DOCSLIB.ORG

Arizona Missing Linkages: Mount Perkins-Warm Springs Linkage Design

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arizona Missing Linkages: Mount Perkins-Warm Springs Linkage Design ARIZONA MISSING LINKAGES Mount Perkins - Warm S prings Linkage Design Paul Beier, Emily Garding, Daniel Majka 2008 MOUNT PERKINS-WARM SPRINGS LINKAGE DESIGN Acknowledgments This project would not have been possible without the help of many individuals. We thank Dr. Phil Rosen, Matt Good, Chasa O’Brien, Dr. Jason Marshal, Ted McKinney, and Taylor Edwards for parameterizing models for focal species and suggesting focal species. Catherine Wightman, Fenner Yarborough, Janet Lynn, Mylea Bayless, Andi Rogers, Mikele Painter, Valerie Horncastle, Matthew Johnson, Jeff Gagnon, Erica Nowak, Lee Luedeker, Allen Haden, Shaula Hedwall, and Martin Lawrence helped identify focal species and species experts. Robert Shantz provided photos for many of the species accounts. Shawn Newell, Jeff Jenness, Megan Friggens, and Matt Clark provided helpful advice on analyses and reviewed portions of the results. Funding This project was funded by a grant from Arizona Game and Fish Department to Northern Arizona University. Recommended Citation Beier, P., E. Garding, D. Majka. 2008. Arizona Missing Linkages: Mount Perkins-Warm Springs Linkage Design. Report to Arizona Game and Fish Department. School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University. Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................................ I LIST OF TABLES & FIGURES ...............................................................................................................................II TERMINOLOGY ..................................................................................................................................................... IV EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................ V INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 NATURE NEEDS ROOM TO MOVE ............................................................................................................................... 1 A STATEWIDE VISION ................................................................................................................................................. 1 ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE WARM SPRINGS – MOUNT PERKINS LINKAGE ................................................... 2 EXISTING CONSERVATION INVESTMENTS ................................................................................................................... 2 THREATS TO CONNECTIVITY ...................................................................................................................................... 2 LINKAGE DESIGN & RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................... 8 FIVE ROUTES PROVIDE CONNECTIVITY ACROSS A DIVERSE LANDSCAPE .................................................................. 8 LAND OWNERSHIP, LAND COVER, AND TOPOGRAPHIC PATTERNS WITHIN THE LINKAGE DESIGN ............................. 9 REMOVING AND MITIGATING BARRIERS TO MOVEMENT ......................................................................................... 13 IMPACTS OF ROADS ON WILDLIFE ............................................................................................................................ 13 Mitigation for Roads ............................................................................................................................................ 14 STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR WILDLIFE CROSSING STRUCTURES .................................................................... 17 Existing Roads in the Linkage Design Area ........................................................................................................ 18 Existing Crossing Structures on SR-68 ................................................................................................................ 19 Recommendations for Highway Crossing Structures .......................................................................................... 19 URBAN DEVELOPMENT AS BARRIERS TO MOVEMENT .............................................................................................. 24 Urban Barriers in the Linkage Design Area ........................................................................................................ 25 Mitigation for Urban Barriers ............................................................................................................................. 25 APPENDIX A: LINKAGE DESIGN METHODS .................................................................................................. 28 FOCAL SPECIES SELECTION ...................................................................................................................................... 