ROUND 19

Page 1 of 14

Round 19 2012

Pipe Springs Rd -SR 389 to RV Park Rd, Pipe Spring

Local Project Application

Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians

Specify MPO/COG Numerical Rank for this Project

ROUND 19

Page 2 of 14

1. Cover Page

2. Applicant Information (1-8)

APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS CHECKLIST

3. Project Description (10A - 13D)

4. Statement of Need

5. Authorized Official Signature

7. Cost Estimate Reviewer Signature

8. MPO/COG Signature

9. Cost Estimate Sheets (C1 - C4)

10. Appendix - Resolution

11. Appendix - State Map

12. Appendix - Vicinity Map

13. Appendix - Existing Location (Before) Photos

14. Appendix - Letters of Support - At Least One (1)

15. Appendix - Right-of-Way Ownership Documents

ROUND 19

Page 3 of 14

PROGRESS REPORT

Does the applicant have any active Transportation Enhancement (TE) projects?

OR Check off N/A below, if neither of the above applies. Word Count Maximum: 250 (1875 characters)

Yes NoIf yes, provide a status summary for each project in the text box below. Include milestones and scheduled construction date.

Yes No

Is the application for a new phase of any previously awarded TE projects?

If yes, provide a status summary for the phases in the text box below.

N/A

ROUND 19

Page 4 of 14

TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT APPLICATION

Applicant and Sponsor

Western Arizona Council of Governments (WACOG)

1.

APPLICANT INFORMATION

Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians

MPO / COG 2.

Date3. Jun 11, 2012

4. Project Name and Limits Word Count Maximum: 50 (375 characters)

Pipe Springs Road from SR 389 to RV Park Road, Pipe Spring. Pipe Springs Road is County Road 240 beginning at SR 389 (MP 0.08) thence north to RV Park Road (MP 0.65).

5. Contact Person - Name and Title

Manuel Savala, Chairperson Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians

Mailing Address HC 65 Box 2

Fredonia

86022

City / Town

Zip Code

Phone Number

Fax Number928-643-7245

Email Address928-643-8329

msavala@kaibabpaiute-nsn.gov

ROUND 19

Page 5 of 14

APPLICANT INFORMATION Continued from previous page

County

Congressional District

Mohave

2nd District

6.

7.

8. Alternate Contact Person - Name and Title

Shirla Bundy, Finance Director Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians

Mailing Address HC Box 2 Fredonia, AZ 86022

Phone Number

Fax Number

Email Address kptacc@color-country.net

928-643-7260

928-643-7245

ROUND 19

Page 6 of 14

PROVISION OF FACILITIES FOR PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLES

PROVISION OF SAFETY AND EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES FOR PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLISTS

PROJECT ACTIVITY CATEGORY

Indicate the primary activity for the proposal with the number 1 (one). If applicable, indicate a secondary category with the number 2 (two). Select no more than 2 (two) activities applicable to the proposal. The proposal will be evaluated based on the primary activity.

ACQUISITION OF SCENIC EASEMENTS OR HISTORIC SITES

SCENIC OR HISTORIC HIGHWAY PROGRAMS (INCLUDING THE PROVISION OF TOURIST AND WELCOME CENTER FACILITIES)

LANDSCAPING AND OTHER SCENIC BEAUTIFICATION

9.

HISTORIC PRESERVATION

REHABILITATION OF HISTORIC TRANSPORTATION BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES, OR FACILITIES (INCLUDING HISTORIC RAILROAD FACILITIES AND BRIDGES)

PRESERVATION OF ABANDONED RAILWAY CORRIDORS (INCLUDING THE CONVERSION AND USE THEREOF FOR PEDESTRIAN OR BICYCLE TRAILS)

CONTROL AND REMOVAL OF OUTDOOR ADVERTISING

ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION TO ADDRESS WATER POLLUTION DUE TO HIGHWAY RUNOFF OR REDUCE VEHICLE-CAUSED WILDLIFE MORTALITY WHILE MAINTAINING HABITAT CONNECTIVITY

ESTABLISHMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MUSEUMS

ARCHEOLOGICAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH

(1) 1

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5) 2

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

(12)

ROUND 19

Page 7 of 14

10. Provide Project Specifications: List all key elements of the project scope. Include the following: project concept, length, mileposts, number of acres, functional classification, and any additional pertinent information. Example: Construct 0.5 mile of 10 foot-wide asphalt multi-use pathway along the north side of X Road. Word Count Maximum: 200 (1500 characters)

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

A.

Construct 3,000 lineal feet of 10-foot wide stained concrete shared-use pathway along the east side of County Road 240 (Pipe Springs Rd.) Project includes three areas for pedestrian rest stops that have bench seating, trash receptacles, and enhanced landscaping. Pedestrian stop areas will be 800 square feet of rock mulch and native high desert trees and shrubs. The landscaped areas will be watered by a drip irrigation system. The walk will have decomposed granite lining each side from the concrete edges out to 5 feet wide. Enhanced areas are planned near the Convenience Store, Tribal Court, and RV Campground. A picnic table will be installed at the Store location. All rest area furnishings will be made of sandstone to match the existing materials in place at the Tribal Headquarters.

What major construction, design, and right-of-way (ROW) work does the project entail? Describe any need for major land modification, retaining walls, etc. Be sure to include all related expenses in the cost estimate budget. Word Count Maximum: 100 (750 characters)

B. 10.

The path will be graded and gravel base material installed under a currently FHWA funded project. Environmental and ROW will be completed under this existing contract. The proposed shared-use path involves survey and design of the concrete walk and landscape architecture. Costs for environmental acceptance by ADOT is included. A stained concrete walk will be installed with a drip irrigation system for plants near the pedestrian seating areas. Decomposed granite 5 ft wide will abut both sides of the path. 1 bench, 1 trash bin, 3 trees, 15 shrubs, curb, boulders, and rock mulch will be installed at 3 locations. A picnic table and bike rack are planned near the store. 3 way-finding signs will be installed. SWPPP measures will be installed.

ROUND 19

Page 8 of 14

Where is the project located?11. A. • Describe actual physical location • Attach state and vicinity map in appendix • For State projects, include the route and beginning and ending mileposts Word Count Maximum: 100 (750 characters)

PROJECT DESCRIPTION Continued from previous page

The project is within the Kaibab Paiute Indian Reservation along County Route 240 (Pipe Springs Road) in Pipe Spring, Mohave County, Arizona. The pathway begins at the Convenience Store and ends at the RV Campground drive entrance. The sidewalk will be located in an exclusively dedicated right-of-way abutting the existing county road right-of-way at approximately sixty feet (60') east of the road center line. See Appendix B for State Map and Appendix C for Vicinity Map.

Who owns the ROW of the proposed project? Provide proof or ROW ownership in Appendix. (Not Applicable for Activities 2 and 10 only)

Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians. See Appendix F for Assessor's Map.

B. 11.

Yes

%

Are any private landowners involved? If the project is on ADOT ROW, what percent of the project area is on ADOT ROW? (Percentage is determined by the ADOT District Engineer)

If this is a rail corridor project, is the corridor “rail banked”? If yes, provide status: Word Count Maximum: 50 (375 characters)

Yes No

No

N/A

N/A (not a rail corridor project)(not a rail corridor project)(not a rail corridor project)

YesIs the abandonment authorized by or proceeding before the Interstate Rail Commission? If yes, provide status: Word Count Maximum: 50 (375 characters)

No

N/A (not a rail corridor project)

ROUND 19

Page 9 of 14

PROJECT DESCRIPTION Continued from previous page

C. Are there any drainage issues to consider? Describe any potential impacts to Waters of the U.S.: Word Count Maximum: 100 (750 characters)

Yes No11.

