DOCSLIB.ORG

Department of Transportation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Department of Transportation Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Denver Airports District Office DRAFT SECTION 303(c)/4(f) DE MINIMIS FINDING For the Provo Municipal Airport City of Provo, Utah County, Utah I. Introduction - Section 4(f) Section 4(f) was initially codified in Title 49 United States Code (USC) § 1653(f) (Section 4(f) of the USDOT Act of 1966). In 1983, § 1653(f) was reworded and recodified as Title 49 USC § 303 but is still commonly referred to as Section 4(f). Congress amended Section 4(f) in 2005 when the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) was enacted. Section 4(f) declares that “it is the policy of the US Government that special effort should be made to preserve the natural beauty of the countryside and public park and recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites.” In addition: Section 4(f) prohibits the use of land of significant publicly owned public parks, recreation areas, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and land of a historic site for transportation projects unless the Administration determines that there is no feasible and prudent avoidance alternative and that all possible planning to minimize harm has occurred. De minimis impacts related to historic sites are defined as the determination of either “no adverse effect” or “no historic properties affected” in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. For publicly owned parks, recreation areas, and wildlife/waterfowl refuges, de minimis impacts are defined as those that do not “adversely affect the activities, features, and attributes” of the Section 4(f) resource. De minimis impact determinations are based on the degree of impact after the inclusion of any measure(s) to minimize harm. II. Project Description The Provo Municipal Airport (Airport) is located two miles west of the City of Provo near Utah Lake in Utah County, Utah. The Airport is proposing to construct a new terminal building, aircraft apron, vehicle parking lot, and access roads. The existing terminal building is unable to accommodate the existing demand. The project includes: • Terminal Building: The approximately 45,000 square foot terminal building will replace the current 4,000 square foot terminal. The new building will be able to meet current and future demand. The new terminal will be constructed south of the existing terminal in an area that is undeveloped but was previously disturbed. The project includes the construction of the building and installation of utilities. • Aircraft Apron: The new concrete aircraft apron will be approximately 130,000 square feet and will include a deicing pad. Aircraft use the apron to park while loading/unloading passengers. 1 • Vehicle Parking and Access Roads: The vehicle parking area and loop road will occupy approximately 30 acres. The parking lot will provide space for 680 vehicles (500 paved and 180 unpaved spaces). The loop road includes an entrance road, exit road, and a circulation road for people picking up passengers. • Stormwater Infrastructure: The project also includes the installation of storm pipe, inlets, and manholes to insure proper drainage of the area. III. Description of Section 4(f) Resource and Potential Impacts Site 42UT1617 consists of a complex irrigation system constructed throughout wetlands and low-lying agricultural lands located south of Center Street and between the eastern edge of Utah Lake and the I-15 corridor. The site has eight large dirt canals, five concrete-lined irrigation ditches, and many smaller subsidiary or divergent ditches. Construction of the irrigation system began during the 1850s, shortly after settlement of the area, to facilitate farming. The Site is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under Criterion A for its importance in the early settlement of the Utah Valley and its role in the agricultural economy of the region. The proposed entrance/exit roads include three crossings over Site 42UT1617. All three crossings will use expansion culverts to avoid direct impacts. In addition to the entrance/exit roads, the project also