28 HABITAT SUITABILITY MODELS ............................................................................................................................... 29 IDENTIFYING POTENTIAL BREEDING PATCHES & POTENTIAL POPULATION CORES .................................................. 30 IDENTIFYING BIOLOGICALLY BEST CORRIDORS ....................................................................................................... 31 PATCH CONFIGURATION ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................................... 32 MINIMUM LINKAGE WIDTH ...................................................................................................................................... 33 FIELD INVESTIGATIONS ............................................................................................................................................ 34 APPENDIX B: INDIVIDUAL SPECIES ANALYSES .......................................................................................... 35 BOBCAT (LYNX RUFUS) ............................................................................................................................................. 37 DESERT BIGHORN SHEEP (OVIS CANADENSIS NELSONI) .............................................................................................. 41 MOHAVE DESERT TORTOISE (GOPHERUS AGASSIZII) ................................................................................................. 47 GILA MONSTER (HELODERMA SUSPECTUM) .............................................................................................................. 51 KIT FOX (VULPES MACROTIS) .................................................................................................................................... 55 MOUNTAIN LION (PUMA CONCOLOR) ........................................................................................................................ 59 MULE DEER (ODOCOILEUS HEMIONUS) ..................................................................................................................... 63 APPENDIX C: FOCAL SPECIES NOT MODELED ............................................................................................ 67 APPENDIX D: THE LINKAGE DESIGN .............................................................................................................. 68 APPENDIX E: DESCRIPTION OF LAND COVER CLASSES .......................................................................... 69 APPENDIX F: LITERATURE CITED ................................................................................................................... 72 Arizona Missing Linkages i Mount Perkins-Warm Springs Linkage Design APPENDIX G: DATABASE OF FIELD INVESTIGATIONS ............................................................................. 78 List of Tables & Figures List of Tables TABLE 1: FOCAL SPECIES SELECTED FOR THE MOUNT PERKINS-WARM SPRINGS LINKAGE ......................................... VI TABLE 2: APPROXIMATE LAND COVER IN THE LINKAGE DESIGN .................................................................................... 9 TABLE 3: ROADS IN THE LINKAGE DESIGN ................................................................................................................... 18 TABLE 4: HABITAT SUITABILITY SCORES AND FACTOR WEIGHTS FOR EACH SPECIES. SCORES RANGE FROM 1 (BEST) TO 10 (WORST), WITH 1-3 INDICATING OPTIMAL HABITAT, 4-5 SUBOPTIMAL BUT USABLE HABITAT, 6-7 OCCASIONALLY USED BUT NOT BREEDING HABITAT, AND 8-10 AVOIDED. ............................................................ 35 List of Figures FIGURE 1: THE LINKAGE DESIGN BETWEEN THE MOUNT PERKINS AND WARM SPRINGS WILDLAND BLOCKS INCLUDES 5 STRANDS, EACH OF WHICH IS IMPORTANT TO DIFFERENT SPECIES. .................................................................... VII FIGURE 2: LAND OWNERSHIP IN THE LINKAGE PLANNING AREA. .................................................................................... 4 FIGURE 3: LAND COVER TYPES WITHIN THE LINKAGE PLANNING AREA .......................................................................... 5 FIGURE 4: EXISTING CONSERVATION INVESTMENTS IN THE GREATER LINKAGE PLANNING AREA ................................... 6 FIGURE 5. BULLHEAD CITY LIMITS AND THE PLANNED GOLDEN VALLEY DEVELOPMENT OVERLAP PART OF THE LINKAGE DESIGN. ................................................................................................................................................... 7 FIGURE 6: PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND FIELD INVESTIGATION WAYPOINTS WITHIN LINKAGE DESIGN. THE
Load more

Recommended publications
  • VGP) Version 2/5/2009
