City of Casa Grande small area transportation study: final report

              City of Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study



(Project Number: X5-310-012)







Final Report







Prepared for: City of Casa Grande 510 E. Florence Blvd. Casa Grande, AZ 85222







Prepared by:







9633 South 48th Street, Suite 290 Phoenix, AZ 85044 And Stantec 8211 South 48th Street Phoenix, Arizona 85044 July 2, 2007







07-02-07







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



Table of Contents



Section 1.0 Page Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Study Context...................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Study Area Overview........................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Report Organization ............................................................................................................ 2 1.4 Previous Plans and Studies................................................................................................. 5 1.5 Community Involvement ...................................................................................................... 5 Transportation Goals, Objectives, and Policies ........................................................................... 8 2.1 Land Use and Transportation/Circulation Integration .......................................................... 8 2.2 Roadway and Streetscape................................................................................................... 9 2.3 Public Transportation Policies ........................................................................................... 10 2.4 Non-Motorized Circulation Policies.................................................................................... 11 2.5 Regional Circulation Planning Policies .............................................................................. 12 2.6 Municipal Airport Policies................................................................................................... 13 2.7 Railroad Transportation Policies........................................................................................ 13 Methodologies and Standards ................................................................................................... 14 3.1 Level of Service (LOS) Definition....................................................................................... 14 3.2 Roadway Segment Level of Service Thresholds ............................................................... 14 Current Conditions..................................................................................................................... 16 4.1 Current Socioeconomic Conditions ................................................................................... 16 4.2 Roadway Network ............................................................................................................. 21 4.3 Roadway Characteristics................................................................................................... 22 4.4 Safety and Crash History................................................................................................... 29 4.5 Truck Traffic....................................................................................................................... 38 4.6 Multi-Modal Transportation................................................................................................ 39 4.7 Programmed and Planned Roadway Improvements ......................................................... 39 4.8 Travel Demand Model Development ................................................................................. 40 Future Conditions ...................................................................................................................... 44 5.1 Population and Employment Forecasts ............................................................................. 44 5.2 Roadway Network Needs .................................................................................................. 60 Implementation Program ........................................................................................................... 63 6.1 Future Roadway Functional Classification Plan................................................................. 63 6.2 Long-Term Roadway Improvement Plan ........................................................................... 65 6.3 Transportation Revenue OUtlook ...................................................................................... 72 6.4 Cost-Constrained Roadway Improvement Plan................................................................. 73 6.5 Public Transit..................................................................................................................... 75 6.6 Regional Truck routes ....................................................................................................... 75 6.7 Implementation Action Items ............................................................................................. 78







2.0







3.0







4.0







5.0







6.0







07-02-07







i







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



7.0 Policies and Guidelines ............................................................................................................. 80 7.1 Roadway Functional Classification .................................................................................... 80 7.2 Roadway Design Standards .............................................................................................. 81 7.3 Access Managment ........................................................................................................... 92 7.4 Traffic Impact Analysis Procedures ................................................................................... 92







Appendix A � Summary of Public Comment Appendix B � Roadway Network Needs Assessment Appendix C � 2001 Casa Grande Multimodal Transportation Study Access Control Guidelines Appendix D � 2001 Casa Grande Multimodal Transportation Study Traffic Impact Analysis Procedures Appendix E � Year 2006 to Year 2030 Population and Employment Growth Rates







07-02-07







ii







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



List of Tables



Table 3-1 3-2 4-1 4-2 4-3 4-4 4-5 4-6 4-7 4-8 4-9 4-10 4-11 4-12 4-13 5-1 5-2 5-3 5-4 5-5 6-1 6-2 6-3 6-4 7-1 Page Daily Roadway Capacities ......................................................................................................... 14 Levels of Service ....................................................................................................................... 14 Minority and Elderly Population ................................................................................................. 16 Mobility Limited and Low Income Population............................................................................. 16 City of Casa Grande Year 2005 Employment Totals ................................................................. 19 Historical Daily Traffic Counts for Selected Facilities................................................................. 26 Key Study Area Facility Average Crash Summary � 2002 to 2004............................................ 30 Key Study Area Facility Crash Severity � 2002 to 2004 ............................................................ 31 Crashes at Key Study Area Intersections � 2002 to 2004 ......................................................... 32 Key Study Area Facility Crashes by Highest and Lowest Month � 2002 to 2004....................... 33 Accident Countermeasures ....................................................................................................... 36 Year 2004 Daily Truck Volumes ................................................................................................ 38 City of Casa Grande Planned Roadway Improvements............................................................. 40 Vehicle Trip Generation Characteristics .................................................................................... 41 Year 2005 Casa Grande External Trips..................................................................................... 43 Casa Grande Population and Employment Estimates ............................................................... 45 Casa Grande Population and Employment Estimate Comparison............................................. 46 Casa Grande Population and Employment Estimates by Traffic Analysis Zone ........................ 53 Casa Grande Travel Demand Model Future External Volume Estimate.................................... 59 Year 2020 and Year 2030 Needs Network Comparison ............................................................ 62 Roadway Improvement Unit Cost Estimate ............................................................................... 65 Year 2020 and Year 2030 Roadway Capacity Improvement Needs.......................................... 67 Projected City of Casa Grande Transportation Revenue Sources............................................. 73 Cost-Constrained Roadway Construction Projects .................................................................... 74 Roadway Design Criteria ........................................................................................................... 84