includes the installation of a water/sewer line. There are two options being considered to limit impacts to the Site. The first option is to bore under both Site 42UT1617 and the airport moat. The second option involves installing a temporary dam to remove the water to allow the installation of the water/sewer line and then restoring the site to preconstruction conditions. Either option will avoid direct, permanent impacts to the Site. The access roads and water/sewer line installation activities affect a relatively small portion of the overall site and will not substantially impact or alter the irrigation system as a whole or any of its character-defining features for which the overall site was determined eligible for the NRHP. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) determined that a finding of No Adverse Effect under Section 106 is appropriate for this project. The Utah State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) concurred with the No Adverse Effect finding in a letter dated July 19, 2019. IV. Discussion of Coordination The public will be offered the opportunity to comment on this Section 4(f) de minimis finding and the Section 106 No Adverse Effect finding. After the 30 day comment period, the FAA will make a final decision based on the information provided above, any public comments received, and in coordination with SHPO as to whether the effects of the proposed project constitute a de minimis Section 4(f) impact. V. Preliminary Finding After careful and thorough consideration of the facts contained herein, the undersigned finds that the proposed Federal action is consistent with Title 49 USC § 303 and other applicable environmental requirements. It is anticipated that the proposed Federal action will not significantly impact the integrity of OGD and therefore constitutes a de minimis Section 4(f) impact. 2 John Bauer, Manager Federal Aviation Administration Denver Airport District Office Date 3 Appendix A Figure 1 – Provo Municipal Airport Location Figure 2 – Above-ground and Archaeological (red) APEs HISTORICA CANAL CROSSING # 3 WATER LINE INSTALLATION HISTORIC CANAL CROSSING # 2 MOAT CROSSING # 2 HISTORIC CANAL CROSSING # 1 TERMINAL PARKING MOAT CROSSING # 1 AND LOOP ROAD XX XX XX XX XX XX NEW TERMINAL BUILDING XX XX GRADING AREA TERMINAL APRON GRADING AREA ® PROVO AIRPORT GRAPHIC SCALE TERMINAL AREA DEVELOPMENT: 125 0 125 250 35 S 400 WEST SUITE 200 ST GEORGE, UT 84770 AREAS OF IMPACT ( IN FEET ) PHONE: 435-673-4677 FAX: 435-673-8484 WWW.JVIATION.COM DATE: 12 JULY 2019 SHEET 1 OF 1 Plotted July 12, 2019 by @ Plotted Alex Nodich 1:55 PM L:\PVU\AIP 44 Term & Apron Design\CAD\EXHIBITS\PVU - CATEX EXHIBIT.dwg Appendix C 122+49 122+00 121+00 120+00 EP: 122+49.30 CANAL CROSSING #3 PT: 121+13.02 119+00 LAKEVIEW PARKWAY PC: 117+90.85 118+00 117+00 PT: 115+25.20 116+00 CANAL CROSSING #2 115+00 114+00 HISTORIC CANAL 113+00 86+00 BP: 86+00.00 MOAT PC: 113+64.16 LAKEVIEW PARKWAY 112+00 CANAL CROSSING #1 87+00 X X PT: 112+01.82 X X 88+00 PC: 111+20.81 HISTORIC CANAL PC: 88+28.31 X 111+00 X MOAT 89+00 MOAT 90+00 110+00 X X PT: 109+38.16 X X 91+00 109+00 X 92+00 PT: 92+17.70 93+00 108+00 94+00 X X PC: 94+19.70 PT: 94+80.78 95+00 96+00 97+00 98+00 99+00 100+00 101+00 102+00 103+00 104+00 105+00 106+00 PC: 106+24.00 107+00 X TERMINAL BUILDING PRELIMINARY LAYOUT TERMINAL CENTERLINE BP: 190+00.00 EP: 210+00.00 4510 4510 LAKEVIEW PARKWAY EOP STA: 86+44.26 4505 EL: 4500.00 4505 STA: 122+05.03 EL: 4499.29 0.50% -0.50% 4500 -2.48% 4500 1.24% 4495 -0.40% 4495 0.40% LAKEVIEW PARKWAY 4490 4490 EOP 4485 4485 4492.1 4493.7 4494.7 4490.0 4493.0 4492.6 4491.5 4490.9 4490.3 4489.5 4490.5 4490.6 4489.9 4489.7 4489.4 4489.7 4490.7 4491.4 4490.0 4489.6 4490.5 4491.5 4492.2 4492.2 4491.9 4490.9 4487.5 4498.7 4489.2 4489.9 4489.9 4490.0 4491.5 4490.8 4490.6 4498.6 4498.61 4492.11 4500.41 4500.71 4496.13 4493.76 4491.30 4491.30 4491.70 4492.10 4492.50 4492.90 4493.30 4493.70 4494.00 4494.10 4494.00 4493.70 4493.30 4492.90 4492.50 4492.10 4491.83 4492.08 4492.88 4494.10 4495.34 4496.59 4497.83 4499.05 4499.90 4500.76 4500.86 4500.32 4499.82 4499.32 86+00 87+00 88+00 89+00 90+00 91+00 92+00 93+00 94+00 95+00 96+00 97+00 98+00 99+00 100+00 