DOCSLIB.ORG

Highway Users Tax Fund (HUTF)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Highway Users Tax Fund (HUTF) Street Inventory Report for: La Plata Co FIPS Code :067 All Segments Route Name: County Road Number Route Route Seg ID From Feature Dir To Feature Len Surface Width Ln Qty AdminCl Jur Split Fun Cl Overlay Cond InspYr ProjYr Name Thick 100 100 100 BGN E 109 0.98 15 16 2 2 0 7 0.0 P 1980 Length: Length of street segment to the 100 100 150 109 E 108 1.24 16 16 2 2 0 7 0.0 P 1995 nearest hundredth of a mile (x.xx). Jurisdiction Split: 100 100 200 108 E 110 1.00 16 16 2 2 Codes0 for jur/split are:7 0.0 P 1998 100 100 300 110 E 105 3.15 16 22 2 1 0 7 0.0 G Inspection2000 Year: 100 100 Primary400 105 Surface: S STR 0.15 2 22 2 1 1 - City/County0 6 0.0 G Year2002 of most recent inspection. 100 100 PAVED500 STR SE SRFCH 1.35 2 22 2 1 2 - State/County0 6 0.0 G 2002 2 - Conventional Asphalt Concrete (Bituminous) 3 - City/City 100 100 600 SRFCH E SH 140 1.27 2 22 2 1 0 6 0.0 G 2001 2001 3 - Jointed Plain Concrete Pavement (JPCP) 5 - on State line, Project Year: Year of 100 100 4 - Jointed700 SH Reinforced 140 Concrete PavementE 134 (JRCP) 1.61 2 24 2 1 jurisdiction0 split with6 0.0 G 1996 last surface 101 101 5 - Continuously100 BGN Reinforced ConcreteN SH 140Pavement (CRCP)1.78 16 22 2 2 neighboring0 state 7 0.0 G 1998 improvement. 101 101 6 - AC200 (Bituminous)SH 140 Overlay overN Existing119 AC (Bituminous)2.21 Pavement16 22 2 2 jurisidiction.0 7 0.0 G 2000 7 - AC (Bituminous) Overlay over Existing Jointed Concrete Pavement 0 or Blank - no 102 102 100 100 N 101 2.00 16 24 2 2 0 7 0.0 G 1999 8 - AC (Bituminous) Overlay over Existing CRCP jurisdictional split 102 102 9 - Unbonded150 101 Joint Concreted OverlayE SH 140 on PCC Pavements0.45 16 24 2 2 0 7 0.0 G 1999 102 102 10 - 200BondedSH 140 PCC Overlays on PCCE 134Pavements 0.54 16 24 2 2 Functional0 Class Codes:7 These 0.0 G 2002 103 103 11 - 100OtherBGN (Surface types not coveredW SH 140 by 1 - 10 0.57 16 20 2 2 classes are 0set by DCPT and7 FHWA 0.0 F 1998 103 103 UNPAVED200 103 N 100 1.00 16 20 2 1 and cannot 0be changed by7 local 0.0 G 1999 13 - Primitive Road jurisdictions. * 103A 103A 50 BGN N SUBD BDRY 0.05 16 14 1 8 0 7 0.0 F 1996 14 - Unimproved Road 1 - Interstate 15 - Graded and Drained 2 - Principal Arterial - other Freeways 103A 103A 100 SUBD BDRY N 103 0.36 16 14 1 2 0 7 0.0 F 1996 16 - Soil, Gravel or Stone or Expressways 103B 103B 100 BGN E SH 140 0.15 16 14 1 2 3 - Principal0 Arterial - other7 0.0 F 1996 Primary Surface Width: For divided streets, total width of driving lanes in 4 - Minor Arterial 103C 103C 100 SH 140 E 103A 0.09 16 14 1 2 0 7 0.0 F 1998 the primary and secondary directions, excluding the median width. For 5 - Major Collector 103D 103D undivided100 SH 140streets, total width. E 103A 0.09 16 14 1 2 6 - Minor Collector0 7 0.0 F 1977 103E 103E 100 BGN N SH 140 0.25 16 14 1 2 7 - Local 0 7 0.0 F 1998 103E 103E 200 SH 140 E 103A 0.10 16 14 1 2 0 7 0.0 F 1977 Overlay Thickness: Depth of overlay pavement * 104 104 Lane100 Quantity:BGN Number of throughS 100 lanes - does NOT0.25 include turn13 lanes. 