DOCSLIB.ORG

Route Restriction Information: Table 4

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Route Restriction Information: Table 4 R17-6-412, Table 4 – Updated April 06, 2021 Table 4. Permanent Highway Restrictions, Requirements, Conditions, and Allowances For “Transport Subject To” requirements see end of document. Route Restriction Location Transport Subject to: Height Length Width Weight (in lbs) (MP = Milepost) Escort requirements: F = front escort, R = rear escort, F/R = front and rear escort, and LE = law enforcement escort Interstate 8 MP 0.00 (California State R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R Line) to MP 21.06 (Dome R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Valley Road TI) Interstate 8 MP 21.06 Westbound (Dome R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 11” Over 14’ - 16’ = R Valley Road TI Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 1325) Interstate 8 MP 21.06 (Dome Valley R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R Road TI) to MP 30.80 R17-6-408; R17-6-409 (Avenue 29E - Wellton TI) Interstate 8 MP 30.80 Westbound R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 11” Over 14’ - 16’ = R (Avenue 29E - Wellton R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Underpass - Structure 1332) Interstate 8 MP 30.80 (Avenue 29E - R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R Wellton TI) to MP 144.55 R17-6-408; R17-6-409 (Vekol Valley Road TI) Interstate 8 MP 144.55 (Vekol Valley R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 11” Over 14’ - 16’ = R Road Underpass - Structure R17-6-408; R17-6-409 550) Interstate 8 MP 144.55 (Vekol Valley R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R Road TI) to MP 151.70 R17-6-408; R17-6-409 (Junction SR 84) Interstate 8 MP 151.70 Eastbound R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 10” Over 14’ - 16’ = R (Junction SR 84 Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 1063) Interstate 8 MP 151.70 (Junction SR 84) R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R to MP 161.60 (Stanfield R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Road TI) Interstate 8 MP 161.60 Eastbound R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 10” Over 14’ - 16’ = R (Stanfield Road Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 1090) Interstate 8 MP 161.60 (Stanfield Road R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R TI) to MP 162.50 (Murphy R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Road TI) Interstate 8 MP 162.50 Westbound R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 11” Over 14’ - 16’ = R (Murphy Road Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 1091) Interstate 8 MP 162.50 (Murphy Road R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R TI) to MP 164.50 (Russell R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Road TI) Interstate 8 MP 164.50 Eastbound R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 10” Over 14’ - 16’ = R (Russell Road Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 1094) Interstate 8 MP 164.50 (Russell Road R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R TI) to MP 167.50 R17-6-408; R17-6-409 (Montgomery Road TI) Interstate 8 MP 167.50 Eastbound R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 10” Over 14’ - 16’ = R (Montgomery Road R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Underpass - Structure 1140) Interstate 8 MP 167.50 (Montgomery R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R Road TI to MP 172.55 R17-6-408; R17-6-409 (Thornton Road TI) Interstate 8 MP 172.55 Eastbound R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 8” Over 14’ - 16’ = R (Thornton Road Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 1196) Interstate 8 MP 172.55 Westbound R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 7” Over 14’ - 16’ = R (Thornton Road Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 1196) Route Restriction Location Transport Subject to: Height Length Width Weight (in lbs) (MP = Milepost) Escort requirements: F = front escort, R = rear escort, F/R = front and rear escort, and LE = law enforcement escort Interstate 8 MP 172.55 (Thornton Road R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R TI) to MP 173.53 (Chuichu R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Road) Interstate 8 MP 173.53 Eastbound R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 9” Over 14’ - 16’ = R (Chuichu Road Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 1197) Interstate 8 MP 173.53 (Chuichu Road) R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R to MP 178.70 (Junction I-10) R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Interstate 10 MP 0.00 (California State R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R Line) to MP 5.84 (Tom R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Wells Road TI) Interstate 10 MP 5.84 Eastbound (Tom R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 10” Over 14’ - 16’ = R Wells Road Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 767) Interstate 10 MP 5.84 Westbound (Tom R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 11” Over 14’ - 16’ = R Wells Road Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 767) Interstate 10 MP 5.84 (Tom Wells Road R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R TI) to MP 17.50 (Junction R17-6-408; R17-6-409 SB 10 - West Quartzsite Blvd) Interstate 10 MP 17.50 (SB 10 Underpass R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 8” Over 14’ - 16’ = R - West Quartzsite Blvd - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 