07-02-07







iii







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



List of Figures



Figure 1-1 4-1 4-2 4-3 4-4 4-5 4-6 4-7 4-8 5-1 5-2 5-3 5-4 5-5 5-6 6-1 6-2 6-3 6-4 7-1 7-2 7-3 7-4 7-5 7-6 7-7 Page Study Area and Major Roadway Network .................................................................................... 4 Year 2005 Estimated Population Density by Traffic Analysis Zone ........................................... 18 Year 2005 Estimated Employment Density by Traffic Analysis Zone ........................................ 20 Existing Year 2005 Number of Lanes ........................................................................................ 23 Speed Limits and Location of Traffic Signals............................................................................. 24 Surface Type ............................................................................................................................. 25 Existing Year 2005 Daily Traffic Volumes.................................................................................. 27 2005 Network Performance ....................................................................................................... 28 Year 2005 Model Validation Summary ...................................................................................... 42 Year 2010 Estimated Population Density by Traffic Analysis Zone ........................................... 47 Year 2020 Estimated Population Density by Traffic Analysis Zone ........................................... 48 Year 2030 Estimated Population Density by Traffic Analysis Zone ........................................... 49 Year 2010 Estimated Employment Density by Traffic Analysis Zone ........................................ 50 Year 2020 Estimated Employment Density by Traffic Analysis Zone ........................................ 51 Year 2030 Estimated Employment Density by Traffic Analysis Zone ........................................ 52 Future Roadway Functional Classification Plan......................................................................... 64 Year 2030 Roadway Improvement Plan .................................................................................... 66 Proposed Local and Commuter Transit Routes ......................................................................... 76 Year 2020 Truck Route Plan...................................................................................................... 77 Expressway Typical Section ...................................................................................................... 85 Principal Arterial Typical Section ............................................................................................... 86 Minor Arterial Typical Section .................................................................................................... 87 Major Collector Typical Section ................................................................................................. 88 Minor Collector Typical Section ................................................................................................. 89 Local Street Typical Section ...................................................................................................... 90 Alternate Local Street Typical Section ....................................................................................... 91







07-02-07







iv







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report







1.0 INTRODUCTION



1.1 STUDY CONTEXT



The Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study (SATS) was initiated by the City of Casa Grande in conjunction with the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT). The City of Casa Grande retained a consultant team led by Wilson & Company, Inc., Engineers & Architects of Phoenix to conduct the study under the direction of a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), which includes representatives from the City of Casa Grande, Pinal County, the Central Arizona Association of Governments (CAAG), ADOT, the City of Maricopa, the City of Eloy, the City of Coolidge, and the Gila River Indian Community (GRIC). This study represents an expanded update and expansion of the Casa Grande Multimodal Transportation Study prepared by Lima & Associates in 2001. In addition, his study was coordinated with the 2006 Pinal County Small Area Transportation Study and study recommendations will also be referenced by the ADOT I-10 Regional Profile Study. Key elements of the SATS work program include the following: � � � � � � � � � � � � � Review of previous plans and studies Inventory of existing conditions, including safety Socioeconomic and land use projections Travel demand model development, calibration and application Analysis of future conditions Development of transportation plan alternatives Evaluation of alternatives Development of alternative transportation funding scenarios Implementation plan for the preferred alternative Transit element Heavy truck route element Stakeholder coordination Public Outreach and City Council Study Sessions







The goal of the study is to develop a comprehensive regional transportation plan for the City of Casa Grande and the greater Casa Grande planning area that will guide multi-modal planning for both subregional and local facilities. Further, this study presents implementation and programming recommendations over a 20-year timeframe for improvements to the local circulation system comprised of City of Casa Grande or Pinal County roadway segments. While this study included roadway facilities owned and operated by ADOT within the study area, it is important to recognize that no recommendations have been made for improving any of these facilities. Rather, ADOT will conduct a Regional Transportation Profile to specifically recommend improvements to the state highway system located within the study area



07-02-07 FINAL REPORT







1







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



established for the Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study. State facilities to be addressed in this future study include: � � � � � Interstate 10 Interstate 8 SR-387 (Pinal Avenue) SR-287 (Florence Boulevard) SR-84 (Gila Bend Highway







A two-level planning framework was established to address mobility and accessibility needs: � Regional � The City of Casa Grande aims to sustain growth and desirable development patterns by providing a high level of access to and from neighboring cities, including the Phoenix metropolitan area, the Tucson metropolitan area, the City of Maricopa, the City of Eloy, and the City of Coolidge. Subregional � This study provides an arterial framework to meet mobility needs of existing and future residents within the urban core and developing suburban portions of the community. (Between new residential developments along Val Vista Boulevard and Montgomery Road with shopping and employment centers in central Casa Grande)







�







1.2 STUDY AREA OVERVIEW



Located near the intersection of I-10 and I-8, the City of Casa Grande has interstate access to the two major Arizona metropolitan centers, Phoenix and Tucson. Casa Grande also has interstate highway access to Yuma and southern California. In addition to the junction of I-10 and I-8, several other state routes converge within the downtown area: SR 387 (Pinal Avenue), SR 84 (Gila Bend Highway) and SR 287 (Florence Boulevard). By rail, the City of Casa Grande connects to Yuma and southern California to the west, and to Tucson and El Paso, Texas, to the east. The study area, shown in Figure 1-1, encompasses more than 270 square miles. It is bounded by the Gila River Indian Community on the north., the Tohono O'Odham Nation and the City of Eloy to the south, Fuqua Road to the west, and 11-Mile Corner Road to the east.







1.3 REPORT ORGANIZATION



This report is organized into seven chapters, as follows: 1.0 Introduction







Provides background information and sets the stage for the study.



07-02-07 FINAL REPORT







2







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



2.0 Transportation Goals, Objectives and Policies







Taken from the City of Casa Grande General Plan 2010, this chapter outlines the transportation goals, objectives, and policies that guided the preparation of this transportation study. 3.0 Methodologies and Standards







Presents the methods used to evaluate the Casa Grande area transportation system under current and future conditions. 4.0 Current Conditions







Describes year 2005 transportation facilities, services, and conditions throughout the Casa Grande Study Area. 5.0 Future Conditions







Outlines the population and employment growth forecasts for the study area and details the roadway improvement needs to accommodate future travel demand. It presents the recommended roadway improvement program for the years 2010, 2020, and 2030. 6.0 Implementation Program







Presents the future roadway functional classification plan together with the transportation revenue outlook and a list of recommended transportation improvement projects. This chapter also lists key transportation plan implementation action items. 7.0 Policies and Guidelines







Details typical roadway design criteria by functional classification, strategies for access management, and guidelines for traffic impact analyses.







07-02-07







3







FINAL REPORT







FIGURE 1-1 2005 Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study



4







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report







1.4 PREVIOUS PLANS AND STUDIES



The jurisdictions involved in the Casa Grande SATS have prepared numerous transportation and land use plans and studies. Specific documents consulted during the preparation of this transportation study include: � � � � � � � � � Casa Grande Multimodal Transportation Study, Lima & Associates, 2001. Casa Grande Transit Feasibility Study, Lima & Associates, 2001. City of Casa Grande General Plan 2010, Partners for Strategic Action, 2001. City of Maricopa Small Area Transportation Study, Lima & Associates, 2005. Pinal County Corridor Definition Study, Arizona Department of Transportation, 2005. Maricopa Association of Governments 2030 Placeholder Projections, 2003. Pinal County Small Area Transportation Study, Kirkham Michael Consulting Engineers, 2006. Traffic Engineering Evaluation: SR 287 (Florence Blvd.) Milepost 111.76 to Milepost 115.87, Arizona Department of Transportation, Baja Regional Traffic Engineering, 2003. Traffic Engineering Evaluation: SR 387 (Pinal Ave.) Milepost 0.00 to Milepost 8.60, Arizona Department of Transportation, Baja Regional Traffic Engineering, 2003.