101+00 102+00 103+00 104+00 105+00 106+00 107+00 108+00 109+00 110+00 111+00 112+00 113+00 114+00 115+00 116+00 117+00 118+00 119+00 120+00 121+00 122+00 123+00 124+00 MOAT WATER SURFACE CANAL CROSSING #2 CANAL CROSSING #3 CANAL CROSSING #1 MOAT WATER SURFACE P-ALIGN-ROAD-1 PROFILE SCALE HORZ: 1"=250', VERT: 1"=25' (SEE SHEET 2 OF 2 FOR DETAIL) (SEE SHEET 2 OF 2 FOR DETAIL) (SEE SHEET 2 OF 2 FOR DETAIL) ® Dane Hurst PROVO AIRPORT by PROPOSED TERMINAL LANDSIDE FACILITIES 12:23 PM PRELIMINARY CANAL CROSSINGS LAYOUT 363 N UNIVERSITY AVE SUITE 106 PROVO, UT 84601 @ GRAPHIC SCALE PLAN VIEW AND OVERVIEW ROADWAY PROFILE 125 0 125 250 PHONE: 801-204-9560 FAX: 801-206-9808 July 8, 2019 WWW.JVIATION.COM ( IN FEET ) DATE: 08 JULY 2019 SHEET 1 OF 2 Plotted L:\PVU\LOC 19-04 Terminal Parking\CAD\EXHIBITS\PVU-LOC 19-04_LandsidePreliminaryLayout_HistoricCanals.dwg 4502 4502 4502 4502 4501 4501 4501 4501 PROPOSED GRADE 4500 4500 4500 4500 PROPOSED GRADE 4499 SINGLE RADIUS ARCH 4499 4499 4499 DIKE ROAD EMBANKMENT STANDARD SHAPE (STEEL OR ALUMINUM) 4498 26.0' 4498 4498 SERVICE ROAD 4498 PROPOSED GRADE 26.0' 4497 4497 4497 PROPOSED 4497 EMBANKMENT 4496 4496 4496 25.2' 4496 4495 SINGLE RADIUS ARCH 4495 4495 4495 DIKE ROAD EMBANKMENT STANDARD
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Geographical Analysis of Mormon Temple Sites in Utah
    Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Theses and Dissertations 1992 The Geographical Analysis of Mormon Temple Sites in Utah Garth R. Liston Brigham Young University - Provo Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd Part of the Geography Commons, and the Mormon Studies Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Liston, Garth R., "The Geographical Analysis of Mormon Temple Sites in Utah" (1992). Theses and Dissertations. 4881. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/4881 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. 3 the geographicalgeograp c ananalysisysls 0off mormormonon tetempletempiepie slsitessltestes in utah A thesis presented to the department of geography brigham young university in partial fulfillment of the requiaequirequirementsrementscements for the degree master of science by garth R listenliston december 1992 this thesis by garth R liston is accepted in its present form by the department of geography of brigham young university as satisfying the thesis requirement for the degree of master of science f c- H L ricirichardard H jackson 1 committeeoommittee chair alan H grey committecommifctemeflermeymere er i w i ige-e&e date laieialeidleaaleig- J 6tevstevtpvnstldepartmentni d- epartmentepartment chair n dedication0 0 this thesis is dedicated to my wonderful mother
    [Show full text]
  • Provo/Orem BRT Before and After Study: Initial Conditions Report Matthew M
    Provo/Orem BRT Before and After Study: Initial Conditions Report Matthew M. Miller, Mercedes Beaudoin, and Reid Ewing University of Utah, Metropolitan Research Center 2 of 142 Report No. UT‐17.XX PROVO-OREM TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (TRIP) Prepared for: Utah Department of Transportation Research Division Submitted by: University of Utah, Metropolitan Research Center Authored by: Matthew M. Miller, Mercedes Beaudoin, and Reid Ewing Final Report June 2017 ______________________________________________________________________________ Provo/Orem BRT Before and After Study: Initial Conditions Report 3 of 142 DISCLAIMER The authors alone are responsible for the preparation and accuracy of the information, data, analysis, discussions, recommendations, and conclusions presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, endorsements, or policies of the Utah Department of Transportation or the U.S. Department of Transportation. The Utah Department of Transportation makes no representation or warranty of any kind, and assumes no liability therefore. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors acknowledge the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) for funding this research through the Utah Transportation Research Advisory Council (UTRAC). We also acknowledge the following individuals from UDOT for helping manage this research: Jeff Harris Eric Rasband Brent Schvanaveldt Jordan Backman Gracious thanks to our paid peer reviewers in the Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Brigham Young University: Dr. Grant G. Schultz, Ph.D., P.E., PTOE. Dr. Mitsuru Saito, Ph.D, P.E., F. ASCE, F. ITE While not authors, the efforts of the following people helped make this report possible. Data Collection Proof Reading/Edits Ethan Clark Ray Debbie Weaver Thomas Cushing Clint Simkins Jack Egan Debolina Banerjee Katherine A.
