Measurements Alt a Alt B Alt C Alt D Alt E Preferred Trails

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Measurements Alt a Alt B Alt C Alt D Alt E Preferred Trails GOGA Dog Management SEIS acreage/mileage summary October 2012 Milagra Ridge Measurements Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D Alt E Preferred Trails - On leash miles 2.73 1.48 1.48 1.65 1.48 Trails - Off leash/ROLA miles Beach - On leash miles Beach - Off leash/ROLA miles Other Acreage - on leash Other Acreage - off leash/ROLA Sweeney Ridge Measurements Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D Alt E Preferred Trails - On leash miles 6.84 4.13 2.43 Trails - Off leash/ROLA miles Beach - On leash miles Beach - Off leash/ROLA miles Other Acreage - on leash Other Acreage - off leash/ROLA Cattle Hill Measurements Alt A* Alt B Alt C Alt D Alt E Preferred Trails - On leash miles 1.12 1.12 1.12 Trails - Off leash/ROLA miles Beach - On leash miles Beach - Off leash/ROLA miles Other Acreage - on leash Other Acreage - off leash/ROLA *not yet GGNRA GGNRA004235 GOGA Dog Management SEIS acreage/mileage summary October 2012 Pedro Point Measurements Alt A* Alt B Alt C Alt D Alt E Preferred Trails - On leash miles 0.31 0.31 2.40 0.31 Trails - Off leash/ROLA miles Beach - On leash miles Beach - Off leash/ROLA miles Other Acreage - on leash Other Acreage - off leash/ROLA *not yet GGNRA Rancho Corral de Tierra Measurements Alt A Alt B Alt C Alt D Alt E Preferred Trails - On leash miles 16.2* 6.48 6.48 1.10 6.48 6.48 Alt A mileage for info only Trails - Off leash/ROLA miles Note: alts B, C, D, E updated Beach - On leash miles trail milage to reflect alt maps Beach - Off leash/ROLA miles Other Acreage - on leash 3858.00 Other Acreage - off leash/ROLA 1.39 1.39 GGNRA004236 Golden Gate National Recreation Area Commercial Dog Walking Interim Permit Requirement Proposal August 2013 INTRODUCTION The National Park Service, Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) is considering requiring permits for persons walking four or more dogs at one time for consideration (commercial dog walker) on lands under the administrative jurisdiction of GGNRA in City and County of San Francisco and Marin County where dog walking is allowed for the interim period prior to the promulgation of a final rule for dog walking in GGNRA, anticipated in 2015. Permits under this interim program would allow a maximum of six dogs per dog walker, and require a business license and proof of liability insurance and approved dog-handling training through existing training courses, such as those offered by Marin Humane or SF SPCA. Permit holders must abide by all National Park Service (NPS) regulations, including 36 CFR 2.15(a), which requires that dogs be restrained by a leash no longer than 6 feet in sites that are not open to voice control dog walking per the 1979 Pet Policy. In a related action, the Presidio Trust (Trust), a federal agency governing the interior Presidio lands that area within the GGNRA boundary, is also proposing an interim public use limit on persons who are walking four or more dogs at one time for consideration (commercial dog walkers) in Area B of the Presidio of San Francisco (Presidio). The limit will require any commercial dog walker with four or more dogs at one time in Area B to possess a valid commercial dog walking permit obtained from GGNRA. Commercial dog walkers will be required to comply with the terms and conditions of the GGNRA permit as well as those rules and regulations otherwise applicable to Area B of the Presidio. This document outlines and describes the reasons why action is needed. Purpose of the Proposed Action This proposed interim permit requirement is a direct response to commercial dog walking permit programs recently enacted by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors and the Town of Tiburon 1 GGNRA004237 in Marin County which went into effect in July 2013, and which limit the number of dogs per commercial dog walker to 8 or 6 dogs, respectively. The proposed permit requirement would be adopted as an interim measure and would be replaced by a new regulation governing dog walking in GGNRA that would be published in Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The new regulation would be developed after GGNRA completes the dog management planning project which addresses both recreational and commercial dog walking. The plan and its accompanying environmental impact statement (EIS) are well underway; a draft Plan/EIS was released for public comment in 2011 and a supplemental draft Plan/EIS is expected to be released for additional public comment in Fall 2013. Once the plan is finalized, the NPS will initiate a rulemaking process and seek public comment on the proposed codification of the dog management plan’s regulatory elements in the Code of Federal Regulations. A final rule is not anticipated until 2015. In the absence of this interim action, if the status quo is not changed, commercial dog walkers would continue walking unlimited number of dogs at GGNRA sites where dog walking is currently allowed. Need for the Proposed Action Given the extremely broad geographical reach (parks, open spaces, Port of San Francisco lands, and San Francisco Public Utility Commission properties) of the City and County of San Francisco's ordinance, coupled with the effect of the City of Tiburon’s ordinance, GGNRA reasonably anticipates that a number of commercial dog walkers, who would otherwise use areas that would cause them to fall under these ordinances, will instead walk their dogs in areas managed by GGNRA in San Francisco and Marin Counties that are already regularly used by dog walkers, including commercial dog walkers. The San Francisco ordinance on commercial dog walking went into effect July 1, 2013, although there is a 120 day grace period to allow completion of permit training requirements. As of August X, XX commercial dog walking permits had been issued by San Francisco’s Animal Care and Control. The City of Tiburon’s permit program went into effect July 19, 2013; as of XXX, 2 permits had been issued by the City of Tiburon. Research and interviews conducted as part of the GGNRA’s dog management planning project indicate that there are now at least 100 commercial dog walkers in the City and County of San Francisco, although there are also commercial dog walkers who do not have a business license and are not listed in the phone book. Many of these dog walkers are single individuals (who may or may not be licensed), as well as companies with several employees. There is at least one association for commercial dog walkers in San Francisco (Prodog). In a recent interview about San Francisco’s new commercial dog walking ordinance, a spokesperson for ProDog estimated that there might be as many as 300 commercial dog walkers in San Francisco. In San Francisco, the GGNRA sites most often used by commercial dog walkers are Fort Funston, Crissy Field and Fort Mason, but commercial dog walkers are also seen at Baker Beach and Ocean Beach. 2 GGNRA004238 Commercial dog walkers typically bring between four and ten dogs or more at a time to GGNRA sites and spend about one hour, twice a day, in the park. The San Francisco ordinance is anticipated to have a noticeable impact, particularly at Fort Funston and Crissy Field, the two sites regularly used by dog walkers. Crissy Field already receives very high visitor use (approximately 3.2 million in 2009), including from individual and commercial dog walkers. GGNRA staff estimates that there are generally ten to fifteen commercial dog walkers per day (fewer on weekends than weekdays), and typically at least three present, with at least four to eight dogs each, at any given time of the day. A 2011 Visitor Use Study found that 24% of visitors at Crissy Field were dog walkers. That same study found that at Fort Funston, where the average number of dogs walked on the site each day is 1,600, approximately 62% of daily visitors were dog walkers (66% on weekdays and 57% on weekends). On weekends, 3.1% of dogs at Fort Funston are walked in groups larger than 6, accounting for 10 dog walker visits. However, on weekdays, 34.7% of dogs were in groups larger than 6, accounting for approximately 127 dog walker visits. Of that group 19.4% of dogs were in groups larger than 8 (approximately 61 dog walker visits). The study notes: “At Fort Funston, many visitors were observed with large groups of dogs. While some of these visitors may be individuals who own multiple dogs, most are likely professional dog walkers.” Marin County Parks and Open Space began requiring permits for commercial dog walkers on Open Space lands in 2002; the permits allowed a maximum of 6 dogs per walker. Currently, certain GGNRA-managed sites in southern Marin are used by commercial dog walkers with more than six dogs per person; dog walkers with six or more dogs have been seen at both Rodeo Beach and the Alta Trail above Marin City. The Alta Trail, an easily accessible GGNRA site in close proximity to Tiburon, is regularly used by commercial dog walkers who have an average of ten dogs per dog walker. GGNRA staff have often experienced up to 50 off-leash dogs at one time on the Alta Trail. Because of the ease of access from Highway 101, availability of on-street parking at the trailhead and proximity to Tiburon, Alta Trail is likely to be an alternative for those commercial dog walkers who would otherwise use Tiburon open space areas, where there is now a permit requirement and limit of 6 dogs per walker.
