ITD moving forward with solution to address safety concerns in Targhee Pass - East Idaho News
Business & Money

ITD moving forward with solution to address safety concerns in Targhee Pass

  Published at  | Updated at

ISLAND PARK — The ongoing and often contentious debate about wildlife crossings along U.S. Highway 20 in Island Park may be coming to a close.

Last week, the Idaho Transportation Department held a meeting with members of the public and proposed a solution, which they feel will best meet the needs of residents and promote safety.

“It was very positive. Everyone was pleased with the decision that was made,” ITD spokeswoman Megan Stark tells EastIdahoNews.com. “Now people are waiting to see what happens next.”

It’s called Alternative 3, and it’s part of the Targhee Pass Environmental Assessment. The study was conducted to help with the reconstruction of the Targhee Pass. The goal is to improve driver safety, traffic flow and roadway structural integrity of U.S. 20 between the junction of Idaho Highway 87 and the Montana state line.

The assessment includes five alternatives or plans to do that. Several of the plans, particularly those involving building wildlife crossings over the highway and fencing along it, have caused controversy in and near Island Park.

However, ITD now believes it has a solution that will be acceptable to most Fremont County residents.

Alternative 3 proposes the installation of a wildlife-detection system. It includes a series of line-of-sight radar systems to cover a 4-mile segment of the pass. A system of warning signs would also be installed along the pass to alert drivers to the presence of animals and any reductions in speed.

ITD officials say they identified Alternative 3 as the preferred solution after many community members said they were in favor of it at a contentious public meeting held last spring. The decision was also made following a subsequent advisory vote in November when residents overwhelmingly voted their dislike of wildlife overpasses and roadside fencing.

RELATED: Neighbors, officials angry over ITD proposal to build fences, overpasses for wildlife in Island Park

The Targhee Pass Environmental Assessment

The Targhee Pass Environmental Assessment’s primary purpose is to recommend a variety of road construction projects that need to be completed.

In all but the first alternative, the assessment recommends the following projects: Targhee Pass’ shoulder would be widened from 5 to 8 feet, and turn lanes would be added at Big Horn Hills Estates. ITD would repair cracks and potholes in the road, shorten hills to improve visibility and stopping distance, and clear trees and other vegetation to improve the pavement’s exposure to sunlight.

Here are the alternatives options on how ITD should handle wildlife crossing the highway.

  • Alternative 1 is a “no-build” option. This means ITD would not undertake any major construction or improvement projects on the road, and would only perform necessary maintenance. Some additional signage could be deployed to warn people of wildlife or changes in speed.
  • Alternative 2 includes all the road-improvement projects plus the installation of a wildlife fence along the highway and the construction of three wildlife overpass crossings.
  • Alternative 3 includes all the road-improvement projects and the creation of the animal-detection system described above.
  • Alternative 4 is a combination of road improvements, an animal-detection system, a single overpass crossing and wildlife crosswalk across the highway.
  • Alternative 5 includes the road improvements and some warning signs. However, no fencing, overpasses, crosswalks or wildlife-detection systems would be installed.

RELATED: Residents of Fremont County vote no on wildlife crossings

What people are saying

But not everyone thinks Alternative 3 is the answer.

“Wildlife-detection systems are great at detecting wildlife, but they’re not great at changing driver behavior,” resident Mary Van Fleet said. “Drivers adapt very quickly to flashing lights, and if they don’t actually see an animal on the road at that moment, they’ll just buzz through there.”

Van Fleet says Alternative 3 will take years to tweak, and eventually, this issue will have to be revisited again.

However, others said the detection system is far better than fencing and wildlife crossings, which could hurt property values. Ken Watts, chairman of the Island Park Preservation Coalition, has said fencing and wildlife crossings would “devastate Island Park” because they would restrict public access to the wilderness.

“(Voters) wanted to be able to do something for the wildlife, and at the same time protect driver safety and keep the costs down,” Watts said. “I commend ITD for the selection of this alternative. I think it’s a good, common-sense solution.”

The total cost of implementing Alternative 3 with the additional road improvements is somewhere between $15 million and $19.5 million, according to ITD spokeswoman Megan Stark. The Federal Highway Administration will cover ninety-three percent of it, and the remaining seven percent will come from state funds collected through gas taxes, vehicle registrations and licenses.

In contrast, ITD estimated Alternative 2 (including the road improvements) would cost between $25 and $30.5 million.

But Jean Bjerke, a volunteer with Island Park Safe Wildlife Passage — a group that supports wildlife crossings over the detection system because of the safety rating and longevity — says ITD is not taking a long-term view, and Alternative 2 could be cheaper and safer in the long run.

“Animal-detection systems require so much maintenance. And they only last 10 years, whereas an overpass is there for decades,” Bjerke said. “I think (ITD) is inconsistent. Their (stated) goal is safety. They’ve rated all the alternatives for safety, and then they failed to choose the safest one.”

Alternative 2 was the only option that received a high safety rating in ITD’s assessment.

What’s next

Although ITD is moving forward with Alternative 3, it is still accepting feedback about the projects. Stark says about 60 people were in attendance during the three-hour meeting Thursday.

If you didn’t attend the public meeting but would still like to weigh in on this discussion, ITD is still taking comments until Feb. 1. You can email targheepass@langdongroupinc.com or call (208) 220-5937.

Once public comments have been evaluated, ITD will consider any suggested revisions. A timeline for implementing any of the projects will include a final review process that would take place over the next several years.

Though it’s hard to predict how the timing of everything unfolds, Stark estimates construction on the project will begin in 2022.

SUBMIT A CORRECTION