    [Show full text]
  • PROVO RIVER DELTA RESTORATION PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Statement Volume I: Chapters 1–5
    PROVO RIVER DELTA RESTORATION PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Statement Volume I: Chapters 1–5 April 2015 UTAH RECLAMATION 230 South 500 East, #230, Salt Lake City, UT 84102 COMMISSIONERS Phone: (801) 524-3146 – Fax: (801) 524-3148 Don A. Christiansen MITIGATION Brad T. Barber AND CONSERVATION Dallin W. Jensen COMMISSION Dear Reader, April 2015 Attached is the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Provo River Delta Restoration Project (PRDRP). The proposed project would restore a naturally functioning river- lake interface essential for recruitment of June sucker (Chasmistes liorus), an endangered fish species that exists naturally only in Utah Lake and its tributaries. In addition to fulfilling environmental commitments associated with water development projects in Utah and contributing to recovery of an endangered species, the project is intended to help improve water quality on the lower Provo River and to provide enhancements for public recreation in Utah County. Alternative B has been identified as the preferred alternative because it would minimize the amount of private lands that would need to be acquired for the project while still providing adequate space for a naturally functioning river delta and sufficient habitat enhancement for achieving the need for the project. The agencies preparing the Final EIS are the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Commission (Mitigation Commission), the Central Utah Water Conservancy District, and the Central Utah Project Completion Act (CUPCA) Office of the U.S. Department of the Interior, collectively referred to as the Joint Lead Agencies. The Final EIS, Executive Summary and Technical Reports can be viewed or downloaded from the project website www.ProvoRiverDelta.us or by requesting a copy on CD.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Development Commission Launches
    OUR TH YEAR www.slenterprise.com July 5, 2021 Volume , Number 50 $1.50 5O Economic development commission launches Weber & Davis commission will be “solutions-oriented.” tablishing subcommittees that serve as con- CountiesReal Estate Brice Wallace “I’m excited to work with state elect- veners to facilitate policy development. The Enterprise ed leaders, cabinet members, local officials “We’re thrilled to announce the cre- PAGE F1 pages 15-1 and others as we collaborate and create new ation of the new Unified Economic Oppor- A new commission charged with de- pathways to economic success,” Cox said. tunity Commission,” said Dan Hemmert, Sponsored by: veloping, directing and coordinating a The commission will convene stake- executive director of the Governor’s Of- statewide economic development strategy holders to develop solutions to the most fice of Economic Opportunity, or GO Utah. has begun its work. critical topics facing Utah’s economy. It That is the new name for the agency former- The Unified Economic Opportunity will also review and create new economic ly known as the Governor’s Office of Eco- Commission, created by HB348, passed strategies and programs to deal with time- nomic Development, or GOED. pages F1-F8 during the 2021 legislative session, has ly topics. Other purposes of the commis- “This commission will help with the been appointed and was scheduled to have sion include aligning economic efforts and state’s growth, education and workforce its first meeting last week, after The Enter- incentive programs, helping support and prise’s press deadlines. align education and industry partnerships Sponsored by: see COMMISSION page 14 Gov.