    Vessel General Permit (VGP) Version 2/5/2009 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) VESSEL GENERAL PERMIT FOR DISCHARGES INCIDENTAL TO THE NORMAL OPERATION OF VESSELS (VGP) AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act (CWA), as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), any owner or operator of a vessel being operated in a capacity as a means of transportation who: • Is eligible for permit coverage under Part 1.2; • If required by Part 1.5.1, submits a complete and accurate Notice of Intent (NOI) is authorized to discharge in accordance with the requirements of this permit. General effluent limits for all eligible vessels are given in Part 2. Further vessel class or type specific requirements are given in Part 5 for select vessels and apply in addition to any general effluent limits in Part 2. Specific requirements that apply in individual States and Indian Country Lands are found in Part 6. Definitions of permit-specific terms used in this permit are provided in Appendix A. This permit becomes effective on December 19, 2008 for all jurisdictions except Alaska and Hawaii. This permit and the authorization to discharge expire at midnight, December 19, 2013 i Vessel General Permit (VGP) Version 2/5/2009 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, 2008 William K. Honker, Acting Director Robert W. Varney, Water Quality Protection Division, EPA Region Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1 6 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, 2008 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, Barbara A.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix H: LHFO RMP Decisions
    Appendix H: LHFO RMP Decisions Conformance with Land Use Plan: The proposed action would conform to the decisions of the Lake Havasu Field Office RMP (2007) as identified with the decisions and excerpts shown below. WF-6. Within WHAs, the route designation process will determine route closures and/or limitation to meet habitat objectives. Page 112: The BLM will designate a Travel Management Network (TMN) for the planning area within 5 years of adoption of this Approved RMP through the TMP. The TMP will evaluate and designate all individual routes/trails for use within the planning area unless specified elsewhere in this Approved RMP. The BLM will follow the process as listed in Appendix B, Administrative Actions and Standard Operating Procedures, of this Approved RMP, when creating the TMN, including evaluating routes using the criteria listed in the Route Evaluation Tree in Appendix L (in the RMP). TM-1. Designations will be made and management implemented for a balance of opportunities for the entire range of motorized and non-motorized access needs, while in balance with other resource values found on public lands. TM-2. Reasonable, safe, and environmentally sound access will be provided to visitors, local residents, licensed or permitted activities, and property owners. Lake Havasu Field Office will be linked with other state, regional, and land management agencies or interest groups to better facilitate travel management. TM-3. Travel between communities within the planning area will be made safer. TM-4. Public access easements will be acquired across private or state lands where public access to federal lands and waterways is not available.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Small Vessel General Permit
    ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PUBLIC NOTICE The United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 W. Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois has requested a determination from the Illinois Department of Natural Resources if their Vessel General Permit (VGP) and Small Vessel General Permit (sVGP) are consistent with the enforceable policies of the Illinois Coastal Management Program (ICMP). VGP regulates discharges incidental to the normal operation of commercial vessels and non-recreational vessels greater than or equal to 79 ft. in length. sVGP regulates discharges incidental to the normal operation of commercial vessels and non- recreational vessels less than 79 ft. in length. VGP and sVGP can be viewed in their entirety at the ICMP web site http://www.dnr.illinois.gov/cmp/Pages/CMPFederalConsistencyRegister.aspx Inquiries concerning this request may be directed to Jim Casey of the Department’s Chicago Office at (312) 793-5947 or [email protected]. You are invited to send written comments regarding this consistency request to the Michael A. Bilandic Building, 160 N. LaSalle Street, Suite S-703, Chicago, Illinois 60601. All comments claiming the proposed actions would not meet federal consistency must cite the state law or laws and how they would be violated. All comments must be received by July 19, 2012. Proposed Small Vessel General Permit (sVGP) United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) SMALL VESSEL GENERAL PERMIT FOR DISCHARGES INCIDENTAL TO THE NORMAL OPERATION OF VESSELS LESS THAN 79 FEET (sVGP) AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act, as amended (33 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • 905 Xxii. Appendix
