DOCSLIB.ORG

Regional Transportation Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Regional Transportation Plan MONO COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN Mono County Local Transportation Commission Mono County Community Development Department Town of Mammoth Lakes Community Development Department MONO COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS Fred Stump, Chair (Mono County) Shields Richardson, Vice-Chair (Mammoth Lakes) Jo Bacon (Mammoth Lakes) Tim Fesko (Mono County) Larry Johnston (Mono County) Sandy Hogan (Mammoth Lakes) STAFF Mono County Scott Burns, LTC Director Gerry Le Francois, Principal Planner Wendy Sugimura, Associate Analyst Jeff Walters, Public Works Director Garrett Higerd, Associate Engineer Courtney Weiche, Associate Planner C.D. Ritter, LTC Secretary Megan Mahaffey, Fiscal Analyst Town of Mammoth Lakes Haislip Hayes, Associate Civil Engineer Jamie Robertson, Assistant Engineer Caltrans District 9 Brent Green, District 9 Director Ryan Dermody, Deputy District 9 Director Planning, Modal Programs, and Local Assistance Denee Alcala, Transportation Planning Branch Supervisor Eastern Sierra Transit Authority (ESTA) John Helm, Executive Director Jill Batchelder, Program Coordinator TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................... 1 Transportation Directives .......................................................................................................................... 1 Summary of Needs and Issues ................................................................................................................... 1 Summary of Transportation System .......................................................................................................... 2 Summary of System Options and Alternatives ............................................................................................ 3 Compliance with Air Quality Plan .............................................................................................................. 3 Summary of Funding Programs ................................................................................................................. 4 Summary of Public Participation in RTP Update ......................................................................................... 4 Summary of Recommended Actions ........................................................................................................... 5 Summary of Significant Environmental Impacts ........................................................................................ 6 CHAPTER 1: PLANNING PROCESS .......................................................................................................... 7 Legal Authority and Purpose of the Plan .................................................................................................... 7 Coordination with Applicable Plans and Programs ...................................................................................... 7 Local Plans and Programs ...................................................................................................................... 7 Regional Plans and Programs ................................................................................................................. 8 State Plans and Programs ...................................................................................................................... 8 Federal Plans and Programs ................................................................................................................... 8 Public Participation ................................................................................................................................... 8 LTC Citizen Advisory Committees ........................................................................................................... 8 Town of Mammoth Lakes Advisory Committees ....................................................................................... 9 Collaborative Planning Team .................................................................................................................. 9 Tribal Consultation ................................................................................................................................ 9 Disabled Population ............................................................................................................................. 10 Planning Analysis ................................................................................................................................... 10 Documents Incorporated by Reference ..................................................................................................... 11 RTP Maintenance .................................................................................................................................... 11 CHAPTER 2: NEEDS ASSESSMENT....................................................................................................... 12 Overview ................................................................................................................................................. 12 Assumptions Used to Determine Transportation Needs ............................................................................ 12 Demographic Projections ...................................................................................................................... 12 Land Use Forecasts .............................................................................................................................. 15 Air Quality Attainment Status .............................................................................................................. 