8 1 (if applicable)9 0 7 0.0 P 1977 104 104 200 100 S SH 140 1.66 16 20 2 1 0 7 0.0 G 2002 105 105 100 100 N STR 0.50 16 20 2 1 0 Surface6 Condition:0.0 G 1999 G = Good 105 105 200AdministrativeSTR ClassificationN IR System: 6.84 16 20 2 1 0 6 0.0 G 2009 The codes for Admin/Cl are: F = Fair 105 105 300 IR N STR 1.11 16 20 2 1 0 6 0.0 G 1995 0. Overlapping miles, non chargable. P = Poor 105 105 4001.STR Arterial Service (The CountyN SH 160 decides this, 8.15not hinged on16 ADT Counts,20 just what 2 1 0 6 0.0 G 1999 106 106 100roadsBGN we think are major/minorN SRFCH roads). 1.19 15 12 1 2 0 7 0.0 P 1982 106 106 2002.SRFCH Local Service. N 100 0.26 16 12 1 2 0 7 0.0 P 1981 106 106 3004.100 Future local road (underN LGconstruction). 0.51 15 12 1 2 0 7 0.0 P 1982 7. Future segment the National Highway System (CDOT Onl). 107 107 100 BGN N 100 1.02 16 18 2 2 0 7 0.0 F 1999 8. Open road maintained by another entity. Not eligible for HUTF. 108 108 1009.BGN Open - not maintained;N not100 eligible for HUTF0.51 16 16 2 2 0 7 0.0 P 1977 108A 108A 100*WeBGN can decide what is maintained:E 100 once a 1.58year, once every15 three years16 2 2 0 7 0 P 1977 1 & 2 are the only HUTF Roads Monday, January 28, 2013 * = ineligible segment Page 1 of 25 Street Inventory Report for: La Plata Co FIPS Code :067 All Segments Overlay Route Route Name Seg ID From Feature Dir To Feature Len Surface Width Ln Qty AdminCl Jur Split FunCl Thick Cond InspYr ProjYr 100 100 100 BEGIN E 109 1.00 15 16 2 2 0 7 0.00 P 1980 100 100 150 109 E 108 1.00 16 16 2 2 0 7 0.00 P 2013 100 100 200 108 E 110 1.00 16 16 2 2 0 7 0.00 P 2013 100 100 300 110 E 105 3.15 16 24 2 1 0 7 0.00 G 2013 100 100 400 105 S STR 0.15 1 22 2 1 0 6 0.00 G 2013 100 100 500 STRUCTUREBRIDGE SE SRFCH 1.35 1 22 2 1 0 6 0.00 G 2013 100 100 600 SURFACE CHANGE E SH 140 1.27 1 22 2 1 0 6 0.00 G 2013 2001 100 100 700 SH 140 E 134 1.61 1 24 2 1 0 6 0.00 G 2013 101 101 100 BEGIN N WIDTH OF SURFACE 1.02 16 18 2 2 0 7 0.00 G 2013 CHANGE 101 101 150 WIDTH OF SURFACE N 100 0.25 16 22 2 2 0 7 0.00 G 2013 CHANGE 101 101 200 CR 100 N SH 140 0.51 16 22 2 2 0 7 0.00 F 2013 101 101 400 SH140 N 102 0.47 16 22 2 2 0 7 0.00 F 2013 101 101 500 102 N 119 1.74 16 22 2 2 0 7 0.00 F 2013 102 102 100 100 N 101 2.00 16 22 2 2 0 7 0.00 F 2013 102 102 150 101 E SH 140 0.45 16 20 2 2 0 7 0.00 F 2013 102 102 200 SH 140 E 134 0.54 16 18 2 2 0 7 0.00 F 2013 103 103 100 BEGIN W 103A 0.32 16 14 2 2 0 7 0.00 F 2013 103 103 150 103A W SH 140 0.08 16 21 2 2 0 7 0.00 F 2013 103 103 200 103 N SH 140 0.13 16 21 2 1 0 7 0.00 G 2013 103 103 300 SH140 N 100 0.85 16 22 2 1 0 7 0.00 G 2013 * 103A 103A 50 BGN N SUBD BDRY 0.05 16 14 1 8 0 7 0.00 F 1996 103A 103A 100 SUBD BDRY N 103 0.36 16 16 1 2 0 7 0.00 G 2013 103B 103B 100 BGN E SH 140 0.15 16 14 1 2 0 7 0.00 F 2013 103C 103C 100 SH 140 E 103A 0.09 16 14 1 2 0 7 0.00 F 2013 103D 103D 100 SH 140 E 103A 0.09 16 16 1 2 0 7 0.00 F 2013 103E 103E 100 BGN N SH 140 0.25 16 16 1 2 0 7 0.00 F 2013 103E 103E 200 SH 140 E 103A 0.10 16 20 1 2 0 7 0.00 F 2013 * 104 104 100 BEGIN S 100 0.25 13 8 1 9 0 7 0.00 P 2013 104 104 200 100 S SH 140 1.66 16 21 2 1 0 7 0.00 G 2013 105 CHERRY CREEK 100 100 N STR 0.50 16 23 2 1 0 6 0.00 G 2013 105 CHERRY CREEK 200 STRUCTUREBRIDGE N IR 6.84 16 23 2 1 0 6 0.00 G 2013 105 CHERRY CREEK 300 IR N STR 1.11 16 23 2 1 0 6 0.00 G 2013 105 CHERRY CREEK 400 STRUCTUREBRIDGE N SH 160 8.15 16 23 2 1 0 6 0.00 G 2013 Tuesday, December 20, 2016 * = ineligible segment Page 1 of 25 Overlay Route Route Name Seg ID From Feature Dir To Feature Len Surface Width Ln Qty AdminCl Jur Split FunCl Thick Cond InspYr ProjYr 106 106 100 BGN N SRFCH 1.19 15 12 1 2 0 7 0.00 P 1982 106 106 200 SRFCH N 100 0.51 16 20 1 2 0 7 0.00 F 2013 106 106 300 100 N LG 0.51 15 12 1 2 0 7 0.00 P 1982 107 107 100 BGN N 100 1.02 16 18 2 2 0 7 0.00 G 2013 108 108 100 BGN N 100 0.51 16 16 2 2 0 7 0.00 F 2013 108A 108A 100 BGN E 100 1.58 15 16 2 2 0 7 0.00 P 1977 109 109 100 LG N 100 2.26 15 16 2 2 0 7 0.00 P 1990 * 109A 109A 100 100 N SRFCH 0.19 16 20 2 8 0 7 0.00 P 1983 * 109A 109A 200 SRFCH N WIDCH 0.56 14 20 2 8 0 7 0.00 P 1983 * 109A 109A 300 WIDCH N 112 1.15 14 8 1 8 0 7 0.00 P 1983 110 110 200 100 N 113 3.00 16 22 2 1 0 7 0.00 G 2013 110 110 300 113 N 114 1.00 16 22 2 1 0 7 0.00 G 2013 110 110 400 114 N END 1.00 15 22 2 2 0 7 0.00 P 1998 * 111 111 100 BGN E 110 0.50 13 12 1 9 0 7 0.00 P 1977 112 112 100 BGN S SRFCH 1.35 14 14 1 2 0 7 0.00 P 1977 112 112 200 SRFCH S 110 1.00 14 14 1 2 0 7 0.00 P 1977 113 113 100 BGN E 110 0.99 14 18 2 2 0 7 0.00 P 1977 113 113 200 110 E 105 3.51 16 20 2 1 0 7 0.00 G 2013 114 114 100 BGN E 110 2.08 16 20 2 2 0 7 0.00 F 2013 115 115 100 114 N P LG 1.50 15 16 2 2 0 7 0.00 P 2009 116 116 100 105 E 119 5.66 16 22 2 1 0 6 0.00 F 2013 116 116 200 119 N 120 0.80 16 22 2 1 0 6 0.00 G 2013 117 117 100 116 N IR 3.00 15 18 2 2 0 7 0.00 P 1977 117 117 200 IR E 120 1.42 15 18 2 1 0 7 0.00 P 1998 * 117A 117A 100 120 NE END 1.67 14 10 1 8 0 7 0.00 P 1977 * 117B DE ORO WAY 100 117 N LG 0.75 15 24 2 8 0 7 0.00 G 2015 118 118 100 116 N 117 0.76 15 14 1 2 0 7 0.00 P 1977 119 119 100 BEGIN W SH 140 0.39 16 24 2 1 0 7 0.00 F 2013 119 119 200 SH 140 W STR 1.65 1 24 2 1 0 7 0.00 G 2010 119 119 300 STRUCTUREBRIDGE N SRFCH 0.58 1 24 2 1 0 7 0.00 G 2010 119 119 350 SURFACE CHANGE N END 116 