Project lands are on flat topography with no watersheds draining directly into Waters of the U.S.

11. D. Are there any utility relocations? If yes, specify: Word Count Maximum: 50 (375 characters)

NoYes

There are no utility lines conflicting with the proposed improvements.

E. What is the proposed time frame for completion of the project? Note: Project must be advertised for construction prior to July 2016. Word Count Maximum: 50 (375 characters)

Complete Design Phase in April 2015 Advertise for Construction in June 2015 Complete Construction in December 2015

F. Will the project be ADA accessible? If no, explain why not: Word Count Maximum: 50 (375 characters)

NoYes

The pathway will comply with all ADA accessible regulations.

A. Identify the organization(s) responsible for on-going maintenance and repairs of the TE project. Word Count Maximum: 50 (375 characters)

12.

The Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians will be responsible for maintenance of the sidewalk facility. The Kaibab Tribe will keep the pedestrian rest areas clean and will provide maintenance of the landscaping and furnishings.

B. Describe the proposed on-going maintenance and repair program. Word Count Maximum: 50 (375 characters)

12.

Weekly inspection for litter; Monthly inspection for health of plants and/or breakage to the landscape irrigation system; Maintenance staff is available to repair sidewalk or landscaping year around.

ROUND 19

Page 10 of 14

C.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION Continued from previous page

Identify the source of funds for on-going maintenance and repairs. Word Count Maximum: 50 (375 characters)

12.

The Tribe receives Indian Reservation Roads funding yearly, and 25% is designated for maintenance activities. Currently the Tribe has approximately $30,000 obligated annually for maintenance.

13. To ascertain any potential Historic Preservation issues in order to avoid potential problems during the review process, the applicant is encouraged to consult with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) or Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO) during preliminary review of the application. Has the SHPO or THPO reviewed and commented on the proposed project?

Yes No

13. If yes, provide the date and name of the SHPO or THPO contact.

Indicate the result of the preliminary SHPO or THPO review: Word Count Maximum: 100 (750 characters)

A.

B. Robert R. Frankeberger, AIA contacted on 12-28-11

13. C.

The project appears not to be located near any potential historic sites or properties; but, the minimal ground disturbance suggests some attention to possible archaeological discovery. See Appendix G for correspondence.

If no, why wasn't the SHPO or THPO contacted? Word Count Maximum: 100 (750 characters)

13. D.

ROUND 19

Page 11 of 14

14. A. Is the project on a:

Planned transportation corridor? Yes No

Corridor under construction? Yes No

Existing transportation corridor? Yes No

If yes, estimated completion date?

If yes, scheduled completion date?

STATEMENT OF NEED

Describe how the community was or will be involved in this project. Word Count Maximum: 200 (1500 characters)

B. 14.

The community was involved in prioritizing this project. Public meetings were held for community input during the Long Range Transportation Plan process, during Phase 1 to determine alignment and connectivity patterns, and as a part of this application. Maps to describe the project were displayed at all Villages and Community Buildings throughout the Reservation with requests for comments. Information was distributed in the Tribal Newsletter with requests for comments. Public meetings were held to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act to inform the community on the scope and impacts of the proposed pathway. Similar outreach will continue for the enhancement phase of the project. The project planning process was open to the community during the following times: Annual Meeting on October 2, 2010 and October 1, 2011 Report at each Tribal Council meeting in October-December 2011 and January-March 2012 Public meeting for path Environmental Assessment on March 20, 2012 Tribal Council meeting to hear resolution supporting application April 19, 2012

ROUND 19

Page 12 of 14

STATEMENT OF NEED Continued from previous page

15. Describe how the project is an enhancement. Word Count Maximum: 250 (1875 characters)

The current pathway is gravel. There are no all-weather surfaces for pedestrian or bicycle use along this corridor. Having a hard surface on this pathway between the Convenience Store and the RV Park will encourage people to walk off of the roadway away from vehicle traffic. The improvements will enhance both the visitor experience to Pipe Spring National Monument as well as provide benefit to Tribal residents. Visitors to the Monument will see native trees and landscaped areas on their way to the site which will be inviting and impress upon them a welcoming environment. Residents will have a safe path to travel which is shaded in the summer months and provides break areas if they are walking long distances. The picnic table at the Store will enhance the project with an additional break area for travelers, visitors, and employees at the Store and the Tribal Headquarters.

ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUAN.UNIT

PRICE TOTALFEDERAL TE

FUNDS @ 94.3%LOCALFUNDS

1. SITE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY LS 1 $12,500.00 $12,500.00 $11,787.50 $712.50

2. PROJECT ASSESSMENT REPORT or DETAILED WORKPLAN LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $4,715.00 $285.00

3. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION (Infrastructure projects, including technical supporting documents)

LS 1 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $18,860.00 $1,140.00

4. HAZMAT ASSESSMENT LS 1 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

$ 37,500 $35,363 $2,138

1. Right-of-Way Acquisition LS 1 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

2. Plans, Special Provisions or Bid Manual, Cost Estimate & Schedules. LS 1 $42,000.00 $42,000.00 $39,606.00 $2,394.00

3. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION and Materials & Pavement Design Report LS 1 $6,500.00 $6,500.00 $6,129.50 $370.50

4. DRAINAGE REPORT LS 1 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

5. SWPPP LS 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $2,829.00 $171.00

$51,500.00 $48,565 $2,936

INSTALLATION OF SWPP MEASURES LS 1 $9,500.00 $9,500.00 $8,958.50 $541.50

SITE PREPARATION LS 1 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $23,575.00 $1,425.00

DEMOLITION

Sawcut LF $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Remove Structures and Obstructions LS 1 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

1. HARDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION

C. CONSTRUCTION OR IMPLEMENTATIONFor non-infrastructure projects (no ground disturbing activities), address only parts 4, D and F.

ARIZONA TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM

ROUND 19 (2012) COST ESTIMATE

B. FINAL PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING DESIGN - Stages II, III, IV and PS&E(Not applicable to non-infrastructure projects)

A. SCOPING (15% Preliminary Engineering Design)(Non-infrastructure projects: Only #2 applies).

SUBTOTAL – PROJECT SCOPING COSTS

SUBTOTAL – PROJECT DESIGN COSTS

ARIZONA TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAMRound 19 (2012) Project Cost Estimate

Page C1 of C4

ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUAN.UNIT

PRICE TOTALFEDERAL TE

FUNDS @ 94.3%LOCALFUNDS

Remove Fencing LF $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Remove Structural Concrete $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Remove Asphaltic Concrete Pavement $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Remove Concrete Sidewalks, Slabs $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

HAZMAT ABATEMENT LS 1 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

UTILITY RELOCATION LS 1 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

RETAINING WALLReinforced concrete cantilevered SF $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

EARTHWORK

General Excavation $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Drainage Excavation $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Structural Excavation $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Structural Backfill $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Borrow (In Place) $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

CURB & GUTTER LF $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

AGGREGATE BASE CY $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

PATHWAY OR SIDEWALK MATERIALS

Concrete $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Colored Concrete 31,000 $9.00 $279,000.00 $263,097.00 $15,903.00

Stamped Color Concrete $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Precast Concrete Pavers $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Asphaltic Concrete Ton $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Polymer or Resin Stabilized Surface SF $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

CROSSWALK ENHANCEMENT

Concrete Pavers $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Stamped Asphalt $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Stamped Concrete $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Concrete $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Integral Color Concrete $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

PEDESTRIAN ADA RAMP SF $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

CULVERT EXTENSIONS LF $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

PEDESTRIAN LIGHTINGIncluding conduit and trenching Each $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

HANDRAIL

Standard $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Decorative $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

$313,500.00 $295,631 $17,870

CY

LF

CY

SF

SF

SUBTOTAL - HARDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION

ARIZONA TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAMRound 19 (2012) Project Cost Estimate