Recommended publications
  • Goga Wrfr.Pdf
    The National Park Service Water Resources Division is responsible for providing water resources management policy and guidelines, planning, technical assistance, training, and operational support to units of the National Park System. Program areas include water rights, water resources planning, regulatory guidance and review, hydrology, water quality, watershed management, watershed studies, and aquatic ecology. Technical Reports The National Park Service disseminates the results of biological, physical, and social research through the Natural Resources Technical Report Series. Natural resources inventories and monitoring activities, scientific literature reviews, bibliographies, and proceedings of technical workshops and conferences are also disseminated through this series. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the National Park Service. Copies of this report are available from the following: National Park Service (970) 225-3500 Water Resources Division 1201 Oak Ridge Drive, Suite 250 Fort Collins, CO 80525 National Park Service (303) 969-2130 Technical Information Center Denver Service Center P.O. Box 25287 Denver, CO 80225-0287 Cover photos: Top: Golden Gate Bridge, Don Weeks Middle: Rodeo Lagoon, Joel Wagner Bottom: Crissy Field, Joel Wagner ii CONTENTS Contents, iii List of Figures, iv Executive Summary, 1 Introduction, 7 Water Resources Planning, 9 Location and Demography, 11 Description of Natural Resources, 12 Climate, 12 Physiography, 12 Geology, 13 Soils, 13
    [Show full text]
  • State of California Department of Transportation Statement of Ongoing Contracts As of 01 District
    State of California Department of Transportation Page 1 Statement of Ongoing Contracts as of 06/20/21 06/28/21 District 01 Location Awarded Contract Bid + CCOs Approved %Time Storm Water Resident Fed Aid Description Comp To date Est Comp % Work Plan Engineer Pgm Code Type Of Work Contractor This Month Accepted Message 01-DN-101-8.2/8.7 IN DEL NORTE COUNTY NEAR KLAMATH AT GOLDEN STATE BRIDGE, INC. CLAYTON MALMBERG $18,896,414 04/21/20 34% 01-0B0904 $5,157,126 05/08/20 PANTHER CREEK BRIDGE #01-0025 AND AT 3701 MALLARD DRIVE; 207 PROCE MALL 27% $1,310,631 08/05/22 HUNTER CREEK BRIDGE #01-0003 CRESCENT CITY, CA 95531 BENICIA CA 94510 REPLACE BRIDGE (707)496-5581 (925)372-8000 HA21 01-DN-101-12.5/15.5 IN DEL NORTE COUNTY NEAR KLAMATH FROM G R SUNDBERG, INC. SANDERS, KAREN $11,985,000 02/16/16 100% 01-0G1004 $11,984,109 05/04/16 0.4 MILE SOUTH OF WILSON CREEK BRIDGE 5211 BOYD ROAD 207 PRICE MALL 100% $0 04/09/21 TO 1.7 MILES NORTH OF RUDISIL ROAD CRESCENT CITY, CA 95531 ARCATA, CA 95521 DIR'S EMERGENCY F. (707)498-4009 OVER RUN (707)825-6565 ROADWAY STABILIZATION AND RETAINING 20.20 WALL R 201130 01-DN-101-25.5/27.4 IN DEL NORTE COUNTY IN AND NEAR S.T. RHOADES CONSTRUCTION, KAREN SANDERS $6,279,838 12/08/20 20% 01-0C6604 $1,447,194 12/29/20 CRESCENT CITY FROM 0.2 MILE SOUTH OF INC.