2.51 16 22 2 1 0 7 0.00 G 2013 119 119 WYE 400 SURFACE CHANGE NW 122 0.19 16 20 2 1 0 7 0.00 P 2013 * 119A 119A 100 BGN E 119 0.75 14 10 1 8 0 7 0.00 P 2000 120 HAY GULCH 140 SH 140 W SRFCH 2.86 1 22 2 1 0 6 0.00 G 1999 2003 120 HAY GULCH 170 SRFCH W 116 0.94 16 22 2 1 0 6 0.00 G 2013 2007 120 HAY GULCH 200 116 N IR 1.13 16 22 2 1 0 6 0.00 G 2013 120 HAY GULCH 300 IR E SRFCH 6.19 16 22 2 1 0 6 0.00 G 2013 Tuesday, December 20, 2016 * = ineligible segment Page 2 of 25 Overlay Route Route Name Seg ID From Feature Dir To Feature Len Surface Width Ln Qty AdminCl Jur Split FunCl Thick Cond InspYr ProjYr 120 HAY GULCH 500 SRFCH E SRFCH 2.49 1 24 2 1 0 6 0.00 G 1999 121 121 100 120 N WIDTH OF SURFACE 1.68 16 21 2 2 0 7 0.00 G 2013 CHANGE 121 121 200 WIDTH OF SURFACE N END 0.60 16 18 2 2 0 7 0.00 G 2013 CHANGE 122 122 100 130 N SH 140 0.69 16 22 2 1 0 7 0.00 G 2013 122 122 200 SH 140 N STR 1.22 16 22 2 1 0 7 0.00 G 2013 122 122 300 STR N 120 2.49 16 23 2 1 0 7 0.00 F 2013 122A 122A 100 122 E END 0.25 16 21 2 2 0 7 0.00 G 2013 123 123 100 120 N WIDCH 1.29 16 21 2 2 0 7 0.00 G 2013 123 123 300 WIDCH N END 0.04 16 14 1 2 0 7 0.00 P 2013 124 LA PLATA CANYON 100 SH 160 N SRFCH 4.59 1 24 2 1 0 6 0.00 G 2008 124 LA PLATA CANYON 300 SRFCH NW WIDCH 0.30 16 20 2 2 0 7 0.00
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Oregon Historic Trails Report Book (1998)
    i ,' o () (\ ô OnBcox HrsroRrc Tnans Rpponr ô o o o. o o o o (--) -,J arJ-- ö o {" , ã. |¡ t I o t o I I r- L L L L L (- Presented by the Oregon Trails Coordinating Council L , May,I998 U (- Compiled by Karen Bassett, Jim Renner, and Joyce White. Copyright @ 1998 Oregon Trails Coordinating Council Salem, Oregon All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Printed in the United States of America. Oregon Historic Trails Report Table of Contents Executive summary 1 Project history 3 Introduction to Oregon's Historic Trails 7 Oregon's National Historic Trails 11 Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail I3 Oregon National Historic Trail. 27 Applegate National Historic Trail .41 Nez Perce National Historic Trail .63 Oregon's Historic Trails 75 Klamath Trail, 19th Century 17 Jedediah Smith Route, 1828 81 Nathaniel Wyeth Route, t83211834 99 Benjamin Bonneville Route, 1 833/1 834 .. 115 Ewing Young Route, 1834/1837 .. t29 V/hitman Mission Route, 184l-1847 . .. t4t Upper Columbia River Route, 1841-1851 .. 167 John Fremont Route, 1843 .. 183 Meek Cutoff, 1845 .. 199 Cutoff to the Barlow Road, 1848-1884 217 Free Emigrant Road, 1853 225 Santiam Wagon Road, 1865-1939 233 General recommendations . 241 Product development guidelines 243 Acknowledgements 241 Lewis & Clark OREGON National Historic Trail, 1804-1806 I I t . .....¡.. ,r la RivaÌ ï L (t ¡ ...--."f Pðiräldton r,i " 'f Route description I (_-- tt |".
