Matching Items (16)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

42462-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsThe Pride Publishing Company (Contributor)
Created2011-06
Description

This version of the Major Streets and Routes Plan revises the original plan and the 2004 revisions. Looking ahead to pending updates to the classification systems of towns and cities in Maricopa County, the original MSRP stipulated a periodic review and modification of the street functional classification portion of the

This version of the Major Streets and Routes Plan revises the original plan and the 2004 revisions. Looking ahead to pending updates to the classification systems of towns and cities in Maricopa County, the original MSRP stipulated a periodic review and modification of the street functional classification portion of the plan. This revision incorporates the following changes: (1) as anticipated, many of the communities in the County have updated either their general or transportation plans in the time since the adoption of the first MSRP; (2) a new roadway classification, the Arizona Parkway, has been added to the Maricopa County street classification system and the expressway classification has been removed; and (3) a series of regional framework studies have been conducted by the Maricopa Association of Governments to establish comprehensive roadway networks in parts of the West Valley.

41885-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsYuma (Ariz.) (Author)
Created2007
Description

A plan for the development and maintenance of the city of Yuma's roadway system, consistent with the city's 2002 general plan, and coordinated with the city's bicycle plan and the Yuma Metropolitan Planning Organization's regional transportation plan.

117470-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsArizona. Department of Transportation (Issuing body) / Coconino County (Ariz.) (Issuing body) / Burgess & Niple (Publisher)
Created2015-10
Description

Bellemont is a rural, unincorporated community with a population of approximately 1,000 residents in Coconino County that has become a suburb of Flagstaff, where residents commute to work. Three roads ó Interstate 40 (I-40), Brannigan Park Road and Shadow Mountain Drive ó are used to access virtually all the private

Bellemont is a rural, unincorporated community with a population of approximately 1,000 residents in Coconino County that has become a suburb of Flagstaff, where residents commute to work. Three roads ó Interstate 40 (I-40), Brannigan Park Road and Shadow Mountain Drive ó are used to access virtually all the private land north of I-40 at Bellemont. Frequent congestion from heavy truck volumes and subdivision traffic causes traffic delays and creates concern for safety and timely emergency response. The 2008 closure of the ADOT Parks Rest Area on I-40, just west of Bellemont, has also increased vehicular traffic accessing the truck stop and restaurants. Future build-out of the subdivision and potential commercial/industrial uses in the area are expected to continue to negatively affect the Brannigan Park Road and Shadow Mountain Drive intersection and the I-40 traffic interchange. ADOT recently prepared the I-40 Bellemont to Winona Initial Design Concept Report, which recommended long-term improvements for the intersection and traffic interchange.

Ultimately, this access management and multimodal transportation study will provide a comprehensive review of the Bellemont area transportation system and provide guidance for determining priority needs for future improvements north of I-40, including alleviating congestion and improving/managing access, and improving and evaluating multimodal access to businesses from residential areas.

42513-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2010-05
Description

This study examines the feasibility of Turner Parkway and establishes guidance for the preservation of right-of-way to assure the functional integrity of the transportation framework. The Turner Parkway corridor is located 13 miles west of Loop 303 in northwestern Maricopa County. When completed, this parkway will be the first major,

This study examines the feasibility of Turner Parkway and establishes guidance for the preservation of right-of-way to assure the functional integrity of the transportation framework. The Turner Parkway corridor is located 13 miles west of Loop 303 in northwestern Maricopa County. When completed, this parkway will be the first major, high-capacity, north-south facility west of White Tank Mountains.

42961-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsThe Pride Publishing Company (Contributor)
Created2009-12
Description

The 2009 Navajo Nation Long Range Transportation Plan is a twenty-year comprehensive plan developed and updated by the Navajo Division of Transportation in a five-year cycle. The plan identifies the Nation’s multi-modal transportation needs over the next 20 years and develops strategies to meet them. The plan provides long range

The 2009 Navajo Nation Long Range Transportation Plan is a twenty-year comprehensive plan developed and updated by the Navajo Division of Transportation in a five-year cycle. The plan identifies the Nation’s multi-modal transportation needs over the next 20 years and develops strategies to meet them. The plan provides long range planning policies and implementation strategies for the Navajo Indian Reservation Roads Program improvements. It is based on a comprehensive analysis of all pertinent factors and issues affecting the Navajo Nation’s existing and future transportation needs.