1.5 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT



The Casa Grande SATS public involvement program provided opportunities for meaningful community and stakeholder input in the long range transportation planning process. The following sections summarize key components of the public involvement program. 1.5.1 TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETINGS







The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was formed at the onset of the study. With key stakeholders participating in developing the project work program. TAC meetings were held at major project milestones to review study results and provide guidance to the planning process. Throughout the study, the TAC members have kept their respective agency or group informed on the planning process, and brought appropriate issues that required technical analysis to the attention of the project team. Members of the TAC included: Dianne Kresich, ADOT Reza Karimvand, ADOT Bret Anderson, ADOT Kevin Louis, City of Casa Grande Rick Miller, City of Casa Grande Doug Hansen, Pinal County Bill Leister, CAAG Jim Moline, GRIC Bob Jackson, City of Maricopa Brent Billingsley, City of Maricopa John Mitchell, City of Eloy C. Alton Bruce, City of Coolidge







07-02-07







5







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



1.5.2 COMMUNITY INTERVIEWS







A series of interviews with community representatives were conducted by the project team in July 2005 to understand key transportation related issues and concerns within the Casa Grande study area. These issues and concerns were subdivided into topics for consideration during the course of the study. Roadways and Traffic � � � � � � � � Public Transit � � Use of alternative modes should be encouraged. Transit service is needed to satisfy retired/elderly mobility needs with access to key activity centers in central Casa Grande. Additional roadway capacity is needed between Casa Grande and Phoenix. Traffic circulation should be enhanced by identifying alternative corridors to Florence Boulevard and Pinal Avenue. Additional traffic interchanges on I-10 and I-8 should be provided. A regional heavy truck route plan should be identified to reduce the impact of heavy truck traffic on central Casa Grande residential and commercial areas. A loop expressway system around Casa Grande using Montgomery Road and Val Vista Boulevard should connect I-10 and I-8. Some study area corridors have higher than average crash rates. Access management guidelines and standards should be applied consistently. New facilities should provide pedestrian and bicycle amenities in a system of logical linkages.







Non-Motorized Transportation � � � Gaps in bicycle network connectivity should be closed. There is a need to provide continuous bicycle lanes to reduce potential conflicts with trucks. Curb cuts and access points should be consolidated to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety.







A summary of these interviews is presented in Appendix A � Summary of Public Comment. 1.5.3 PUBLIC OPEN HOUSES/CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSIONS







Public open houses were scheduled at key points in the planning process. The first public open house was held on Monday, December 12, 2005, at the Casa Grande City Hall. This initial meeting presented the planning process to the public together with an assessment of existing conditions. The goal of the meeting was to confirm the work program and identify key transportation concerns. The presentation included a



07-02-07 FINAL REPORT







6







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



project newsletter and graphic displays. Comment cards were distributed to solicit written comments from the public. In a separate study session with the Casa Grande City Council on the same date, the project team briefed the council on the study work program. A second public open house was held on Monday, November 20, 2006. At this second meeting, the project team presented recommendations for improvements to the study area transportation system through the year 2030. The presentation included a detailed project newsletter with maps and graphic displays. Comment cards were distributed to solicit written comments from the public. In a separate City Council study session, the project team gave a slideshow overview of the transportation plan recommendations. The Public Involvement Summary Report for each open house is included in Appendix A.







07-02-07







7







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report







2.0 TRANSPORTATION GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES



The City of Casa Grande General Plan 2010 transportation/circulation goals, objectives and policies were used as guide in the preparation of this transportation plan. This chapter excerpts the key goals, objectives and policies from the City's current General Plan. This chapter is structured according to the following major topics: � � � � � � � Land Use and Transportation/Circulation Integration Policies Roadway and Streetscape Policies Public Transportation Policies Non-Motorized Circulation Policies Regional Circulation Planning Policies Municipal Airport Polices Railroad Transportation Policies







2.1 LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION INTEGRATION



The City's circulation system is an integral part of the overall development pattern of the City. The land use densities and intensities as shown on the General Plan Land Use Plan provide the basis for the development of appropriate transportation facilities. The design of the circulation system and the level of accessibility can strongly influence the locations and intensities of land uses, as well as determine the community's ability to accommodate increased growth. The following policies are intended to direct efforts that integrate a functional, multimodal circulation system with existing and future land uses in the City of Casa Grande. Goal 1.0 Promote a transportation system of arterial, collector, and local streets capable of accommodating the anticipated travel demands of the Land Use Element of the general plan.







Objective 1.1 The general plan shall include compatible, consistent, and integrated Land Use and Transportation/Circulation Elements. Policy 1.1.1 The Transportation/Circulation Element shall define the multimodal transportation facilities necessary to adequately serve the land uses specified in the Land Use Element. A proposed change or modification in either element shall be preceded by an evaluation of the land use and multimodal transportation impacts in order to ensure compatibility between the elements. The City shall address transit, pedestrian, bicycle, and equestrian facilities for proposed land use developments in order to facilitate the transportation circulation system.







Policy 1.1.2







07-02-07 8







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



Objective 1.2 Proposed land uses shall not overburden the City's circulation system. Policy 1.2.1 Policy 1.2.2 The City shall monitor the impacts of land use on transportation demand to ensure that the circulation system is not overburdened. The City will actively coordinate land use development and transportation decisions.







2.2 ROADWAY AND STREETSCAPE POLICIES



The functional network of roadways is the backbone of the circulation system. The roadways are used not only for automobile travel, but also serve bicycle, pedestrian, and freight movement needs throughout the City. This system ensures that each roadway functions consistently with its intended use. The policies contained in this section are intended to encourage design standards, which promote the efficiency and safety of the circulation system. Goal 2.0 Adopt arterial, collector, and local roadway design standards to accurately reflect travel function and anticipated travel volumes based upon development density and intensity.