    [Show full text]
  • Gallatin National Forest Plan W
    FOREST SERVICE Gallatin Forest Plan 1987 as Amended through November 2015 12/01/2015 PREFACE The natural resources and the wildlands environment of the Gallatin National Forest is a national trust that is shared by all people of the United States. These resources are used and valued by many different people, sometimes at odds with each other. The management philosophy of the Gallatin Forest is to respond to these various needs by providing goods and services to local, regional, and national levels. This goal is tempered with the realization that it is not possible to provide all things to all people. The Forest Plan recognizes that there is a limit to the uses to which the land and resources can be put. The importance of recognizing these limitations is to ensure that National Forests can continue to provide for future generations. One of the major overall objectives of the Forest Plan is to recognize and manage for the high quality recreational, vegetative, and wildlife resources found on the Gallatin National Forest. Resources (such as the grizzly bear, migratory elk herds, a range of vegetative types, and the entire spectrum of recreation opportunities) are considered not only as they relate to the Gallatin Forest but also in the larger context. The Plan recognizes the significance of the Greater Yellowstone Area and has been designed to complement the management of the entire Greater Yellowstone Area and coordinate the use and management of the Forest’s resources with the other National Forests, National Parks and agencies involved. This Forest Plan is in compliance with the National Forest Management Act of 1976 (NFMA); the regulations for National Forest Land and Resource Management Planning (36 CFR Part 219); and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), including the Record of Decision for the Environmental Impact Statement covering the Forest Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • 2009 BLM Facts
    BLM Oregon & Washington Bureau of Land Management of Bureau U.S. Department of the Interior the Interior of U.S. Department Oregon & Washington Bureau of Land Management BLM/OR/WA/AE-10/074+1792 The Bureau of Land Management Welcomes You to Oregon & Washington! Oregon & Washington i Welcome n early 2010, President Obama announced America’s Great Outdoors initiative Ito conserve our cherished lands and encourage Americans to enjoy the outdoors. And in this I’m reminded of William Shakespeare’s quote, “One touch of nature makes the whole world kin.” Throughout my years of experience, this great notion still rings true. I can attest that Americans have grown closer by the simple virtue of spending time together in nature. And it is on this note that I am thrilled to present our 2009 edition of BLM Facts. Between 96 pages of photos, maps, and detailed facts, I’m very pleased to highlight the diversity of the BLM’s multiple use mission. We serve the public lands by accomplishing what is perhaps the most extensive range of duties by any one agency. BLM foresters use scientific methods to plan for a sustainable growth of trees which also provide a healthy environment while still affording Americans homes, offices, and jobs. Our recreation planners and interpretive specialists present inspirational educational events and breathtaking locations for Americans to visit and create long-lasting memories. Resource specialists care for our special areas protected under the National Landscape Conservation System. Scientists at the BLM complete crucial research using the most current data to ensure we maintain these lands for future generations.
    [Show full text]
  • Protecting the Crown: a Century of Resource Management in Glacier National Park
    Protecting the Crown A Century of Resource Management in Glacier National Park Rocky Mountains Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit (RM-CESU) RM-CESU Cooperative Agreement H2380040001 (WASO) RM-CESU Task Agreement J1434080053 Theodore Catton, Principal Investigator University of Montana Department of History Missoula, Montana 59812 Diane Krahe, Researcher University of Montana Department of History Missoula, Montana 59812 Deirdre K. Shaw NPS Key Official and Curator Glacier National Park West Glacier, Montana 59936 June 2011 Table of Contents List of Maps and Photographs v Introduction: Protecting the Crown 1 Chapter 1: A Homeland and a Frontier 5 Chapter 2: A Reservoir of Nature 23 Chapter 3: A Complete Sanctuary 57 Chapter 4: A Vignette of Primitive America 103 Chapter 5: A Sustainable Ecosystem 179 Conclusion: Preserving Different Natures 245 Bibliography 249 Index 261 List of Maps and Photographs MAPS Glacier National Park 22 Threats to Glacier National Park 168 PHOTOGRAPHS Cover - hikers going to Grinnell Glacier, 1930s, HPC 001581 Introduction – Three buses on Going-to-the-Sun Road, 1937, GNPA 11829 1 1.1 Two Cultural Legacies – McDonald family, GNPA 64 5 1.2 Indian Use and Occupancy – unidentified couple by lake, GNPA 24 7 1.3 Scientific Exploration – George B. Grinnell, Web 12 1.4 New Forms of Resource Use – group with stringer of fish, GNPA 551 14 2.1 A Foundation in Law – ranger at check station, GNPA 2874 23 2.2 An Emphasis on Law Enforcement – two park employees on hotel porch, 1915 HPC 001037 25 2.3 Stocking the Park – men with dead mountain lions, GNPA 9199 31 2.4 Balancing Preservation and Use – road-building contractors, 1924, GNPA 304 40 2.5 Forest Protection – Half Moon Fire, 1929, GNPA 11818 45 2.6 Properties on Lake McDonald – cabin in Apgar, Web 54 3.1 A Background of Construction – gas shovel, GTSR, 1937, GNPA 11647 57 3.2 Wildlife Studies in the 1930s – George M.