    [Show full text]
  • PROVO RIVER DELTA RESTORATION PROJECT Bird-Aircraft Strike Risk Technical Memorandum Prepared for the Final Environmental Impact Statement
    PROVO RIVER DELTA RESTORATION PROJECT Bird-Aircraft Strike Risk Technical Memorandum Prepared for the Final Environmental Impact Statement April 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND RELEVANT BACKGROUND .................................................. 1 Description of Project Alternatives ............................................................................................. 6 2.0 METHODS .......................................................................................................................... 7 Describing Existing Bird Communities ...................................................................................... 7 Study Area Bird Surveys ........................................................................................................ 7 Internet and Other Data Sources ............................................................................................. 9 Assessment of Bird-Aircraft Strike Risk .................................................................................. 11 Quantitative Approach .......................................................................................................... 11 Habitat-Based Quasi-Quantitative Approach ....................................................................... 12 3.0 RESULTS .......................................................................................................................... 17 Existing Bird Communities based on Project Area Surveys, Provo’s Wildlife Hazard Assessment, and Bird Strike Reports .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Films in This Cinematic Innovation, New Frontier Is Also a Venue Showcasing Section Will Shape a “Greater” Next Wave in American Cinema
    T U , E C N A D N U S , T R O S E R N I A T N U O M E C N A D N U S F O Y S E T R U O C SUNDANCE INSTITUTE PRESENTS THE SUNDANCE FILM FESTIVAL ABOUT SUNDANCE INSTITUTE ABOUT SUNDANCE FILM FESTIVAL Sundance Institute is a nonprofit cultural organization Each January, the Sundance Film Festival attracts the most founded by Robert Redford to advance the work of risk-taking innovative storytellers and adventurous audiences to a 10-day storytellers worldwide. With a range of programs for artists celebration of the best independent filmmaking today. In a and audiences, the Institute provides year-round creative and small mountain town, a diverse range of ideas, stories, artists, financial support for the development and presentation of and film lovers converge to launch the year in culture. original stories for the screen and stage. W ELCOME ST RA NGER N Sundance Institute Presents E E R G R E 2014 Sundance Film Festival EV Here is an overview of the program at this year’s Sundance Film Festival. HA LF NE LSON U .S. DRAMATIC COMPETITION D OCUMENTARY PREMIERES FROM THE COLLECTION SUNDANCE KIDS Presenting the world premieres of 16 narrative feature films, Renowned filmmakers and films about far-reaching subjects Rediscover classic works of independent cinema as the This new section of the Festival is designed for independent the Dramatic Competition offers Festivalgoers a first look at comprise this section highlighting our ongoing commitment to Sundance Film Festival presents films from the vaults of the film’s youngest fans.