42602-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2002-02
Description

The study details the direct and indirect impacts of roads on natural resources, including direct mortality and loss of habitat, physical changes to the topography and hydrology of an area, impacts to habitat, noise, light and other types of pollution, and habitat fragmentation.

43572-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2005-06
Description

The quality of jobs in the United States became a national concern in the 1980s after a long period of losses of relatively high-paying manufacturing jobs and gains of frequently low-paying service jobs. National job quality remains a concern today, as witnessed by the debate in the 2004 presidential campaign.

The quality of jobs in the United States became a national concern in the 1980s after a long period of losses of relatively high-paying manufacturing jobs and gains of frequently low-paying service jobs. National job quality remains a concern today, as witnessed by the debate in the 2004 presidential campaign. The overall average wage is a measure of prosperity or well-being, but is not in itself a measure of job quality since job quality is just one of several factors — including cost of living, productivity, and desirability of an area — that affect the overall average wage. Little information on these factors is available by state. Adjusting for job quality reduces the state-by-state variation in wages. However, even after adjusting for job quality, the average wage still varies substantially by state.

43574-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2006-03
Description

The long-term trend toward lower-quality jobs in the United States continued between 2001 and 2004. Industrial job quality fell 1.6 percent nationally between 2001 and 2004. The decrease in occupational job quality was not quite as great at 0.9 percent. Thus, overall U.S. job quality dropped 2.5 percent during the

The long-term trend toward lower-quality jobs in the United States continued between 2001 and 2004. Industrial job quality fell 1.6 percent nationally between 2001 and 2004. The decrease in occupational job quality was not quite as great at 0.9 percent. Thus, overall U.S. job quality dropped 2.5 percent during the three years, causing the U.S. average wage to be 2.5 percent less than it otherwise would have been. Arizona’s job quality fell between 2001 and 2004 at a pace worse than the national average. Relative to the national average, the industrial and occupational job mixes each slipped a bit more than 0.3 percent during the three years, for an overall decline of 0.7 percent. In Arizona, job quality in 2004 was 2.0 percent below the national average, but Arizona ranked 23rd among all states.

43576-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2005-03
Description

Available data on the cost of living indicate that living costs in Arizona are close to the national average — thus, the state’s lower-than-average wages are not offset by low living costs. No productivity data exist for Arizona. Worker productivity in Arizona could be below the national average due to

Available data on the cost of living indicate that living costs in Arizona are close to the national average — thus, the state’s lower-than-average wages are not offset by low living costs. No productivity data exist for Arizona. Worker productivity in Arizona could be below the national average due to lesser investments in physical or human capital, which would result in lower wages. Labor market supply and demand factors are a likely cause of the low wages in Arizona. A substantial number of people seem willing to move to Arizona and accept a substandard wage in exchange for perceived qualitative advantages to living in Arizona, primarily climate.

43584-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2005-06
Description

The best way to evaluate job quality would be to analyze a dataset that presents both occupational and industrial data, but the only dataset of this nature available by state comes from the decennial census. It is severely limited by small sample size, the latest data are for 1999, and

The best way to evaluate job quality would be to analyze a dataset that presents both occupational and industrial data, but the only dataset of this nature available by state comes from the decennial census. It is severely limited by small sample size, the latest data are for 1999, and the 1999 data are not consistent with the 1989 data. Thus, the initial work by the Seidman Institute on job quality ("Job Quality in Arizona," March 2005) presented data on Arizona job quality from several sources of either industrial or occupational data. "Job Quality in Arizona Compared to All States" (June 2005), is an extension of the March 2005 report. Arizona’s job quality in the latest year and its change over time is compared to the national
average and is ranked among the 51 “states” (including the District of Columbia).