    [Show full text]
  • Primitive Roads Informational Brochure 051007.Pub
    PINAL COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS WORKS PUBLIC OF DEPARTMENT COUNTY PINAL FLORENCE, ARIZONA 85232 ARIZONA FLORENCE, 727 BOX P. O. F BUILDING STREET, 31 N.PINAL PUBLIC NOTICE May 2007 Primitive Roads On March 21, 2007 during regular ses- sion of the Pinal County Board of Su- Protecting and enhancing the quality of life in Pinal County. pervisors, the Board adopted 73 road- ways as primitive roads. A listing of the adopted primitive roads is available to PINAL COUNTY DEPARTMENT download at: OF PUBLIC WORKS http://www.co.pinal.az.us/PubWorks/ 31 N. PINAL STREET, BUILDING F P. O. BOX 727 Within the FLORENCE, ARIZONA 85232 next few (520)866-6411 months, you will notice signs being placed on the RIGHT-OF-WAY AND ROAD primitive NOT COUNTY OWNED roads. The VISITOR OR PINAL COUNTYRESIDENT signs will serve to alert the traveling public to use the roads at their own risk and warn them that the roadway sur- face is not regularly maintained. Please note, primitive roads will continue to be maintained in basi- cally the same condition and at the same frequency as they are cur- rently receiving. Additional information on primitive roads is available on the website ad- dress listed above or by contacting Kathy Borquez at: 520-866-6406 or [email protected]. Primitive Roads Introduction has designated certain roads as Purpose Pinal County “primitive roads” in accordance to Ari- The purpose of the primitive roads Board of Supervi- zona Revised Statute 28-6706. designation is to improve safety on sors (the Board) roadways through signing by: 1) may spend public Background cautioning the traveling public to monies for main- In July 1994, a state law was passed that use the roads at their own risk; tenance of public gives the board of supervisors, or the and, 2) warning the traveling public roads other than legally designated governing body of a city or town, the that the roadway surface is not state and county highways provided authority to designate public roads regularly maintained.
    [Show full text]
  • Vested Interest Route List.Pdf
    MESA COUNTY SUGGESTED VESTED INTEREST ROUTES GJFO Draft RMP 06/21/2013 ROUTE NUMBER ZONE ROUTE_NAME WIDTH SURFACE TYPE ALTERNATIVE B MILES (Preferred) 571 F 4WD untreated primitive road Open 0.10 571 F 4WD untreated primitive road Open 0.03 571 F untreated primitive road Closed (Rehab) 0.56 571 F untreated primitive road Closed (Rehab) 1.11 572 F Single Track untreated trail Closed (Rehab) 0.06 572 F ATV untreated trail Closed (Rehab) 0.19 572 F ATV untreated trail Closed (Rehab) 0.18 A118 A 2WD bladed road Open 0.07 A124 A 4WD bladed primitive road Open 0.13 A124 A 4WD bladed primitive road Open 0.02 A125 A 4WD bladed primitive road Open 0.34 A126 A 4WD bladed primitive road Open 0.01 A126 A 4WD bladed primitive road Open 0.06 A142 A 4WD bladed primitive road Open 0.18 A142 A 4WD bladed primitive road Open 0.02 A142 A 4WD bladed primitive road Open 0.61 A142 A 4WD bladed primitive road Open 0.15 A142 A 4WD bladed primitive road Open 0.56 A143 A 2WD bladed road Open 1.16 A143 A 2WD bladed road Open 0.08 A143 A 2WD bladed road Open 0.03 A144 A BLM 7624A 2WD bladed road Open 0.91 A149 A 2WD bladed road Open 0.10 A149 A 2WD bladed road Open 0.02 A15 A 2WD bladed road Open 0.02 A15 A 2WD bladed road Open 1.86 A15 A 2WD bladed road Open 4.26 A15 A 2WD bladed road Open 0.23 A15 A 2WD bladed road Open 0.32 A15 A 2WD bladed road Open 0.56 A15 A 2WD bladed road Open 0.62 A15 A 2WD bladed road Open 0.18 A15 A 2WD bladed road Open 0.01 A15 A 2WD bladed road Open 0.82 A15 A 2WD bladed road Open 0.03 A15 A 2WD bladed road Open 1.01 A152 A 4WD bladed
    [Show full text]
  • Final Wilderness Recommendation
