City of Tombstone State Route 80 alternate route PARA study

              SR 80 Alternative Route Study
Final Report
City of Tombstone
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
Prepared for:
Arizona Department of Transportation
And
City of Tombstone
Prepared by:
May 21, 2012
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study i
May 2012
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..............................................................................................................................VIII
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Study Area Overview ...................................................................................................... 1
2.0 REVIEW OF RELEVANT PREVIOUS STUDIES ................................................................................... 4
2.1 Final Project Assessment, SR 80 – Fremont Street between 3rd Street and 6th
Street (2011) ....................................................................................................................... 4
2.2 Historic Streetscape Assessment Report for a Roadway Transportation
Enhancement Project on SR 80, Fremont Street in the Schieffelin Historic District,
Tombstone, Cochise County, Arizona (2011) ............................................................... 4
2.3 Pedestrian Safety Analysis for SR 80, Highway Enhancements for Safety (HES),
Tombstone, Arizona (2010) ............................................................................................. 4
2.4 Cochise County Comprehensive Plan (2006) ............................................................... 5
2.5 Tombstone Civic Town Plan (2005) ............................................................................... 5
2.6 Plan for the Creation of a Historic Environment (1972) ............................................. 5
3.0 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS .................................................................................. 6
4.0 SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS ............................................................................................ 9
4.1 Existing Population.......................................................................................................... 9
4.2 Current Demographic Characteristics and Environmental Justice Considerations9
4.3 Future Population .......................................................................................................... 10
4.4 Employment ................................................................................................................... 11
5.0 TRANSPORTATION ........................................................................................................................ 12
5.1 Existing Roadways ......................................................................................................... 12
5.2 Intersection Controls ..................................................................................................... 12
5.3 Parking ............................................................................................................................ 13
5.4 Crash Data ....................................................................................................................... 13
5.5 Programmed Network Improvements ....................................................................... 13
5.6 Regional Planned Improvements ................................................................................ 13
5.7 Existing Local Traffic Volumes and Level of Service ................................................ 14
5.8 Future No-Build Traffic Volumes and Level of Service ........................................... 20
5.9 Future Build Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service ................................................ 24
5.10 Existing and Planned Transit Service .......................................................................... 26
5.11 Railroad Characteristics ................................................................................................ 27
5.12 Pedestrian ........................................................................................................................ 27
6.0 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCE CONSIDERATIONS ......................................................... 28
6.1 Records Review .............................................................................................................. 29
6.1.1 Methods .............................................................................................................. 29
6.1.2 Prior Cultural Resource Studies ...................................................................... 29
6.1.3 Previously Recorded Cultural Resources ...................................................... 32
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study ii
May 2012
6.2 Tombstone Historic District National Historic Landmark Status ........................... 39
7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS .......................................................................................... 42
8.0 STAKEHOLDER AND PUBLIC INPUT ............................................................................................. 44
8.1 Technical Advisory Committee ................................................................................... 44
8.2 Other Stakeholders ........................................................................................................ 44
8.3 Public Involvement ........................................................................................................ 45
9.0 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR AN ALTERNATE CORRIDOR ............................................................... 46
9.1 Project Need .................................................................................................................... 46
9.2 Project Purpose ............................................................................................................... 47
10.0 POTENTIAL CORRIDORS ............................................................................................................... 48
10.1 Corridor Development Process .................................................................................... 48
10.2 No-Build .......................................................................................................................... 49
10.3 Corridor N1 ..................................................................................................................... 49
10.4 Corridor N2 ..................................................................................................................... 51
10.5 Corridor N3 ..................................................................................................................... 53
10.6 Corridor S1 ...................................................................................................................... 55
10.7 Corridor S2 ...................................................................................................................... 57
10.8 Corridor S3 ...................................................................................................................... 59
10.9 Corridor S4 ...................................................................................................................... 61
11.0 ALTERNATE CORRIDOR EVALUATION ........................................................................................ 63
11.1 Length of the Corridor .................................................................................................. 63
11.2 Minimizes Number of Land Owners Affected .......................................................... 64
11.3 Minimize Wash Crossings ............................................................................................ 64
11.4 Avoid Major Utilities ..................................................................................................... 64
11.5 Terrain and Topography ............................................................................................... 65
11.6 Potential Overall Corridor Cost ................................................................................... 65
11.7 Provides Route for Through Traffic that Meets Their Expectations for Long Trip
Travel ............................................................................................................................... 65
11.8 Diverts Through Traffic from the Historic District ................................................... 66
11.9 Throughput Travel Time Saving ................................................................................. 66
11.10 Increases Roadway Capacity ........................................................................................ 66
11.11 Improves Safety .............................................................................................................. 67
11.12 Provides Convenient Access to the City ..................................................................... 67
11.13 Visibility of Tombstone Historic Landmark .............................................................. 67
11.14 Preserves City’s Historic Sites ...................................................................................... 68
11.15 Avoids Historic and/or Current Mining Activities ................................................... 68
11.16 Proximity to Residences and Neighborhoods ........................................................... 68
11.17 Supports and/or Creates Economic Development Opportunities for the City ..... 68
11.18 Meeting the Purpose and Need ................................................................................... 69
11.19 Summary of Observations ............................................................................................ 71
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study iii
May 2012
CORRIDORS 12.0 RECOMMENDED FOR FURTHER STUDY ................................................................... 73
12.1 Summary of Observations ............................................................................................ 73
12.2 Selection of a South Corridor ....................................................................................... 73
12.3 Selection of a North Corridor ....................................................................................... 75
12.4 Recommended Corridors .............................................................................................. 77
13.0 ALTERNATE CORRIDOR FEATURES .............................................................................................. 78
13.1 Cross-Section Requirements ......................................................................................... 78
13.2 Corridor Design Speeds ................................................................................................ 78
13.3 Corridor S4 ...................................................................................................................... 79
13.4 Corridor N2 ..................................................................................................................... 80
13.5 No-Build .......................................................................................................................... 80
14.0 PLANNING LEVEL COST ESTIMATE .............................................................................................. 82
14.1 Corridor Summaries ...................................................................................................... 83
15.0 IDENTIFY AVAILABLE FUNDING MECHANISMS .......................................................................... 85
15.1 State Funding .................................................................................................................. 85
15.2 Federal Funding ............................................................................................................. 85
15.3 Other Funding Possibilities .......................................................................................... 86
16.0 CONCLUSION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ............................................................................... 87
17.0 REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................... 90
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study iv
May 2012
List of Tables
Table 1 Existing Population.......................................................................................................... 9
Table 2 Minority Population ...................................................................................................... 10
Table 3 Population Characteristics ............................................................................................ 10
Table 4 Total Number of Households – 2020 and 2040 Projections ..................................... 11
Table 5 Employment Change – 2020 and 2040 Projections .................................................... 11
Table 6 Crash Data Summary .................................................................................................... 13
Table 7 Existing Area Arterial Highway Volumes ................................................................. 15
Table 8 Existing Peak Hour Factors .......................................................................................... 15
Table 9 Vehicle Classification ..................................................................................................... 17
Table 10 Origin-Destination Data Collection Summary .......................................................... 18
Table 11 Level of Service Upper Limit Thresholds for Roadway Segments (ADT) ............. 18
Table 12 Peak Hour Level of Service Thresholds for Two-Lane Class II & III Highways .. 20
Table 13 Existing Level of Service ............................................................................................... 20
Table 14 No-Build Daily Traffic Volumes .................................................................................. 21
Table 15 Future No-Build Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ............................................................ 23
Table 16 2020 No-Build LOS ........................................................................................................ 23
Table 17 2030 No-Build LOS ........................................................................................................ 23
Table 18 2040 No-Build LOS ........................................................................................................ 24
Table 19 2040 Daily Build Traffic Volumes ................................................................................ 24
Table 20 Future Build Peak Hour Traffic Volumes – Existing SR 80 Roadway .................... 25
Table 21 Future Build Peak Hour Traffic Volumes – Alternate SR 80 Corridor ................... 25
Table 22 2040 Build LOS ............................................................................................................... 26
Table 23 Prior Studies within 1 Mile of the Study Area ........................................................... 29
Table 24 Previously Recorded Historic Districts, Buildings and Structures within the
Records Review Area .................................................................................................... 34
Table 25 Previously Recorded Cultural Resources within the Records Review Area ......... 38
Table 26 Summary of Environmental Concerns ........................................................................ 42
Table 27 Alternate Corridor Evaluation Table .......................................................................... 70
Table 28 Level of Service Upper Limit Thresholds for Roadway Segments (ADT) ............. 78
Table 29 Planning Cost Estimate – Corridor S4 ......................................................................... 83
Table 30 Planning Cost Estimate – Corridor N2 ....................................................................... 83
Table 31 Corridor Summaries ...................................................................................................... 84
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study v
May 2012
List of Figures
Figure 1 Study Area Overview ...................................................................................................... 3
Figure 2 Existing Land Use ............................................................................................................ 7
Figure 3 Parcel Information ........................................................................................................... 8
Figure 4 Existing Transportation Conditions ............................................................................ 16
Figure 5 Future Transportation Conditions ............................................................................... 22
Figure 6 Historic and Cultural Considerations ......................................................................... 33
Figure 7 Corridor Development Process .................................................................................... 48
Figure 8 Corridor N1 ..................................................................................................................... 50
Figure 9 Corridor N2 ..................................................................................................................... 52
Figure 10 Corridor N3 ..................................................................................................................... 54
Figure 11 Corridor S1 ...................................................................................................................... 56
Figure 12 Corridor S2 ...................................................................................................................... 58
Figure 13 Corridor S3 ...................................................................................................................... 60
Figure 14 Corridor S4 ...................................................................................................................... 62
Figure 15 Conceptual Alternate Corridors .................................................................................. 72
Figure 16 Typical Non-Divided Rural Highway Cross-Section ............................................... 78
List of Appendices
Appendix A Public Involvement Summary Report No. 1
Appendix B Public Involvement Summary Report No. 2
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study vi
May 2012
List of Acronyms
AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
ADEQ Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
ADOT Arizona Department of Transportation
ADT Average Daily Traffic
APS Arizona Public Service
ASLD Arizona State Land Department
BFO Board Funding Obligation
BLM Bureau of Land Management
BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway
CC Cochise County
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality
DES (Arizona) Department of Economic Security
DHV Design Hour Volume
EB Eastbound
GAN Grant Application Notes
HCM Highway Capacity Manual
HCS Highway Capacity Software
HELP Highway Expansion and Extension Loan Program
HES Hazard Elimination Program
HSIP Highway Safety Improvement Program
HURF Highway User Revenue Fund
I-10 Interstate 10
IM Interstate Maintenance
LOS Level of Service
MPH (or mph) Miles per Hour
NB Northbound
NHS National Highway System
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
OD Origin-Destination
OHV Off-Highway Vehicle
PARA Planning Assistance for Rural Areas
PGP (Traffic Engineering) Policies, Guidelines and Procedures
PHF Peak Hour Factor(s)
R/W Right-of-Way
RDG (ADOT) Roadway Design Guidelines
RMA Rural Minor Arterial
RMC Rural Major Collector
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study vii
May 2012
RV Recreational Vehicle
SB Southbound
SHPO State Historic Preservation Office
SIB State Infrastructure Bank
SR 80 State Route 80
SR 82 State Route 82
SSVEC Sulfur Springs Valley Electric Company
TAC Technical Advisory Committee
TAZ Transportation Analysis Zone
TIGER Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
UTV Utility Vehicle
UPRR Union Pacific Railroad
vpd Vehicles per Day
WB Westbound
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study viii
May 2012
Background: The purpose of the City of Tombstone State Route 80 Alternate Route study is to
assess the issues and opportunities for a potential realignment of State Route 80 (SR 80). The
study was initiated by the City of Tombstone City Council when they requested planning
assistance from ADOT through the Planning Assistance for Rural Areas (PARA) program. The
study would determine if there is a long range need for an alternate route.
The study area along SR 80 extends from SR 82 through the City of Tombstone and ends at
Davis Road southeast of Tombstone. SR 80 bisects the Tombstone historic district and there are
several historic buildings along Fremont Street (SR 80). As highway traffic increases along
Fremont Street, the historic buildings become more vulnerable to vibration damage.
Project Need: Based on its current configuration as well as input from the TAC, interested
members of the public, and investigation of the study area, there were numerous reasons
identified for pursuing potential SR 80 alternate alignment possibilities. Key elements in
identifying the project need include:
The current traffic volume on SR 80 through the Tombstone Historic District is
approximately 4,000 vehicles per day (vpd). Due to growth in the region and the state,
the traffic volumes are expected to double by 2040.
Twenty percent of the current traffic is passing through the city with no particular
destination in the study area. Trucks comprise approximately 10% of the traffic stream
on a typical day. With growth in the region and state projected to increase faster than
in the City of Tombstone, the through traffic and truck traffic is expected to become a
higher percentage in the future.
The mix of through traffic with local and tourist traffic and with pedestrian and bicycle
traffic in the Tombstone Historic District creates conflict that diminishes the experience
of the tourist and inflicts delays and unexpected traffic conditions on the through rural
highway traveler.
Special events held in the Tombstone Historic District, which occur a few times
throughout the year, attract large numbers of tourists which increases pedestrian
traffic throughout the Historic District. During these events, conflicts between
pedestrians and through traffic along SR 80 are more likely to occur and may diminish
the tourist experience.
