DOCSLIB.ORG

03 Page F-304

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read 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. The area is already heavily fragmented by the CAP and freeways so I would propose an improved train system or double decking on I-10. Movement of Good Can't think of anything desirable about I-11...not needed protecting wildlife linkages, air quality and protected lands commuter rail in existing transportation corridor I-11 Survey Monkey Summary of Public Scoping Responses Page 1 Page F-306 Establish passenger rail along I-10. Don't build I-11. Are the above things really what I-11 is all about, seriously??? Potentially saving money by taking this alternative route. The Interstate 10 corridor (especially between Phoenix and Tucson) is very congested and often dangerous (particularly in the areas where the freeway has two lanes in each direction). Rather than creating a new freeway(s), I urge ADOT to finish its upgrades on State Route 85 and perhaps add lanes to I-8 and I-10 while improving rail capacity for freight and passenger service (a new freeway is not desirable for this region). Focus on improving existing highways while encouraging passenger (Phoenix-Nogales) and freight rail along this corridor. THE LAST ITEM ALONE SHOULD NEGATE THE I-11 PLAN. Do not build this interstate highway. There is no need for another highway in our region. There is not one desirable outcome to this project Please look at no-corridor option. Improve existing transportation facilities only for all modes. It needs to allow for improved economy Preserve vital habitat and threatened wildlife, ensure Tucson and Southern AZ is connected rather than be bypassed ALTERNATIVE ROUTE FOR ACCIDENTS/WILDFIRES Protection of wildlife corridors, national monuments, migration corridors, and habitate conservation plans There MUST BE NO I-11 Expand existing I-10 and I-19 as needed. rail, rail, rail!! The existing maps don't show clearly the existing roads and highways in each section. Maps don't show small areas of important economic value for the region like Old Tucson Studios and Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum either. Do not build a highway just to benefit commerce at the expense of residents and the environment. no more highways commuter trains not to impact migratory route for animals along the southern border Buenos Aires game reserve , Ironwood National Park and Saguaro Nat. Park west. desert bighorn sheep have recently been seen in the Tucson mt. range , crossing from the Silverbell mt. range. Improve I-19 up from nogales, keep trucks in the middle lanes only especially through town. then improve I-10 past picacho especially. this area of 1-10 has major dust storms up through Casa Grande and into Phoenix , these dust storms be worse if you dig up another highway along that same corridor. it's already very dusy and visibility drastically reduced. pretty dangerous highway driving. Widening I-19 use and repair what you have stay away from wildlife refuges and national parks and forests. Protect our southern AZ desert Avoid impact on current environment Railway OPEN SPACE, MINIMAL HIGHWAY INTRUSION, DARK SKIES, QUIET ENVIRONMENT, NOT INTERSECTING CASA GRANDE WITH YET ANOTHER FREEWAY I-11 Survey Monkey Summary of Public Scoping Responses Page 2 Page F-307 East, West freeways on west side of valley far more important than this freeway. Avoid subsidizing sprawl development & maintain or improve travel time to PHX Sky Harbor Expand transit and rail options rather than create a new freeway i-11 should avoid saguaro national park & the San Pedro valley avoid environmental damage creating a corridor between Wickenburg and Nogales to better important illegals does not support security or defense. PROTECT Nat. PARKS & Monuments (GREEN areas) Leave the Desert alone, there are enough roads already. Do not build it. PRESERVE AND PROTECT THE WILDLIFE AND ENVIRONMENT none, I do not believe I-11 should be built protect the natural environment (animals, plants, air, water, etc.), Stay home! No desirable outcomes. Find a way to widen I-10, even if it takes more time. Why should the people of Southern Arizona be inconvenienced so that Phoenix can have a by-pass? If you're going to build by-passes; build us one, too! I cry B.S.!!! Put in rail. Don't be so retrograde. This is the ideal place for rail. Straight shot from Tucson to Vegas. At 300 miles per hour! Bullet Train. Don't build it!!! It will destroy pristine land and communitiies and it replicates extising routes. This is a "make-money" project for agencies and contractors, it si unnecessary and disregards the borader needs of Southern Arizona's citizens. DON'T BUILD IT!!!!!!!! I oppose the bypass due to environmental impacts I 11 is not necessary Protect sensitive environments and wildlife corridors Avoid ruining sensitive areas I 11 Freeway is a HORRIBLE idea. Do not do it. Improve existing