    Final Wilderness Recommendation 2010 Update Grand Canyon National Park Arizona National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior NOTE: This document is a draft update to the park’s 1980 Final Wilderness Recommendation submitted to the Department of Interior in September 1980. The 1980 recommendation has never been forwarded to the president and Congress for legislative action. The 2010 draft update is to reconcile facts on the ground and incorporate modern mapping tools (Geographical Information Systems), but it does not alter the substance of the original recommendation. In 1993, the park also completed an update that served as a resource for the 2010 draft update. The official wilderness recommendation map remains the map #113-40, 047B, submitted to the Department of Interior in 1980. FINAL WILDERNESS RECOMMENDATION 2010 Update GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK ARIZONA THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE RECOMMENDS THAT WILDERNESS OF 1,143,918 ACRES WITHIN GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK, ARIZONA, AS DESCRIBED IN THIS DOCUMENT, BE DESIGNATED BY AN ACT OF CONGRESS. OF THIS TOTAL, 1,117,457 ACRES ARE RECOMMENDED FOR IMMEDIATE DESIGNATION, AND 26,461 ACRES ARE RECOMMENDED FOR DESIGNATION AS POTENTIAL WILDERNESS PENDING RESOLUTION OF BOUNDARY AND MOTORIZED RIVER ISSUES. 2 Table of Contents I. Requirement for Study 4 II. Wilderness Recommendation 4 III. Wilderness Summary 4 IV. Description of the Wilderness Units 5 Unit 1: Grand Wash Cliffs 5 Unit 2: Western Park 5 (a) Havasupai Traditional Use Lands 6 (b) Sanup Plateau 7 (c) Uinkaret Mountains 7 (d) Toroweap Valley 8 (e) Kanab Plateau 8 - Tuckup Point 8 - SB Point 8 (f) North Rim 8 (g) Esplanade 9 (h) Tonto Platform 9 (i) Inner Canyon 9 (j) South Rim (west of Hermits Rest) 9 (k) Recommended Potential wilderness 9 - Colorado River 9 - Curtis-Lee Tracts 9 (l) Non-wilderness 9 - Great Thumb 9 - North Rim Primitive Roads 10 - Kanab Plateau Primitive Roads 10 Unit 3: Eastern Park 10 (a) Potential Wilderness 11 - Private Lands 11 - Colorado River 12 (b) Non-wilderness: North Rim Paved Roads 12 Unit 4: The Navajo Indian Properties 12 VI.
    [Show full text]
  • An Ordinance of the Board of Supervisors of Pima County
    ORDINANCE 2021- __,1~1 _ AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA, RELATING TO TRAFFIC AND HIGHWAYS; AMENDING THE PIMA COUNTY CODE BY AMENDING TITLE 10, TRAFFIC AND HIGHWAYS, CHAPTERS 10.04 (GENERAL PROVISIONS), 10.08 (SPEED LIMITS), 10.12 (TRAFF.IC­ CONTROL SIGNALS), 10.16 (STOP INTERSECTIONS), 10.20 (YIELD CONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS), 10.24 (THROUGH STREETS), 10.28 (ONE-WAY STREETS), 10.32 (TURNING RESTRICTIONS), 10.36 (OVERSIZE AND OVERWEIGHT SPECIAL PERMITS), 10.40 (STOPPING, STANDING AND PARKING RESTRICTIONS) AND 10.46 (PRIMITIVE ROADS) TO DELEGATE TO THE COUNTY ENGINEER APPROVAL AUTHORITY. The Board of Supervisors of Pima County, Arizona, finds that: 1. The county engineer, under direction of the board, has charge ·of all county highways under A.R.S. § 11-562. 2. Base~ on engineering judgment and engineering study, the county engineer recommends the type and placement of traffic control devices to regulate, warn or guide traffic in accordance with the state adopted manual and spec.ifications for uniform system of traffic control devices. A.R.S. § 28-641. 3. It is in the best interest of the County to amend chapters 10.04, 10.08, 10.12, 10.16, 10.20, 10.24, 10.28, 10.32, 10.36, 10.40 a,nd 10.46 of the Pima County Traffic a·nd Highways Code to delegate to the county engineer approval authority of traffic control devices on county highways and acceptance of roadways into the maintenance system. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA: SECTION t.