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda Items Proposed for Action and Consideration (Pdf)
    Utah Reclamation Mitigation & Conservation Commission COMMISSIONERS 230 South 500 East Suite 230 Salt Lake City, UT 84102-2045 Brad T. Barber, Chair Phone: (801) 524-3146 – Fax: (801) 524-3148 Robert L. Morgan Gene Shawcroft MEETING AGENDA Monday, September 13, 2021 TIME: 9:30 a.m. LOCATION: Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Commission, 230 S. 500 East Suite 230, Salt Lake City, UT, 84102 Also available online through Microsoft Teams Click here to join the meeting or type the following into your internet browser: https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetup- join/19%3ameeting_MzAwN2ZmNzEtYzFmMS00Y2EwLTg5ODEtNjk5NTgzNjk1ZDI1%40th read.v2/0?context=%7b%22Tid%22%3a%220693b5ba-4b18-4d7b-9341- f32f400a5494%22%2c%22Oid%22%3a%2209fd8a27-76fc-460d-af33-294b0a20928f%22%7d ITEMS ON THE AGENDA FOR ‘ACTION’ AND FOR ‘CONSIDERATION’ MAY BE ACCESSED ON THE COMMISSION’S WEBSITE by navigating through mitigationcommission.gov/news Or at https://mitigationcommission.gov/news/pdf/AgreementsProposedForAction- Consideration.pdf 1. WELCOME AND OPENING REMARKS 2. APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MINUTES 3. ITEMS FOR COMMISSION RATIFICATION A. A Resolution concurring in the issuance of the Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for ‘Block Notice 7A-2 Temporary Use in North Utah County’ 4. ITEMS FOR COMMISSION ACTION A. Proposed Modification of Agreement with Provo City for Cooperative Planning, Design, Construction and Funding of the Provo Lakeview Parkway and Trail PRDRP B. Proposed Agreement with USDA-Wildlife Services for Funding Wildlife Hazard Mitigation at Provo Airport and Provo River Delta Restoration Project 5. ITEMS FOR COMMISSION CONSIDERATION None 6. PRESENTATIONS BY STAFF A. Diamond Fork System Update Draft Environmental Assessment B.
    [Show full text]
  • Birds of the Brigham Young University Campus
    Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Theses and Dissertations 1956-06-01 Birds of the Brigham Young University campus Barid Baran Mukherjee Brigham Young University - Provo Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Mukherjee, Barid Baran, "Birds of the Brigham Young University campus" (1956). Theses and Dissertations. 7832. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/7832 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. BIRDS 01'~ THE BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY CAMPUS A Thesis Submitted to the Department of Z,oology and Entomology Brigham Young University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of iV[ast.er of Science by Barid Baran Mukherjee June 1956 ACKNOV,·LEDGEMENTS The completion of this thesis, to a large extent, was possible because of the aid and assistance of several persons, and the writer here wishes to acknowledge very gratefully their contribution and expresses his deep appreciation to each one of them. The writer finds it difficult to express in words his sincere gratitude a-nd deep appreciation to Dr. C. Lynn Hayward, his Committee Chairman, who spent much of his precious time in helping and guiding this work, and without whose constant encouragement and assistance it would have been impossible for the writer to carry on and complete this study. Appreciation is especially extended to Dr. Lawrence Morris, the writer's committee member, who helped him immeasurably with con- stant encouragement.
    [Show full text]
  • Provo City Corporation V. Donna I
    Brigham Young University Law School BYU Law Digital Commons Utah Supreme Court Briefs 1991 Provo City Corporation v. Donna I. Knudsen : Brief of Respondent Utah Supreme Court Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/byu_sc1 Part of the Law Commons Original Brief Submitted to the Utah Supreme Court; digitized by the Howard W. Hunter Law Library, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah; machine-generated OCR, may contain errors. Glen J. Ellis; attorney for appellant. Glen E. Fuller, Marlin K. Jensen; attorneys for respondent. Recommended Citation Brief of Respondent, Provo City Corporation v. Donna I. Knudsen, No. 914637.00 (Utah Supreme Court, 1991). https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/byu_sc1/3904 This Brief of Respondent is brought to you for free and open access by BYU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Utah Supreme Court Briefs by an authorized administrator of BYU Law Digital Commons. Policies regarding these Utah briefs are available at http://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/utah_court_briefs/policies.html. Please contact the Repository Manager at [email protected] with questions or feedback. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF UTAH PROVO CITY CORPORATION, Plaintiff and Appellant, -vs- Case No. 14637 DONNA I. KNUDSEN, Defendant and Respondent RESPONDENT'S BRIEF Appeal from the Judgment of the Fourth District Court The Honorable J. Robert Bullock GLEN E. FULLER and MARLIN K. JENSEN 15 East 4th South Street Salt Lake City, Utah Attorneys for Respondent
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form 1