    APPENDIX 905 XXII. APPENDIX 1. Arizona Desert Wilderness Act of 1990 PUBLIC LAW 101–628—NOV. 28, 1990 104 STAT. 4469 Public Law 101–628 101st Congress An Act To provide for the designation of certain public lands as wilderness in the State of Nov. 28, 1990 Arizona. [H.R. 2570] Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.—Titles I through III of this Act may be Arizona Desert cited as the “Arizona Desert Wilderness Act of 1990”. Wilderness Act of 1990. TITLE I—DESIGNATION OF WILDERNESS AREAS TO BE 16 USC 460ddd ADMINISTERED BY THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT note. National Wilderness SEC. 101. DESIGNATION AND MANAGEMENT. Preservation System. (a) DESIGNATION.—In furtherance of the purposes of the 16 USC 1132 Wilderness Act, the following public lands are hereby designated as note. wilderness and therefore, as components of the National Wilderness Preservation System: (1) certain lands in Mohave County, Arizona, which comprise approximately 23,600 acres, as generally depicted on a map entitled “Mount Wilson Wilderness” and dated February 1990, and which shall be known as the Mount Wilson Wilderness; (2) certain lands in Mohave County, Arizona, which comprise approximately 31,070 acres, as generally depicted on a map entitled “Mount Tipton Wilderness” and dated February 1990, and which shall be known as the Mount Tipton Wilderness; (3) certain lands in Mohave County, Arizona, which comprise approximately 27,530 acres, as generally depicted on a map entitled
    [Show full text]
  • MINERAL RESOURCES of the WARM SPRINGS WILDERNESS STUDY AREA (AZ-O20-O28/O2g), MOHAVE COUNTY, ARIZONA
    MLA ++++ Mineral Land Assessment I Open File Report/1988 I Mineral Resources of the Warm Springs Wilderness I Study Area (AZ-020-028/029), I Mohave County, Arizona I I I i I I I I I I I /~_~~ '~ BUREAU OF MINES I .'~,::i~lll~'"_.~J UNITEDSTATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ! m MINERAL RESOURCES OF THE WARM SPRINGS WILDERNESS STUDY AREA (AZ-O20-O28/O2g), MOHAVE COUNTY, ARIZONA I by I Stanley L. Korzeb I MLA 4B-8B 1988 I ,| |, Intermountain Field Operations Center Denver, Colorado I I UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR I Denver, Colorado BUREAU OF MINES I T S Ary Director I I ii, ~': i~,¸ PREFACE I The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-579) requires the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Bureau of Mines to conduct I mineral surveys on certain areas to determine the mineral values, if any, that may be present. Results must be made available to the public and be submitted I to the President and the Congress. This report presents the results of a I mineral survey of the Warm Springs Wilderness Study Area (AZ-020-028/029), Mohave County, Arizona. I I I ill= .... ;i~il~: , i~!¸¸ j ~ !!i!~!~ ~!~ii~~ This open-file report summarizes the results of a Bureau of Mines wilderness study. The report is preliminary and has not been edited or reviewed for conformity with the Bureau of Mines editorial I standards. This study was conducted by personnel from the Resource Evaluation Branch, Intermountain Field Operations Center, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Kaibab National Forest
    United States Department of Agriculture Kaibab National Forest Forest Service Southwestern Potential Wilderness Area Region September 2013 Evaluation Report 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 of communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TTY). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Cover photo: Kanab Creek Wilderness Kaibab National Forest Potential Wilderness Area Evaluation Report Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1 Inventory of Potential Wilderness Areas .................................................................................................. 2 Evaluation of Potential Wilderness Areas ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Grand Canyon Council Oa Where to Go Camping Guide
    GRAND CANYON COUNCIL OA WHERE TO GO CAMPING GUIDE GRAND CANYON COUNCIL, BSA OA WHERE TO GO CAMPING GUIDE Table of Contents Introduction to The Order of the Arrow ....................................................................... 1 Wipala Wiki, The Man .................................................................................................. 1 General Information ...................................................................................................... 3 Desert Survival Safety Tips ........................................................................................... 4 Further Information ....................................................................................................... 4 Contact Agencies and Organizations ............................................................................. 5 National Forests ............................................................................................................. 5 U. S. Department Of The Interior - Bureau Of Land Management ................................ 7 Maricopa County Parks And Recreation System: .......................................................... 8 Arizona State Parks: .................................................................................................... 10 National Parks & National Monuments: ...................................................................... 11 Tribal Jurisdictions: ..................................................................................................... 13 On the Road: National