roadways rather than building new ones Wildlife corridor stays intact! improve Phoenix metro bypass options Don't build I-11 I see no need for a new interstate. Do not take anymore land from wildlife! We must learn to protect all wildlife from homospiens! There are no desirable outcomes of building another freeway no new interstate Expand mass transit both locally and regionally. Enough with more freeways. It will not help our region for most Arizonans. The way this question is worded assumes that there are problems the I-11 Corridor will address. This biased approach to collecting public input makes the outcome of your process completely unreliable and in violation of the intent of public scoping. I do not understand your desire to fill in little dots. I just want to comment. You are making a mistake , an expensive one. Why not just widen I-19 to accomodate the needs. Please I-11 Survey Monkey Summary of Public Scoping Responses Page 3 Page F-308 do not tear our community apart and ruin our little art community that we love so much. How could you do that to us? This project is a ridiculous, unnecessary, complete waste of tax dollars. Sustainable transportation infrastructure that does not fragment the landscape further. Any new corridors should take into account wildlife habitat movement. relieve traffic on Highway 93 Provide increased economic development for the region, encourage movement of manufacturing and other businesses, and jobs, to the region supported by increased capacity for future freight and travel throughout the State IF nuclear waste/Tar Sands oil is to be transported, then safety is top priority... preserve natural ecosystems and air we breathe Not cut through exsisting homes, ranches, or farms near the Tubac area. There is none. We already have i8 to get to west state. The best outcome would be for it to not happen First on the list is FIX THE INTERSTATE BETWEEN PHOENIX AND TUCSON makes me sick to see a 2 lane to 3 lane than back to a 2 lane from both directions !!! needless to say no one moves to the right so bottles neck because you have someone going about 60 on the fast lane were there is a two lane !!! Another option for the I-10 traffic around Phoenix environmental impact reduced None None No interstate 11. We live where we do to avoid the business of town. Please consider wildlife!!! (animals, plants, tortoises, reptiles, birds, etc.) No interstate 11 built in my backyard. Your questions assume that there are problems that need to be solved by constructing a new road in this corridor. I don't see that those problems exist. Improve transportation reliability and efficiency while minimizing future maintenance costs. dont sacrifice more joshua tree parkway and burro bridge cnyn link to MC85 (east-west) to serve Buckeye & Goodyear via Southern Av Superstreet corridor which needs to be part of the plan. East - West traffic is served only by I-10 now. This fwy will not be adequate in the future as the sole east-west link, because of growth that is already planned. Superstreet needed. Southern Av is best. It threatens security. NAFTA None. This corridor will ruin desert landscape, wild life corridor, quality of CAPE recharge system we have I-19 widen it.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ADOT's $5.7B CIP Budget Cuts Highway Spending to $3.5B
    Friday Volume 4 Issue 37 Issue Date: June 28, 2013 CONNECTING THE LOCAL BUILDING INDUSTRY ADOT’s $5.7B CIP Budget Cuts Highway Spending to $3.5B By Eric Jay Toll for The gavel pounded “approved” on In a time when maintaining the the detailed subscriber-only 2013 Arizona Builder’s a challenging $5.7B ADOT budget. system and meeting growing Capital Project Issue. The subscriber- only 2014 Capital Project Issue will Exchange When you take out $2.6B from economic demands screams for Maricopa and Pima county taxpayers more improvements and projects, be published July 30). This includes and $1.2B for airports, the rest of the agency had to slash more than Maricopa and Pima county taxpayer- Arizona gets a paltry $1.9B for roads. $350M from its projected budget. voted revenue, airport and transit spending—most of which is paid Legislative robbery, improved fuel To put the current five year plan with federal grants. economy, and recession-caused into perspective, last year ADOT revenue declines combined to drain projected that it would spend $5.5B State Spending Drops $2B over 5 capital dollars from the Arizona for highways between fiscal 2013 Years Department of Transportation. and 2017 (AZBEX, July 31, 2012 and The five year capital budget covering fiscal 2014-2018 is a $500M drop from last year. Combine this year’s reduction with cuts last year, and the 2014-2018 budget is $2.2B less than the 5-year plan adopted in 2011. At the same time, the state’s road system cries out for increases maintenance and expanded capacity at an even higher pace as the state starts its post-recession growth.