    NPS Form 10-900 (7-81) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form See instructions in How to Complete National Register Forms Type all entries complete applicable sections_______________ 1. Name historic and/or common Tithing Offices and Granaries of the Mormon Church Thematic Resources street & number See individual structure/site forms not for publication city, town vicinity of congressional district state code county code 3. Classification - See individual structure/site forms Category Ownership Status Present Use district public occupied agriculture museum building(s) private unoccupied commercial park structure both work in progress educational private residence site Public Acquisition Accessible entertainment religious object in process yes: restricted government scientific being considered yes: unrestricted industrial transportation no military Other! 4. Owner of Property name See individual structure/site forms street & number city, town vicinity of state 5. Location of Legal Description See individual structure/site forms courthouse, registry of deeds, etc. street & number city, town state 6. Representation in Existing Surveys title See individual structure /site forms has this property been determined eligible? yes date federal __ state __ county . local depository for survey records city, town state DGSCriptlOII See individual structure/site forms for specific information on each building, Condition Check one Check one excellent deteriorated unaltered oriainal site good ** ruins altered moved date fair . unexposed Describe the present and original (iff known) physical appearance Architectural Overview Utah's tithing buildings can be divided into three major categories: those that were built prior to the turn of the century, those that were built after the turn of the century, and those that were built specifically as granaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Feasibility Study for FBO/Aviation Service Provider Salt Lake City International Airport (SLC) Salt Lake City, Utah
    Feasibility Study for FBO/Aviation Service Provider **************** Salt Lake City International Airport (SLC) Salt Lake City, Utah Prepared for: Mr. John Buckner, Jr. Director of Administration and Commercial Services Salt Lake City Department of Airports P.O. Box 145550 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114 Date of Report: December 31, 2013 Airport Business Solutions “Valuation and Consulting Services to the Aviation Industry” 13007 W. Linebaugh Avenue, #102 Suite B, Tampa, Florida 33626-4489 Phone (813) 855-3600 Fax (813) 200-1014 December 31, 2013 Mr. John Buckner, Jr. Director of Administration and Commercial Services Salt Lake City Department of Airports P.O. Box 145550 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114 RE: Feasibility Study for FBO/Aviation Service Provider Salt Lake City International Airport (SLC) Salt Lake City, Utah Dear Mr. Buckner: Per the request by the Salt Lake City Department of Airports, we are pleased to present this document, which represents the Feasibility Study for an additional FBO/Aviation Service Provider at the Salt Lake City International Airport in Salt Lake City, Utah. The following report provides our assessment and analysis of various and potential issues related to the addition of another FBO/Aviation Service Provider, including the demand for such services and our recommendations for consideration. In the development of this document, Airport Business Solutions researched many sectors of the local, regional and national airport market, expanding as necessary to gain sufficient and comprehensive data to yield adequate and supportable conclusions. Moreover, we reviewed SLC operational and market data from a number of reliable sources, as well as data from the ABS proprietary industry database.
    [Show full text]
  • Scoping Report
    - Scoping Report - Old Spanish National Historic Trail Comprehensive Management Plan/ Environmental Impact Statement August 2006 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management New Mexico State Office Division of Resources National Park Service National Trails System, Santa Fe Preparers: Sarah Schlanger Bureau of Land Management, New Mexico State Office Sharon Brown Aaron Mahr Otis Halfmoon National Park Service, National Trails System – Santa Fe TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Acronyms and Abbreviations……………………………………………………………..iii Introduction and Background ....................................................................................………..…...1 Issue Summary . ……………………………………………………………………..20 Draft Planning Criteria...............................................................................................……….…..30 Summary of Future Steps in the Planning Process………………………………………...…….32 TABLES Table 1. Paid Advertisements……………………………………………………………………6 Table 2. Public Scoping Meetings ……………………………………………………………....7 Table 3. Meeting Attendee Representation……………………………………………………...9 Table 4. Tribal Consultation Record …………………………….…………………………….15 MAPS Map 1. Designated trail………………………………………………………………………….3 APPENDICES Appendix 1. Media Releases………………………………………………...…………………34 Appendix 2. Written Comments Summary………………………………………………...…..40 Appendix 3. Verbal Comments Recorded During Public Meetings Summary………………..51 ii LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS BLM Bureau of Land Management NPS National Park Service USFS United States Forest Service,
    [Show full text]