Objective 2.1 The Transportation/Circulation Element shall identify a roadway system that recognizes the importance of the use and function of each roadway classification. Policy 2.1.1 The City shall plan, design, and implement a roadway system based upon a roadway functional classification system. Functional classification is the process by which streets in a roadway network are grouped into classes according to the service that the roadway is intended to provide. The City shall adopt design standards for all streets in accordance with their functional classification and recognized design standards. The City will utilize right-of-way standards as established by the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) for Pinal Avenue, Florence Boulevard and the Gila Bend Highway. The City of Casa Grande will coordinate with ADOT, Pinal County, and the Central Arizona Association of Governments to identify regional options for relieving growth of future traffic demands on these transportation facilities. The City shall ensure that bridges are designed to accommodate a design year storm cross-section to commensurate with planned roadway improvements. Low-flow crossing designs shall be developed for local and collector street wash crossings where traffic volumes do not warrant construction of a bridge. Installation of new traffic control devices shall be based upon established warrants and professional analysis in order to ensure traffic safety. The City shall seek opportunities to improve existing vehicular and pedestrian rail crossings to provide safe mobility.







Policy 2.1.2 Policy 2.1.3







Policy 2.1.4







Policy 2.1.5 Policy 2.1.6







07-02-07







9







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



Policy 2.1.7 Goal 3.0 Installation of new traffic signals shall include preemptive devices to facilitate decreased response travel times for emergency vehicles. Establish guidelines regarding safety and appropriate access control to and from arterial streets and adjacent properties.







Objective 3.1 The City of Casa Grande shall specify appropriate guidelines regarding driveway access spacing and street intersection spacing in order to maintain capacity, efficiency, and safe traffic flow on City streets. Policy 3.1.1 The City shall update driveway spacing and location requirements on arterial and collector streets to provide appropriate access to property in a manner that is not detrimental to traffic flow or traffic safety. The City shall establish street intersection spacing and alignment requirements in order to establish a consistent and contiguous network of streets in the community. The City may require the consolidation of driveway access points along roadways classified as arterial when the arterial street is improved in order to enhance and protect the capacity and safety of the circulation system and reduce potential traffic conflicts. The City will establish an ongoing process in cooperation with ADOT to coordinate zoning and subdivision approval with ADOT's access permitting process.







Policy 3.1.2 Policy 3.1.3







Policy 3.1.4







2.3 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION POLICIES



The availability of public transportation to, from, and within the City of Casa Grande is an integral part of Casa Grande's transportation system. Public transit plays an essential role in guaranteeing mobility to individuals and households that lack other means of transportation and public investment in transit, where appropriate, has proved to be a significant economic benefit to the community. As Casa Grande grows, increased use of public transportation in the future may provide additional benefits such as reduced congestion and improved air quality. For public transportation to be successful, it should be planned so that it is convenient, accessible, dependable, and targeted to address unmet local and regional transportation needs. The following policies are intended to provide guidance in establishing an expanded public transportation system to serve the needs of the City and the region. Goal 4.0 Provide or facilitate the provision of local and regional public transportation service in areas or markets where unmet transportation needs exist.







Objective 4.1 The Transportation/Circulation Element of the general plan should promote convenient and efficient public transportation as an alternative to the automobile. Policy 4.1.1 The City of Casa Grande shall support the use of public transportation where demand and cost effectiveness can be demonstrated.







07-02-07







10







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



Policy 4.1.2 The City shall work with Pinal County, ADOT, or private transportation providers to meet the demand for public transportation in the City as well as between Casa Grande and neighboring communities. The City shall coordinate with local and regional publicly funded and private transportation providers in the promotion and coordination of their services and promote public awareness of service availability. The City shall coordinate with Amtrak in providing a rail stop in the City. The City shall also be encouraged to preserve the existing Railroad Depot located in the downtown core.







Policy 4.1.3







Policy 4.1.4







2.4 NON-MOTORIZED CIRCULATION POLICIES



Non-motorized circulation, including bicycling, walking, and equestrian modes can provide efficient and enjoyable means of transportation and recreation for people of all ages. The City of Casa Grande has numerous opportunities to establish bikeways, pedestrian, and equestrian facilities along City streets, utility easements, canals, and scenic off-road areas. The following policies encourage the development of functional bicycle, pedestrian, and equestrian facilities that address transportation needs and provides a system of facilities throughout the community. Goal 5.0 Provide non-motorized modes of transportation through the use of bicycle and pedestrian pathways, and equestrian trails.







Objective 5.1 The City shall facilitate the use of alternative, non-vehicular modes of transportation by establishing specific and conceptual bicycle corridors throughout the City. Policy 5.1.1 Policy 5.1.2 � Bicycling shall be encouraged to provide a safe and healthy alternative to automobile transportation in the City of Casa Grande. The following types of bicycle facilities shall be identified. Bike Path � A bike path is a special pathway designated for the use of bicycles (and pedestrians) where cross-flows of motorists is minimized. Bike paths are usually buffered from vehicular roadways by the use of a landscape strip or physical buffer. Bike paths may be totally separated from roadways, or utilize canal rights-of-way, utility corridors, washes, linear parks or other easements for the path. Some areas may have paved paths while others may consist of natural material or other surfaces. Bike Lane � A bike lane is a paved lane on the shoulder of a roadway that is marked for bicycle use only. Bike lanes may be found on arterial and collector streets, and are marked to alert both bicyclists and motorists that each is sharing the roadway. Bicycle lanes may be established on arterial roadways with sufficient pavement width to allow for the safety of the bicyclist. Bike Route � A bike route is a roadway identified as a bicycle facility by signs only. Bike routes may be identified on local streets and collector streets where traffic volumes are modest.







�







�







07-02-07







11







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



Policy 5.1.3 The Casa Grande Multi-Use Path Plan shall identify bikeways which link residential areas with as many primary destination points as possible, including parks, schools, open space areas and commercial facilities. This plan shall also indicate the general location of a looped recreational bicycle system in the City and surrounding area. The Casa Grande Multi-Use Path Plan shall designate the specific location of bike paths, lanes, and routes as well as equestrian trails on selected City streets and off-road areas.







Policy 5.1.4







Objective 5.2 The Transportation/Circulation Element of the general plan shall promote the development of pedestrian facilities throughout the City to encourage walking as a mode of transportation and recreation. Policy 5.2.1 Policy 5.2.2 In the pedestrian system, priority shall be given to segments, which provide safe routes to schools and/or enhance the continuity of the existing pedestrian system. All new arterial and collector streets shall have improved sidewalks within the public rightof-way on both sides of the street when the street is built to ultimate specifications. Sidewalks, where possible, should be separated from the edge of the roadway by a landscaped buffer. Local streets in all residential categories are required to have a sidewalk on both sides of the street. The City shall promote the conversion within easements of open ditches to bicycle, pedestrian, and equestrian uses.