17 Performance Conditions (LOS) .............................................................................................................. 19 Capital Operations and Maintenance Costs ........................................................................................... 20 Cost of Alternatives .............................................................................................................................. 20 Time Frames ........................................................................................................................................ 20 Environmental Resources of Concern ................................................................................................... 20 Complete Streets .................................................................................................................................. 20 Issues and Needs .................................................................................................................................... 22 Operational Issues, Including Emergency Preparedness ........................................................................ 22 Existing Regional/Interregional Transportation System ......................................................................... 25 Interregional Travel Demand and Corridor Needs .................................................................................. 28 Specialized Needs ................................................................................................................................. 30 Goods Movement ................................................................................................................................. 31 Local Corridor Needs ............................................................................................................................ 31 Maintenance of the Existing Regional/Interregional Transportation System ........................................... 33 Traffic Demand, Mono County .............................................................................................................. 33 Demand Management Strategies .......................................................................................................... 34 Parking Management ........................................................................................................................... 35 Environmental and Energy Impacts ...................................................................................................... 36 Climate Change ................................................................................................................................... 37 Resource-Efficient Transportation System/Greenhouse Gas Reduction ................................................. 37 Mono County RTP – 2015 Update Page i Community Needs and Issues .............................................................................................................. 37 Resource Sharing and Partnership Opportunities ................................................................................. 43 Coordination with Caltrans Systems Planning ...................................................................................... 44 Cross-Jurisdictional Communications Network Needs ........................................................................... 45 Scenic Routes/Scenic Highway Designation .......................................................................................... 45 Town of Mammoth Lakes Transportation System .................................................................................. 49 Travel Demand, Town of Mammoth Lakes ............................................................................................. 57 Transit ...............................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • California Pika Consortium Mono Basin- Bodie Hills Field Trip Sunday, July 31, 2011 – Monday, August 1, 2011
    California Pika Consortium Mono Basin- Bodie Hills Field Trip Sunday, July 31, 2011 – Monday, August 1, 2011 Amended with comments and observations in red font after the Field Trip: 13 August 2011 (cim) Field Trip Objectives: Provide a forum for California Pika Consortium (CPC) participants to observe and discuss topics of current interest at key and relevant field sites. In particular, to observe and contrast pika habitat abundance, quality, and connectivity in the Sierra Nevada and Bodie Hills; to visit low-elevation and high-elevation sites typical of the central-eastern Sierra Nevada; to observe and compare anthropogenic habitat (ore dumps) and native talus sites in the Bodie Hills; to discuss the relevance of these observations to climate relationships, talus thermal regimes, dispersal and connectivity (source/sink), population dynamics, and population processes in California and elsewhere in American pika’s range. Agenda Sunday, July 31 (see accompanying Road Log and Maps for specifics) 8:00 am Convene at USFS Mono Basin Scenic Area Visitor Center, consolidate vehicles (don’t forget lunch, snacks, water) 8:15 am Depart Visitor Center for Stops 1-7 Stop 1: Lundy Cyn (short walk) Stop 2: Virginia Lks Cyn Trailhead (short walk) Stop 3: Conway Highlands Overview instead we made a brief stop to “Benjamin Buttes” Stop 4: Bodie Pass – LUNCH (bring your own) Stop 5: Syndicate Mine, Bodie (short walk) Stop 6: Chemung Mine weather did not allow us to visit this site Stop 7: Serrita Mine, New York Hill, Masonic District (short walk) weather did not allow us to visit this site Note: If time gets short, we might forego one or more of the final stops ~ 7pm? Dinner (no host) at Tioga Gas Mart, Tioga Toomey’s Café, 0.25 miles west on SR 120 of junction with US 395.
