Work Plan - Final - Maricopa County Department of Transportation
Work Plan - Final - Maricopa County Department of Transportation Work Plan - Final - Maricopa County Department of Transportation
Figure 3-1 Hidden Waters Parkway North Project Issues MapHidden WatersFinal Work PlanCorridor Feasibility Study April, 2011Maricopa County Department of Transportation 5 EPS Job No. 10-092
3.2 DrainageThe Hidden Waters Corridor crosses numerous well defined tributary washes thatgenerally run from north to south. As such, there are many opportunities to reducestructure costs and minimize floodplain impacts by developing landform-sensitivealignments that minimize the number and length of potential drainage crossings.Numerous ephemeral washes and several major drainages, including Jackrabbit Wash,Daggs Wash and Star Wash are likely to be considered Waters of the United States.Efficient corridor alignments could also reduce the amount of permitting that is required,by limiting the number of jurisdictional Waters of the US that are crossed.3.3 UtilitiesThere are a number of large utility corridors that have the potential to affect alignmentalternatives. Those of major significance include a WAPA 345 kV power transmissionline, the WAPA 500 kV transmission line, the APS 500 kV power transmission line andthe proposed APS high voltage transmission line (all as shown on Figure 3-1). Theexisting CAP Canal is another significant utility corridor that will affect the parkwayalignment. The greatest utility constraint likely occurs at the location where the WAPA345 kV transmission line and the WAPA 500 kV transmission line are converging(approximately 1/2 mile separation) at the crossing of the CAP canal. Review of aerialphotographs indicate that transmission towers are likely in direct conflict with theproposed 200' wide parkway corridor proposed as part of the Belmont DMP.3.4 EnvironmentalA preliminary review of the study area indicates that there is potentially suitable habitatpresent for state-listed species such as the western burrowing owl and the lesser longnosed bat. The northern portion of the study corridor also passes through BLMdesignatedCategory 2 and Category 3 desert tortoise habitats. It will be important toidentify potential locations for wildlife crossings associated with long-term wildlifemovement corridors and to coordinate with the Arizona Game and Fish Department(AGFD) to obtain their input during the development of strategies for addressing habitatconnectivity.Cultural resource research will be compiled from several sources including MCDOT, theState Historic Preservation Office, the National Register Information Systems database,and AZSITE, the state's electronic inventory of cultural resources. Although cultural fieldreviews will not be included in the scope of this feasibility study, previous researchwould indicate a great potential for discovering a high density of prehistoric sites. Thedata compiled from the Environmental Overview (EO) will be used to map and avoidany known environmental "fatal flaws" within the corridor.A review of the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) Well Registryidentified over 50 ground water wells in the project corridor. Alternative corridors shouldbe developed to avoid or limit impact to these water resources.Hidden WatersFinal Work PlanCorridor Feasibility Study April, 2011Maricopa County Department of Transportation 6 EPS Job No. 10-092
- Page 1 and 2: Hidden Waters Parkway NorthCorridor
- Page 3 and 4: AbbreviationsArizona Department of
- Page 5 and 6: 2.0 Study Area Definition/Project U
- Page 7: 3.0 Key IssuesThe intent of this st
- Page 11 and 12: 5.0 Study Process and ApproachThe H
- Page 13 and 14: Figure 5-2 Project ScheduleHidden W
- Page 15 and 16: Arizona Parkway Intersection/Interc
- Page 17 and 18: 8.0 Criteria for Evaluation of Alte
- Page 19 and 20: xHiddenWaters Parkway: Interstate 1
- Page 21 and 22: xAttendeesHidden Waters Parkway: In
- Page 23 and 24: x444AgendaHidden Waters Parkway:Int
- Page 25 and 26: xHiddenProject GoalsWaters Parkway:
- Page 27 and 28: xHiddenTechnical Advisory Committee
- Page 29 and 30: x111Scope of WorkHidden Waters Park
- Page 31 and 32: ContentsStudy Overview ............
- Page 33 and 34: the first step in the development p
- Page 35 and 36: • Topography from existing source
- Page 37 and 38: Product: Technical Memorandum #2 -
- Page 39 and 40: o CAP drainage studies that address
- Page 41 and 42: 3.1. Technical Advisory Committee (
- Page 43 and 44: o Douglas Rancho Toyota Proving Gro
- Page 45 and 46: • Study Purpose/Need,• Study Go
- Page 47 and 48: The Consultant will prepare the cor
- Page 49 and 50: x222Project NotesProject Budget:$50
- Page 51 and 52: Type First Name Last Name Title Com
- Page 53 and 54: HIDDEN WATERS PARKWAY CFS: QUALITY
- Page 55 and 56: verification of verbal conversation
- Page 57: □ Preferred Alignmento Standard c
Figure 3-1 Hidden Waters Parkway North Project Issues MapHidden Waters<strong>Final</strong> <strong>Work</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>Corridor Feasibility Study April, 2011<strong>Maricopa</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Department</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Transportation</strong> 5 EPS Job No. 10-092
Change language