The existing traffic conditions in Tombstone do not meet the expectations of the
through rural highway traveler because the speed limit on SR 80 changes from 65 mph
at either end of the City to 30 mph within the Tombstone Historic Landmark.
Motorists and truckers do not always fully transition from rural highway speeds to
very restricted speeds in such a short distance. There are also limited passing
opportunities within the study area which are atypical of a rural highway.
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study ix
May 2012
The historic buildings and structures throughout the City may be adversely affected
by vibration from higher-speed or heavy vehicle traffic;
Growth in Tombstone has been somewhat stagnant and there is a desire to provide
and enhance opportunities for economic growth by providing an improved roadway
system with access to developable vacant land.
Project Purpose: The purpose of a potential alternative corridor is to divert through traffic from
the historic district to enhance the tourist experience and protect historic resources, enhance
development opportunities in other parts of Tombstone and to provide a route that meets the
expectations of the through traveler by providing a route with a consistent design speed and
minimal interruptions due to traffic signals and unrestricted access.
Corridors Selected for Further Study: Seven alternate corridors were identified through the
study process and were evaluated based on how well they met the project purpose and need
and other evaluation criteria such as neighborhood impacts and safety (see section 11).
Corridors S4 and Corridor N2 were selected for further study in addition to the No-Build option
through input from stakeholders, Technical Advisory Committee members and members of the
public.
Corridor S4 diverges from SR 80 in the vicinity of Middlemarch Road near the municipal solid
waste landfill and heads south across a new bridge over Walnut Gulch west of the existing
SR 80 bridge (see Figure 14). It then curves to the southeast near the Sulphur Springs Valley
Electrical Cooperative, Inc. (SSVEC) Tombstone Substation and crosses the west end of Allen
Street and follows the SSVEC power line. Corridor S4 then crosses Charleston Road and curves
east along the old runway south of Tombstone and north of the hills and near the southern City
boundary. The alternate corridor would curve northeast just south of the Skyline neighborhood,
curve around on the north side of the open pit mining area before it reconnects with SR 80
southeast of the City.
Proximity to abandoned mine sites could create structural or cost considerations to address
subsidence potential and/or impacts on bat habitats. A key stakeholder along Corridor S4 is the
owner of a large open pit mine who was very receptive to Corridor S4. In addition, Corridor S4
provides a very nice view of the historic downtown Tombstone which is highly desirable to key
stakeholders as a way to attract tourists into Tombstone. Corridor S4 meets the purpose and
need of the study, has relatively good separation from most residential areas, has good access to
the historic district, provides good opportunity for new economic development meets the
expectations of regional trip travel and enhances safety.
Corridor N2 avoids known historic and current mining activities. Corridor N2 diverges from
SR 80 in the vicinity of Middlemarch Road near the municipal solid waste landfill and heads
east north of Walnut Gulch and the north Tombstone City limits (see Figure 9). Near the
northeast corner of the Tombstone City limits Corridor N2 curves south crossing Camino San
Rafael Road and Gleeson Road and Walnut Gulch as it heads south to rejoin SR 80 southeast of
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study x
May 2012
Tombstone. Corridor N2 is located almost entirely on state trust lands which could mitigate the
negative impact of right-of-way acquisition. Corridor N2 meets the purpose and need of the
study, provides good opportunity for new economic development, meets the expectations of
regional trip travel and enhances safety.
Although the No-build alternative would not meet the purpose and need of the study, this
option would be carried forward to the next phase of study and analysis until final approvals
are obtained to move forward with the alternate. The no-build options would leave SR 80 on its
current alignment on Fremont Street in Tombstone. It would also include the planned
narrowing of Fremont Street between 3rd Street and 6th Street.
Cost and Funding: The cost of final design, right-of-way acquisition and construction of
Corridor S4 is estimated to be approximately $15 million while Corridor N2 is estimated to cost
approximately $19 million. If a 20% factor was added for mining contingencies, then the project
cost for S4 would be approximately $18 million.
No funding source is currently available for the design and construction of an alternate route.
Although the realignment of SR 80 is recommended, current conditions are not favorable for
further action at this time to move the project forward. Future activities related to the
realignment of SR 80 will occur at a time that is mutually beneficial and agreeable to both
ADOT and the City of Tombstone.
Public and Agency Involvement:
The ADOT study team and the city council made a considerable effort to involve stakeholder
agencies, stakeholders and the public during the study process. Five Technical Advisory
Meetings consisting of agency stakeholders were held along with five stakeholder interviews
and two public meetings. Issues including truck traffic, neighborhood impacts, business
impacts and safety were expressed. Many residents who attended the public meetings
expressed a preference for the No-Build option.
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 1
May 2012
1.0
The purpose of the City of Tombstone State Route 80 (SR 80) Alternate Route Planning
Assistance for Rural Areas (PARA) Study is to assess the issues and opportunities for a
potential realignment of SR 80. The intent of a potential realignment would be to serve future
regional traffic, improve regional connectivity, and support efforts to retain and enhance the
historic features within the City of Tombstone. This study will serve as the gateway for any
future scoping documents and engineering design.
The main goals and objectives of the study include:
Document and analyze existing conditions along SR 80;
Analyze anticipated future conditions within the study area;
Determine the need for and feasibility of a realignment of SR 80; and
Develop and identify a preferred corridor for a SR 80 realignment.
This report provides an inventory and analysis of existing and future land use, socioeconomic,
transportation, historic and environmental conditions in a study area that encompasses the City
of Tombstone and the surrounding area. The information about the characteristics of the study
area will provide the foundation for the identification of alternative SR 80 corridors to address
community needs and anticipated deficiencies.
1.1 STUDY AREA OVERVIEW
SR 80 is an east-west route traversing southeastern Arizona beginning in Benson and ending at
the New Mexico state line. SR 80 provides a direct connection from Benson to Bisbee and serves
as a rural minor arterial. Locally, SR 80 travels through the corporate limits of the City of
Tombstone from approximate milepost 315.4 to 318.6 where it is known as Fremont Street.
Within the City it serves as a collector for local streets and offers access for fronting businesses
and residences. Figure 1 provides an overview of the study area characteristics.
Its current location was established in 1964 when SR 80, then US 80, was moved one block north
to Fremont Street from Allen Street. The purpose of the 1964 realignment was to provide more
right-of-way and better accommodate the operations of motorized vehicles. Fremont Street is
narrow, providing only 80 feet of right-of-way nominally between the faces of fronting
buildings. When the highway was constructed in 1964, the pre-existing boardwalks and porches
were removed to accommodate the new 4-lane roadway. In 2007, the 4-lane undivided street
section was changed to two lanes with a center turn lane as a means to mitigate higher
operating speeds that were prevalent in the historic district.
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 2
May 2012
Several historic buildings are present along both sides of SR 80 as it bisects the City of
Tombstone historic district. As traffic increases along the current alignment, the historic
buildings become more vulnerable due to the increased vibrations of truck traffic in addition to
natural deterioration. In addition, the City of Tombstone is an important tourist destination
where several special events are conducted every year celebrating its Old West heritage. The
largest of these special events can attract crowds of nearly 100,000 from around the world over a
week-long period.
The City of Tombstone is surrounded by mining claims and active and abandoned mines.
Mining activity is ongoing and is largely located immediately south of the City on both private
land and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land, south of SR 80.
ADOT is now working with the City through the Highway Safety Improvements Program
(HSIP) and Transportation Enhancements (TE) Program to construct safety improvements,
implement enhancement, and perform certain historic rehabilitations on Fremont Street (SR 80)
from 3rd Street to 6th Street. These improvements include narrowing the highway to make room
for pedestrian facilities. These facilities will include sidewalks, landscaping and pedestrian
lighting, street lights, and, where appropriate, the construction of historically consistent
boardwalks and porches. Completion of these improvements is expected in 2013. Although the
highway will remain a three-lane section, a consequence of this work is that there will be no
room to add lanes for future vehicular capacity or safety upgrades, such as traffic or pedestrian
signals, in the future.
Figure 1
Study Area Overview
P:\TRANSPORTATION\ADOT_TPD\23446138_Tombstone_PARA_Scope\GIS\mxds\FinalReport\Study_Area_Overview_WP2_Final.mxd (BLC 5/22/2012)
Source:
Historic Districts: AZSITE 2011
Hazmat: ADEQ Website 2011 (http://gisweb.azdeq.gov)
State Trust Lease: ASLD 2011
Abandoned Mine: BLM 2011
Residential Area: City of Tombstone 2011, Cochise County 2011
Approximate Open Pit Mining Area: URS 2011
Floodplains: FEMA 2008
Roads: ADOT 2009
Pipelines: Rextag Pipelines 2009
Transmission Lines/Substations: SSVEC 2011,
Platts, A Division of the McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. -
POWERmap (Platts analytical database: 2009)
Base: ALRIS 1997 - 2010, BTS 2011
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study
Randolf
Way
Landin Park Way
Lariat Dr
Camino San Rafael Rd
MP 321.1
MP 313.9
Tombstone
Gulch
Walnut Gulch
Reeves Creek
4600
4500
5000
4900
4800
4700
4600
4500
5200
5100
5000
4900
5100
5100
5000
4800
4700
4600
4700
4600
4500
4700
4600
4400
4300
4500
5000
5200
4800
4800 4700
4800
4900
4800
4600
4600
4800
4600
4300
4400
4500
4700
4600
4500
4600
4700
4700
4300
4600
4900
4600
4500
5100
4200
4600
4700
4400
5200
El Paso Natural Gas Company
Sulphur Springs Valley
Electric
Cooperative
Sulphur Springs
Valley Electric
Cooperative
Sulphur
Springs Valley
Electric Cooperative
Sulphur Springs
Valley Electric
Cooperative
Arizona Public Service Co.
Arizona Public Service Co.
Tombstone
Cemetery
Old
Tombstone
High School
Boothill
Cemetery
Landin Park
Walter J Meyer School
Medigovich
Field
Tombstone Courthouse
State Historical Park
Tombstone High School
6th St
3rd St
San Diego St
Old Bisbee Hwy
Fremont St
Davis Rd
Allen St
Middlemarch Rd
Gleeson Rd
Charleston Rd
0 0.5 1
Miles
Legend
City of Tombstone Boundary
Tombstone Historic District National
Historic Landmark / National Register
of Historic Places District
Tombstone Historic District (AZSITE)
100-year Floodplain
Floodway
Closed Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
Mine Permitting Activity
Abandoned Mine
Cemetery
School / School Facility
Park
State Park
Tombstone High School / Waste-Water
Treatment Plant (ASLD Lease)
Residential Area
Approximate Open Pit Mining Area
Surface Management
Bureau of Land Management
State Trust Land (ASLD)
Private
General Features
Milepost Marker
State Route
Local Road
Abandoned Railroad
Substation
Transmission Line
Natural Gas Pipeline
50-foot Contour
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 4
May 2012
2.0
There are several studies and plans that pertain to the study area. This section provides a
summary for each plan or study and notes the applicability to the City of Tombstone State
Route 80 Alternate Route Study.
2.1 FINAL PROJECT ASSESSMENT, SR 80 – FREMONT STREET BETWEEN 3RD STREET AND 6TH
STREET (2011)
As described in Section 1.1 above, a TE and HISP project is planned for construction in 2013 in
Tombstone along SR 80. The TE project would address previous recommendations regarding
safety and the enhancement of the historic landmark district, including constructing
boardwalks or other pedestrian facilities on both sides of Fremont Street between 3rd and 6th
streets, reconstructing porches along the road as historically appropriate, constructing historic
district entry monuments, and landscaping and lighting improvements.
As part of this project, the roadway would be narrowed from the current 68-foot width to
44 feet. On-street parking will be eliminated, and the remnants of a pedestrian bridge along
Fremont Street will be removed. The new street section will have one 16-foot through lane in
each direction, a continuous 12-foot center left turn lane, and curbs and gutters on each side.
2.2 HISTORIC STREETSCAPE ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR A ROADWAY TRANSPORTATION
ENHANCEMENT PROJECT ON SR 80, FREMONT STREET IN THE SCHIEFFELIN HISTORIC
DISTRICT, TOMBSTONE, COCHISE COUNTY, ARIZONA (2011)
This report assesses the historic character of the streetscape along SR 80 between 3rd Street and
6th Street. The purpose of the study was to better inform the project design of the evolution of
Fremont Street and properties adjacent to the corridor. Recommendations included the
restoration of porches and boardwalks to buildings (pre-1960) as well as rehabilitation and
preservation of any intact character-defining features of the Landmark through rehabilitation of
the roadway and streetscape.
2.3 PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ANALYSIS FOR SR 80, HIGHWAY ENHANCEMENTS FOR SAFETY (HES),
TOMBSTONE, ARIZONA (2010)
This report documents a comprehensive Highway Enhancement Pedestrian Safety Analysis
performed for SR 80 in downtown Tombstone. The purpose of the analysis was to evaluate
conditions affecting the safety of pedestrians crossing SR 80 and to recommend improvements.
Selected recommendations from the safety study are planned for the project described in the
previous section (2.1).
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 5
May 2012
2.4 COCHISE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (2006)
The Comprehensive Plan sets forth goals and development policies for land use, transportation,
and other elements throughout the unincorporated areas of Cochise County. Transportation
policies within the Plan address overall circulation and access management to ensure safe and
smooth traffic flow, particularly as future development occurs.
Within the land use plan for Cochise County, Tombstone is identified within a Category B
Growth Area boundary. This suggests potential for moderately paced rural residential type
development, particularly to the northeast of Tombstone City limits. Land uses within the City
are regulated by Tombstone in accordance with its zoning ordinance, as discussed in
Section 3.1.