    [Show full text]
  • Airport Strategic Business Plan
    AIRPORT STRATEGIC BUSINESS PLAN ___________________________ MARANA REGIONAL AIRPORT MARANA, ARIZONA | FEBRUARY 2017 Marana Regional Airport Airport Strategic Business Plan Final Report Prepared for Town of Marana, Arizona By The Genesis Consulting Group, LLC 1202 E Maryland Ave, Suite 1D Phoenix, AZ 85018 In Association With Armstrong Consultants, Inc. February 2017 ADOT No. E5S3N . TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................ 1 Marana Regional Airport – Business Plan .................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Airport Mission ............................................................................................................................................................... 2 Situational Analysis ......................................................................................................................................................... 2 Overall Airport Development ...................................................................................................................................... 3 New Business Development Opportunities .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Linen, Section 2, G to Indians
    Arizona, Linen Radio Cards Post Card Collection Section 2—G to Indians-Apache By Al Ring LINEN ERA (1930-1945 (1960?) New American printing processes allowed printing on postcards with a high rag content. This was a marked improvement over the “White Border” postcard. The rag content also gave these postcards a textured “feel”. They were also cheaper to produce and allowed the use of bright dyes for image coloring. They proved to be extremely popular with roadside establishments seeking cheap advertising. Linen postcards document every step along the way of the building of America’s highway infra-structure. Most notable among the early linen publishers was the firm of Curt Teich. The majority of linen postcard production ended around 1939 with the advent of the color “chrome” postcard. However, a few linen firms (mainly southern) published until well into the late 50s. Real photo publishers of black & white images continued to have success. Faster reproducing equipment and lowering costs led to an explosion of real photo mass produced postcards. Once again a war interfered with the postcard industry (WWII). During the war, shortages and a need for military personnel forced many postcard companies to reprint older views WHEN printing material was available. Photos at 43%. Arizona, Linen Index Section 1: A to Z Agua Caliente Roosevelt/Dam/Lake Ajo Route 66 Animals Sabino Canyon Apache Trail Safford Arizona Salt River Ash Fork San Francisco Benson San Xavier Bisbee Scottsdale Canyon De Chelly Sedona/Oak Creek Canyon Canyon Diablo Seligman
    [Show full text]
  • Mobility Matters Throughout Our Lives. 2040 Regional Transportation Plan PAG and Regional Transportation Planning PAG and Regional Transportation Planning
    Adopted July 1, 2010 Mobility matters throughout our lives. 2040 Regional Transportation Plan PAG and Regional Transportation Planning PAG and Regional Transportation Planning Pima Association of Governments (PAG) is a nonprofit metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for the Pima County region. PAG’s planning area covers Pima County, a total area of 9,189 square miles, which is larger than some states. PAG is governed by a nine-member Regional Council with an elected official serving from each member jurisdiction, including the Cities of South Tucson and Tucson, Pima County, the Towns of Marana, Oro Valley and Sahuarita, the Pascua Yaqui Tribe, the Tohono O’odham Nation and the Arizona State Transportation Board. PAG’s mission is to help promote good decision making for the region by providing accurate data and encouraging consensus among its members and the public. PAG’s programs focus on cross-jurisdictional planning issues, such as air quality, water quality, population growth and transportation. One of PAG’s primary responsibilities as the MPO is to coordinate the development of the long-range regional transportation plan. This long-range plan represents the work of the regional community; input was provided by all the jurisdictions, many interest group representatives and the public at large. The 2040 RTP presents the collective vision for the transportation network for the next 30 years. PAG provides staff support for the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA), a government entity that manages the $2.1 billion, 20-year RTA plan, which was approved by Pima County voters on May 16, 2006. The RTA is governed by a nine-member board, which includes the same representatives who serve on the PAG Regional Council.
    [Show full text]
  • Utah Geological Association Publication 30.Pub
    Utah Geological Association Publication 30 - Pacific Section American Association of Petroleum Geologists Publication GB78 239 CENOZOIC EVOLUTION OF THE NORTHERN COLORADO RIVER EXTEN- SIONAL CORRIDOR, SOUTHERN NEVADA AND NORTHWEST ARIZONA JAMES E. FAULDS1, DANIEL L. FEUERBACH2*, CALVIN F. MILLER3, 4 AND EUGENE I. SMITH 1Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, University of Nevada, Mail Stop 178, Reno, NV 89557 2Department of Geology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242 *Now at Exxon Mobil Development Company, 16825 Northchase Drive, Houston, TX 77060 3Department of Geology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37235 4Department of Geoscience, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154 ABSTRACT The northern Colorado River extensional corridor is a 70- to 100-km-wide region of moderately to highly extended crust along the eastern margin of the Basin and Range province in southern Nevada and northwestern Arizona. It has occupied a criti- cal structural position in the western Cordillera since Mesozoic time. In the Cretaceous through early Tertiary, it stood just east and north of major fold and thrust belts and also marked the northern end of a broad, gently (~15o) north-plunging uplift (Kingman arch) that extended southeastward through much of central Arizona. Mesozoic and Paleozoic strata were stripped from the arch by northeast-flowing streams. Peraluminous 65 to 73 Ma granites were emplaced at depths of at least 10 km and exposed in the core of the arch by earliest Miocene time. Calc-alkaline magmatism swept northward through the northern Colorado River extensional corridor during early to middle Miocene time, beginning at ~22 Ma in the south and ~12 Ma in the north.