Policy 5.2.3 Policy 5.2.4







Objective 5.3 The Transportation/Circulation Element of the general plan shall promote the development of equestrian trails as a safe and convenient mode of transportation and recreation. Policy 5.3.1 Where appropriate, off-road trails shall accommodate horseback riding.







2.5 REGIONAL CIRCULATION PLANNING POLICIES



Portions of the City's circulation system function as a linkage within the regional circulation system. It is important that the City coordinate with Pinal County, the Gila River Indian Community, and the Arizona Department of Transportation to maximize compatibility with adopted circulation plans and planned regional transportation system improvements. Goal 6.0 Support appropriate multi-jurisdictional planning among the City of Casa Grande, Pinal County, Central Arizona Association of Governments, Gila River Indian Community, and Arizona Department of Transportation that share common transportation facilities.







07-02-07







12







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



Objective 6.1 The City of Casa Grande shall support regional transportation planning programs and planning coordination with Pinal County, Central Arizona Association of Governments, Gila River Indian Community, and ADOT. Policy 6.1.1 Policy 6.1.2 The City shall coordinate efforts with adjacent jurisdictions to ensure adequate and consistent roadway widths, alignments, classifications, and improvements. The City shall continue to work jointly with Pinal County to plan and improve roadways and public transportation through the formation of intergovernmental agreements.







2.6 MUNICIPAL AIRPORT POLICIES



Goal 7.0 Provide for the future expansion of the municipal airport. Objective 7.1 Ensure that land uses surrounding the municipal airport are compatible with future expansion of the airport. Policy 7.1.1 The City of Casa Grande shall utilize the Casa Grande Municipal Airport Master Plan to protect airspace around the airport from encroachment of incompatible land uses.







2.7 RAILROAD TRANSPORTATION POLICIES



Goal 8.0 Ensure that industrial users in Casa Grande continue to have adequate rail service to meet their needs.







Objective 8.1 Increase the availability of rail sidings and tracks to industrial users in the City of Casa Grande. Policy 8.1.1 Policy 8.1.2 The City of Casa Grande shall support the development of private rail sidings that provide service to industrial developments in the City. The City of Casa Grande shall coordinate improvements to, and new rail sidings with the Union Pacific Railroad Company and private industries where possible.







07-02-07







13







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report







3.0 METHODOLOGIES AND STANDARDS



3.1 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) DEFINITION



Level of Service (LOS) is a quantitative measurement of operational characteristics of traffic and the perception of the traffic conditions by both motorists and passengers. There are six levels of service defined by the Highway Capacity Manual, published by the Transportation Research Board (TRB). Each level of service is given a letter designation from A to F, with A representing the optimal or best condition and F the worst. Levels of service on roadway segments is characterized by the Highway Capacity Manual as follows: LOS A: Best, free flow operations (on uninterrupted flow facilities) and very low delay (on interrupted flow facilities). Freedom to select desired speeds and to maneuver within traffic is extremely high. LOS B: Flow is stable, but presence of other users is noticeable. Freedom to select desired speeds is relatively unaffected, but there is a slight decline in the freedom to maneuver within traffic. LOS C: Flow is stable, but the operation of users is becoming affected by the presence of other users. Maneuvering within traffic requires substantial vigilance on the part of the user. LOS D: High density but stable flow. Speed and freedom to maneuver are severely restricted. The driver is experiencing a generally poor level of comfort and convenience. LOS E: Flow is at or near capacity. All speeds are reduced to a low, but relatively uniform value. Freedom to maneuver within traffic is extremely difficult. Comfort and convenience levels are extremely poor. LOS F: Worse, facility has failed, or a breakdown has occurred. For typical long range transportation planning studies in urban areas, LOS D is usually used because it allows for a generally accepted quality of service. To maintain consistency with the 2001 Casa Grande Multimodal Transportation Study and the 2000 Pinal County Transportation Plan, this study uses a LOS D standard for determining future need for roadway facilities.







3.2 ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE THRESHOLDS



This section presents the level of service thresholds utilized to analyze segment performance for freeways, arterials, and collector streets. The analysis of segment level of service is based on the number of lanes, the functional classification of the roadway, the maximum desired level of service capacity and the existing or forecasted average daily traffic (ADT) volume. The capacities used in the Casa Grande study area were based on the capacities used in the 2001 Casa Grande Multimodal Transportation Study. Table 3-1 summarizes daily roadway directional lane capacities by functional classification.







07-02-07







14







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



TABLE 3-1 DAILY ROADWAY CAPACITIES Functional Classification Interstate/Freeway Arterial Collector Freeway Ramps Daily Per Lane Capacity 16,375 8,700 7,500 8,000







Source: Casa Grande Multimodal Transportation Study, 2001.







A volume-capacity (v/c) ratio was used to evaluate a roadway segment's LOS. The directional daily per lane capacities were used with daily traffic volume estimates to determine the associated v/c ratio. Segment level LOS was determined using the v/c guidelines shown in Table 3-2.



TABLE 3-2 LEVELS OF SERVICE LOS A B C D E F Maximum V/C 0.00 � 0.30 0.30 � 0.54 0.54 - 0.75 0.75 - 0.90 0.90 - 1.00 >1.00







Source: Casa Grande Multimodal Transportation Study, 2001.







07-02-07







15







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report







4.0







CURRENT CONDITIONS







This section provides an overview of year 2005 socioeconomic and roadway conditions within the Casa Grande study area. It includes an updated study area population and employment estimate, an inventory of roadway facilities, an evaluation of safety conditions on key study area arterials, an assessment of heavy truck traffic, and overview of current transit operations. It also includes a list of roadway improvement projects in the Casa Grande five-year capital improvement program.