2.5 TOMBSTONE CIVIC TOWN PLAN (2005)
This Plan documents the outcome of a 3-day charrette that was conducted in 2005. The purpose
of this charrette was to consider strategies for historic preservation issues within the context of
overall community and economic development goals. The charrette was partially a response to
notification from the National Park Service that Tombstone’s status as a national landmark was
threatened due to inappropriate alterations and new construction.
The charrette produced a set of recommendations. The most pertinent to this study is the
recommendation to eliminate regional traffic from Fremont Street, traffic calming on Fremont
Street, and minimizing the separation of Fremont Street from the historic district. The
conceptual alignment for a regional route shown in this document continues south toward
Sierra Vista and Bisbee, suggesting improvement of Charleston Road. This Plan is addressed in
more detail in Section 4.2.
2.6 PLAN FOR THE CREATION OF A HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT (1972)
Although the City of Tombstone is not required to maintain a General Plan under Arizona law,
this 1972 plan was identified by City officials as a key guide to land use and other decisions in
the City. The purpose of the Plan is to outline procedures for preserving and enhancing the
physical record of Tombstone’s history within a community that is active with residents and
tourists. The Plan is a summary of the goals of the Tombstone Restoration Commission.
The Plan proposed a Schieffelin Historic Conservation District, which generally encompasses
the area within the current historic district. SR 80, which was moved to Fremont Street from
Allen Street in the 1960s, was identified as a potential threat to historic resources on the basis of
intrusion into the historic district area. The Plan shows improvement of Charleston Road,
extension of Fremont Street to the west, and development of a major arterial perpendicular to
the highway at 9th Street.
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 6
May 2012
3.0
Existing and planned land uses within the study area are shown in Figure 2. Existing
commercial land uses are clustered along SR 80 near the historic core of Tombstone, where a
National Historic District Landmark has been designated. Low-density residential development
has occurred north of the historic core and continues to the northeast toward Walnut Gulch.
Arizona State Trust land located to the north, east, and west of downtown Tombstone is
generally leased for grazing. The Tombstone High School is located along SR 80 northwest of
downtown on leased State Trust land.
Historic and ongoing mines or mining operations are located to the south of historic
Tombstone. The southern portion of the study area is largely land managed by the BLM. This
area is mostly subject to mining claims and includes a large number of abandoned mines.
Figure 2 shows the current inventory of abandoned mines; this inventory is incomplete and is
still ongoing by BLM.
The City’s zoning reinforces the existing land use patterns and guides future development. The
majority of the city (over 60 percent) is zoned for residential uses. Centered on Fremont and
Allen Streets, the Business designations cover the central portion of the city including the
Tombstone Historic District Landmark, as identified on Figure 2. There are some Business zones
identified along SR 80 in the northwestern portion of the city as well. The land area south of the
historic district is identified as an Industrial/Mining zoning district. The majority of the study
area stretching between SR 82 to the north and Davis Road to the south is undeveloped private
land, Arizona State Trust Land, or federal land managed by the BLM. Existing parcel
boundaries within the City of Tombstone are illustrated in Figure 3.
There are multiple transmission lines located throughout the study area, as shown in Figure 2.
Additionally, there is a natural gas pipeline that spans the project study area from the north to
the eastern edge. The pipeline does not cross within city limits as shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2
Existing and Planned
Land Use
P:\TRANSPORTATION\ADOT_TPD\23446138_Tombstone_PARA_Scope\GIS\mxds\FinalReport\LandUse_TAZs_WP1_Final.mxd (BLC 5/16/2012)
Source:
Historic District: AZSITE 2011
Zoning: City of Tombstone 2011, Cochise County 2011
State Trust Lease: ASLD 2011
Abandoned Mine: BLM 2011
TAZ: Cochise County 2011
Roads: ADOT 2009
Pipelines: Rextag Pipelines 2009
Transmission Lines/Substations: SSVEC 2011,
Platts, A Division of the McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. -
POWERmap (Platts analytical database: 2009)
Base: ALRIS 1997 - 2010, BTS 2010
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study
Randolf
Way
Landin Park Way
Lariat Dr
Camino San Rafael Rd
6th St
3rd St
San Diego St
Old Bisbee Hwy
Fremont St
Davis Rd
Allen St
Middlemarch Rd
Gleeson Rd
Charleston Rd
MP 318.6
MP 315.4
Sulphur Springs
Valley Electric
Cooperative
Sulphur Springs
Valley Electric
Cooperative
Sulphur Springs Valley
Electric Cooperative
Sulphur Springs
Valley Electric
Cooperative
El Paso Natural Gas Company
Arizona Public Service Co.
Arizona Public Service Co.
456
415
388
439
324
431
426
441
448
447
445
453
440
444
442
0 0.5 1
Miles
Legend
City of Tombstone Boundary
Tombstone Historic District National
Historic Landmark / National Register
of Historic Places District
Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ)
Abandoned Mine
Tombstone Zoning
Residential
Business
Industrial and Warehouse
Industrial and Mining
Cochise County Zoning
RU-4 (Rural Residential, 1 unit per 4 acres)
TR-36 (Transitional Residential,
1 unit per 36,000 square feet)
Mixed
Surface Management
Bureau of Land Management
State Trust Land
Private
State Trust Land Lease Status
Tombstone High School / Waste-Water Treatment Plant
Grazing Lease
General Features
Milepost Marker
State Route
Local Road
Abandoned Railroad
Substation
Transmission Line
Natural Gas Pipeline
447
Figure 3
Parcel Information
P:\TRANSPORTATION\ADOT_TPD\23446138_Tombstone_PARA_Scope\GIS\mxds\FinalReport\Parcel_Information_WP1_Final.mxd (BLC 5/16/2012)
Source:
Historic District: AZSITE 2011
Parcel: Cochise County 2011
State Trust Lease: ASLD 2011
Floodplains: FEMA 2008
Roads: ADOT 2009
Pipelines: Rextag Pipelines 2009
Transmission Lines/Substations: SSVEC 2011,
Platts, A Division of the McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. -
POWERmap (Platts analytical database: 2009)
Base: ALRIS 1997 - 2010, BTS 2010
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study
8
15
40
17
10
10
19
40
Phoenix
Flagstaff
Tucson
Project Area
Tombstone
Randolf
Way
Landin Park Way
Lariat Dr
6th St
3rd St
San Diego St
Old Bisbee Hwy
Fremont St
Middlemarch Rd
Charleston Rd
Gleeson Rd
Allen St
MP 318.6
MP 315.4
Tombstone
Gulch
Walnut Gulch
Reeves Creek
El Paso Natural Gas Company Sulphur Springs
Valley
Electric Cooperative
Sulphur Springs
Valley Electric
Cooperative
Arizona Public Service Co.
Walter J Meyer School
Tombstone High
School
10901002
10905028C
10819001E
10902001G
10903004B
10903005
10903008A
10902001H
10903008B
60905008P
60912005
60912025
60912007
60912001X
60912008
60912009
60912006A
60912001D
60912002H
60912024B
60912002L
60912024A
60912014
60912013
10905028B
60912006B
10904030A
10905032B
10925020A
10925020
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Legend
City of Tombstone Boundary
Tombstone Historic District National
Historic Landmark / National Register
of Historic Places District
Schieffelin Historic District
Parcel
100-year Floodplain
Floodway
School / School Facility
Surface Management
Bureau of Land Management
State Trust Land
Private
State Trust Land Lease Status
Tombstone High School / Waste-Water Treatment Plant
General Features
Milepost Marker
State Route
Local Road
Abandoned Railroad
Substation
Transmission Line
Natural Gas Pipeline
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 9
May 2012
4.0
A review of existing and future population and employment growth trends was conducted to
understand the demographic and socioeconomic characteristics in the City of Tombstone. Data
were collected from Cochise County and the US Census for this analysis. Cochise County data
are organized by Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZs) within the City of Tombstone while the
US Census data are broken down by census blocks.
4.1 EXISTING POPULATION
According to Census data, Cochise County had population of 131,346 people in 2010. The study
area had a 2010 population of 1,788 people; of which 77 percent reside within Tombstone City
limits (US Census Bureau 2011). As shown in Table 1, Tombstone has lost population over the
past decade even while Cochise County population grew by over 11 percent.
Table 1 Existing Population
Area 2000 2010 Percent Growth
Tombstone 1,506 1,380 -8.40%
Study Area 1,747 1,788 2.3%
Cochise County 117,755 131,346 11.5%
Arizona 5,130,632 6,392,017 24.6%
Source: US Census Bureau, 2010 Census
4.2 CURRENT DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
CONSIDERATIONS
The potential for environmental justice considerations within the study area was assessed based
on an analysis of the minority and/or low-income populations within the study area. Table 2
shows a breakdown of the population by race and ethnicity based on 2010 Census data. Data
are shown for the City of Tombstone, Cochise County, and the State of Arizona to identify
where there might be a disproportionately large environmental justice population. Minority
populations are defined as those residents who are not reported as White/Non-Hispanic in the
Census. Of the 1,380 people living in Tombstone as of the 2010 Census, over 90 percent are
White. In comparison, Cochise County population is about 78 percent White. The Hispanic
population in Tombstone comprises about 21 percent of the population. The Hispanic youth
population in Tombstone, or persons under 18 years of age, account for approximately
39 percent of the population. Comparatively, Cochise County is approximately 32 percent
Hispanic and the State of Arizona is nearly 30 percent Hispanic. It appears that the City of
Tombstone does not have a disproportionate minority population relative to Cochise County as
a whole.
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 10
May 2012
Table 2 Minority Population
Location
White
African
American
Native
American
Asian
Pacific
Islander
Other Race
Multi Race
Total
Hispanic
Tombstone 1,269 6 9 9 1 39 47 1,380 288
Cochise County 103,085 5,465 1,589 2,525 418 12,989 5,275 131,346 42,543
Arizona 4,667,121 259,008 296,529 176,695 12,648 761,716 218,300 6,392,017 1,895,149
Source: US Census Bureau, 2010 Census
The disabled population includes those who suffer from conditions such as blindness, deafness,
other severe vision and/or hearing impairments, and limited mobility. According to available
data, approximately 24 percent of the population of the City of Tombstone is living with a
disability, which is a higher percent of the total when compared to Cochise County (19 percent)
as identified in Table 3.
As show in Table 3, over 26 percent of the Tombstone population is over the age of 65 and
21 percent are living below the poverty level, compared to 17 percent and 15 percent,
respectively, throughout Cochise County.
Table 3 Population Characteristics
Total Male
Population
Total Female
Population
Persons with
Disability*
Persons
65+
Persons Living
Below Poverty
Level
Tombstone 683 697 359 362 297
Cochise County 66,977 64,369 22,467 22,688 19,351
Arizona 3,175,823 3,216,194 902,252 881,831 933,113
Source: US Census Bureau, 2010 Census
*Data from 2000 Census, since 2010 data not available
4.3 FUTURE POPULATION
The analysis of future population is based on Cochise County total household projections,
which are based on 2000 Census data at the time of this writing. Transportation planning in
Cochise County is generally based on data summarized by TAZs which includes Cochise
County projections for future population growth. Cochise County’s population estimates for
2020 and 2040 show growth to over 90,000 households countywide and over 1,300 households
in the City of Tombstone. It should be noted that the number of households identified in this
analysis for the study area include data from all TAZs that intersect and may extend partially
beyond the study area boundary. Table 4 summarizes the Cochise County projections for future
household growth from 2007 to 2040.
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 11
May 2012
Table 4 Total Number of Households – 2020 and 2040 Projections
Area 2007 2020 2040
Future Growth
Percentage
Tombstone 1,039 1,312 1,359 31%
Study Area 1,041 1,432 1,584 52%
Cochise County 45,546 74,031 98,386 116%
Source: Cochise County, 2010
4.4 EMPLOYMENT
According to Cochise County data, the City of Tombstone provided roughly 2 percent of all
employment in Cochise County in 2007, supplying over 650 jobs. Future growth projections
suggest that Tombstone will increase the total number of jobs to nearly 1,000 by 2040. Due to the
rural nature of the study area there are no employment centers outside of the city limits. Table 5
identifies the existing and future employment projections for the City and study area based on
Cochise County data.
Table 5 Employment Change – 2020 and 2040 Projections
Area 2007 2020 2040
Percent
Change
Tombstone 661 808 989 50%
Study Area 661 808 989 50%
Cochise County 40,920 57,083 83,673 104%
Source: Cochise County, 2010
Tourism-related businesses comprise an important segment of the City of Tombstone’s
economy and provide many jobs in the area. The City of Tombstone is the largest single
employer with nearly 60 part-time and full-time employees.
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 12
May 2012
5.0
An inventory of the current transportation system throughout the City of Tombstone was
conducted to assess current conditions at study locations and to identify any current or
anticipated deficiencies at the study locations.
5.1 EXISTING ROADWAYS
SR 80 provides regional connectivity to the City of Tombstone, connecting to Benson and I-10 to
the north and Bisbee to the south and providing connectivity to the Arizona/New Mexico
border. SR 80 is also known as Fremont Street throughout the City limits and serves as a rural
minor arterial with varying posted speed limits. The posted speed limit on SR 80 south of State
Route 82 (SR 82) is 65 miles per hour (mph), and then reduces to 55 mph north of Middlemarch
Road. The posted speed limit is reduced to 45 mph just north of Randolph Way and to 35 mph
just south of Randolph Way.