    [Show full text]
  • Rio Vista Airport Pavement Management Plan, Drainage Assessment, and Electrical Plan
    Statement of Qualifications for Rio Vista Airport Pavement Management Plan, Drainage Assessment, and Electrical Plan Prepared for City of Rio Vista Prepared by Statement of Qualifications for RioRio VVistaista AAirportp Pavement Management Plan, DrainageiA AsseAssessment,ssment,ment,nt, and Electrical Plan July 22, 2010 765 The City Drive Suite 400 Mr. John Andoh Orange, California Transit & Airport Coordinator 92868 City of Rio Vista TEL 714 939 1030 FAX 714 938 9488 One Main Street Rio Vista, CA 94571 Re: Statement of Interest and Qualifications for Professional Airport Engineering Design and Planning Services for the City of Rio Vista and the Rio Vista Municipal Airport Dear Mr. Andoh: The City of Rio Vista is looking for the most qualified airport consultant to work with the City to improve the Rio Vista Municipal Airport. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (Kimley-Horn) is that firm. We believe that Kimley-Horn is the right choice for the City based on the following: History of Stability and Strong California Presence. Kimley-Horn is an employee owned, national firm. Since its inception in 1967, our firm has never been sold or acquired, or merged with other entities. Furthermore, we are ranked in the top 20 national aviation firms by ENR, have been ranked No.1 firm to work for by CE News several times, and are in the top 100 companies to work for by Fortune. Kimley-Horn is stable. We are consistent and we’re not going anywhere. We are confident that the people and the company you see in California today will be the people and company you see for the life of your projects.
    [Show full text]
  • A HISTORY of WELLIAMS, ARIZONA 1876-1951 James R. Fuchs A
    A history of Williams, Arizona, 1876-1951 Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic); maps Authors Fuchs, James R. Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 09/10/2021 06:46:33 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/551188 A HISTORY OF WELLIAMS, ARIZONA 1876-1951 James R. Fuchs A Thesis submitted to the faculty of the Department of History in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS in the Graduate College, University of Arizona 1952 3 - % TAB IE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.......................... ill TABLE OF MAPS.................................. lv INTRODUCTION .................................. v Chapter I. NORTHERN ARIZONA, 1540-1870.............. 1 II. PIONEERS IN THE WILLIAMS AREA, 1869-1881 . 25 III. CHARLES T. ROGERS AND THE WILLIAMS TOWNSITE................................. 38 IV. FORMATIVE YEARS, 1881-1890 .............. 56 V. GROWING PAINS, 1891-1900 ................ 104 VI. COMING OF AGE, 1901-1910.................. 154 VII. ERA OF CIVIC IMPROVEMENT, 1911-1930. 206 VIII. RECENT PROGRESS, 1931-1951.............. 259 IX. GATEWAY TO THE GRAND CANYON(CONCLUSION) . 296 APPENDICES......................................... 304 BIBLIOGRAPHY....................................... 312 22321S LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Follows Page 1 1.-.' John Clark............ .......................... 28 Charles Thomas Rogers, 1827-1905. 58 Gurley Street- Prescott, Showing Rogers' Market . 40 Frank Lansing'Rogers in 1876. ., . ..... 45 Williams in 1882 (Looking West) . 55- First Bridge in Johnson Canyon, At Simms Tunnel . 58 Completed Bridge in Johnson Canyon.
    [Show full text]
  • Report Cover.Ai
    Appendix C 14 CFR PART 150 REVIEW Appendix C 14 CFR Part 150 Review INVENTORY Ryan Airfield INTRODUCTION The purpose of this review is to provide an assessment for the current Noise Compati- bility Study by reexamining the noise and land use conditions at Ryan Airfield and the surrounding area. The information presented in this section will be used to identify existing and future noise-sensitive areas that may be adversely impacted by aircraft noise and to evaluate the current strategies to mitigate or avoid those impacts. The information in this chapter includes: A discussion of the purpose and procedures required to undertake a Noise Compati- bility Program, as described under Title 14, Part 150 of the Code of Federal Regula- tions (CFR) (formerly referred to as F.A.R. Part 150). A description of airport facilities, airspace, and airport operating procedures. A discussion of the roles and responsibilities for each of the entities impacted by aircraft activity from Ryan Airfield. An overview of the land use planning documents and tools applicable within the area surrounding the airport. The information outlined in this appendix was obtained through on-site inspections, interviews with airport staff, airport tenants, and representatives of Pima County Planning, the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT), and the Federal Avia- C-1 tion Administration (FAA). Information was also obtained from available documents concerning the airport and the Tucson area. This review is being prepared concurrently with the Airport Master Plan Update for Ryan Airfield. This provides ample opportunity for the full assessment of potential noise impacts of alternative master planning strategies.