826) Interstate 10 MP 17.50 (Junction SB 10 - R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R West Quartzsite Blvd) to MP R17-6-408; R17-6-409 26.65 (Gold Nugget Road TI) Interstate 10 MP 26.65 Westbound (Gold R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 10” Over 14’ - 16’ = R Nugget Road Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure769) Interstate 10 MP 26.65 (Gold Nugget R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R Road TI) to MP 45.34 R17-6-408; R17-6-409 (Vicksburg Road TI) Interstate 10 MP 45.34 (Vicksburg Road R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 7” Over 14’ - 16’ = R Underpass - Structure 1207) R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Interstate 10 MP 45.34 (Vicksburg Road R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R TI) to MP 69.60 (Avenue R17-6-408; R17-6-409 75E TI) Interstate 10 MP 69.60 Westbound R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 11” Over 14’ - 16’ = R (Avenue 75E Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 1283) Interstate 10 MP 69.60 (Avenue 75E TI) R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R to MP 81.21 (Salome Road R17-6-408; R17-6-409 TI) Interstate 10 MP 81.21 Eastbound R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 10” Over 14’ - 16’ = R (Salome Road Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 1209) Interstate 10 MP 81.21 Westbound R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 9” Over 14’ - 16’ = R (Salome Road Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 1209) Interstate 10 MP 81.21 (Salome Road TI) R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R to MP 101.40 (355th R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Avenue) Interstate 10 MP 101.40 Westbound R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 8” Over 14’ - 16’ = R (355th Avenue Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 1647) Interstate 10 MP 101.40 (355th Avenue) R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R to MP 133.98 (Junction SR R17-6-408; R17-6-409 101 Loop) Interstate 10 MP 133.98 (Junction SR 101 R17-6-404; R17-6-405; Over 14’ - 16’ = R Loop) to MP 138.76 R17-6-406; R17-6-408; (Junction SR202 Loop, R17-6-409 South Mountain) Route Restriction Location Transport Subject to: Height Length Width Weight (in lbs) (MP = Milepost) Escort requirements: F = front escort, R = rear escort, F/R = front and rear escort, and LE = law enforcement escort Interstate 10 MP 138.76 (Junction SR202 R17-6-404; R17-6-405; Over 14’ - 16’ = R Loop, South Mountain) to R17-6-406; R17-6-408; MP 140.65 (43rd Avenue TI) R17-6-409 Interstate 10 MP 140.65 Eastbound (43rd R17-6-404; R17-6-405; 15’ 11” Over 14’ - 16’ = R Avenue Underpass - R17-6-406; R17-6-408; Structure 1931) R17-6-409 Interstate 10 MP 140.65 (43rd Avenue TI) R17-6-404; R17-6-405; Over 14’ - 16’ = R to MP 161.35 (Junction SR R17-6-406; R17-6-408; 202 Loop, Santan) R17-6-409 Interstate 10 MP 161.35 (Junction SR 202 R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R Loop, Santan) to MP 167.47 R17-6-408; R17-6-409 (Riggs Road TI) Interstate 10 MP 167.47 (Riggs Road R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 9” Over 14’ - 16’ = R Underpass - Structure 1148) R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Interstate 10 MP 167.47 (Riggs Road TI) R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R to MP 169.85 (Goodyear R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Road) Interstate 10 MP 169.85 Eastbound R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 9” Over 14’ - 16’ = R (Goodyear Road Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 1149) Interstate 10 MP 169.85 (Goodyear Road) R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R to MP 174.63 (Nelson Road) R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Interstate 10 MP 174.63 Eastbound R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 11” Over 14’ - 16’ = R (Nelson Road Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 1213) Interstate 10 MP 174.63 (Nelson Road) to R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R MP 175.81 (Casa Blanca R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Road TI) Interstate 10 MP 175.81 Eastbound (Casa R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 11” Over 14’ - 16’ = R Blanca Road Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 1214) Interstate 10 MP 175.81 (Casa Blanca R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R Road TI) to MP 177.76 (Gas R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Line Road) Interstate 10 MP 177.76 Eastbound (Gas R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 11” Over 14’ - 16’ = R Line Road Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 1215) Interstate 10 MP 177.76 (Gas Line Road) R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R to MP 179.39 (Seed Farm R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Road) Interstate 10 MP 179.39 Westbound (Seed R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 10” Over 14’ - 16’ = R Farm Road Underpass - R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Structure 1216) Interstate 10 MP 179.39 (Seed Farm R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R Road) to MP 188.20 (Val R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Vista Road) Interstate 10 MP 188.20 Westbound (Val R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 9” Over 14’ - 16’ = R Vista Underpass - Structure R17-6-408; R17-6-409 1152) Interstate 10 MP 188.20 (Val Vista Road) R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R to MP 190.73 (McCartney R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Road TI) Interstate 10 MP 190.73 Westbound R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 9” Over 14’ - 16’ = R (McCartney Road Underpass R17-6-408; R17-6-409 - Structure 1153) Interstate 10 MP 190.73 (McCartney R17-6-405; R17-6-406; Over 14’ - 16’ = R Road TI) to MP 193.88 R17-6-408; R17-6-409 (Cottonwood Lane) Interstate 10 MP 193.88 Eastbound R17-6-405; R17-6-406; 15’ 7” Over 14’ - 16’ = R (Cottonwood Lane R17-6-408; R17-6-409 Underpass - Structure 1154) Interstate 10 MP 193.88 Westbound R17-6-405; R17-6-406;
Load more

Recommended publications
  • I-11 Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection Letter to ADOT, July 2016
    July 8, 2016 Interstate 11 Tier 1 EIS Study Team c/o ADOT Communications 1655 W. Jackson St., MD 126F Phoenix, AZ 85007 RE: Scoping Comments on the Interstate 11 Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement, Nogales to Wickenburg To Whom It May Concern: The Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection appreciates the opportunity to provide scoping comments for the Interstate 11 Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), Nogales to Wickenburg. We submit the enclosed comments on behalf of the Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection, founded in 1998 and comprised of 34 environmental and community groups working in Pima County, Arizona. Our mission is to achieve the long-term conservation of biological diversity and ecological function of the Sonoran Desert through comprehensive land-use planning, with primary emphasis on Pima County’s Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan. We achieve this mission by advocating for: 1) protecting and conserving Pima County’s most biologically rich areas, 2) directing development to appropriate land, and 3) requiring appropriate mitigation for impacts to habitat and wildlife species. In summary, our scoping comments highlight the need for further evaluation of the purpose and need for this project and major environmental impacts that should be considered statewide and particularly in Pima County as this study area is evaluated. Specifically, potential environmental impacts in Pima County include impacts to federal lands such as Saguaro National Park, Ironwood Forest National Monument, and the Bureau of Reclamation’s Central
    [Show full text]
  • Socioeconomic Assessment for the Tonto National Forest
    4. Access and Travel Patterns This section examines historic and current factors affecting access patterns and transportation infrastructure within the four counties surrounding Tonto National Forest (TNF). The information gathered is intended to outline current and future trends in forest access as well as potential barriers to access encountered by various user groups. Primary sources of data on access and travel patterns for the state’s national forests include the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT), the Arizona Department of Commerce (ADOC), and the circulation elements of individual county comprehensive plans. Indicators used to assess access and travel patterns include existing road networks and planned improvements, trends in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) on major roadways, seasonal traffic flows, and county transportation planning priorities. Additional input on internal access issues has been sought directly from forest planning staff. Various sources of information for the area surrounding TNF cite the difficulty of transportation planning in the region given its vast geographic scale, population growth, pace of development, and constrained transportation funding. In an effort to respond effectively to such challenges, local and regional planning authorities stress the importance of linking transportation planning with preferred land uses. Data show that the area surrounding Tonto National Forest saw relatively large increases in VMT between 1990 and 2000, mirroring the region’s relatively strong population growth over the same period. Information gathered from the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) and county comprehensive plans suggest that considerable improvements are currently scheduled for the region’s transportation network, particularly when compared to areas surrounding Arizona’s other national forests.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 233/Monday, December 4, 2000
    Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 233 / Monday, December 4, 2000 / Notices 75771 2 departures. No more than one slot DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION In notice document 00±29918 exemption time may be selected in any appearing in the issue of Wednesday, hour. In this round each carrier may Federal Aviation Administration November 22, 2000, under select one slot exemption time in each SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, in the first RTCA Future Flight Data Collection hour without regard to whether a slot is column, in the fifteenth line, the date Committee available in that hour. the FAA will approve or disapprove the application, in whole or part, no later d. In the second and third rounds, Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the than should read ``March 15, 2001''. only carriers providing service to small Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. hub and nonhub airports may L. 92±463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: participate. Each carrier may select up is hereby given for the Future Flight Patrick Vaught, Program Manager, FAA/ to 2 slot exemption times, one arrival Data Collection Committee meeting to Airports District Office, 100 West Cross and one departure in each round. No be held January 11, 2000, starting at 9 Street, Suite B, Jackson, MS 39208± carrier may select more than 4 a.m. This meeting will be held at RTCA, 2307, 601±664±9885. exemption slot times in rounds 2 and 3. 1140 Connecticut Avenue, NW., Suite Issued in Jackson, Mississippi on 1020, Washington, DC, 20036. November 24, 2000. e. Beginning with the fourth round, The agenda will include: (1) Welcome all eligible carriers may participate.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report, Volume 1 | I-19: San Xavier Road to Interstate 10 Study