    [Show full text]
  • 50K Course Guide
    50K COURSE GUIDE IMPORTANT UPDATES (11/02/2017) • NEW COURSE MODIFICATION - Old Inn to Muir Beach • New 2017 Start & Finish Locations • On-Course Nutrition Information • UPDATED Crew and spectator information RACE DAY CHECKLIST PRE-RACE PREPARATION • Review the shuttle and parking information on the website and make a plan for your transportation to the start area. Allow extra time if you are required or planning to take a shuttle. • Locate crew- and spectator-accessible Aid Stations on the course map and inform your family/friends where they can see you on-course. Review the crew and spectator information section of this guide for crew rules and transportation options. • If your distance allows, make a plan with your pacer to meet you at a designated pacer aid station. Review the pacer information section of this guide for pacer rules and transportation options. • Locate the designated drop bag aid stations and prepare a gear bag for the specific drop bag location(s). Review the drop bag information section of this guide for more information regarding on-course drop bag processes and policies. • Pick up your bib and timing device at a designated packet pickup location. • Attend the Pre-Race Panel Discussion for last-minute questions and advice from TNF Athletes and the Race Director. • Check the weather forecast and plan clothing and extra supplies accordingly for both you and your friends/family attending the race and Finish Festival. It is typically colder at the Start/Finish area than it is in the city. • Make sure to have a hydration and fuel plan in place to ensure you are properly nourished throughout your race.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidio of San Francisco an Outline of Its Evolution As a U.S
    Special History Study Presidio of San Francisco An Outline of Its Evolution as a U.S. Army Post, 1847-1990 Presidio of San Francisco GOLDEN GATE National Recreation Area California NOV 1CM992 . Special History Study Presidio of San Francisco An Outline of Its Evolution as a U.S. Army Post, 1847-1990 August 1992 Erwin N. Thompson Sally B. Woodbridge Presidio of San Francisco GOLDEN GATE National Recreation Area California United States Department of the Interior National Park Service Denver Service Center "Significance, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder" Brian W. Dippie Printed on Recycled Paper CONTENTS PREFACE vii ABBREVIATIONS viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ix INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER 1: THE BEGINNINGS, 1846-1861 5 A. Takeover 5 B. The Indians 8 C. The Boundaries 9 D. Adobes, Forts, and Other Matters 10 CHAPTER 2: CIVIL WAR, 1861-1865 21 A. Organizing 21 B. Keeping the Peace 22 C. Building the Post 23 CHAPTER 3: THE PRESIDIO COMES OF AGE, 1866-1890 31 A. Peacetime 31 B. The Division Comes to the Presidio 36 C. Officers' Club, 20 46 D. Other Buildings 47 E. Troop Duty 49 F. Fort Winfield Scott 51 CHAPTER 4: BEAUTIFICATION, GROWTH, CAMPS, EARTHQUAKE, FORT WINFIELD SCOTT, 1883-1907 53 A. Beautification 53 B. Growth 64 C. Camps and Cantonments 70 D. Earthquake 75 E. Fort Winfield Scott, Again 78 CHAPTER 5: THE PRESIDIO AND THE FORT, 1906-1930 81 A. A Headquarters for the Division 81 B. Housing and Other Structures, 1907-1910 81 C. Infantry Terrace 84 D. Fires and Firemen 86 E. Barracks 35 and Cavalry Stables 90 F.
    [Show full text]
  • Marin Conservation League Walk Into
    This park receives supportMarin in part Conservation from a nonprofit League organization. For further information, contact: Marin State Park Association WalkP.O. Box 223, Into Inverness, (Conservation) CA 94937 History #11 China Camp State Park Saturday, May 5, 2012 Marin Conservation League 1623–A Fifth Avenue, San Rafael, CA 94901 415.485.6257 marinconservationleague.org Marin Conservation League was founded in 1934 to preserve, protect and enhance the natural assets of Marin County. Marin Conservation League Walk Into (Conservation) History # 11 CHINA CAMP STATE PARK MAY 5, 2012 – 9:30 to 1:00 Today’s Walk As early as 1957, a state report Walk Leaders: had recognized that “this area Our walk begins at the north kiosk Yvonne Brown, Friends of China Camp (should) be included in the State entrance to the Park and parking Park System to meet existing and lot for Back Ranch Meadows Louise Kanter Lipsey, Community Activist future pubic needs.” That report camping area. We will follow the Kathy Cuneo, Ph. D., Botanist suggested a park of 2,700 acres, Shoreline Trail that ascends slightly Nona Dennis, Marin Conservation League with 6 miles of shoreline on San and then follows the contour in Rafael and San Pablo Bays. In and out of the wooded canyons of 1970, the Association of Bay Area San Pedro Ridge, crosses the Back how to help the Friends of China into public ownership only with a governments (ABAG) proposed Ranch Fire Road, and loops back Camp keep the Park open against huge collaborative citizen effort a greenbelt plan that called for to the south side of parking area.