Page C2 of C4

ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUAN.UNIT

PRICE TOTALFEDERAL TE

FUNDS @ 94.3%LOCALFUNDS

TREES above 15 gallon in size as required per Local code or special design requirements

Each $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

TREES (15 GALLON SIZE) Each $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

TREES (5 GALLON SIZE) Each 10 $175.00 $1,750.00 $1,650.25 $99.75

SHRUBS (5 GALLON SIZE) Each 15 $45.00 $675.00 $636.53 $38.48

SHRUBS (1 GALLON SIZE) Each 30 $35.00 $1,050.00 $990.15 $59.85

CACTUS (5 GALLON SIZE) Each $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

MULCH

Decomposed Granite 300 $191.00 $57,300.00 $54,033.90 $3,266.10

Organic $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

TOPSOIL CY 50 $150.00 $7,500.00 $7,072.50 $427.50

SEEDING Acre $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

TURF SOD SY $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

BOULDERS Each 20 $250.00 $5,000.00 $4,715.00 $285.00

IRRIGATION SYSTEM

Drip 5,500 $4.50 $24,750.00 $23,339.25 $1,410.75

Turf $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

SLEEVING FOR IRRIGATION SYSTEM

Directional Bore $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Cut and Patch 20 $150.00 $3,000.00 $2,829.00 $171.00

LANDSCAPE HEADER CURB LF 400 $20.00 $8,000.00 $7,544.00 $456.00

LANDSCAPE ESTABLISHMENT LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $9,430.00 $570.00

$119,025.00 $112,241 $6,784

BENCHES Each 3 $750.00 $2,250.00 $2,121.75 $128.25

SEATWALLS LF $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

BIKE RACKS Each 1 $600.00 $600.00 $565.80 $34.20

TRASH RECEPTACLES Each 3 $850.00 $2,550.00 $2,404.65 $145.35

DRINKING FOUNTAINS Each $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

SIGNAGE (Standard Traffic Control) Each 3 $250.00 $750.00 $707.25 $42.75

TREE GRATES Each $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

$6,150.00 $5,799 $351

PICNIC TABLE Each 1 $2,750.00 $2,750.00 $2,593.25 $156.75 WEED BARRIER FABRIC SF 32,400 $0.25 $8,100.00 $7,638.30 $461.70

$0.00 $0.00 $0.00

$0.00 $0.00 $0.00

$0.00 $0.00 $0.00

$0.00 $0.00 $0.00

LF

3. SITE FURNISHINGS

4. OTHER CONSTRUCTION ITEMS. ALSO, ITEMIZED LINE ITEMS FOR NON-INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS.(Insert additional rows if necessary)

SUBTOTAL – LANDSCAPING & IRRIGATION ITEMS

SF

SUBTOTAL – SITE FURNISHINGS

CY

2. LANDSCAPING & IRRIGATION ITEMS

ARIZONA TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAMRound 19 (2012) Project Cost Estimate

Page C3 of C4

ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUAN.UNIT

PRICE TOTALFEDERAL TE

FUNDS @ 94.3%LOCALFUNDS

$0.00 $0.00 $0.00

$0.00 $0.00 $0.00

$10,850.00 $10,232 $618

CONTRACTOR MOBILIZATION LS 1 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $18,860.00 $1,140.00

TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $9,430.00 $570.00

CONSTRUCTION SURVEY & LAYOUT LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $4,715.00 $285.00

CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCIES LS 1 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $37,720.00 $2,280.00

CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION LS 1 $58,000.00 $58,000.00 $54,694.00 $3,306.00