    [Show full text]
  • HISTORY of the TOIYABE NATIONAL FOREST a Compilation
    HISTORY OF THE TOIYABE NATIONAL FOREST A Compilation Posting the Toiyabe National Forest Boundary, 1924 Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Chronology ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Bridgeport and Carson Ranger District Centennial .................................................................... 126 Forest Histories ........................................................................................................................... 127 Toiyabe National Reserve: March 1, 1907 to Present ............................................................ 127 Toquima National Forest: April 15, 1907 – July 2, 1908 ....................................................... 128 Monitor National Forest: April 15, 1907 – July 2, 1908 ........................................................ 128 Vegas National Forest: December 12, 1907 – July 2, 1908 .................................................... 128 Mount Charleston Forest Reserve: November 5, 1906 – July 2, 1908 ................................... 128 Moapa National Forest: July 2, 1908 – 1915 .......................................................................... 128 Nevada National Forest: February 10, 1909 – August 9, 1957 .............................................. 128 Ruby Mountain Forest Reserve: March 3, 1908 – June 19, 1916 ..........................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Walker Basin, Nevada and California: Physical Environment, Hydrology, and Biology
    EXHIBIT 89 The Walker Basin, Nevada and California: Physical Environment, Hydrology, and Biology Dr. Saxon E. Sharpe, Dr. Mary E. Cablk, and Dr. James M. Thomas Desert Research Institute May 2007 Revision 01 May 2008 Publication No. 41231 DESERT RESEARCH INSTITUTE DOCUMENT CHANGE NOTICE DRI Publication Number: 41231 Initial Issue Date: May 2007 Document Title: The Walker Basin, Nevada and California: Physical Environment, Hydrology, and Biology Author(s): Dr. Saxon E. Sharpe, Dr. Mary E. Cablk, and Dr. James M. Thomas Revision History Revision # Date Page, Paragraph Description of Revision 0 5/2007 N/A Initial Issue 1.1 5/2008 Title page Added revision number 1.2 “ ii Inserted Document Change Notice 1.3 “ iv Added date to cover photo caption 1.4 “ vi Clarified listed species definition 1.5 “ viii Clarified mg/L definition and added WRPT acronym Updated lake and TDS levels to Dec. 12, 2007 values here 1.6 “ 1 and throughout text 1.7 “ 1, P4 Clarified/corrected tui chub statement; references added 1.8 “ 2, P2 Edited for clarification 1.9 “ 4, P2 Updated paragraph 1.10 “ 8, Figure 2 Updated Fig. 2007; corrected tui chub spawning statement 1.11 “ 10, P3 & P6 Edited for clarification 1.12 “ 11, P1 Added Yardas (2007) reference 1.13 “ 14, P2 Updated paragraph 1.14 “ 15, Figure 3 & P3 Updated Fig. to 2007; edited for clarification 1.15 “ 19, P5 Edited for clarification 1.16 “ 21, P 1 Updated paragraph 1.17 “ 22, P 2 Deleted comma 1.18 “ 26, P1 Edited for clarification 1.19 “ 31-32 Clarified/corrected/rearranged/updated Walker Lake section 1.20
    [Show full text]
  • Mono County ¡Lanning Commission Agenda
    MONO COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION PO Box 347 PO Box 8 Mammoth Lakes, CA 93546 Bridgeport, CA 93517 760.924.1800, fax 924.1801 760.932.5420, fax 932.5431 [email protected] www.monocounty.ca.gov AGENDA THURSDAY, AUGUST 14, 2014 – 10 a.m. Supervisors Chambers, County Courthouse, Bridgeport *Videoconference: BOS Conference Room, third floor, Sierra Center Mall, Mammoth Lakes Full agenda packets, plus associated materials distributed less than 72 hours prior to the meeting, will be available for public review at the Community Development offices in Bridgeport (Annex 1, 74 N. School St.) or Mammoth Lakes (Minaret Village Mall, above Giovanni’s restaurant). Agenda packets are also posted online at www.monocounty.ca.gov / boards & commissions / planning commission. For inclusion on the e- mail distribution list, interested persons can subscribe on the website. *Agenda sequence (see note following agenda). 1. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. PUBLIC COMMENT: Opportunity to address the Planning Commission on items not on the agenda 3. MEETING MINUTES: Review and adopt minutes of July 10, 2014 – p. 1 4. CONSENT ITEM 10:10 A.M. FINAL APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP 13-001/ Hildenbrand-Booth. Approval of Parcel Map 13- 001 will divide APN 026-220-009, totaling 6.30 acres, into four lots of 2.39, 1.19, 1.19, and 1.43 acres, along with an offer of dedication of 0.10 acres along Valley Road. The project is located in the community of Chalfant. Access is via Valley Road, with a proposed private road, Owens Ranch Road. Individual wells and septic systems are proposed.