    [Show full text]
  • MARTIN GRIFFIN an Oral History Interview Conducted by Debra Schwartz in 2015
    Mill Valley Oral History Program A collaboration between the Mill Valley Historical Society and the Mill Valley Public Library MARTIN GRIFFIN An Oral History Interview Conducted by Debra Schwartz in 2015 © 2015 by the Mill Valley Public Library TITLE: Oral History of Martin Griffin INTERVIEWER: Debra Schwartz DESCRIPTION: Transcript, 37 pages INTERVIEW DATE: October 20th, 2015 In this oral history, physician, naturalist, champion of open spaces and bane of developers Martin Griffin recounts with warmth and humor his long and extraordinarily active life. Born in Ogden, Utah, in 1920 to nature-loving parents, Martin moved with his family to Portland, Oregon, when the Great Depression hit, and then down to Los Angeles and finally up to Oakland, where he attended elementary school through high school. Martin recalls some early experiences that shaped his love for the environment, including his involvement with the Boy Scouts, where he met the graduate student entomologist Brighton C. “Bugs” Cain, who profoundly inspired him. It was also as a boy that Martin came over to Mill Valley for the first time, making his way by ferry and train, to go hiking on Mt. Tamalpais. He conjures the beautiful vision he had from the ridge that day of white birds down on Bolinas Lagoon, a vision which made such a powerful impression on him and would, years later, feed the flames of his conservationist passion. Martin recounts being involved in ROTC while an undergraduate at U.C. Berkeley, later attending medical school at Stanford, where he got married, and moving over to Marin to begin his medical practice.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Health Service Hospital Final Supplemental
    Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Public Health Service Hospital, The Presidio of San Francisco, CA This document provides new analysis, information, and changes made in response to public comments on the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the Public Health Service Hospital (PHSH), which was circulated and filed in August 2004. This document, together with the accompanying Response to Comments, will be filed as the Final SEIS. The Final SEIS is a supplement to and tiers from the 2002 Final EIS for the Presidio Trust Management Plan (PTMP), the Presidio Trust’s comprehensive land use plan and policy framework for Area B of the Presidio. The PTMP evaluated in the 2002 Final EIS included planning guidelines for the PHSH district. LEAD AGENCY The Presidio Trust (Trust), a federal corporation and executive agency created by Congress in 1996, is the lead agency for the proposed action under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Trust maintains jurisdiction over the interior 80 percent of the Presidio of San Francisco (Area B), while the National Park Service has jurisdiction over the coastal areas of the former army post (Area A). The Trust must preserve and enhance the Presidio and also become financially self-sufficient by the year 2013. ABSTRACT The Trust is proposing to rehabilitate and reuse buildings within the PHSH district of the Presidio, to re-introduce residential uses to the district, and to undertake related site improvements. These actions represent the “proposed action” evaluated in this Final SEIS. The Final SEIS evaluates five alternatives, including a publicly requested “no action” alternative and the PTMP baseline alternative.