$133,000.00 $125,419.00 $7,581.00

$582,525.00 $549,321.08 $33,203.93

D. ADOT Fee for PE Reviews and Staff Charges

LS 1 $5,000.00 $5,000.00

$ 676,525

BO

X A

671,525$

BO

X B

633,248$ B

OX

C

38,277$

BO

X D

0$

BO

X E

38,277$

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION OR IMPLEMENTATION COST

SUBTOTAL - OTHER CONSTRUCTION LINE ITEMS

NO ENTRYE. TOTAL PROJECT COST(All subtotals + ADOT local projects review fee)

NO ENTRY

F. SUMMARY OF FEDERAL AND NON-FEDERAL FUNDS

TOTAL FEDERAL FUNDS @ 94.3% (.943 x amount shown in Box A above).Note: For Local projects, the maximum amount that can be requested is $750,000 ($943,000 for State projects). If the amount automatically calculated by this program exceeds the maximum amount allowed for a State or Local project, manually input the maximum allowed amount of federal funds.

TOTAL NON-FEDERAL FUNDS(Sum of Box C and Box D)

5. MOBILIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION COSTS

SUBTOTAL – MOBILIZATION & ADMINISTRATION COSTS

TOTAL SPONSOR MATCHING FUNDS (.057 x cost shown in Box A above).Note: The maximum amount that should be shown on this line is $45,334 for Local projects ($57,000 for State projects). If the amount automatically calculated by this program exceeds the appropriate amount for a State or Local project, manually input the appropriate amount.

TOTAL ADDITIONAL FUNDS(Amount in Box A in excess, if any, of $795,334 for Local projects or $1,000,000 for State projects)

TOTAL COST FOR PROJECT DEVELOPMENT OR IMPLEMENTATION(Exclusive of ADOT Fee)

ARIZONA TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAMRound 19 (2012) Project Cost Estimate

Page C4 of C4

State Map

Pipe Springs Road from SR 389 to RV Park Road

Transportation Enhancement Application

Round 19 2012

Appendix B

ProjectLocation

N

S

W E

Pipe Springs Rd. fromSR389 to RV Park Rd.TransportationEnhancement ApplicationRound 19 2012

0 400' 800'

Vicinity Map

    Appendix D Photos Page A5 of A13

Pipe Springs Rd (CR 240) from Store looking north

Proposed location of path east of CR 240 at Store looking south

    Appendix D Photos Page A6 of A13

Pipe Springs Rd (CR 240) at Red Hills Rd (Red Hills Village) looking north

Proposed location of path at RV Park Rd looking south

    Appendix D Photos Page A7 of A13

Proposed Stained Concrete Sidewalk

Proposed Picnic Table, Rock Mulch & Boulder to Match Tribal Headquarters Area

Co

un

ty o

f M

oh

ave,

Ari

zon

aG

eog

rap

hic

Info

rmat

ion

Sys

tem

sP

ipe

Sp

rin

gs

Rd

- S

R38

9 to

RV

Par

k R

d, P

ipe

Sp

rin

g

065

013

00ft

.M

ap c

reat

ed o

n:

Ap

r 26

, 201

2M

ap c

ente

r: 3

6° 5

1' 4

5.7"

N, 1

12°

44' 4

.7"

W

Thi

s m

ap is

a u

ser

gene

rate

d st

atic

out

put f

rom

Moh

ave

Cou

nty

Inte

ract

ive

Map

Vie

wer

and

is fo

r g

ener

alre

fere

nce

only

. D

ata

laye

rs th

at a

ppea

r on

this

map

may

or

may

not

be

accu

rate

, cur

rent

, or

oth

erw

ise

relia

ble.

TH

IS M

AP

IS N

OT

TO

BE

US

ED

AS

A L

EG

AL

DO

CU

ME

NT

, FO

R P

RO

PE

RT

Y D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

S,

OR

D

ET

ER

MIN

AT

ION

OF

LE

GA

L T

ITLE

, AN

D S

HO

ULD

NE

VE

R B

E S

UB

ST

ITU

TE

D F

OR

SU

RV

EY

OR

DE

ED

INF

OR

MA

TIO

N. T

he u

ser

agr

ees

to c

ompl

y w

ith th

e Li

mita

tion

of U

se, a

nd A

ssum

ptio

n of

Ris

k as

stat

ed in

the

full

disc

laim

er a

t h

ttp://

mci

mv.

co.m

ohav

e.az

.us/

imf/s

ites/

moh

_tes

t/jsp

/laun

ch.js

p

Not

es: T

rans

port

atio

n E

nhan

cem

ent A

pplic

atio

nR

ound

19

2012

Sca

le:

1:8,

000

December 28, 2011 Robert Frankeberger, AIA State Historic Preservation Office Arizona State Parks 1300 W. Washington Street Phoenix, Arizona 85007 RE: Transportation Enhancement Grant Application, Round 19 2012 Local Project, Pipe Springs Road from SR 389 to RV Park Road Dear Mr. Frankeberger, The Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians is applying for Transportation Enhancement funding through the Western Arizona Council of Governments. As a part of the application process, the Tribe is seeking comments on their proposed project. The project is within the Kaibab Paiute Indian Reservation along County Route 240 (Pipe Springs Road) in Pipe Spring, Mohave County, Arizona. The pathway begins at the Convenience Store and ends at the RV Campground drive entrance. Construction consists of approximately 3,000 lineal feet of 10-foot wide stained concrete shared-use pathway along the east side of Pipe Springs Rd. Project includes three areas for pedestrian rest stops that have bench seating, trash receptacles, and enhanced landscaping. The pathway will be lined with shade trees spaced 100 feet apart watered by a drip irrigation system. Rest stop areas will be 800 square feet of rock mulch and native high desert plants. Rest areas are planned near the Convenience Store, Tribal Court, and RV Campground. The sidewalk will be located in an exclusively dedicated right-of-way abutting the existing county road right-of-way at approximately sixty feet (60') east of the road center line. A State Map and Vicinity Map are attached for reference. Please provide any comments on the proposed project by February 24, 2012. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at the enclosed address, phone number, or email. Sincerely, High Road Engineering, Inc. By: Elisabeth F. Whitlock, PE President Attachment: State Map, Vicinity Map Cc: Manuel Savala, Chairperson – Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians

PO Box 97 St. George, UT 84771

PHONE 435.767.8481 FAX 435.574.0456 E-MAIL ewhitlock@highroadengineering.com

High Road  ENGINEERING, INC.CIVIL ENGINEERING & CONSULTING 

1

Elisabeth Whitlock

From: Robert R Frankeberger <rfrankeberger@azstateparks.gov>Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2011 12:45 PMTo: Elisabeth WhitlockSubject: Re: Kaibab Paiute Tribe

This project appears not to be located near any potential historic sites or properties; but, the minimal ground disturbance suggests some attention to possible archaeological discovery. The purpose of this preliminary review is to assist the applicant in addressing possible historic preservation concerns in planning the project and completing the application. The Section 106 compliance will be conducted by ADOT on behalf of FHWA after the grant has been awarded. Robert R Frankeberger AIA Architect, State Historic Preservation Office (602) 542-6943 On Dec 28, 2011, at 11:00 AM, Elisabeth Whitlock wrote: Dear Mr. Frankeberger,   Your name was given to me by Sharon Mitchell of WACOG as the contact person at SHPO to seek comments on historically significant sites as it relates to proposed transportation enhancement projects.  The Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians is in the process of completing funding applications and are researching any potential impacts to historical sites.  Please see the attached letter requesting comments on the proposed projects.  The Tribe is applying for both a local and state project.   You may contact me if there are any questions.   Sincerely,   

ELISABETH WHITLOCK, PE President <image003.jpg>  CIVIL ENGINEERING & CONSULTING   PO Box 97 St. George, UT 84771 P: 435.767.8481 F: 435.574.0456 ewhitlock@highroadengineering.com     

<SHPO Letter Local Project 12-28-11.pdf><SHPO Letter State Project 12-28-11.pdf>