    [Show full text]
  • Bailey-1976.Pdf
    VOL. 81, NO. 5 JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH FEBRUARY 10, 1976 Volcanism, Structure,and Geochronologyof Long Valley Caldera, Mono County, California RoY A. BAILEY U.S. GeologicalSurvey, Reston, Virginia 22092 G. BRENT DALRYMPLE AND MARVIN A. LANPHERE U.S. GeologicalSurvey, Menlo Park, California 94025 Long Valley caldera, a 17- by 32-km elliptical depressionon the east front of the Sierra Nevada, formed 0.7 m.y. ago during eruption of the Bishoptuff. Subsequentintracaldera volcanism included eruption of (1) aphyric rhyolite 0.68-0.64 m.y. ago during resurgentdoming of the caldera floor, (2) porphyritic hornblende-biotiterhyolite from centersperipheral to the resurgentdome at 0.5, 0.3, and 0.1 m.y. ago, and (3) porphyritic hornblende-biotiterhyodacite from outer ring fractures0.2 m.y. ago to 50,000 yr ago, a sequencethat apparently records progressivecrystallization of a subjacentchemically zoned magma chamber. Holocene rhyolitic and phreatic eruptions suggestthat residual magma was present in the chamber as recentlyas 450 yr ago. Intracaldera hydrothermalactivity beganat least0.3 m.y. ago and was widespreadin the caldera moat; it has sincedeclined due to self-sealingof near-surfacecaldera sediments by zeolitization, argillization, and silicificationand has becomelocalized on recentlyreactivated north- west-trendingSierra Nevada frontal faults that tap hot water at depth. INTRODUCTION concentrates were treated with a dilute HF solution to remove small bits of attached glassand fragments of other mineral In the westernUnited States,only three calderasare known grains. Obsidian used for dating was totally unhydrated and to be large enoughand young enoughto possiblystill contain not devitrified. Small blocks sawed from many of the hand residual magma in their chambers:the Vailes caldera (•1.1 specimenswere used for dating.
    [Show full text]
  • Campground in Yosemite National Park
    MileByMile.com Personal Road Trip Guide California Byway Highway # "Tioga Road/Big Oak Flat Road" Miles ITEM SUMMARY 0.0 End of Tioga Pass Road on Scenic Tioga Pass Road on State Highway #120, ends at the junction of State Highway #120 Big Oak Road just outside Yosemite Valley within Yosemite National Park, California. Altitude: 6158 feet 0.6 Tuolumne Grove Trail Tuolumne Grove Trail Head, Tioga Pass Road, Tuolumne Grove, is a Head sequoia grove located near Crane Flat in Yosemite National Park, California Altitude: 6188 feet 3.7 Old Big Oak Flat Road South to Tamarack Flat Campground in Yosemite National Park. Has 52 campsites, picnic tables, food lockers, fire rings, and vault toilets. Altitude: 7018 feet 6.2 Old Tioga Road Trail To Old Tioga Road, Hetch Hetchy Reservoir, lies in Hetch Hetchy Valley, which is completely flooded by the Hetch Hetchy Dam, in Yosemite National Park, California. Wapama Falls, in Hetch Hetchy Valley, Lake Vernon, Rancheria Falls, Rancheria Creek, Camp Mather Lake. Altitude: 6772 feet 6.2 Trail to Tamarrack Flat Altitude: 6775 feet Campground 13.7 Siesta Lake Altitude: 7986 feet 14.5 White Wolf Road To White Wolf Campground, located outside of Yosemite Valley, just off Tioga Pass Road in California. Altitude: 8117 feet 16.5 Access To Luken's Lake, Yosemite Creek Trail, Altitude: 8182 feet 19.7 Access A mountainous Road/Trail, Quaking Aspen Falls, is a seasonal water fall, that stream relies on rain and snow melting, dries up in summer, located just off Tioga Pass Road, in Yosemite National Park, Altitude: 7500 feet 20.3 Quaking Aspen Falls East of highway.