    FINAL DESIGN CONCEPT REPORT (Volume 1 of 2) I-19 San Xavier Road to I-10 Project No. 019 PM 057 H5105 01L Federal Aid Reference Number: 019-A (014) ADOT Contract No. 04-34 August 23, 2012 Prepared For the Arizona Department of Transportation Tucson District – Pima County PREPARED BY: 1860 East River Road, Suite 300 Tucson, Arizona 85718 FINAL DESIGN CONCEPT REPORT I-19 San Xavier Road to I-10 Project No. 019 PM 057 H5105 01L Federal Aid Reference Number: 019-A (014) ADOT Contract No. 04-34 August 23, 2012 Prepared For the Arizona Department of Transportation Tucson District – Pima County Prepared By: 1860 East River Road, Suite 300 Tucson, Arizona 85718 Final Design Concept Report I-19 San Xavier Road to I-10 1.5 Agency and Public Scoping ....................................................................................... 26 Table of Contents 1.5.1 Agency Scoping .................................................................................................. 26 1.5.2 Public Scoping .................................................................................................... 27 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Traffic And Crash Data .............................................................................................................. 29 Environmental Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................... 8 2.1 2001 Conditions .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Senate Concurrent Resolution 1012
    Senate Engrossed State of Arizona Senate Fifty-second Legislature First Regular Session 2015 SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1012 A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION'S COMMENTS TO THE FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION IN RESPONSE TO THE PROPOSED DESIGNATION OF THE PRIMARY FREIGHT NETWORK. (TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE) - i - S.C.R. 1012 1 Whereas, the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) submitted 2 comments to the federal Department of Transportation (DOT) in response to the 3 proposed designation of the Primary Freight Network (PFN) that highlighted 4 problems with the proposal and provided recommendations for improvement; and 5 Whereas, the federal legislation "Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st 6 Century Act" (MAP-21) calls for the United States Secretary of Transportation 7 to designate up to 27,000 miles on existing interstate and other roadways, 8 with a possible addition of 3,000 miles in the future, as a PFN to help 9 states strategically direct resources toward improving freight movement; and 10 Whereas, the Federal Register notice identifies more than 41,000 miles 11 of comprehensive, connected roadway that a Federal Highway Administration 12 (FHWA) analysis shows would be necessary to transport goods efficiently on 13 highways throughout the nation to make up the PFN; and 14 Whereas, the PFN proposal is based on the origins and destination of 15 freight movement, shipment tonnage and values, truck traffic volumes and 16 population; and 17 Whereas, under MAP-21, the PFN
    [Show full text]
  • National Hazardous Materials Route Registry (March 31, 2021)
    32306 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 115 / Thursday, June 17, 2021 / Notices under which such actions were taken Resource Conservation and Recovery Office hours are from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., are described in the Environmental Act (RCRA) [42 U.S.C. 6901–6992(k)]. ET., Monday through Friday, except for Assessment (EA) approved on December 10. Executive Orders: E.O. 11990 Federal holidays. 17, 2020, in FHWA’s FONSI issued on Protection of Wetlands; E.O. 11988 Legal Basis and Background May 26, 2021, and other documents in Floodplain Management; E.O. 12898, the project file. The EA, FONSI and Federal Actions to Address Paragraphs (a)(2) and (b) of section other project records are available by Environmental Justice in Minority 5112 of title 49 United States Code contacting FHWA or the Georgia Populations and Low Income (U.S.C.) permit States and Tribal Department of Transportation at the Populations; E.O. 11593 Protection and governments to designate and limit addresses listed above. The EA and Enhancement of Cultural Resources; highway routes over which hazardous FONSI can also be reviewed and E.O. 13007 Indian Sacred Sites; E.O. materials (HM) may be transported, downloaded from the project website at 13287 Preserve America; E.O. 13175 provided the State or Tribal government https://majormobilityga.com/projects/ Consultation and Coordination with complies with standards prescribed by eastsideic/. Indian Tribal Governments; E.O. 11514 the Secretary of Transportation (the This notice applies to all Federal Protection and Enhancement of Secretary) and meets publication agency decisions as of the issuance date Environmental Quality; E.O.