4.1 CURRENT SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS



An estimate of year 2005 population and employment was developed from several sources including Census 2000 population data, historic building permit activity, and a commercial employment database. This section outlines the development of year 2005 socioeconomic estimates. 4.1.1 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE







Executive Order (EO) 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations) dated February 11, 1994, requires that disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations, and low-income populations of federal programs, policies and activities be identified and addressed. The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) has published a Final USDOT Order to establish procedures for use in complying with EO 12898. The order defines key terms and provides guidance for identifying and addressing disproportionately high and adverse impacts to low-income and minority populations. If disproportionately high and adverse impacts would result from the proposed action, mitigation measures or alternatives must be developed to avoid or reduce the impacts, unless an agency finds that such measures are not practicable. Congress passed Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related statutes to assure that individuals are not subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, sex, or disability. Recipients of federal assistance for transportation-related projects are required to demonstrate compliance with all civil rights standards applicable to the specified transportation-related project, as defined in the amended Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Transportation improvements implemented from this study should not adversely impact such groups disproportionately. To identify and address environmental justice issues, community outreach and public involvement programs should involve under-represented populations from the planning to the implementation of any transportation improvement project. A variety of possible alternatives should be developed and considered in order to ensure all groups are fairly represented in the amount and type of transportation services provided. Data from Census 2000 shown in Table 4-1 provides a comparison of the minority and elderly population for Arizona, Pinal County, and the City of Casa Grande. This table shows that Casa Grande has a higher proportion of minorities, which includes Black, Hispanic, Asian-American, and American Indian populations,







07-02-07







16







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



than Pinal County and the state as a whole. The table also shows that portion of the population age 65 and over is lower than Pinal County and is consistent with the statewide average.



TABLE 4-1 YEAR 2000 MINORITY AND ELDERLY POPULATION Jurisdiction Arizona Pinal County City of Casa Grande(2) Total 5,130,632 179,727 25,224 Total Minorities(1) 1,856,374 74,086 12,517 Percent Minority 36.2% 41.2% 49.6% Total Age 65+ 667,839 29,171 3,469 Percent Age 65+ 13.0% 16.2% 13.8%







Source: Arizona Department of Economic Security - Census Summary File 1, Census 2000. Note: (1) A minority is a person who is Black, Hispanic, Asian American, or an American Indian/Alaska Native. (2) City limit boundary as of April 1, 2000.







Table 4-2 shows the portion of the population between age 16 and age 64 whose mobility is limited by a disability. The census data shows that the Casa Grande portion of mobility limited population is consistent with Pinal County, and lower overall than the statewide average. The Casa Grande low income population, or those living in a household whose annual income is below poverty status, is both higher than the countywide and statewide averages.



TABLE 4-2 YEAR 2000 MOBILITY LIMITED AND LOW INCOME POPULATION Mobility Limited(1) 166,812 5,198 727 Percent Mobility Limited 3.3% 2.9% 2.9% Low Income(2) 698,669 27,816 4,024 Percent Low Income 13.6% 15.5% 16.0%







Jurisdiction Arizona Pinal County City of Casa Grande(3)







Total 5,130,632 179,727 25,224







Source: Arizona Department of Economic Security - Census Summary File 3, Census 2000. Note: (1) The mobility limited populations includes those between age 16 and age 64 with a self-care or go-outsidehome disability as defined by the Census Bureau. (2) Low-Income population includes those whose household income is at or below the Department of Health and Human Services poverty guidelines. (3) City limit boundary as of April 1, 2000.







4.1.2







YEAR 2005 POPULATION AND HOUSING UNIT ESTIMATE







Significant growth has occurred within the City of Grande study area since the year 2000. In the 2000 census, the Census Bureau recorded 32,831 people occupying 12,783 dwelling units in the study area. City of Casa Grande data show that over 5,309 building permits were issued between January 1, 2002, and September 23, 2005, resulting in over 18,000 occupied dwelling units in the study area. Census 2000 data showed that the number of persons living in each housing unit varied by location. The 2005 study area population was estimated by applying these observed occupancy patterns to the updated housing unit estimate. Based on this data, the Casa Grande SATS current year 2005 study area population is estimated at 51,230. Figure 4-1 shows the year 2005 estimated study area population density by traffic analysis zone.



07-02-07 FINAL REPORT







17







Trekell Rd







Burris Rd







Pinal Ave







-C as a







Gr an







de







Hw y







Val Vista Blvd







11 182 21 8







18 0 17 320







e A







Overfield Rd







8 0







9 3,18 8







10 56 13 438







12 51 22 93 25 4 34 0 48 2,13 3 60 233 36 0 23 219 28 313 37 4







Toltec Buttes Rd







Sunland Gin Rd







Trading Post Rd







1 205







2 46







4 20 3 0







5 0







6 151







7 76







Cox Rd







ric op a







Peart Rd







Ma







NTS







�







Indian Valley Rd







Anderson Rd







Montgomery Rd







Thornton Rd







Russell Rd







Henness Rd







Midway Rd







Bianco Rd







YEAR 2005 ESTIMATED POPULATION DENSITY BY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE







Stanfield Rd







15 16 30 0 42 7 52 0 67 0 95 0 121 0 68 4 43 0 53 0 69 0 98 4 123 21 70 2 99 23 124 6 71 150 100 671 125 287 72 6 101 37 126 5 14 211 44 171 55 190 74 600 103 6 128 20







26 1







19 6







20 500







$ a " !







24 0 27 38 38 7







Woodruff Rd



29 103







Estimated Population per Square Mile



0 - 1,500 1,500 - 4,000 4,000 - 6,500







McCartney Rd



39 350 51 6







31 2,04 9 45 614







32 123 46 571







33 3,042 47 1,218 59 53







35 0







Rodeo Rd







Signal Peak Rd







49 0 61 2 62 9 83 8 111 16 137 4







50 142 63 17 84 16 112 21 138 0







Cottonwood Ln



65 201 93 26 66 404 94 20 120 17 144 15 159 0 163 0







54 13 73 4 102 23 127 12







57 58 56 922 2,00 5 2,79 8







64 6 85 7 113 11 139 0 157 55 86 18 114 10 140 0







Curry Rd







Kortsen Rd







40 10







41 11







Tweedy Rd







6,500 + 00 00 TAZ Number Population Estimate







Gila Bend Hwy







� ?



97 0 122 9







Peters Rd Selma Hwy



119 0 143 0 158 0 96 34







145 0







146 4







147 147







148 0 168 0 167 27







149 0 169 0







150 43 170 2







164 3







165 0







$ ` " !







76 77 78 79 82 75 887 1,80 6 895 510 80 81 3,24 1 89 90 91 92 813 534 4,17 4 1,15 6 834 904 0 108 109 106 110 104 1,704 107 1,220 441 105 1,773 117 118 1,023 151 988 2 4 132 134 135 36 136 130 129 131 519 111 4 6 4 63 133 9 155 153 152 132 3 37 151 154 3 29 161 160 6 215 171 116 178 44 181 33 172 186 179 0 182 22 184 17 186 0 185 0 173 206







� A



115 6 141 31







87 9







88 4 116 5







Florence Blvd







Base Map Features



Earley Rd







142 12







Arterials



Selma Hwy







StudyArea







156 38







166 23







174 127







Arica Rd







175 0







Jim m







176 109







177 47







180 0







ie Ke rr







Blv







d







Shedd Rd







Chuichu Rd







183 5







Houser Rd







Battaglia Rd



Sources: US Census Bureau, 2000; City of Casa Grande, 2005; Wilson & Company, 2005.







FIGURE 4-1 2006 Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study



18







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



4.1.3 EMPLOYMENT ESTIMATE







Employment for 2005 was estimated using a commercial employment database supplemented with input from the City of Casa Grande Economic Development Foundation. Through this process, 15,730 jobs were documented in the City of Casa Grande SATS study area. Table 4-3 shows the job totals by employment classification. Figure 4-2 shows the year 2005 estimated study area employment density by traffic analysis zone.



TABLE 4-3 CITY OF CASA GRANDE YEAR 2005 EMPLOYMENT TOTALS Classification Retail Office Government General Total Employment 5,225 6,203 1,009 3,293 15,730







Sources: InfoUSA, 2005; City of Casa Grande Economic Development Foundation, 2005







4.1.4







SCHOOL ENROLLMENT







The Casa Grande public school system has seven elementary schools, two middle schools, and one high school. Total current year 2005 enrollment reported by the Casa Grande Elementary School District for elementary and middle schools is 6,495. Total 2005 high school enrollment reported by the Casa Grande Union High School District is 3,194. The Central Arizona Community College reported 3,300 students attending its Signal Peak Campus on Overfield Road.







07-02-07







19







FINAL REPORT







Trekell Rd







Burris Rd







Pinal Ave







-C as a







Gr an







de







Hw y







Val Vista Blvd







11 0 21 0







Overfield Rd







8 0







9 40 18 0 17 0







10 0 13 26







12 4 22 16 25 5 34 0 48 4 60 5 81 1,172 109 68 118 0 135 2 36 0 23 0 28 6 37 0







Toltec Buttes Rd







Sunland Gin Rd







Trading Post Rd







1 0







2 0







3 0







4 0







5 0







6 0







7 13







Cox Rd







ric op a







Peart Rd







Ma







�



NTS



Signal Peak Rd Tweedy Rd Curry Rd



86 0 114 0 140 0







Indian Valley Rd







Anderson Rd







Montgomery Rd







Thornton Rd







Russell Rd







e A







Henness Rd







Midway Rd







Bianco Rd







YEAR 2005 ESTIMATED EMPLOYMENT DENSITY BY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE







Stanfield Rd







15 35 30 1 44 20 55 919 74 924 103 22 128 0







26 424







19 0







20 0







$ a " !







24 0 27 0 38 0







Woodruff Rd



29 30 39 0 51 0







Estimated Employment per Square Mile



0 - 500 500 - 1,000 1,000 - 3,000 3,000 + 00 00 TAZ Number Employment Estimate







McCartney Rd







31 34 45 42 56 231 75 364 104 886 129 0







32 34 46 151 57 58 286 531 76 77 494 258 89 90 427 400 106 1051,992 722







33 318 47 228 59 3 78 104 91 750







Rodeo Rd







Kortsen Rd







40 0







41 0







42 0 52 0 67 0 95 0 121 0 68 0







43 0 53 0 69 12 98 0 123 0







14 18







35 0 49 11 61 0







$ a " !



62 10 83 0 111 3 137 0







50 43 63 0 84 0 112 35 138 12







Cottonwood Ln



65 0 93 0 66 0 94 0 120 0 144 0 159 0 163 0







54 0 70 6 99 0 124 4 71 0 100 121 125 4 72 0 101 103 126 0 73 1 102 0 127 310







64 0 85 0 113 0 139 0 157 3







Gila Bend Hwy







� ?



97 0 122 0







Peters Rd Selma Hwy



119 0 143 0 158 0 96 0







130 0 152 0 160 7 172 15 179 0 182 2 184 0 186 0







145 0







146 0







147 8







148 0







149 0







150 0 169 0 170 0







151 31 171 32 178 1 181 0







79 70 80 92 546 226 108 183 107 117 519 0 132 134 122 131 37 35 133 0 153 4







82 256 110 168 136 4 155 249







� A



115 0 141 0







87 0







88 0 116 0







Florence Blvd







Base Map Features



Earley Rd







142 0







Arterials



Selma Hwy







StudyArea







164 0







165 0







$ ` " !







166 0 167 0







$ ` " !



168 0







161 8







154 0







156 29







174 368 173 44







Arica Rd







175 10







Jim m







176 69







177 0







180 0







ie Ke rr







Blv







d







Shedd Rd



185 0







Chuichu Rd







183 0







Houser Rd







Battaglia Rd



Sources: InfoUSA, 2005; City of Casa Grande, 2005; Wilson & Company, October 2005.