    [Show full text]
  • LAKE TAHOE BASIN MANAGEMENT UNIT Travel Analysis Process
    LAKE TAHOE BASIN United States MANAGEMENT UNIT Department of Agriculture Forest Service Travel Analysis Process January 2012 Kjar, J. Craig. 2011. Travel Analysis Process. Boise, Idaho. Prepared for U.S. Forest Service Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit, South Lake Tahoe, California. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 – Setting Up the Analysis ....................................... 1 Objectives ................................................................................................................................... 1 Scale ............................................................................................................................................ 1 How the Report Will be Used ..................................................................................................... 2 Roles of Specialists ..................................................................................................................... 2 Identification of Information Sources ......................................................................................... 2 Analysis Plan .............................................................................................................................. 3 Chapter 2 - Describing the Situation ....................................... 4 Existing Road System and Direction .......................................................................................... 4 Forest Highways and Scenic Byways ......................................................................................... 6 Forest Highways
    [Show full text]
  • List of Subcontractors
    COUNTY OF MONO, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS TABLE OF CONTENTS RUNWAY RECONSTRUCTION AT THE LEE VINING AIRPORT Invitation For Bids ......................................................................................................IB-1 Instructions To Bidders ..............................................................................................IB-2 1. Securing Bid Documents.............................................................................IB-2 2. Pre-Bid Conference.....................................................................................IB-2 3. Interpretation of Project Plans and Specifications.......................................IB-2 4. Approximate Quantities...............................................................................IB-2 5. Proposals....................................................................................................IB-3 6. Modification of Bid.......................................................................................IB-4 7. Withdrawal of Bid ........................................................................................IB-4 8. Agreement and Bonds ................................................................................IB-4 9. Opening of Bids...........................................................................................IB-4 10. Award or Rejection of Bids..........................................................................IB-5 11. Identification of Apparent Low Bid / Bid Protests ........................................IB-5 12.
    [Show full text]
  • 5.1 Historic Period Human Interaction with the Watershed
    Upper Carson River Watershed Stream Corridor Assessment 5. Human Interaction With the Watershed 5.1 Historic Period Human Interaction With the Watershed The purpose of this section is to summarize human activities that have had some effect on the Carson River watershed in Alpine County, California. Regional prehistory and ethnography are summarized by Nevers (1976), Elston (1982), d’Azevedo (1986), and Lindstrom et al. (2000). Details of regional history can be found in Maule (1938), Jackson (1964), Dangberg (1972), Clark (1977), Murphy (1982), Marvin (1997), and other sources. A book published by the Centennial Book Committee (1987) contains an excellent selection of historic photographs. Particularly useful is a study on the historical geography of Alpine County by Howatt (1968). 5.1.1 Prehistoric Land Use Human habitation of the Upper Carson River Watershed extends thousands of years back into antiquity. Archaeological evidence suggests use of the area over at least the last 8,000 to 9,000 years. For most of that time, the land was home to small bands of Native Americans. Their number varied over time, depending on regional environmental conditions. For at least the last 2,000 years, the Washoe occupied the Upper Carson River Watershed. Ethnographic data provides clues as to past land use and land management practices (see extended discussions in Downs 1966; Blackburn and Anderson 1993; Lindstrom et al. 2000; Rucks 2002). A broad range of aboriginal harvesting and hunting practices, fishing, and camp tending would have affected the landscape and ecology of the study area. Shrubs such as service berry and willow were pruned to enhance growth.