The 35 mph posted speed limit continues on SR 80 until 3rd Street, where the posted speed limit
is reduced to 30 mph. Between 3rd Street and 6th Street, there are historic buildings located at the
right-of-way line in close proximity to Fremont Street traffic. The posted speed limit increases to
35 mph south of 6th Street and increases to 45 mph north of Landin Parkway. The posted speed
limit increases to 55 mph just south of Landin Parkway and then increases to 65 mph north of
Davis Road. Figure 4 illustrates the street network.
SR 80 consists of a two-lane roadway north of Lariat Drive consisting of one lane in each
direction of travel, flaring to a three-lane section to provide a two-way left-turn lane south of
Lariat Drive. The three-lane section continues to San Diego Street. South of San Diego Street
SR 80 reduces to a two-lane section flaring at Davis Road to provide a southbound left-turn
lane.
The remainder of the streets in Tombstone are minor collectors and local streets providing
access to commercial and residential areas of the city. Typically, none of these streets provide
regional connectivity. Most of these streets are two lanes with a speed limit of 30 mph or less.
5.2 INTERSECTION CONTROLS
All of the intersections within the City of Tombstone are unsignalized. The minor streets are
stop controlled along SR 80 with SR 80 operating as free-flow. In the downtown area, primarily
between 3rd Street and 6th Street, pedestrian crossing signs are present in both directions of
travel along SR 80.
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 13
May 2012
5.3 PARKING
Parking areas are located throughout the Tombstone downtown area. SR 80 serves as the
regional access to these parking lots and one parking lot is located directly along SR 80. SR 80
does not provide on-street parking between 3rd Street and 6th Street. On-street parking is
provided between 1st Street and 3rd Street, then again between 6th Street and 10th Street. During
normal business hours, the existing parking is sufficient to accommodate the demand.
5.4 CRASH DATA
Crash data along SR 80 within the City of Tombstone limits (MP 315.4 to MP 318.6) were
obtained from ADOT Traffic Records Section. It should be noted that crash data from the City of
Tombstone were not provided and therefore not included within the analysis. The crash data
acquired were for a five-year period from January 2006 through December 2010. Table 6
summarizes the total number of crashes per year.
Table 6 Crash Data Summary
Year Yearly
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total Average
Number of Crashes 3 0 0 3 1 7 1.4
Source: Arizona Department of Transportation 2011
As illustrated in Table 6, a total of 7 crashes have occurred between January 2006 and December
2010 with an average of 1.4 crashes occurring yearly along SR 80 within the City of Tombstone
limits. The highest number of crashes occurred in 2006 and 2009 with 3 crashes. However, of the
7 crashes 3 have resulted in fatalities, or 43 percent. Two of the 3 fatal crashes occurred with
pedestrians.
5.5 PROGRAMMED NETWORK IMPROVEMENTS
Signing and striping improvements were completed in July 2010 on SR 80 which eliminated on-street
parking from 3rd Street to 6th Street, provided additional signs directing visitors to parking
areas and reduced the speed limit to 30 mph. A traffic enhancement project will construct
boardwalks along both sides of SR 80 from approximately 3rd Street to 6th Street. The
construction of the boardwalks will include wider walkways, overhead canopies and
landscaping. Additional destination signage will also be installed along SR 80 to assist in
directing patrons to the historic locations.
5.6 REGIONAL PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS
SR 80 in Benson is planned to be widened by horizon year 2040 to provide two lanes per
direction of travel through the Benson City limits. No regional widening improvements are
planned within the City of Tombstone in the five year plan.
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 14
May 2012
5.7 EXISTING LOCAL TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LEVEL OF SERVICE
Daily traffic counts were conducted by Traffic Research and Analysis, Inc. (TRA) on Thursday,
August 25th and Saturday, August 27th of 2011. Daily (24-hour) traffic counts and Scheme F
classification counts were recorded for each day at four locations, beginning at 12:00 AM and
ending at 11:59 PM:
SR 80 north of Randolph Way;
SR 80 south of Landin Parkway;
SR 80 south of Davis Road; and
Davis Road east of SR 80.
In addition, TRA collected origin and destination (OD) data at two locations along SR 80 on the
same days beginning at 6:00 AM and ending at 4:59 PM:
SR 80 south of Randolph Way; and
SR 80 north of Landin Parkway.
Table 7 presents the 2011 existing traffic volumes at the study locations. Figure 4 identifies the
roadway network throughout the City of Tombstone and illustrates the existing traffic volumes.
In general, traffic volumes are higher at the north end of Tombstone compared to the southern
extents. The highest 24-hour volume recorded was approximately 4,000 vehicles per day on
SR 80 just north of Randolph Way.
It should be noted that incomplete data were obtained on Thursday, August 25th at the SR 80,
north of Randolph Way location in the southbound direction. A malfunction in the tube
occurred resulting in inaccurate data collection. The malfunction occurred from 4:15 PM on
August 25th through 10:30 AM on August 26th. Traffic count data were collected after 10:30 AM
on August 26th through Saturday, August 27th. Therefore, traffic counts obtained on Friday,
August 26th from 4:15 PM through 11:45 PM were used in place of the malfunction time period.
This results in a more conservative analysis as traffic volumes on Friday, August 26th were
slightly higher at other locations than on Thursday, August 25th.
ADOT MPD provided seasonal adjustment factors for SR 80 near the Tombstone area. The
month of August had an adjustment factor of 0.998; therefore an adjustment factor of 1.0 was
applied to all traffic volumes obtained.
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 15
May 2012
Table 7 Existing Area Arterial Highway Volumes
HWY Location Direction Class
Traffic Counts
24 Hour
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
Thursday August 25, 2011
SR 80 North of Randolph Way SB* RMA 2,088 127 157
SR 80 North of Randolph Way NB RMA 1,861 108 169
SR 80 South of Landin Park Way SB RMA 1,202 85 92
SR 80 South of Landin Park Way NB RMA 1,202 86 96
SR 80 South of Davis Road SB RMA 736 57 60
SR 80 South of Davis Road NB RMA 747 42 71
Davis Rd East of SR 80 WB RMC 553 52 41
Davis Rd East of SR 80 EB RMC 449 44 47
Saturday August 27, 2011 24 Hour Mid-day Peak Hour
SR 80 North of Randolph Way SB RMA 2,125 191
SR 80 North of Randolph Way NB RMA 1,898 149
SR 80 South of Landin Park Way SB RMA 1,474 119
SR 80 South of Landin Park Way NB RMA 1,321 118
SR 80 South of Davis Road SB RMA 862 81
SR 80 South of Davis Road NB RMA 829 80
Davis Rd East of SR 80 WB RMC 529 48
Davis Rd East of SR 80 EB RMC 653 43
Source: TRA, 2011
* Combination of 8/26/11 and 8/27/11 traffic volumes.
RMA: Rural Minor Arterial
RMC: Rural Major Collector
The existing AM and PM peak hour factors (PHF) for the study locations are summarized in
Table 8. A PHF is the peak hour traffic volume divided by four times the highest 15-minute
peak count. The PHF is used to gauge the platooning, or arrival of vehicles during the peak
hour. The lower the PHF, the more concentrated the peak hour flow.
Table 8 Existing Peak Hour Factors
HWY Location
Peak Hour Factor
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
SR 80 North of Randolph Way 0.65 0.67
SR 80 South of Landin Park Way 0.72 0.79
SR 80 South of Davis Road 0.68 0.77
Davis Rd East of SR 80 0.59 0.65
Figure 4
Existing Traffic Conditions
P:\TRANSPORTATION\ADOT_TPD\23446138_Tombstone_PARA_Scope\GIS\mxds\FinalReport\ExistingTraffic_Conditions_Final.mxd (BLC 5/16/2012)
Source:
Historic District: AZSITE 2011
Roads: ADOT 2009
Base: ALRIS 1997 - 2010, BTS 2011
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study
8
15
40
17
10
10
19
40
Phoenix
Flagstaff
Tucson
Project Area
Tombstone
Randolf
Way
Landin Park Way
Lariat Dr
Camino San Rafael Rd
MP 318.6
MP 315.4
6th St
3rd St
San Diego St
Fremont St
Davis Rd
Allen St
Middlemarch Rd
Gleeson Rd
Charleston Rd
0 0.5 1
Miles
Legend
City of Tombstone Boundary
Tombstone Historic District National
Historic Landmark / National Register
of Historic Places District
Surface Management
Bureau of Land Management
State Trust Land
Private
General Features
Milepost Marker
State Route
Local Road
Abandoned Railroad
P:\TRANSPORTATION\ADOT_TPD\23446138_Graphics\Figures\PDFs\Fig4_ExistingTraffic_Conditions.pdf (RJW) 5/16/2012
52(41) / 48
553 / 529
1002 1182
449 / 653
44(47) / 43
57(60) / 81
736 / 862
1483 1691
747 / 829
42(71) / 80
86(96) / 118
1202 / 1321
2404 2795
1202 / 1474
85(92) / 119
108(169) / 149
1861 / 1898
3949 4023
2088* / 2125
127(157)* / 191
Weekday / Weekend Daily Traffic
Weekday / Weekend Directional Daily Traffic
Weekday AM(PM) / Weekend Peak Hour Traffic
1234 1234
1234 / 1234
123(123) / 123
* Partial Friday counts utilized
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 17
May 2012
Of the amount of traffic throughout the Tombstone area, the majority is classified by the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) as passenger cars. Due to the absence of alternative routes
between SR 82 and Davis Road, regional truck traffic including oversize loads along SR 80 from
Benson and I-10 to Bisbee and Douglas are frequently routed through Tombstone. For the
purposes of this evaluation, FHWA’s 10 truck vehicle classifications have been grouped into
two categories as follows:
Single Unit Trucks – Includes buses and single unit trucks without trailers; and
Multiple Unit Trucks – Includes single unit trucks or multiple trailer trucks, recreational
vehicles (RV’s) and RV trailers, and buses
To analyze the amount of truck traffic in the vicinity of Tombstone an analysis was conducted
over a three-day period within the city limits. Table 9 summarizes the breakdown between
vehicle classifications within the City of Tombstone.
Table 9 Vehicle Classification
HWY Location Direction
Truck Traffic
Single
Unit
(SU)
SU %
of Total
Multiple
Unit
(MU)
MU %
of
Total
Total
% of
Trucks
Thursday August 25, 2011
SR 80 North of Randolph Way SB* 55 2.6% 78 3.7% 6.3%
SR 80 North of Randolph Way NB 59 3.2% 92 4.9% 8.1%
SR 80 South of Landin Parkway SB 30 2.5% 81 6.7% 9.2%
SR 80 South of Landin Parkway NB 29 2.4% 84 7.0% 9.4%
SR 80 South of Davis Road SB 25 3.4% 34 4.6% 8.0%
SR 80 South of Davis Road NB 19 2.5% 35 4.7% 7.2%
Davis Rd East of SR 80 WB 26 4.7% 42 7.6% 12.3%
Davis Rd East of SR 80 EB 18 4.0% 36 8.0% 12.0%
Saturday August 27, 2011
SR 80 North of Randolph Way SB 23 1.1% 30 1.4% 2.5%
SR 80 North of Randolph Way NB 15 0.8% 35 1.8% 2.6%
SR 80 South of Landin Parkway SB 13 0.9% 20 1.4% 2.3%
SR 80 South of Landin Parkway NB 10 0.8% 27 2.0% 2.8%
SR 80 South of Davis Road SB 11 1.3% 12 1.4% 2.7%
SR 80 South of Davis Road NB 8 1.0% 15 1.8% 2.8%
Davis Rd East of SR 80 WB 6 1.1% 14 2.6% 3.7%
Davis Rd East of SR 80 EB 7 1.1% 11 1.7% 2.8%
Source: TRA, 2011
* Combination of 8/26/11 and 8/27/11 traffic volumes.
Origin and destination (OD) data were also collected via license plate recognition in which the
last four digits of license plates were noted. These digits were then compiled in a database and
matched to determine the beginning and ending location of each. The purpose of collecting the
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 18
May 2012
OD data was to determine the amount of traffic traveling through the City. In addition, the OD
data collection efforts recorded vehicles in a simplistic classification: class 4 truck (single unit
truck) and larger or passenger vehicle. The data were collected from 6:00 AM to 6:00 PM.
Of the vehicles traveling south, approximately 20 percent entering Tombstone continue through
the City with minimal stops during the typical weekday and Saturday. Approximately 26
percent of the vehicles traveling northbound entering Tombstone continue through the City with
minimal stops during a typical weekday and Saturday.
More specifically, approximately 8 percent of southbound truck traffic is through-put traffic, or
traffic that makes minimal stops within the City during the typical weekday and Saturday.
Approximately 50 percent of the northbound truck traffic is through-put traffic during a typical
weekday while approximately 20 percent of the northbound truck traffic is through-put traffic
during a typical Saturday. It should be noted that the OD data collection location on SR 80 at the
southern end of Tombstone was just north of the main entrance to the mine, or just north of
Landin Parkway. In addition several parking lots south of SR 80 accommodate RV’s, RV
trailers, and buses which may attract many visitors entering Tombstone from the north
(southbound traffic) and then return to the north. These parking lots and Charleston Road
absorb RV’s, RV trailers, and buses which are believed to account for a majority of the truck
trips on SR 80 within the study area. Table 10 summarizes the OD data collection.
Table 10 Origin-Destination Data Collection Summary
% Pass Thru Traffic
Location
Weekday Weekend
Total Truck Total Truck
SB SR 80 19% 9% 21% 7%
NB SR 80 30% 51% 24% 20%
Source: TRA, 2011
Existing level of service (LOS) is a function of the roadway capacity and existing traffic
volumes. Table 11 provides LOS definitions as related to the daily volume thresholds for each
roadway classification.
Table 11 Level of Service Upper Limit Thresholds for Roadway Segments (ADT)
Classification
Level of Service
A B C D E
Rural Minor Arterial (2-lane w/ TWLTL) <5,000 7,000 10,000 13,000 15,000
Rural Minor Collector w/2 lanes <4,000 5,500 7,500 9,000 10,000
Rural Highway w/ 2-lanes <1,500 3,500 6,600 11,200 19,000
Sources: ITE Guidelines, 2000
TWLTL: Two-way left-turn lane
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 19
May 2012
Daily levels of service serve as a very good planning tool to identify segment needs based on
daily traffic volumes. Peak hour analyses are more robust and account for several factors not
included in the daily analyses. For this reason, infrastructure improvements are generally
guided by peak hour analyses. The detailed peak hour roadway segment level of service
analysis is determined considering factors such as number of lanes, the width of each lane and
the width of each shoulder, the peak hour factor (PHF), the percent passing zones available, the
percent trucks, buses and RVs, the existing traffic volumes, the posted or measured speed limit
and the overall roadway terrain.
The daily levels of service for SR 80 at the study locations were based on the ADT and
thresholds identified in Table 11 for a rural minor arterial and the results are shown in Table 13.
In general, SR 80 in the City of Tombstone operates with a daily LOS of A under existing
conditions. The daily levels of service for Davis Road at the study location were based on the
ADT and thresholds identified in Table 11 for a rural minor collector.
The posted speed limit on SR 80 within the City limits changes from 55 mph at the edges to
30 mph in the downtown area. The traffic counts conducted within the City limits were located
where the posted speed limit changed from 35 mph to 45 mph. For purposes of peak hour
analyses, SR 80 at the study locations is classified as a Class III highway per the Highway
Capacity Manual 2010 (HCM 2010). A Class III highway is classified as a highway serving
moderately developed areas that may pass through small towns or developed recreational
areas. Local traffic often mixes with through (regional) traffic and the density of unsignalized
roadside access points is noticeably higher than in a purely rural area. Such segments often
contain reduced speed limits that reflect higher levels of activities (pedestrian and vehicular).
Davis Road east of SR 80 is posted with a 55 mph speed limit and would be classified as a
Class II highway. The posted speed limit on Davis Road where the traffic counts were
conducted is 25 mph and is near the stop controlled intersection with SR 80. Therefore, for
purposes of peak hour analyses, Davis Road is classified as a Class III highway due to the lower
posted speed limit at the location where traffic counts were conducted.
The HCM 2010 establishes methods and criteria to determine the roadway segment level of
service. Table 12 illustrates the level of service criteria thresholds for a two-lane highway with
vehicles traveling at lower speeds for a Class II and Class III highway.
Final Repo
SR 80 Alte
Table 12
LOS P
A
B
C
D
E
F W
Sources: 20
Peak hou
posted sp
peak hou
the LOS i
SR 80 bet
compare
the intera
Table 13
HWY
SR 80
SR 80
SR 80
Davis Rd
RMA: Rural
RMC: Rural
5.8 FUT
The traffi
the Coch
approxim
growth o
The 2020
this stud
traffic vo
provided
rt
rnate Route PAR
Peak
Percent of T
When deman
010 HCM
ur levels of s
peed limits a
ur factors ide
is the same i
tween 3rd Str
d to study s
action of ped
Existi
Location
North of R
South of L
South of D
East of SR
l Minor Arterial
Major Collector
TURE NO‐BU
ic volumes i
hise County C
mately 2 perc
over the last
0 and horizon
y. The 2030
olumes. Futu
d in Table 14
RA Study
Hour Level
Class II
Time Spent F
≤40
>40‐55
>55‐70
>70‐85
>85
nd flow exceed
capacity
service were
at the count
entified in T
in the AM an
reet and 6th S
egments as a
destrian traf
ing Level of
Randolph Way
Landin Parkw
Davis Road
80
UILD TRAFFI
in the Tombs
Comprehens
cent per yea
10 years, wh
n year 2040
traffic foreca
ure 2020, 203
4 and are illu
City of Tomb
Alternate R
of Service T
Following
ds segment
calculated u
locations, th
able 8 and th
nd PM peak
Street will lik
higher con
ffic occur.
Service
Class
y RMA
way RMA
RMA
RMC
C VOLUMES
stone area ar
sive Plan an
ar. Historic tr
hich corresp
traffic foreca
asts were int
30 and horizo
ustrated in F
bstone State R
Route PARA
20
Thresholds f
Percent
When dem
using the Hi
he traffic volu
he roadway
k hours.
kely result in
ncentration o
s Daily
A A
A A
A A
C A
AND LEVEL
re expected
nd projected
raffic counts
ponds to the
asts were ob
terpolated u
on year 2040
igure 5. It sh
Route 80
Study
for Two‐Lan
Class III
t of Free‐Flo
>91.7
>83.3‐91.7
>75.0‐83.3
>66.7‐75.0
≤66.7
mand flow exc
capacity
ghway Capa
umes and p
geometrics.
n decreased
of vehicles an
y
AM Pe
Hou
C
B
A
B
OF SERVICE
to increase b
traffic forec
s yield in app
Cochise Cou
btained from
utilizing the 2
0 forecasts fo
hould be not
ne Class II &
ow Speed
eeds segment
acity Softwa
ercent truck
. As identifie
levels of ser
nd turning m
eak
ur
PM Pe
Hou
C
B
A
B
E
based on gro
asts at a rate
proximately
unty project
m Cochise Co
2020 and ho
or the study
ted that the g
Ma
III Highw
t
are (HCS), th
ks obtained,
ed in Table 1
rvice when
movements
eak
ur
owth forecas
e of
y 1.8 percent
ed growth r
ounty for use
orizon year 2
locations ar
growth rates
ay 2012
ways
he
the
13,
and
sts in
rate.
e in
2040
re
s
HW
SR
SR
SR
Dav
Final Repo
SR 80 Alte
between
2 percent
The grow
Due to th
or develo
that deve
reflected
2007 traff
in a large
Table 14
WY Loca
80 Nor
80 Sou
80 Sou
vis Rd East
Source: Co
Design h
direction
factors w
hour and
the existi
implies th
direction
direction
the major
direction
Table 15.
rt
rnate Route PAR
2020 and 20
t per year gr
wth rate betw
he rural natu
opment coul
elopment wi
in Table 14.
fic volume d
er growth ra
No‐Bu
ation
rth of Randolp
th of Landin
th of Davis R
t of SR 80
ochise County, 2
hourly volum
nal (D) factor
were based on
d 8 percent d
ing traffic co
hat each pea
n. During the
n along SR 80
rity of traffic
n along Davi
.
RA Study
030 and betw
rowth rate.
ween existin
ure of Tombs
ld result in a
ill occur with
. In addition
data utilized
ate.
uild Daily T
W
ph Way 3
Parkway 2
Road
2010 Transportati
mes were dev
rs to the proj
n the existin
during the PM
ounts, which
ak hour has
e AM peak h
0 and the we
c is traveling
s Road. The
City of Tomb
Alternate R
ween 2020 an
g (2011) and
stone and th
an increase in
hin the next
n, the existing
d to calibrate
Traffic Volu
Exst
Wkdy
Exst
Wkn
3949 4023
2404 1795
1483 1691
1002 1182
ion Model
veloped by a
jected 2020,
ng traffic cou
M peak hou
h show a 55 p
a higher per
hour the maj
estbound dir
g in the north
projected fu
bstone State R
Route PARA
21
nd horizon y
d the year 20
he surroundi
n traffic dem
9 years resu
g traffic volu
the Cochise
umes
t
nd
2020
3 6150
5 4548
1 2388
2 2194
applying the
2030 and 20
unts, which y
r. The direct
percent/45 p
rcent of traff
jority of traff
rection along
hbound dire
uture peak h
Route 80
Study
year 2040 ver
020 is higher
ing area, min
mand and ge
ulting in the
ume data co
e County mo
Daily T
Annual
Growth
from
Existing
4.8%
7.3%
3.9%
7.1%
e following h
040 daily traf
yielded 7 pe
tional factor
percent split.
fic traveling
fic is travelin
g Davis Roa
ection along
hour traffic v
ry closely ap
r than the 2 p
nor changes
eneration. It
larger grow
ollected are lo
odeling effor
Traffic
2030
An
Gr
f
2
7267 1
5611 2
3254 3
2743 2
hourly (K) a
ffic volumes
ercent during
rs were deter
. The directio
on the road
ng in the sou
ad. During th
g SR 80 and e
volumes are
Ma
pproximate t
percent per y
s in employm
is anticipate
wth rate as
ower than th
rts, which re
nnual
rowth
from
2020
2040
1.7% 8384
2.1% 6673
3.1% 4120
2.3% 3292
and
s. The hourly
g the AM pe
rmined base
onal factor
way in a cer
uthbound
he PM peak
eastbound
depicted in
ay 2012
the
year.
ment
ed
he
esults
0
Annual
Growth
from
2020
4 1.6%
3 1.9%
0 2.8%
2 2.0%
y
eak
ed on
rtain
hour
Figure 5
Future Traffic Conditions
P:\TRANSPORTATION\ADOT_TPD\23446138_Tombstone_PARA_Scope\GIS\mxds\FinalReport\FutureTraffic_Conditions_Final.mxd (BLC 5/16/2012)
Source:
Historic District: AZSITE 2011
Roads: ADOT 2009
Base: ALRIS 1997 - 2010, BTS 2010
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study
8
15
40
17
10
10
19
40
Phoenix
Flagstaff
Tucson
Project Area
Tombstone
Randolf
Way
Landin Park Way
Lariat Dr
Camino San Rafael Rd
MP 318.6
MP 315.4
6th St
3rd St
San Diego St
Fremont St
Davis Rd
Allen St
Middlemarch Rd
Gleeson Rd
Charleston Rd
0 0.5 1
Miles
Legend
City of Tombstone Boundary
Tombstone Historic District National
Historic Landmark / National Register
of Historic Places District
Surface Management
Bureau of Land Management
State Trust Land
Private
General Features
Milepost Marker
State Route
Local Road
Abandoned Railroad
P:\ADOT_TPD\23446138_Graphics\Figures\PDFs\Fig5_FutureTraffic_Conditions.pdf (RJW) 5/16/2012
3292 127(119) 104(145)
2040 Daily Traffic Volumes
2030 Daily Traffic Volumes
2020 Daily Traffic Volumes
1234
2040 AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
2030 AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
2020 AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
123(123)
123(123)
123(123)
2743 106(99) 86(121)
2194 84(79) 66(97)
4120 159(148) 130(181)
3254 125(117) 103(143)
2388 92(86) 75(105)
210(294) 6673 257(240)
177(247) 5611 216(202)
143(200) 4548 175(164)
264(369) 8384 323(302)
229(320) 7267 280(262)
194(271) 6150 237(221)
1234
1234
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 23
May 2012
Table 15 Future No-Build Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
HWY Location Direction
Existing 2020 2030 2040
AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM
SR 80 North of Randolph Way SB 127 157 237 221 280 262 323 302
SR 80 North of Randolph Way NB 108 169 194 271 229 320 264 369
SR 80 South of Landin Parkway SB 85 92 175 164 216 202 257 240
SR 80 South of Landin Parkway NB 86 96 143 200 177 247 210 294
SR 80 South of Davis Road SB 57 60 92 86 125 117 159 148
SR 80 South of Davis Road NB 42 71 75 105 103 143 130 181
Davis Rd East of SR 80 WB 52 41 84 79 106 99 127 119
Davis Rd East of SR 80 EB 44 47 69 97 86 121 104 145
The future segment level of service analyses for the horizon year 2020 are summarized in
Table 16. For purposes of this analysis, the existing PHFs summarized in Table 8 at each
location were utilized. All of the study locations are projected to operate with acceptable levels
of service (LOS C or better) during the peak hours. No mitigation is warranted based on LOS
criteria.
Table 16 2020 No-Build LOS
HWY Location Class Daily
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
SR 80 North of Randolph Way RMA C C C
SR 80 South of Landin Parkway RMA B C C
SR 80 South of Davis Road RMA A B B
Davis Rd East of SR 80 RMC A B B
RMA: Rural Minor Arterial
RMC: Rural Major Collector
The future segment level of service analyses for the horizon year 2030 were performed using the
existing PHFs summarized in Table 8 and are summarized in Table 17. All of the study
locations are projected to operate with acceptable levels of service (LOS C or better) during the
peak hours. No mitigation is warranted based on LOS criteria.
Table 17 2030 No-Build LOS
HWY Location Class Daily
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
SR 80 North of Randolph Way RMA C C C
SR 80 South of Landin Parkway RMA C C C
SR 80 South of Davis Road RMA A B B
Davis Rd East of SR 80 RMC A B B
RMA: Rural Minor Arterial
RMC: Rural Major Collector
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 24
May 2012
The future segment level of service analyses for the horizon year 2040 were performed using the
existing PHFs summarized in Table 8 and are summarized in Table 18. All of the study
locations are projected to operate with acceptable levels of service (LOS C or better) during the
peak hours with the exception of the PM peak hour on SR 80 north of Randolph Way, which is
projected to operate with a LOS D. Per ADOT Policies, Guidelines and Procedures (PGP)
Section 430, mitigation is warranted on rural roadways in which the levels of service are worse
than a LOS C.
Table 18 2040 No-Build LOS
HWY Location Class Daily
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
SR 80 North of Randolph Way RMA D C D
SR 80 South of Landin Parkway RMA C C C
SR 80 South of Davis Road RMA B B B
Davis Rd East of SR 80 RMC A C C
RMA: Rural Minor Arterial
RMC: Rural Major Collector
5.9 FUTURE BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LEVELS OF SERVICE
The projected levels of service for the horizon year 2020 and 2030 indicated that additional
mitigation is not warranted based on traffic volumes alone. In the horizon year 2040 the PM
peak hour level of service on SR 80 drops to a LOS D. Per the ADOT PGP, mitigation is
warranted based on traffic volumes.
The OD data collection and summarized in Table 10 indicate that approximately 20 percent of
the existing traffic on SR 80 pass-through the City with minimal delay. It is anticipated that this
same percentage would pass through Tombstone in the horizon year 2040. If an alternate
corridor for SR 80 were proposed, it is estimated that approximately 20 percent of the 2040
traffic volumes would utilize this corridor instead of the current SR 80 alignment. In doing so, a
20 percent reduction of traffic utilizing the existing SR 80 alignment would occur. Considering
the 20 percent shift of traffic, the 2040 daily build volumes for the existing SR 80 segment and
the alternate corridor are illustrated in Table 19.
Table 19 2040 Daily Build Traffic Volumes
HWY Location
2040 No-
Build
2040 Existing
Roadway
2040 Alternate
Corridor
SR 80 North of Randolph Way 8384 6707 1677
SR 80 South of Landin Parkway 6673 5338 1335
SR 80 South of Davis Road 4120 3296 824
Davis Rd East of SR 80 3292 2634 658
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 25
May 2012
Based on the projected 2040 daily traffic volumes summarized in Table 19 and the daily
capacities for various roadways illustrated in Table 11, the alternate corridor will operate under
capacity with a single lane in each direction as a rural highway.
Design hourly volumes were developed by applying the following hourly (K) and
directional (D) factors to the projected 2040 daily traffic volumes. The hourly factors were based
on the existing traffic counts, which yielded 7 percent during the AM peak hour and 8 percent
during the PM peak hour. The directional factors were determined based on the existing traffic
counts conducted, which resulted in a 55 percent/45 percent split. The directional factor implies
that each peak hour has a higher percent of traffic traveling on the roadway in a certain
direction. During the AM peak hour the majority of traffic is traveling in the southbound
direction along SR 80 and the westbound direction along Davis Road. During the PM peak hour
the majority of traffic is traveling in the northbound direction along SR 80 and eastbound
direction along Davis Road. The projected 2040 build peak hour traffic volumes along the
existing SR 80 roadway are depicted in Table 20.
Table 20 Future Build Peak Hour Traffic Volumes – Existing SR 80 Roadway
HWY Location Direction
Existing 2040
AM PM AM PM
SR 80 North of Randolph Way SB 127 157 258 241
SR 80 North of Randolph Way NB 108 169 211 295
SR 80 South of Landin Parkway SB 85 92 206 192
SR 80 South of Landin Parkway NB 86 96 168 235
SR 80 South of Davis Road SB 57 60 127 119
SR 80 South of Davis Road NB 42 71 104 145
Davis Rd East of SR 80 WB 52 41 101 95
Davis Rd East of SR 80 EB 44 47 83 116
The projected 2040 build peak hour traffic volumes along the alternate corridor of SR 80 are
depicted in Table 21.
Table 21 Future Build Peak Hour Traffic Volumes – Alternate SR 80 Corridor
HWY Location Direction
2040
AM PM
SR 80 North of Randolph Way SB 65 60
SR 80 North of Randolph Way NB 53 74
SR 80 South of Landin Parkway SB 51 48
SR 80 South of Landin Parkway NB 42 59
SR 80 South of Davis Road SB 32 30
SR 80 South of Davis Road NB 26 36
Davis Rd East of SR 80 WB 25 24
Davis Rd East of SR 80 EB 21 29
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 26
May 2012
The future level of service analyses for the existing segment of SR 80 and the alternate corridor
for SR 80 during the horizon year 2040 are summarized in Table 22. For purposes of peak hour
analyses, the existing PHFs at each location were utilized and the alternate corridor was
analyzed as a two-lane Class II highway. Class II highways generally have no-passing zones
and function as access routes to Class I highways serving as scenic or recreational routes. The
LOS criteria for Class II highways are identified in Table 12.
All of the study locations are projected to operate with acceptable levels of service (LOS C or
better) during the peak hours with the addition of the future SR 80 corridor.
Table 22 2040 Build LOS
HWY Location
Existing Roadway Alternate Corridor
Daily
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
Daily
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
SR 80 North of Randolph Way C C C A B B
SR 80 South of Landin Parkway B C C A A A
SR 80 South of Davis Road B B B
Davis Rd East of SR 80 A C C
In addition to improving the level of service on the existing SR 80 segment, an alternate corridor
would also reduce the travel time that a regional commuter would endure as the posted speed
limit on the alternate corridor could be as high as 65 mph, as is the case on most rural arterial
roadways in the ADOT system. It takes approximately 6 minutes to travel through the City of
Tombstone limits, or where the posted speed limit changes from 65 mph, assuming no stops
occur for pedestrian crossings or for vehicles entering SR 80 from access points within the City
limits. If a future corridor were developed with similar extents, it would take approximately
4 minutes to traverse the same distance, resulting in a time savings of 2 minutes per vehicle.
This translates to approximately 56 hours of savings per day using the projected future corridor
daily traffic volumes shown in Table 19. This assumes the alternate corridor will be access
controlled and of similar length to the existing segment.
5.10 EXISTING AND PLANNED TRANSIT SERVICE
There are no public transit operations in the study area. The closest public transportation
options are located in Benson, approximately 20 miles northwest of the City of Tombstone
which offers Amtrak and Greyhound bus service. Benson Area Transit (BAT) provides deviated
fixed route bus service throughout the City of Benson and to Cochise College, Mescal/J6,
St David and Pomerene. Although no services operate exclusively within the City of
Tombstone, there are companies that operate shuttles with stops in Tombstone providing
service to Tucson International and Sierra Vista Municipal Airports.
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 27
May 2012
5.11 RAILROAD CHARACTERISTICS
Regional railroad connections do not exist within the City of Tombstone limits. An abandoned
railroad line exists in the northwest City limits, west of SR 80. There are no future plans for
construction of new railroad lines within the City.
5.12 PEDESTRIAN
The City of Tombstone is rural in nature and has a history of pedestrian access and activity
along Fremont and Allen Streets in the city. From 3rd Street to 6th Street, Allen Street is not open
to traffic and serves as a pedestrian only thoroughfare. Upon the 1964 realignment of SR 80,
pedestrian activity along Fremont Street was reduced when historic boardwalks and porches
were removed for construction of the new roadway. ADOT is working with the City to improve
the pedestrian facilities along Fremont Street by narrowing the highway and reconstructing
new sidewalks, boardwalks and porches. These improvements are anticipated to create a more
pedestrian friendly environment and represent a more historically accurate configuration of the
City of Tombstone.
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 28
May 2012
6.0
Given the importance of historic and cultural resources to the evaluation of a potential
realignment, specific focus was provided to inventorying historic and cultural resources in the
study area. Cultural resources include archaeological sites, historical buildings and structures,
and places that have significance for traditional groups that have cultural affiliations with the
study area. When an individual project advances, ADOT considers effects on properties listed
in or eligible for the Arizona Register of Historic Places (Arizona Register) pursuant to the State
Historic Preservation Act and the Arizona Antiquities Act. If Federal Highway Administration
approval is required or if federal funds are used, effects on properties listed in or eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places (National Register) also would be considered pursuant to
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and Section 4(f) of the Department of
Transportation Act.
Criteria for inclusion in the Arizona Register and in the National Register are identical (Arizona
Administrative Code, Title 12, Chapter 8, Article 3, R12-8-302; Title 36, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 60). To be eligible, properties must be at least 50 years old (unless they have
special significance) and have national, state, or local significance in American history,
architecture, archaeology, engineering, or culture. They also must possess integrity of location,
design, setting materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and meet at least one of four
criteria:
Criterion A: be associated with significant historical events or trends
Criterion B: be associated with historically significant people
Criterion C: have distinctive characteristics of a style or type, or have artistic value, or
represent a significant entity whose components may lack individual
distinction
Criterion D: have yielded or have potential to yield important information
The State Historic Preservation Officer, in consultation with the Arizona Historic Sites Review
Committee, has authority to list properties in the Arizona Register. The Keeper of the National
Register (a position within the National Park Service [NPS]) has authority to list properties in
the National Register, but for purposes of Section 106, consensus determinations of eligibility
usually are made between the lead federal agency and the State Historic Preservation Officer.
Specific historic and cultural resources for the study area are listed in Table 23 and Table 24.
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 29
May 2012
6.1 RECORDS REVIEW
6.1.1 Methods
A records review was conducted to identify and compile information about prior cultural
resource studies and previously recorded archaeological and historical sites within the study
area and a 1-mile buffer. A primary source of data was the AZSITE Cultural Resource
Inventory, a geographic information system database that includes information compiled by the
AZSITE Consortium members (State Historic Preservation Office [SHPO], Arizona State
Museum, Arizona State University, Museum of Northern Arizona) and other participating
agencies. Information on file at SHPO provided additional data about the Tombstone Historic
District National Historic Landmark. The ADOT Historic Preservation Team Portal, a web-based
geographical information system, also was checked.
Prior planning documents also were reviewed, including:
 Plan for the Creation of a Historic Environment, prepared by Billy G. Garrett and James W.
Garrison with the Tombstone Restoration Commission Inc., 1972
 Tombstone Civic Town Plan, prepared by City of Tombstone, National Parks Service,
Arizona State Historic Preservation Office, and Arizona State University Design Studio,
September 2005
6.1.2 Prior Cultural Resource Studies
The records review identified 32 prior cultural resource studies within the study area and a
1-mile buffer (Table 23; Figure 6). These studies were either linear surveys or surveys of limited
block areas, and most of the study area has not been surveyed for cultural resources.
Table 23 Prior Studies within 1 Mile of the Study Area
Project Name/Number Scope Results Reference
1 Pioneer National Title Lease State
Trust land survey
1980-51.ASM
3 acres no sites Madsen 1980
2 materials pit # 5388 survey
1980-202.ASM
40 acres no sites Gibb 1980
3 Willow Wash materials source and
processing area survey
1983-177.ASM
14 acres no sites Stone 1983
4 State Trust land survey
(application #16-91361)
1985-95.ASM
28 acres no sites Rozen 1985
5 San Rafael transmission line alternate
route corridors survey
1985-213.ASM
unknown 18 sites, none in records review area Dosh and
Stebbins 1985
6 State Trust land survey
(application #11-92569)
1986-56.ASM
81 acres no sites Rozen 1986
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 30
May 2012
Project Name/Number Scope Results Reference
7 U.S. Highway 80 and Gleeson Road
intersection widening survey
less than 1
acre
1 previously recorded site in records
review area, Tombstone Historic
District [AZ EE:8:73(ASM)]
Elson 1988
8 Fairbank-Tombstone underground
cable State Trust land survey
1989-60.ASM
10 feet x 3
miles
no sites Adams 1989
9 Casa Loma Triangle Housing survey 3 acres 1 previously recorded site in the
records review area, Tombstone
Historic District [AZ EE:8:73(ASM)]
Douglas 1990
10 U.S. West Communications buried
cable alignment survey
1993-308.ASM
less than 1
acre
no sites Roth 1994
11 Sulphur Springs Valley Electric
Cooperative power line right-of-way
survey
1995-434.ASM
20 feet x
6,000 feet
no sites Heuett 1995
12 Arizona Department of
Transportation bridge survey
1996-314.ASM
16 acres no sites Kwiatkowski
1996
13 U.S. Highway 80 (Tombstone to
intersection with State Route 90)
survey
1997-392.ASM
405 acres 3 sites, 2 in records review area,
AZ EE:8:289 and 290(ASM)
Stone and
Palus 1997
14 Henderson right-of-Way survey
BLM-060-SP-99-16
unknown no sites Childress 1998
15 materials pit survey
1999-310.ASM/11-85.BLM
47 acres no sites Jones 1999
16 U.S. Highway 80 (Clifford Wash to
Tombstone) survey
2000-270.ASM
163 acres 5 sites found in records review area,
AZ EE:4:76(ASM) and
AZ EE:8:300 to 303(ASM)
Punzmann and
Jackman 2000
17 Tombstone quarry survey
SHPO-2000-1718
unknown no sites Hammack 2000
18 Bachmann Springs Project access
road survey
2001-155.ASM
79 acres 1 site, not in records review area Plummer 2001
19 Bachmann Springs Project access
road reroute survey
2001-430.ASM
73 acres no sites Plummer 2001
20 southeastern Arizona fiber-optic
corridor survey
1,723 acres 51 previously recorded sites, none in
records review area; 5 sites discovered,
1 in records review area
[AZ EE:8:305(ASM)]
Knoblock 2001
21 State Route 80 (milepost 318) survey
2002-234.ASM
less than 1
acre
no sites Klune 2002
22 State Route 80 segments survey 229 acres 7 previously recorded sites, 2 in
records review area, Tombstone
Historic District [AZ EE:8:73(ASM)]
and U.S. Highway 80
[AZ FF:9:17(ASM)]
Shepard and
Turner 2002
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 31
May 2012
Project Name/Number Scope Results Reference
23 State Route 82 survey 22 acres 1 previously recorded site, not in
records review area
Shepard 2002
24 Winters right-of-Way survey
BLM-069-02-39
unknown no sites Childress 2002
25 360Network fiber-optic cable survey
2003-910.ASM
227 acres 3 previously recorded sites in the
records review area, AZ EE:8:289, 290,
and 291(ASM); 24 sites discovered, 1 in
records review area,
AZ EE:8:312(ASM)
Railey and
Yost 2001
26 Tombstone school site survey
2003-1294.ASM
61 acres 2 sites in records review area,
AZ EE:8:335 and 336(ASM)
Bauer and Hill
2002
27 Tombstone high school gas pipeline
survey
2004-236.ASM
1 acre no sites Moses 2004
28 Tombstone Red Rock Phase II drill
pads and access roads survey
2004-416.ASM
15 acres no sites Barr 2004
29 AZ Tombstone 2 telecommunications
tower survey
2005-142.ASM
1 acre no sites Payette 2005
30 Bachmann Springs electrical services
survey
2005-893.ASM
27 acres no sites Gavioli and
Hesse 2005
31 Southern Silver Exploration drill pad
locations and access roads survey
2007-745.ASM
24 acres no sites Barr 2008
32 Fremont Street/State Route 80
historic streetscape assessment report
not
applicable
3 previously recorded sites in records
review area, Tombstone Historic
District [AZ EE:8:73(ASM)],
Tombstone City Hall
[AZ EE:8:75(ASM)], and U.S. Highway
80 [AZ FF:9:17(ASM)]
Leonard and
others 2011
Many of the prior studies were conducted along or near the SR 80, State Route 82, and Davis
Road corridors for highway, fiber-optic, and utility projects. The SR 80 right-of-way has been
completely surveyed within the study area, with the exception of the segment that runs through
Tombstone (Punzmann and Jackman 2000; Stone and Palus 1997). The most recent study was a
historic streetscape assessment of SR 80/Fremont Street for a roadway transportation
enhancement project (Leonard and others 2011). Five surveys were completed for materials pits,
quarries, drill pads, and associated access roads, and 5 others were small surveys for proposed
rights-of-way and leases on State Trust land or public land administered by BLM. Other
surveys were conducted for a telecommunications tower, the Tombstone High School and
associated pipeline, roads and electrical services for the Bachmann Springs residential
development project (abandoned), and another small housing project within Tombstone city
limits.