    [Show full text]
  • THE CALIFORNIA DESERT WHO MANAGES the DESERT El Centro Field Office Havasu National Wildlife Refuge 1661 S
    BLM SPECIAL EDITION 1999 EXAMPLES OF AGENCY SIGNS SURFACE MANAGEMENT STATUS DESERT ACCESS GUIDE C aiiforma. c*cJ#der£ ocJidiricl ^^ v- Davis Dam BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT ^ USDA FOREST SERVICE 1:100,000-Scale topographic map showing: Highways, roads and other manmade structures • Water features • Contours and elevations in meters • Recreation sites Partial coverage of former desert access guide #13 Needles NATIONAL PARK SERVICE •IITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR /READ OF LAND MANAGEMENT CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS Edited and published by the Bureau of Land Management National Applied Resource Sciences Center, Denver, Colorado in cooperation with the Bureau of Land Management California State Office. Planimetry partially revised by BLM from various source material. Revised information not field ( li.'c (.cd Base map prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey. Compiled from USGS 1:24,000 and l:62,500-scale topographic maps dated 1956-1980, and from advance materials. Partially revised from aerial photographs taken 1980 and other source data. Revised information not CALIFORNIA STATE field checked. Map edited 1982. VEHICULAR RECREATION AREA Projection and 10,000-meter grid, zone 11: Universal Help protect your public lands by observing posted Transverse Mercator. 25,000-foot grid ticks based on Arizona OHV designations. Watch for OHV signs and read coordinate system, west zone, Nevada coordinate system, east them carefully. zone and California coordinate system, zone 5. 1927 North American Datum. For more information contact the BLM, USDA Forest Service, National Park Service, California State Park, Land lines are omitted in areas of extensive tract surveys. or California State Motorized Vechicle Recreation Area Office (see back panel for address and phone There may be private inholdings within the boundaries of numbers).
    [Show full text]
  • Mohave County Fairgrounds
    TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................5 History ................................................................................. 5 Location ............................................................................... 7 Climate ................................................................................ 9 Population ........................................................................... 9 EMPLOYMENT AND LABOR FORCE ..................................................... .11 Major Employers ............................................................... 12 Kingman Area Labor Force ................................................ 15 Job Training Services ......................................................... 16 UTILITIES AND SERVICES...................................................................... 17 Electricity ........................................................................... 17 Natural Gas ....................................................................... 19 Propane ............................................................................. 21 Water ................................................................................ 23 Sewer ................................................................................ 25 Solid Waste ....................................................................... 27 Telephone Providers ......................................................... 28 Wireless Service Providers ...............................................
    [Show full text]
  • MSU Billings Government Documents Weeding List I 19.3 Numbers 1700’S