    [Show full text]
  • W • 32°38'47.76”N 117°8'52.44”
    public access 32°32’4”N 117°7’22”W • 32°38’47.76”N 117°8’52.44”W • 33°6’14”N 117°19’10”W • 33°22’45”N 117°34’21”W • 33°45’25.07”N 118°14’53.26”W • 33°45’31.13”N 118°20’45.04”W • 33°53’38”N 118°25’0”W • 33°55’17”N 118°24’22”W • 34°23’57”N 119°30’59”W • 34°27’38”N 120°1’27”W • 34°29’24.65”N 120°13’44.56”W • 34°58’1.2”N 120°39’0”W • 35°8’54”N 120°38’53”W • 35°20’50.42”N 120°49’33.31”W • 35°35’1”N 121°7’18”W • 36°18’22.68”N 121°54’5.76”W • 36°22’16.9”N 121°54’6.05”W • 36°31’1.56”N 121°56’33.36”W • 36°58’20”N 121°54’50”W • 36°33’59”N 121°56’48”W • 36°35’5.42”N 121°57’54.36”W • 37°0’42”N 122°11’27”W • 37°10’54”N 122°23’38”W • 37°41’48”N 122°29’57”W • 37°45’34”N 122°30’39”W • 37°46’48”N 122°30’49”W • 37°47’0”N 122°28’0”W • 37°49’30”N 122°19’03”W • 37°49’40”N 122°30’22”W • 37°54’2”N 122°38’40”W • 37°54’34”N 122°41’11”W • 38°3’59.73”N 122°53’3.98”W • 38°18’39.6”N 123°3’57.6”W • 38°22’8.39”N 123°4’25.28”W • 38°23’34.8”N 123°5’40.92”W • 39°13’25”N 123°46’7”W • 39°16’30”N 123°46’0”W • 39°25’48”N 123°25’48”W • 39°29’36”N 123°47’37”W • 39°33’10”N 123°46’1”W • 39°49’57”N 123°51’7”W • 39°55’12”N 123°56’24”W • 40°1’50”N 124°4’23”W • 40°39’29”N 124°12’59”W • 40°45’13.53”N 124°12’54.73”W 41°18’0”N 124°0’0”W • 41°45’21”N 124°12’6”W • 41°52’0”N 124°12’0”W • 41°59’33”N 124°12’36”W Public Access David Horvitz & Ed Steck In late December of 2010 and early Janu- Some articles already had images, in which ary of 2011, I drove the entire California I added mine to them.
    [Show full text]
  • Exigency Report to the Board of Supervisors Re. SFPD's Joint
    CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO POLICE DEPARTMENT HEADQUARTERS 3 1245 R1 Street San Francisco, California 94158 LONDON N. BREED WILLIAM SCOTT MAYOR CHIEF OF POLICE August 5, 2021 Board of Supervisors City and County of San Francisco City Hall, Room 244 1 Dr. Canton B Goodlett P1 San Francisco, CA 94102 President Walton and Members: Re: S.F. Administrative Code 1913.7, Exigency Report: Joint Search Operation and Unmanned Aerial Support (UAS/Drone) Involvement on June 7, 2021 Chapter 19B of the San Francisco Administrative Code ("Chapter 19B") was enacted in August 2019. Under Section 19B.7, the San Francisco Police Department ("SFPD" or "Department") is required to report to the Board of Supervisors the acquisition or use of Surveillance Technology, as defined by Chapter 19B, in exigent circumstances. On June 7, 2021, the Department participated in a multi-agency search for a missing 84-year-old person where the Mann County Sheriff's Office's Small Unmanned Aerial System Team used and operated an Unmanned Aerial System (UAS), commonly known as a drone. At no time did SFPD members operate or use the UAS directly, nor did SFPD members acquire the UAS. But SFPD members aiding with the terrain search benefitted from observations and information provided by Mann County Sheriffs Deputies operating the UAS. As the Department partnered with the Mann County Sherriff's Department's use of its Surveillance Technology, as defined by Chapter 19B, the Department issues this 19B.7 Exigency Report to the Board of Supervisors. As required, this exigency
    [Show full text]
  • Tunnel Road Safety: a Look at Older Drivers’ Performance
    TUNNEL ROAD SAFETY: A LOOK AT OLDER DRIVERS’ PERFORMANCE AND SIGHT IMPAIRMENT A Thesis presented to the Faculty of California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degrees Master of City & Regional Planning Master of Science in Engineering (Transportation Planning Specialization) by Edith Lopez Victoria March 2014 © 2014 Edith Lopez Victoria ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Page ii COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP TITLE: Tunnel Road Safety: A Look at Older Drivers’ Performance and Sight Impairment AUTHOR: Edith Lopez Victoria DATE SUBMITTED: March 2014 COMMITTEE CHAIR: Dr. Cornelius Nuworsoo, Associate Professor City & Regional Planning Department COMMITTEE MEMBER: Dr. Anurag Pande Assistant Professor Civil Engineering Department COMMITTEE MEMBER: Chris Clark, JD, Lecturer City & Regional Planning Department Page iii ABSTRACT Tunnel Road Safety: A Look at Older Drivers’ Performance and Sight Impairment Edith Lopez Victoria In California, there is an observed trend in which collisions cluster in and around tunnels. The break in road continuity created by the tunnels disturbs traffic flow that can lead to collisions. One of the main contrasts between open roads and tunnel roads occurs in lighting. Drivers with sight deficiencies are unable to adapt their sight to the change in the lighting environment and may crash due to misperception of road alignment, vehicle’s speed and other physiological reactions, such as tension. The suspect population group of crashes occurring under the influence of tunnels conditions is older drivers. The literature suggests that sight and driving performance deteriorate with age. This research attempted to validate this claim by performing a study that looked at driver and crash characteristic of injury and fatal collisions that occurred in and around tunnels.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Named Freeway Publication
    Photograph taken by Caltrans Photography 2020 Named Freeways, Highways, Structures and Other Appurtenances in California Prepared by The California Department of Transportation © 2021 California Department of Transportation. All Rights Reserved. [page left intentionally blank] 2020 Named Freeways, Highways, Structures and Other Appurtenances in California STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY David S. Kim, Secretary CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Toks Omishakin, Director CALTRANS DIVISION OF RESEARCH, INNOVATION and SYSTEM INFORMATION Office of Highway System Information and Performance January 2021 [page left intentionally blank] PREFACE 2020 Named Freeways, Highways, Structures and Other Appurtenances in California Named Freeways, Highways, Structures and Other Appurtenances in California is produced by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) as a reference on the many named facilities that are a part of the California State Highway System. This publication provides information on officially named freeways; highways; structures such as bridges, tunnels, and interchanges; Blue Star Memorial Highways; Safety Roadside Rest Areas; and memorial plaques. A section concerning historical names is also included in this publication. The final section of this publication includes background information on each naming. HOW FREEWAYS, HIGHWAYS AND STRUCTURES ARE NAMED Each route in the State Highway System is given a unique number for identification and signed with distinctive numbered Interstate, United States, or California State route shields to guide public travel. The State Legislature designates all State highway routes and assigns route numbers, while the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) has authority over the numbering of Interstate and United States routes. In addition to having a route number, a route may also have a name and, in some cases, multiple names.
    [Show full text]
  • Marin Headlands: Golden Gate Bridge to Tennessee Valley Marin County From: the Golden Gate Bridge in Sausalito To: Tennessee Valley in Mill Valley
    Marin Headlands: Golden Gate Bridge to Tennessee Valley Marin County From: the Golden Gate Bridge in Sausalito To: Tennessee Valley in Mill Valley To Mill Valley 101 Tam Junction 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 mile 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 kilometer Sh 1 Manzanita oreline Hwy. Park and Ride Contour interval is 200 feet To Muir Bay Area Beach Donahue St. Ridge Trail R Multi-Use Dr. ic ew ha i . Hiking/Bikes yv rd t d s un o o R n C Horse/Hiking transit center B y a e l y l Hiking a Marin V City Hiking on Sidewalk M il & Bikes on Street i e w ra e Oa o s k T s w Connector Trails k o b e o 1 r n d V a n T Other Trails b e al r u T ello le 101 a c h in T y Segment Start/End i r T l R a ra r M i a l il 1.0 Mileage Between Points 1.5 Bridgew 400 A a l y ta 200' Tennessee Valley T W Trailhead r P a a Ferry to i l l d o s San Francisco o G l . ra r 880' Bobcat de e a Old il v ra C A T Five rail T n 0.8 Corners a 1,041' S 800 k Sausalito o rail 600' 796' 0.7 MorningT S w p i rin Sun r Ave M A e .
    [Show full text]