    [Show full text]
  • East Walker River Watershed Assessment
    East Walker River Watershed Assessment March 2012 Contributors and Acknowledgements Assessment and plan written by Rick Kattelmann Ph.D., retired hydrologist who specialized in watershed management and snow hydrology. He worked and contracted for a variety of agencies, public utilities, and conservation groups. Rick was the principal hydrologist for the Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project in the mid-1990s and authored more than 150 scientific and technical papers. He served two terms on the Mono County Planning Commission and wrote watershed assessments for the other principal watersheds of Mono County. Rick holds B.S. and M.S. degrees in forestry and watershed hydrology at U.C. Berkeley and a Ph.D. in snow hydrology from U.C. Santa Barbara. Assessment and plan production managed by Eastern Sierra Land Trust: Aaron Johnson, Lands Director, Heather Freeman, Office Coordinator, Karen Ferrell-Ingram, Executive Director Assistance with cartographic design and spatial analysis: Kimberly Forkner Funders/Support: Funding for this project has been provided by the Sierra Nevada Conservancy, an agency of the State of California. The maps and cartographic products included in this report were made possible through a generous grant of the ArcGIS software by Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) through the ESRI Conservation Program. Disclaimer Watershed Assessments are a snapshot in time of a location, synthesizing all the known information concerning that area. Omissions, errors, an d misunderstandings can occur. The authors request that corrections, additions, and suggestions be sent to the address below. Eastern Sierra Land Trust P.O. Box 755 Bishop, CA 93515 East Walker River Watershed Assessment Table of Contents Contributors and Acknowledgements ............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Toiyabe National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan Table of Contents
    United States Department of Agriculture NATIONAL FOREST PREFACE This National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) was developed to direct the management of the Toiyabe National Forest. The goal df the Plan is to provide a management program reflective of a mixture of management activities that allow use and protection of Forest resources; fulfill legislative requirements; and address local, regional, and national issues and concerns. To accomplish this, the Forest Plan: SPECIFIES THE STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES AND THE APPROXIMATE TIMING AND VICINITY OF THE PRACTICES NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE THAT DIRECTION; AND ESTABLISHES THE MONITORING AND EVALUATION REQUIREMENTS NEEDED TO ENSURE THAT THE DIRECTION IS CARRIED OUT AND TO DETERMINE HOW WELL OUTPUTS AND EFFECTS WERE PREDICTED. The Forest Plan will be reviewed (and updated if necessary) at least every five years. It will be revised on a IO- to 15-year cycle. Preparation of the Forest Plan is required by the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act (RPA) as amended by the National Forest Management Act (NFMA). Assessment of its environmental impacts is required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the implementing regulations of NFMA (36 WR 219). The Forest Plan replaces all previous resource management plans prepared for the Toiyabe National Forest. Upon approval of the Forest Plan, all subsequent activities affecting the Forest must be in compliance with the Forest Plan. In addition, all permits, contracts and other instruments for the use and 0 occupancy of National Forest System lands mst be in conformance with the Forest Plan. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANNINC LEVELS Development of this Forest Plan occurs within the framework of Forest Service regional and national planning.
    [Show full text]
  • Aviation in California: Benefits to Our Economy and Way of Life
    Aviation in California: Benefits to Our Economy and Way of Life JUNE 2003 PUBLIC USE AIRPORTS BY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION Commercial/Primary (29) Metropolitan (20) Regional (66) Community (102) Limited Use (33) Joint Use — Military/Commercial (2) The contents of this report reflect the views of the author who is responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the State of California or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. This report was prepared with funds from a grant provided by the United States Government (80%) and funds from the State of California (20%). Aviation in California: Benefits to Our Economy and Way of Life FINAL REPORT Prepared for BUSINESS,TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS Submitted by Economics Research Associates JUNE 2003 ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY ADVISORY COMMITTEE Nancy Benjamin Alan R. Tubbs Study Project Manager District Field Services Manager California Department of Transportation Airborne Express, Mather Field Division of Aeronautics Chuck Oldham R. Austin Wiswell Robert Chung Chief California Transportation Commission California Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautics Carl Williams Senior Policy Director Michael Armstrong California Space Authority, Inc. (CSA) Senior Lead Planner Southern California Association of Governments Bonnie Cornwall (SCAG) Program Manager Division
    [Show full text]