    [Show full text]
  • River Cities VISITOR & RELOCATION GUIDE
    DINING REAL ESTATE RECREATION EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT HEALTH Relocating to the River Cities VISITOR & RELOCATION GUIDE Bullhead City | Laughlin | Fort Mohave | Mohave Valley | Needles Relocating to the EXPERIENCE River Cities AWARD-WINNING EXCITEMENT! Best Casino PLAY – Casino Player Magazine Best Hotel Best Overall Gaming Resort STAY – Casino Player Magazine Best Overall Dining DINE – Casino Player Magazine CALL TODAY TO MAKE YOUR RESERVATION AND WE’LL WELCOME YOU TO THE RIVER 800.950.7700 GOLDENNUGGET.COM Relocating to the River Cities VISITOR & RELOCATION GUIDE CONTENTS DINING 4 REAL ESTATE 8 RECREATION 12 EDUCATION 22 DEVELOPMENT 28 HEALTH 32 Relocating to the River Cities VISITOR & RELOCATION GUIDE Relocating to the River Cities LARRY KENDRICK General Manager | WELLS ANDREWS Sales/Circulation Director BILL MCMILLEN Editorial | ERIC FRAKES Operations Manager | JASON LORD Layout & Design ADVERTISING: Jody Bristyan, CAREY FEARING, JAMIE MCCORKLE, NANCY Novak, LU WEISS PRODUCTION: BEN KANE Prepress Manager, MICHAEL KENITZER Relocating to the River Cities is published and distributed annually. The Bullhead Area Chamber of Commerce contributed to this magazine and will make the guide available online and at their local office. Call the chamber at (928) 754-4121 to request by mail. Although every attempt is to be as accurate as possible, News West Publishing is not responsible for any errors, misprints, omissions, or accuracy of the stories in this publication. ©2019 News West Publishing, Inc News West Publishing | 2435 Miracle Mile, P.O. Box 21209, Bullhead City, AZ 86442 | 928.763.2505 | www.MohaveDailyNews.com 3 DINING The River Cities are home to a wide variety of fantastic restaurants suited for any taste.
    [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]
  • Ca-Lower-Colorado-River-Valley-Pkwy
    I • I I I ) I I A REPORT TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES ---1 I 'I I I I THE LOWER I COLORADO I RIVER I VALLEY • PARKWAY I I D- '°'le> F; 1-e. ·• NFS- ' f\CAc:.+... \ V"C. , ~ P,of>oseol I ~~~~=-'~c f~l~~c~~w I THE LOWER COLORADO I filVERVALLEYPARKWAY I I I A proposal for a National Parkway and Scenic Recreation Road System along the Lower Colorado River Valley in 'I California, Arizona, and Nevada. I NATIONAL PARK .i DENVER SEfiViC I ·-.-:. a.t ..1flkllb""ll.--';,.i. n II"~ r.· " •· \..' ;: · I ;:~::::.;.;:;.:J I I I U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service I in cooperation with Lower Colorado River Office Bureau of Land Management • PLE~\SE RtTUR?j TO: I February 1969 I , lJnited States Department of the Interior OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY I WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240 I I Dear Mr. President: We are pleased to transmit herewith. a report on the feasibility anc;l desirability of developing a nation~l p;;i.rkwa,y and sc;enic recreation I road system within. the Lower C9l9rado River· Vaiiey in Arizona, Califo~nia, and Nevada, from the Lake Mead National Recreation I Area and Davis Dam on the north to the International Boup.d:;i.ry ~ith Mexico on the south in: the vicinity of San Luis, Arizqna arid Mexic.o.· . ·. ' .. ·.' . ·. I This :i;eport is based on ci. study 11,'lade by the Lower Col<;>rado River Office ap.d the NatiQnal :Par~ Service pf this Depa.rtmep.t with engineerin.g assistance by the Buqlau of Public Roads of the Departmep.t of .
    [Show full text]