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 32
May 2012
6.1.3 Previously Recorded Cultural Resources
The records review identified 28 previously recorded cultural resources within the study area
and 1-mile buffer (Figure 6). Twelve of those resources are historic districts, buildings, and
structures and 16 are archaeological sites.
Figure 6
Environmental
Considerations
P:\TRANSPORTATION\ADOT_TPD\23446138_Tombstone_PARA_Scope\GIS\mxds\FinalReport\Environmental_Considerations_WP1_Final.mxd (BLC 5/16/2012)
Source:
Cultural Resources: AZSITE 2011
Historic District: AZSITE 2011
Abandoned Mine: BLM 2011
Roads and Wildlife Linkage: ADOT 2009
Base: ALRIS 1997 - 2010, BTS 2010
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study
8
15
40
17
10
10
19
40
Phoenix
Flagstaff
Tucson
Project Area
Tombstone
Randolf
Way
Landin Park Way
Lariat Dr
Camino San Rafael Rd
Schieffelin Grave Site
and Monument
Sacred Heart Catholic Church
516 Safford Street
Tombstone Courthouse
219 E. Toughnut Street
Tombstone City Hall
315 E. Fremont Street
St. Paul's Episcopal Church
3rd and Safford Streets
AZ EE:8:73(ASM)
Dragoon -
San Pedro
River
3rd St
6th St
San Diego St
Old Bisbee Hwy
Fremont St
Davis Rd
Allen St
Middlemarch Rd
Gleeson Rd
Charleston Rd
MP 318.6
MP 315.4
0 0.5 1
Miles
Legend
City of Tombstone Boundary
Tombstone Historic District National
Historic Landmark / National Register
of Historic Places District
Tombstone Historic District (AZSITE)
Previously Recorded Historical Structure
Arizona Wildlife Linkages
Abandoned Mine
Surface Management
Bureau of Land Management
State Trust Land
Private
General Features
Milepost Marker
State Route
Local Road
Abandoned Railroad
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 34
May 2012
Historic Districts, Buildings, and Structures
The historic resources identified within the study area and 1-mile buffer include the Tombstone
Historic District National Historic Landmark; the locally designated Schieffelin Historic
Conservation District; four buildings individually listed in the National Register; four
highways, roads, or road segments; one railroad; and one grave site (Table 24).
Table 24 Previously Recorded Historic Districts, Buildings and Structures within the
Records Review Area
Site Number Description Register Eligibility Reference
Historic Districts
1 Tombstone Historic
District NHL
district roughly bounded by Safford
Street, Toughnut Street, Third Street,
and Sixth Streets
listed, Criterion A Larew 1978
2 Schieffelin Historic
Conservation District
district roughly bounded by
Fremont Street, Toughnut Street,
Third Street, and Sixth Streets
locally designated
conservation district
within the Tombstone
Historic District NHL
Garrett and
Garrison 1972
Historic Buildings
3 Sacred Heart Church
516 Safford Street
Gothic Revival-style church
constructed in 1947
listed, Criteria A and C SHPO files
4 St. Paul's Episcopal
Church
3rd and Safford Streets
Gothic Revival-style church
constructed in 1882
listed, Criteria A, B, and C;
within Tombstone Historic
District NHL
SHPO files
5 Tombstone City Hall
315 E. Fremont Street
late Victorian-style building
constructed in 1883
listed, Criterion C; within
Tombstone Historic
District NHL
SHPO files
6 Tombstone Courthouse
219 E. Toughnut Street
Territorial Victorian-style building
constructed in 1882
listed, Criteria A and C;
within Tombstone Historic
District NHL
SHPO files
Historic Structures
7 Schieffelin Grave Site
and Monument
AZ EE:8:18(ASM)
large historic stone monument
marking the grave site of Ed
Schieffelin, founder of Tombstone
determined eligible,
Criterion B and Criteria
Consideration C
Austin 2006
8 Tombstone to Benson
Road segment
AZ EE:8:290(ASM)
historic road segment segments determined
eligible, Criterion D
Stone and Palus
1997; Railey and
Yost 2001
9 Middle March Road
AZ EE:8:302(ASM)
historic road alignment determined ineligible Punzmann and
Jackman 2000
10 El Paso &
Southwestern Railroad,
Tombstone Branch
AZ EE:8:307(ASM)
historic railroad between Fairbank
and Tombstone constructed between
1902 and 1903; abandoned in 1960
recommended eligible,
Criterion A
Childress 2003;
Myrick 1975
11 old State Route 82
AZ EE:8:312(ASM)
old highway alignment recommended ineligible Railey and Yost
2001
12 U.S. Highway 80
AZ FF:9:17(ASM)
AZ EE:8:291(ASM)
historic highway determined eligible,
Criterion D
Railey and Yost
2001; ADOT 2002
NOTES: Register = National Register, NHL = National Historic Landmark, SHPO = State Historic Preservation
Office, ADOT = Arizona Department of Transportation
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 35
May 2012
Tombstone began as a boom town that resulted from Ed Schieffelin’s 1877 discovery of rich
silver deposits in the San Pedro Valley and the subsequent “mining rush” that followed. The
Tombstone town site claim was filed in April 1879. By 1881, the population was about 6,000 and
Tombstone was named the seat of Cochise County. In the early 1880s, Tombstone was the
largest town in Arizona Territory with a population of about 10,000. That population included
miners, speculators, prospectors, rustlers, and gamblers, as well people who operated and
worked at the multiple saloons, gambling houses, dance halls, general stores, and other
businesses. Tombstone also was known as one of the more cultured cities west of the
Mississippi River. Schieffelin Hall hosted some of the world’s best actors and musicians, and the
town also had four churches, two newspapers, schools, and libraries. The Tombstone business
district was rebuilt twice in 1881 and 1882 after fires destroyed much of the town site. The town
began to decline in the second half of the 1880s as a result of union strikes and flooding of the
mine tunnels. In 1929, the Cochise County seat was moved to Bisbee (City of Tombstone, NPS,
Arizona State Historic Preservation Office, and Arizona State University Community Design
Studio 2005; Garrett and Garrison 1972; Granger 1983; Larew 1978).
Tombstone is best known as the location of the famous gunfight at the O.K. Corral where the
Earp brothers and Doc Holiday squared off against the Clantons in October 1881. After the
county seat was relocated to Bisbee in 1929, the mystique of that gunfight combined with a
growing interest in the “old West,” inspired the Tombstone community to reinvent itself as a
tourist destination (City of Tombstone, NPS, Arizona State Historic Preservation Office, and
Arizona State University Community Design Studio 2005; Garrett and Garrison 1972; Sheridan
1995).
In 1936, NPS completed a preliminary report on historic Tombstone, and five years later
completed a special report, which recommended that Tombstone be classified and designated
as a national historic site (Neasham 1941). In July 1961, the Tombstone Historic District was
designated a National Historic Landmark. National Historic Landmarks are nationally
significant historic places designated by the Secretary of the Interior because they possess
exceptional value or quality in illustrating or interpreting the heritage of the United States
(NPS 2010). The Tombstone Historic District was considered nationally significant when it was
designated because it was “one of the best preserved specimens of the rugged frontier town of
the 1870s and 1880s,” the “site of one of the West’s richest silver strikes and the gunfight at the
O.K. Corral,” and because it “epitomizes the legendary reputation of the Wild West and
lawlessness of the 19th century mining camps” (NPS 2011).
The Tombstone Historic District National Historic Landmark is roughly bounded by Safford
Street and Toughnut Street on the north and south, and Third and Sixth streets to the east and
west. Because the Tombstone Historic District was designated a National Historic Landmark in
1961, it was automatically listed in the National Register when Congress established the
National Register in 1966 with the passage of the National Historic Preservation Act. A National
Register nomination form was not prepared until 12 years after the landmark district was
officially listed (Larew 1978). There are at least 25 buildings within the Tombstone Historic
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 36
May 2012
District National Historic Landmark that are considered to be contributing properties to the
district. Those properties include:
1. Buford House
2. Tombstone Courthouse (also individually listed in the National Register)
3. Goodspeed House
4. Morman (Mike) House
5. Aztec Boarding House
6. St. Paul's Episcopal Church (also individually listed in the National Register)
7. Residence at 101 N. 3rd Street
8. Milton (Jeff) House
9. Tombstone City Library (formerly the Tombstone railroad station)
10. Rose Tree Museum
11. Tombstone City Hall (also individually listed in the National Register)
12. Schieffelin Hall
13. Russ House (now Café Margarita)
14. San Jose Boarding House
15. public swimming pool
16. Birdcage Theater
17. Marlowe House
18. Sacred Heart Catholic Church (also individually listed in the National Register)
19. Pioneer House
20. English (Allen) House
21. Attorney’s offices (across the street from the courthouse)
22. Engine Company #1 Fire Station
23. Grand Hotel
24. OK Corral
25. Herring Offices
The Schieffelin Historic Conservation District is a locally-designated district that has essentially
the same southern, western, and eastern boundaries as the Tombstone Historic District National
Historic Landmark, but the northern boundary only extends to Fremont Street and excludes the
properties on Safford Street. The district was established as part of a preservation plan for the
City of Tombstone that was completed in 1972 (Garrett and Garrison 1972).
Three buildings that are individually listed in the National Register are within the boundaries of
the Tombstone Historic District National Historic Landmark. Those buildings are St. Paul's
Episcopal Church, Tombstone City Hall, and Tombstone Courthouse. The courthouse also is an
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 37
May 2012
Arizona State Park. The church was listed in 1971 and the city hall and courthouse were listed
in 1972. The other individually listed building is the Sacred Heart Church, which was listed in
the National Register in 2002.
Four of the previously recorded cultural resources are historic highways or road segments and
one is a historic railroad grade. Site AZ EE:8:290(ASM) is a segment of the old Tombstone to
Benson Road that was in use by 1882. The road was later replaced by SR 80 and most segments
have been obliterated. Segments of the road are considered eligible for the National Register for
their information potential (Railey and Yost 2001; Stone and Palus 1997). An old alignment of
Middle March Road [AZ EE:8:302(ASM)] and an old segment of State Route 82 also are in the
records review area. The segment of Middle March Road was determined to be ineligible for the
National Register and the recorders of the segment of old State Route 82 recommended it be
considered ineligible (Punzmann and Jackman 2000; Railey and Yost 2001).