    [Show full text]
  • CX Appendix C Burro Movem
    1 B. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES 2 Name and Address of Applicant or Applicant Organization: 3 Arizona Game and Fish Department 4 5000 W. Carefree Highway 5 Phoenix, AZ 85086 6 Evaluation of Burro Movements and Collisions along Roads Near Lake Pleasant 7 Herd Management Area 8 With burro populations above acceptable Herd Management Area (HMA) levels, burro- 9 vehicle collisions (BVC) have become an increasing problem for the travelling public on 10 roads in proximity to Lake Pleasant (LP) HMA. BVC in and around the LPHMA have 11 increased dramatically and exceeded 35 between October 1, 2015 and December 7, 12 2015, and will continue to pose a hazard to motorists. The Bureau of Land Management 13 (BLM) and its partners are seeking solutions to return the population to acceptable HMA 14 levels. Current BLM burro removal efforts cannot keep pace with the herd’s population 15 growth. Until long-term burro reduction strategies are implemented, there is an ever 16 increasing risk to the safety of both motorists and burros. The Arizona Department of 17 Transportation (ADOT) shoulders a bulk of the liability associated with BVCs. To help 18 mitigate risks to motorists and burros, an evaluation of burro movements and collision 19 locations is warranted. We propose to gather information on burro movements along 20 roads within and adjacent to LPHMA through the collection of 1) GPS movement data, 21 2) BVC hotspots and associated variables, and 3) burro roadway access point camera 22 data collection. Our analysis of this Information will 1) provide recommendations for 23 strategic reduction in BVCs while considering implications to wildlife connectivity and 2) 24 identify additional areas for burro removal efforts.
    [Show full text]
  • Lesser-Known Areas the National Parks: Lesser-Known Areas
    The National Parks: Lesser-Known Areas The National Parks: Lesser-Known Areas Produced by the Office of Public Affairs and the Division of Publications National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Washington, D.C. 1985 National Park Service U. S. Department of the Interior As the nation's principal ment of life through outdoor conservation agency, the recreation. The Department Department of the Interior assesses our energy and has responsibility for most of mineral resources and works our nationally owned public to assure that their develop­ lands and natural resources. ment is in the best interest of This includes fostering the all our people. The Depart­ wisest use of our land and ment also has a major respon- water resources, protecting siblity for American Indian our fish and wildlife, preserv­ reservation communities and ing the environmental and for people who live in island cultural values of our national territories under United parks and historical places, States administration. and providing for the enjoy­ For sale by the Superintendent of Documents U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 Contents Introduction 4 Maps of the National Park System 6 National Park Service Regional Offices 9 Lesser-Known Areas Listed by State 10 Index 48 Lesser-Known Parks: Doorways to Adventure Few travelers are familiar with most parks described here. Many are located away from principal highways or are relatively new to the National Park Sys­ tem. And most, but not all, are smaller than the more popular parks. Yet these sites contain nationally significant sce­ nic and cultural resources, many of com­ parable quality to the more famous parks.
