Filtering by
- All Subjects: Watershed management
- All Subjects: Job satisfaction
- Language: English
- Creators: Battelle Memorial Institute. Technology Partnership Practice
Phase IIA focuses on identifying alternatives for mitigating the hazards and problems, evaluating the alternatives for flood mitigation potential and cost effectiveness, and recommending a preferred alternative and flood control policy.
This plan has focused on two program areas: 1) floodplain management through revised floodplain delineations and assessment of subsequent FEMA mapping revisions; and 2) basin-wide planning issues involving both short- and long-term drainage infrastructure and regulatory needs.
The study developed the 100-year floodplain limits within the watershed and identified the area between Westover Avenue and Valencia Road as a major flood hazard area affecting most of the properties along the channel.
The purpose of this study, which represents Phase I, is to determine long range planning and land use policies for flood control and floodplain management in the southwest area.
The purpose of Phase I of the Riverside Terrace Basin management plan is the assessment of the existing hydrologic and basic hydraulic properties of the watershed.
The purpose of this study is to develop a basin management plan for Highlands Wash and the two washes west of Highlands Wash.
Provides basic information about the source of surface water in Cienega Creek at the downstream end of the natural preserve, which will contribute to efforts to conceptualize and implement effective land management proposals for the SDCP. Study results indicate that the surface flow or subflow from Agua Verde Creek do not significantly influence the water in the Cienega Creek.
Concerns research into the origin of water sustaining the Bingham Cienega. For purposes of long term management, we need to understand what the source of water is for the various riparian areas.
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.
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.