    MSU Billings Government Documents Weeding List I 19.3 Numbers 1700’s I 19.3: 1701-A 1987 Mineral resources of the big horn mountain wilderness study area, Maricopa county, Arizona I 19.3: 1701-B 1987 Mineral resources of the lower burro creek wilderness study area, Mohave and Yavapai counties I 19.3: 1701-C 1988 Mineral resources of the harquahala mountains wilderness study area I 19.3: 1701-E 1989 Mineral resources of the arrastra mountain/peoples canyon wilderness study area I 19.3: 1701-G 1990 Mineral resources of the rawhide mountains wilderness study area I 19.3: 1702-A 1988 Mineral resources of the table top mountain wilderness study area I 19.3: 1702-B 1989 Mineral resources of the new water mountains wilderness study area I 19.3: 1702-C 1989 Mineral resources of the signal mountain wilderness study area I 19.3: 1702-D 1989 Mineral resources of the muggings mountains wilderness study area I 19.3: 1702-E 1989 Mineral resources of the baboquivari peak and coyote mountains wilderness study area I 19.3: 1702-F 1989 Mineral resources of the Woolsey peak wilderness study area I 19.3: 1702-G 1989 Mineral resources of the eagletail mountains wilderness study area (WSA) I 19.3: 1702-H 1989 Mineral resources of the ragged top WSA I 19.3: 1702-I 1989 Mineral resources of the Sierra Estralla WSA I 19.3: 1702-J 1989 Mineral resources of the trigo mountains WSA I 19.3: 1702-K 1990 Mineral resources of the kofa unit 4 north wilderness study area I 19.3: 1703-A 1987 Mineral resources of the fishhooks WSA I 19.3: 1703-B 1987 Mineral resources of
    [Show full text]
  • Warm Springs Wilderness Study Area, Mohave County, Arizona
    Mineral Warm Springs Wilderness Study Area, Mohave County, Arizona U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1737-F Chapter F Mineral Resources of the Warm Springs Wilderness Study Area, Mohave County, Arizona By FLOYD GRAY, ROBERT C. JACHENS, ROBERT J. MILLER, ROBERT L. TURNER, DANIEL H. KNEPPER, JR., JAMES A. PITKIN, WILLIAM J. KEITH, JOHN MARIANO, and STEPHANIE L.JONES U.S. Geological Survey STANLEY L. KORZEB U.S. Bureau of Mines U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1737 MINERAL RESOURCES OF WILDERNESS STUDY AREAS: BLACK MOUNTAINS REGION, ARIZONA U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MANUEL LUJAN, JR., Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1990 For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section U.S. Geological Survey Federal Center, Box 25425 Denver, CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Mineral resources of the Warm Springs wilderness study area, Mohave County, Arizona / by Floyd Gray...[et al.]. p. cm. (Mineral resources of wilderness study areas Black Mountains region,; ch. F) (U.S. Geological Survey bulletin; 1737) Includes bibliographical references (p. ). Supt. of Docs, no.: I 19.3:1737-F 1. Mines and mineral resources Arizona Warm Springs Wilderness. 2. Warm Springs Wilderness (Ariz.) I. Gray, Floyd. I. Series. III. Series: U.S. Geological Survey bulletin; 1737. QE75.B9 no. 1737-F 557.3 s dc 20 90-14079 [TN24.A6] [553'.09791'59] CIP STUDIES RELATED TO WILDERNESS Bureau of Land Management Wilderness Study Areas The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (Public Law 94-579, October 21,1976) requires the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • FEE 2012012840 OFFICIAL RECORDS of MOHAVE COUNTY G CAROL MEIER COUNTY RECORDER 03142012 0129 PM Fee 0 PAGE 1 of 34
    FEE 2012012840 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF MOHAVE COUNTY g CAROL MEIER COUNTY RECORDER 03142012 0129 PM Fee 0 PAGE 1 of 34 RESOLUTION NO 2012022 A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH AN AMENDMENT TO BOS RESOLUTION NO 2010231 WHICH SET FORTH THE APPROVAL OF A MAJOR AMENDMENT TO THE STERLING AREA PLAN AND BOUNDARY EXPANSION AND ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE STERLING AREA PLAN AND THE DESERT HILLS FIRE DISTRICT AREA PLAN AS NEEDED CONSISTING OF PROPERTIES LOCATED IN SECTIONS 22 23 25 26 27 34 AND 35 TOWNSHIP 16 12 NORTH RANGE 20 12 WEST FROM UDA LR URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL UDA MR URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SDA SR SUBURBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL UDA NC URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL AND UDA PP URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA PUBLIC PARKS LAND USE DESIGNATIONS FOR SECTION 30 S 12 OF SECTION 31 EXCEPTING THE SE 14 SE 14 SECTION 32 AND S 12 SW 14 OF SECTION 33 TOWNSHIP 16 12 NORTH RANGE 20 WEST FROM UDA LR URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL UDA MR URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL UDA HR URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SDA SR SUBURBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL UDA NC URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL UDA GC URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA GENERAL COMMERCIAL UDA MU URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA MIXED USE AND UDA PP URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA PUBLIC PARKS LAND USE DESIGNATIONS FOR SECTIONS 1 2 3 PORTIONS OF SECTIONS 10 AND 11 SECTION 12 AND A PORTION OF SECTION 13 TOWNSHIP 16 NORTH RANGE 20 12 WEST FROM UDA LR URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
    [Show full text]