    [Show full text]
  • 03 Page F-304
    Page F-300 Page F-301 Page F-302 Page Page F-303 Page F-304 Online Survey Responses (Summary) Page F-305 I-11 Survey Monkey Summary of Responses: Summer 2016 Public Scoping Question 1 Please tell us what problems you experience today, or anticipate in the future, related to transportation in the Corridor Study Area that the I-11 project could address. Please rank the following in order of importance to you. (1= highest ranking [most important], 5=lowest ranking [least important]). Relieve local congestion, improve travel time and 134 reliability (reduce how long a trip will take or ensure 67 certainty of travel time) 61 46 173 Relieve regional congestion, improve travel time and 139 reliability (between Southern and Northwestern Arizona) 75 68 41 158 Improve freight travel and reliability, reducing 125 bottlenecks on existing highways 72 72 50 158 Improve local access to communities and resources 73 (parks, recreation, and tourism) 56 98 73 173 Need for a different transportation mode than what 149 exists today 53 49 49 172 Support homeland security and national defense needs 73 34 81 58 226 0 50 100 150 200 250 1 (most important) 2 3 4 5 (least important) Other desirable outcomes (open-ended response): [responses not edited for spelling, grammar, or capitalization] Freeze construction of new homes until the current commuting demands are addressed and solved. Minimal disruption of the desert environment especially in the area of the Arizona Sonoran Desert Museum and the Saguaro National Park.. Protecting what is left of the southern Arizona natural world.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Transportation History
    Arizona Transportation History Final Report 660 December 2011 Arizona Department of Transportation Research Center DISCLAIMER The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Arizona Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. Trade or manufacturers' names which may appear herein are cited only because they are considered essential to the objectives of the report. The U.S. Government and the State of Arizona do not endorse products or manufacturers. Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA-AZ-11-660 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date December 2011 ARIZONA TRANSPORTATION HISTORY 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author 8. Performing Organization Report No. Mark E. Pry, Ph.D. and Fred Andersen 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. History Plus 315 E. Balboa Dr. 11. Contract or Grant No. Tempe, AZ 85282 SPR-PL-1(173)-655 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13.Type of Report & Period Covered ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 206 S. 17TH AVENUE PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85007 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Project Manager: Steven Rost, Ph.D. 15. Supplementary Notes Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration 16. Abstract The Arizona transportation history project was conceived in anticipation of Arizona’s centennial, which will be celebrated in 2012. Following approval of the Arizona Centennial Plan in 2007, the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) recognized that the centennial celebration would present an opportunity to inform Arizonans of the crucial role that transportation has played in the growth and development of the state.
    [Show full text]
  • Infrastructure Costs
    Infrastructure Costs Leah Brooks and Zachary Liscow* July 2019 DRAFT. COMMENTS WELCOME. There is widespread consensus that US infrastructure investment—and infrastructure quality—has been on the decline. In response, politicians across the ideological spectrum have called for increased infrastructure spending. How much infrastructure we would get depends on how much output is produced per dollar of spending. Yet we know surprisingly little about infrastructure costs across time and place. We help to fill this gap by using data we digitized on the Interstate highway system—one of the nation’s most valuable infrastructure assets—to document spending per mile over the history of its construction. We make two main contributions. First, we find that spending per mile on Interstate construction increased more than three-fold (in real terms) from the 1960s to the 1980s. We date the inflection point of increase to the early 1970s. We further show that changes in observed geography over time do not explain these changes. Second, we provide suggestive evidence of the determinants of the increase in spending per mile. In particular, the increased spending per mile coincides with the rise of “citizen voice” in government decision-making in the early 1970s. And rising incomes and housing prices nearly completely statistically explain the increase in costs. We also largely rule out several common explanations for rising costs, such as increases in per-unit labor or materials prices. JEL codes: H4, H5, H7, K0, N4, N7, N9, R4 Keywords: infrastructure; highways; public participation; environmental review 1. Introduction Although the United States spends over $400 billion per year on infrastructure, there is a consensus that infrastructure investment has been on the decline and with it the quality of US * Associate Professor, George Washington University ([email protected]) and Associate Professor, Yale University ([email protected]).
    [Show full text]
  • Major Roadways Plan
    Major Roadways Plan 2005 City of Yuma April 20, 2005 R2005-41 As amended by R2007 -008, adopted February 7, 2007 and R2007-71, adopted November 20, 2007 2005 Major Roadways Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Table of Contents................................................................................................................. i List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... iii List of Figures.................................................................................................................... iii 1 Guiding Policy.....................................................................................................................1 2 Roadway Functional Classification Plan.............................................................................3 Roadway Characteristics and Features to be Provided..................................................4 Interstates and Freeways..........................................................................................4 Expressways.............................................................................................................4 Principal Arterials ....................................................................................................6 Minor Arterials.........................................................................................................7 Collectors .................................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]