    [Show full text]
  • Maintenance Guidelines for Monument Roads and Primitive Roads Are
    APPENDIX E TRANSPORTATION MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES Ironwood Forest National Monument Travel Management Plan Maintenance guidelines for Monument Roads and Primitive Roads are established to achieve consistency in the way that Monument routes are maintained, and to ensure that only minimal maintenance work is accomplished for the access purposes that the different routes serve as identified in the land use allocations made in the IFNM RMP and the route designations established concurrently. Monument transportation routes provide access for administrative purposes that require access by different types of vehicles depending on the management activities (i.e. special projects, resource surveys, monitoring, law enforcement and emergencies) including sport utility vehicles, off highway vehicles, 4WD trucks, service trucks, wild land fire engines, and transports for construction and maintenance equipment. Monument access routes also provide access for the use, maintenance and operation of existing facilities and improvements under current land use authorizations (i.e. utilities, transportation, communication sites, range improvements, wildlife waters) that need access by different types of vehicles for normal inspection, maintenance, and emergency repairs. The Monument routes also provide access to not-federal land inholdings, including residential areas and ranch headquarters which need access by passenger car and livestock trailer trucks. The routes also provide access for outdoor recreational use by the general public who visit the Monument by variety of motor vehicle types, including passenger car, pick up truck, motor home and various off highway vehicles. The different types of vehicles using Monument routes have differing physical characteristics and performance capabilities, which were considered in developing maintenance guidelines for Monument roads, primitive roads and trails.
    [Show full text]
  • Road & Bridge Standards 1 DEVELOPMENT CODE REVISIONS CHAPTER 51 CASE
    SUMMIT COUNTY LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 5: Road & Bridge Standards DEVELOPMENT CODE REVISIONS CHAPTER 51 CASE # RESO # SECTION/DESCRIPTION DATE 94-165 95-51 Entire Chapter 6/12/95 99-74 99-166 5600 12/20/99 99-174 00-86 5102.07 8/14/00 03-053 03-75 Entire Chapter 8/11/03 04-077 07-44 Comprehensive Amendments to the Code 5/22/07 10-143 13-74 Entire Chapter 10/8/13 18-091 19-22 Addressing, Road Naming, and Road Numbering; Appendix 5 -1 3/26/19 18-124 19-23 Entire Chapter 3/26/19 1 The Sections referenced above were the Sections in effect at the time the Development Code was amended. Subsequent amendments to the Development Code may have resulted in section numbers being modified and may no longer be applicable. 1 SUMMIT COUNTY LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 5: Road & Bridge Standards TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 5 5000: INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................... 6 5001: Purpose and Intent ....................................................................................................................................... 6 5002: Authority ..................................................................................................................................................... 6 5003: Types of Roads ............................................................................................................................................ 6 5003.01: Publicly Owned and Maintained Roads ................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Good Roads Everywhere: a History of Road Building in Arizona
    GOODGGOODGOOOODD ROADSRROADSROOAADDSS EVERYWHERE:EEVERYWHERE:EVVEERRYYWWHHEERREE:: A HistoryHistory ofof RoadRoad BuildingBuilding inin ArizonaArizona prepared for prepared for Arizona Department of Transportation Environmental Planning Group May 2003 Cover Photograph U.S. Highway 66 at Gold Road, circa 1930s Norman Wallace, Photographer (Courtesy of Arizona Department of Transportation) GOOD ROADS EVERYWHERE: A HISTORY OF ROAD BUILDING IN ARIZONA prepared for Arizona Department of Transportation Environmental Planning Section 205 South 17th Avenue Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Project Number STP-900-0(101) TRACS #999 SW 000 H3889 01D Contract Number 97-02 URS Job 23442405 prepared by Melissa Keane J. Simon Bruder contributions by Kenneth M. Euge Geological Consultants, Inc. 2333 West Northern Avenue, Suite 1A Phoenix, Arizona 85021 revisions by A.E. (Gene) Rogge URS Corporation 7720 N. 16th Street, Suite 100 Phoenix, Arizona 85020 URS Cultural Resource Report 2003-28(AZ) March 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................... iv List of Figures..................................................................................................................................... iv List of Pocket Maps............................................................................................................................ v Foreword (by Owen Lindauer and William S. Collins)....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Assessment
    United States Department of Wild and Scenic Agriculture Forest Service Snake River Headwaters May 2013 Forest Plan Amendment Environmental Assessment Bridger-Teton National Forest Supervisors Office Jackson, Wyoming The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Snake River Headwaters Environmental Assessment Bridger-Teton National Forest EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Wild and Scenic Snake River Headwaters Forest Plan Amendment Environmental Assessment Bridger-Teton National Forest On March 30, 2009, passage of the Craig Thomas Snake Headwaters Legacy Act added all or segments of 13 rivers and streams in the Snake River Headwaters to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. The purpose of this designation is to protect the free-flowing condition, water quality, and ‘outstandingly remarkable’ values of the Headwaters for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations.
    [Show full text]