Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Food for thought on road placement goals/constraints #4

Open
d-diaz opened this issue Aug 18, 2015 · 1 comment
Open

Food for thought on road placement goals/constraints #4

d-diaz opened this issue Aug 18, 2015 · 1 comment

Comments

@d-diaz
Copy link

d-diaz commented Aug 18, 2015

Helpful reference goals for road placement coming from General Forest Road Plan (GFRP) guidelines from the Oregon Department of Forestry for State Forests:

Road Location for Planning Purposes (not on-the-ground location)
The following list provides additional guidance for identifying locations of new roads in the GFRP:

  1. Preferred locations are on DEM (Digital Elevation Model) slopes under 50 percent and near ridge top;
  2. Preferred grades between 6 and 12 percent if side slopes under 50 percent;
  3. Use grades up to 20 percent to get roads off slopes steeper than 60 percent and also to get roads away from streams quickly;
  4. Grades steeper than 20 percent may be used only for spurs and only where essential to access units;
  5. Keep new roads at least 100 from streams when those roads are parallel to streams, with maximum of 500 feet per mile within 100 feet of streams when there are no other alternative locations;
  6. Go around significant wetlands except when there are no reasonable alternatives-if there are no reasonable alternatives then roads may cross wetlands for a maximum of 500 feet;
  7. No new roads on DEM slopes over 85 percent, or DEM slopes over 70 percent within 200 feet of and parallel to streams. Exceptions require discussion with geotechnical specialist and state forests engineer to determine if additional engineering mitigation might be feasible.
@ustroetz
Copy link
Owner

Thanks @d-diaz for the interesting information. All parameters could be easily modeled and reflect in the project. I hope one day I can continue to work on it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants