate.
The commission also discussed bridge funding opportunities for an off-system bridge at the Container Plant area and agreed staff should prepare applications in advance rather than waiting until the November cycle.