U.S. Highway 80 [AZ FF:9:17(ASM)] was one of the first transcontinental highways in the
country, extending from Tybee Island, Georgia, to San Diego, California. In Arizona,
U.S. Highway 80 connected Douglas, in the southeastern part of the state, with Phoenix, and
Gila Bend and Yuma to the southwest. Portions of this highway were developed originally as
wagon roads during the Arizona territorial era. U.S. Highway 80 has been defunct in Arizona
since 1987, but a segment of U.S. Highway 80 was converted into the eastbound lanes of
Interstate 8 in the Yuma vicinity, and a segment between Buckeye and Gila Bend is now a
Maricopa County road known as Old U.S. Highway 80. The segment in the study area is now
designated as SR 80. As part of the historical state highway system developed between 1912 and
1955, U.S. Highway 80/SR 80 is considered eligible for the National Register under Criterion D
(Arizona Department of Transportation 2002). The historic railroad is the Tombstone Branch of
the El Paso & Southwestern Railroad [AZ EE:8:307(ASM), which was constructed between
Tombstone and Fairbank between 1902 and 1903. The railroad was abandoned in 1960 (Myrick
1975). The railroad is considered eligible for the National Register under Criterion A.
Another historical structure in the records review area is the Schieffelin Grave Site and
Monument [AZ EE:8:18(ASM)], which is a large stone monument marking the grave site of
Tombstone founder Ed Schieffelin. The monument was determined to be eligible for the
National Register under Criterion B and Criteria Consideration C for its outstanding
significance to the community of Tombstone and as the only remaining property directly
associated with Schieffelin (Austin 2006).
Archaeological Sites
Sixteen previously recorded cultural resources in the study area and 1-mile buffer are
archaeological sites. Five of the sites are prehistoric, nine sites are historic, and two sites include
both prehistoric and historic components.
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 38
May 2012
The prehistoric sites are scatters of flaked stone. One of the multi-component sites is scatter of
prehistoric flaked stone and a historic mine shaft, and the other site is a scatter of prehistoric
flaked stone, rock rings, and remnants of a historic structure. Eight of the historic archaeological
sites are trash dumps and scatters associated with Tombstone and another site includes the
remnants of a hard rock mine.
Table 25 Previously Recorded Cultural Resources within the Records Review Area
Site Number Description Register Eligibility Reference
Prehistoric and Historic Archaeological Sites
1 AZ EE:4:76(ASM) historic trash scatter, 1930s to 1940s determined not eligible Punzmann and
Jackman 2000
2 AZ EE:4:91(ASM scatter of Archaic (Cochise) flaked
stone
unevaluated; surface
collection completed
Whalen 1975
3 AZ EE:4:92(ASM) scatter of Archaic (Cochise) flaked
stone
unevaluated; surface
collection completed
Whalen 1975
4 AZ EE:4:93(ASM) scatter of Archaic (Cochise) flaked
stone
unevaluated; surface
collection completed
Whalen 1975
5 AZ EE:4:94(ASM) scatter of Archaic (Cochise) flaked
stone
unevaluated; surface
collection completed
Whalen 1975
6 Walnut Gulch
AZ EE:8:22(ASM)
scatter of prehistoric flaked stone, rock
rings, remnants of historic structure
unevaluated Herring 1963
7 Tombstone Historic
District
AZ EE:8:73(ASM)
archaeological remnants of historic
Tombstone
determined significant,
eligibility dependent on
particular feature
Douglas 1990; Elson
1988; Shepard and
Turner 2002
8 AZ EE:8:289(ASM) late nineteenth to early twentieth
century hard rock mining site
recommended eligible,
Criterion D
Stone and Palus 1997;
Railey and Yost 2001
9 AZ EE:8:300(ASM) historic trash scatter, possibly
Tombstone town dump between the
1880s and 1930s
determined eligible,
Criterion D
Punzmann and
Jackman 2000
10 AZ EE:8:301(ASM) historic trash scatter determined ineligible Punzmann and
Jackman 2000
11 AZ EE:8:303(ASM) historic trash scatter determined eligible,
Criterion D
Punzmann and
Jackman 2000
12 AZ EE:8:305(ASM) historic trash scatter, 1900s to World
War II
recommended eligible,
Criterion D
Knoblock 2001
13 AZ EE:8:321(ASM) scatter of Archaic (Cochise) flaked
stone and potsherds
unevaluated; surface
collection completed
Whalen 1975
14 AZ EE:8:335(ASM) historic trash dump recommended eligible,
Criterion D
Bauer and Hill 2002
15 AZ EE:8:336(ASM) historic trash dump recommended eligible,
Criterion D
Bauer and Hill 2002
16 Agave Trespass
AZ EE:8:338(ASM)
scatter of prehistoric flaked stone and
possible rock feature; historic mine
shaft
recommended eligible,
Criterion D
Childress and Cook
2003
The other historic archaeological site is the Tombstone Historic District, which was assigned a
number in the Arizona State Museum site survey system in 1976 [AZ EE:8:73(ASM)]. The site
boundary associated with the ASM number encompasses the Tombstone city limits and is much
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 39
May 2012
larger than the Tombstone Historic District National Historic Landmark boundary. Because of
the historical location and association, archaeological features found within the city limits
generally are considered historically significant, but the National Register eligibility of
individual features is evaluated on a case-by-case basis. For example, a 3-acre survey conducted
in 1990 within the Tombstone city limits for the Casa Loma Triangle Housing project found a
scatter of historic artifacts and three features, including a possible prospecting pit, a concrete
slab, and a concrete block, which were identified as remnants of a hospital constructed in the
first decade of the twentieth century. Because of the poor condition of the features and the lack
of associated artifacts, the site recorder recommended that those features had no additional
potential to yield important information and warranted no further consideration.
6.2 TOMBSTONE HISTORIC DISTRICT NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARK STATUS
In 1963, two years after the Tombstone Historic District National Historic Landmark was
designated, the NPS conducted a biennial visit to Tombstone and reported that although the
historic buildings were well preserved, the historical integrity of the landmark was being
compromised by commercial development and a proposed routing of U.S. Highway 80 through
the center of the landmark on Fremont Street (Brown 1963). The Tombstone Restoration
Commission, which had been incorporated in 1949, drafted City Ordinance No. 146 that was
enacted in April 1954. That ordinance established a restoration zone and a zoning commission,
and stipulated that all new buildings be complementary to Tombstone as it appeared in 1883
(Garrett and Garrison 1972). Although Fremont Street was within the restoration zone
established by the ordinance, many merchants and citizens in Tombstone feared that a highway
bypassing the town would discourage tourists from stopping and disrupt residential areas
north of the commercial district (Garrett and Garrison 1972).
U.S. Highway 80 was constructed through the landmark district in 1964 and the historical
integrity of the district continued to decline. The Tombstone Restoration Commission
recognized the importance of tourism to the local economy, and in 1972, commissioned the
preparation of a historic preservation plan to facilitate implementation of their program. That
plan established 1885 as the baseline for restoration and introduced the proposed Schieffelin
Historic Conservation District. The plan also recognized that other historically significant sites,
buildings, and structures were located outside of the Schieffelin Historic Conservation District
(including Boot Hill) and recommended that the commission extend its historic conservation
district to these areas in order to expand tourism and improve the overall impression of the city
(Garrett and Garrison 1972).
Despite the commission’s best efforts, the restoration ordinance was not adequately enforced
and extensive alterations to buildings within the landmark district occurred. In 1985 the NPS
and State Parks Board began the process of reviewing Tombstone’s National Historic Landmark
status (Hess 1985). If National Historic Landmarks do not retain a high level of historic integrity
consistent with their period of significance, NPS can revoke landmark designations. The
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 40
May 2012
National Historic Landmarks Program uses four levels for characterizing the integrity of
landmarks:
1. Satisfactory: in good condition, exhibiting no current or potential threat
2. Watch: landmarks face actions or circumstances that likely will cause a loss of integrity
3. Threatened: landmarks have suffered, or are in imminent danger or, a severe loss of
integrity
4. Emergency: recent catastrophic damage has occurred that requires immediate
intervention (NPS 2010)
In 2004, the U.S. Department of the Interior classified the Tombstone Historic District National
Historic Landmark as “threatened,” with a possible loss of landmark designation. In 2005, the
City of Tombstone, NPS, SHPO, and Arizona State University Community Design Studio
sponsored a charrette to discuss measures to prevent more damage to the historical integrity of
the district. Charrette participants pointed out that the 1881 gunfight at the O.K. Corral is not
the only basis for Tombstone’s historical significance, and that the national significance
recognized by the National Historic Landmark status is based on the broader history of
Tombstone as a mining boom town, from its founding in 1879 to the time the county seat was
moved to Bisbee in 1929 (City of Tombstone, NPS, Arizona State Historic Preservation Office,
and Arizona State University Community Design Studio 2005).
The charrette resulted in the development of a civic town plan (City of Tombstone, NPS,
Arizona State Historic Preservation Office, and Arizona State University Community Design
Studio 2005). One of the recommendations included in the plan involves the revision of
Tombstone’s historic preservation strategy, which would be accomplished by:
developing new design guidelines for infill construction, which includes the extension of
Tombstone’s period of historical significance to 1931 (when the town reinvented itself as
a tourist attraction after the Cochise County seat was moved)
pursuing Certified Local Government status under the State Historic Preservation
Program
identifying and designating historic preservation districts
revising the historic preservation ordinance
The plan recommended that historic preservation districts be zoned for historic use and that the
Schieffelin Historic Conservation District area be enlarged to include areas of expansion where
additional related infill construction could occur and be zoned as the Central Commercial
Historic District. The plan also recommended two additional areas for historic preservation
zoning—a residential and mixed-use district north of the commercial district and a mining
district to the south.
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 41
May 2012
The plan also recommended that Tombstone pursue an alternate route for SR 80 to eliminate
regional traffic and develop traffic calming on Fremont Street, and minimize Fremont Street’s
separation from the Central Commercial Historic District.
As a result of the 2005 charrette and the resulting plan, NPS changed the status of the
Tombstone Historic District National Historic Landmark to “watch.” The NPS, Arizona State
Parks, and SHPO continue to monitor the landmark and provide advice and guidance to the
City of Tombstone and property owners (NPS 2011; De Journett 2006).
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 42
May 2012
7.0
This environmental overview highlights additional natural and physical resources present in
the study area that may require consideration in planning future transportation projects.
Due to extensive historic mining south of Tombstone, there are concerns about subsidence in
this area. Data from the AZ Geological Survey and Arizona Department of Water Resources for
areas of fissures and active subsidence were reviewed. No portion of the study area was
identified as an active uplift or fissure area in these databases. However, emerging data from
the BLM on abandoned mines (shown in Figure 6) suggest clustering of mining activity to the
southwest of downtown.
Data from the Arizona Game and Fish Department were reviewed to assess potential
constraints due to habitat or special status species considerations. As shown in Figure 6, a
wildlife linkage area is identified in the northwestern corner of the study area and connects
with the San Pedro river corridor.
A review was conducted of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) and
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) online databases for sites of environmental
concern within the study area. It should be noted that a site reconnaissance has not been
conducted as part of this limited environmental database review. A summary of this review is
provided in Table 26.
Table 26 Summary of Environmental Concerns
Township/
Range/ Section Site Name Location Description
Significant
Environmental
Concern
19 South/ 22 East/
32
Walnut Valley Ranch
Subdivision Onsite
Wastewater Treatment
Plant
No address No specific details
identified
No
19 South/ 22 East/
34
City of Tombstone
Middlemarch Landfill
No address,
northwest of S.R. 80
and Middlemarch
Road
Closed Municipal Solid
Waste Landfill
No
19 South/ 22 East/
34
Bachman Springs 2338 Middlemarch
Road
No specific details
identified, NPDES permit
No
19 South/ 22 East/
35
City of Tombstone
Wastewater Treatment
Plant
No address No specific details
identified, NPDES permit
No
20 South/ 22 East/
2
Tombstone Transfer
Station
No address No specific details
identified
No
City of Tombstone State Route 80
Alternate Route PARA Study
Final Report
SR 80 Alternate Route PARA Study 43
May 2012
Township/
Range/ Section Site Name Location Description
Significant
Environmental
Concern
20 South/ 22 East/
2
Circle K #2701310 Southeast corner of
Sumner & Bruce
One LUST incident
(facility 0-001393)
identified in 2004. File
closed by ADEQ in 2005
without reported
groundwater impacts.
Four USTs listed as
currently in service.
No
20 South/ 22 East/
11
Tombstone Texaco 84 East Fremont
Street
Four USTs (facility 0-
000459) permanently
removed from service in
1994. Although ADEQ
eMaps shows this site as a
LUST, this site is not listed
on ADEQ’s online LUST
database.
No
20 South/ 22 East/
11
Tombstone Chevron
#9-5452
191 East Fremont
Street
Three USTs (facility
0-001062) listed as
currently in service. Five
USTs permanently
removed in 1988 without a
reported fuel release.
No
20 South/ 22 East/
12
Apache Market 1007 East Fremont
Street
Two USTs (facility 0-
004052), currently in
service. No LUST incident
identified.
No
20 South/ 22 East/
13
Emerald Mine –
Tombstone
No address Sand and gravel mine No
20 South/ 22 East/
14
Red Mountain Pit –
Tombstone
1037 South Old
Bisbee Highway
No specific details
identified
No
20 South/ 22 East/
14
Contention Mine No address No specific details
identified, NPDES permit
No
20 South/ 22 East/
15
Helday G Plant Mine No address No specific details
identified
No
20 South/ 22 East/
16
State of Maine –
Tombstone Silver
Mine Inc.
No address No specific details
identified, NPDES permit
No
20 South/ 22 East/
20
Alanco Ltd – Armco
Mill Facility
No address No specific details
identified
No
20 South/