FIGURE 4-2 2006 Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study



20







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report 4.2 ROADWAY NETWORK



In an economy where just-in-time shipments are becoming increasingly important to conduct day-to-day business, moving both people and goods is paramount to an efficient transportation system. Higher order roadways, such as freeways and arterials, are the backbone of the intra-urban and inter-community system because they can move people and commodities safely and quickly. The City of Casa Grande roadway system is composed of a network of freeways, arterials, collectors, and local roadways. In addition, some multi-use paths that serve various activity centers, and public transportation provided by both private and public agencies also comprise the primary surface transportation system. The existing roadway system consists primarily of a grid system defined by mile-section arterial roadways. The grid system is generally oriented in north-south and east-west directions. The original town site of Casa Grande follows a northwest-southeast orientation parallel and perpendicular to the Union Pacific Railroad tracks. The Maricopa-Casa Grande Highway and Jimmie Kerr Boulevard are principal arterials that run on a diagonal following the Union Pacific Railroad line. Collector roadways within the City connect residential areas to the arterial roadways, and local roads provide direct access to residential neighborhoods. The major roadways in the study area are described below: Florence Boulevard (SR 287) is a state principal arterial and regionally significant roadway that provides connectivity from downtown Casa Grande east to I-10 and SR 87. The roadway also connects to Pinal Avenue (SR 387) and to Gila Bend Highway (SR 84). Within the city, Florence Boulevard plays a significant role providing local circulation between commercial, governmental, and other activity centers. Pinal Avenue (SR 387) is state principal arterial and regionally significant roadway that provides connectivity from downtown Casa Grande north to I-10. For traffic traveling between Casa Grande and the Phoenix area on I-10, Pinal Avenue is the major entryway to Casa Grande. Additionally, Casa Grande Municipal Airport is located west of Pinal Avenue and south of Val Vista Road. The four-lane roadway also serves local trips accessing commercial activities within the City. Maricopa-Casa Grande Highway is a principal arterial and regionally significant roadway that provides access between Casa Grande and the community of Maricopa to the northwest. It connects to central Casa Grande from its alignment parallel to the Union Pacific Railroad tracks via Cottonwood Lane. Trekell Road is a city principal arterial and regionally significant roadway that provides connectivity between residential areas in the north, the central business district, and I-8 to the south. Peart Road is a city principal arterial that provides connectivity between residential areas in the north, commercial activity centers along Florence Boulevard, and agricultural and industrial areas located to the south. Interstate 10 is an east-west freeway and regionally significant roadway serving longer interregional trips between California and points east. The four-lane freeway is a major transportation link that provides highspeed automobile and truck service between the Phoenix and Tucson areas.



07-02-07 FINAL REPORT







21







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



Interstate 8 is the major route for traffic from Arizona to the southern California region. The highway intersects with I-10 in the southeast corner of the study area. Gila Bend Highway (SR 84) is a state-owned principal arterial and regionally significant roadway that connects downtown Casa Grande west to the community of Stanfield. It joins I-8 approximately 25 miles to the west of Casa Grande. Jimmie Kerr Boulevard is a city principal arterial that provides a connection between downtown Casa Grande and the City of Eloy to the southeast. This road parallels the Union Pacific Railroad tracks, goes beneath I-10, and continues south to Eloy.







4.3 ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS



This section summarizes key roadway characteristics and attributes. 4.3.1 JURISDICTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY







The State of Arizona is responsible for all state routes and interstate highways in the study area. The responsibility of the City of Casa Grande extends to all non-state routes within the city limits. Pinal County administers all roadways in the unincorporated portions of the study area. 4.3.2 NUMBER OF LANES







Most roadways in the study area are two-lane facilities. Five-lane roadways are comprised of four through lanes plus a continuous center left-turn lane. Similarly, three-lane roadways have two through lanes and a continuous left-turn lane. Figure 4-3 shows the current year 2005 number of lanes on study area facilities 4.3.3 TRAFFIC CONTROL







Speed limits in the study area range from 75 mph on the interstate freeways to 25 mph on lower-level collector and local streets. The rural portions of the state routes in the study area are generally posted at 55 mph. The county roads in the study area are generally posted at 50 mph. Depending on the degree of urbanization, speed limits on state routes and principal arterials are typically 45 and 35 mph. Posted speed limits and the location of signalized intersections in the study area are shown in Figure 4-4. This figure also illustrates the ownership of each signalized intersection. 4.3.4 SURFACE TYPE







In the urbanized portions of the study area, all collector level and higher roadways including interstate and state routes, are paved. In the rural portions of the study area, the only streets that are paved in addition to the interstate and state routes are the major one-mile grid arterial streets. However, many of the arterial streets, particularly in the western part of the study area, are unpaved. Roadway surface types in the study area are shown in Figure 4-5.







07-02-07







22







FINAL REPORT







FIGURE 4-3 2005 Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study



23







FIGURE 4-4 2005 Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study



24







FIGURE 4-5 2005 Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study



25







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



4.3.5 TRAFFIC COUNTS







The year 2005 traffic volumes are shown in Figure 4-6. Table 4-4 shows historical growth trends for key roadways in the study area. The overall average annual growth rate on the selected facilities for the fouryear period between 2002 and 2005 is seven percent, ranging from a high of 30.2 percent on Korsten Road to a low of 0.1 percent on I-10. Figure 4-7, 2005 Network Performance, shows that all study area facilities were operating at acceptable levels of service in year 2005.



TABLE 4-4 HISTORICAL DAILY TRAFFIC COUNTS FOR SELECTED FACILITIES Facility Korsten Road SR 84 (Gila Bend Hwy) Pinal Avenue Pinal Avenue Trekell Road McCartney Road Rodeo Road Kortsen Road Cottonwood Lane Florence Boulevard I-10 I-10 I-10 Location E of Thornton Road E of Thornton Road N of Val Vista Boulevard S of Kortsen Road N of Cottonwood Lane E of Trekell Road E of Trekell Road E of Trekell Road E of Trekell Road W of Peart Road S of SR 387 S of McCartney Road S of SR 287/ Florence Boulevard 2002 4,516 11,629 13,744 18,941 18,736 2,752 5,081 3,711 7,947 22,946 38,700 35,200 36,800 2003 4,246 10,849 15,424 17,621 18,059 2,851 4,736 4,444 11,165 21,873 40,400 44,600 42,200 2004 5,686 12,537 17,104 20,195 20,381 2,993 5,626 3,950 20,239 29,672 38,900 48,000 40,900 2005 5,453 12,550 16,978 20,586 21,629 3,084 7,012 8,200 13,208 28,809 38,900 46,900 38,700 Annual Growth Rate 5.2% 2.0% 5.9% 2.2% 3.9% 3.0% 9.5% 30.2% 16.6% 6.4% 0.1% 8.3% 1.3%







Source: City of Casa Grande Public Works Department, 2005; Arizona Department of Transportation, 2005







07-02-07







26







FINAL REPORT







Thornton Rd.







X.X







Average Daily 2005 Traffic Volumes - (in thousands)







FIGURE 4-6 2005 Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study



27







FIGURE 4-7 2005 Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study



28







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report 4.4 SAFETY AND CRASH HISTORY



Crash data was collected from the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) and the City of Casa Grande for key roadways for the years 2002 to 2004. The project team reviewed safety conditions on the following key study area arterial facilities: � � � � � � � � � � � Cottonwood Lane Florence Boulevard Henness Road Kortsen Road McCartney Road Peart Road Pinal Avenue (SR 387) Rodeo Road SR 84 Trekell Road Val Vista Road







The purpose of this review was to identify safety trends on the roadway network. Further, for locations where high crash frequency is identified, possible treatments are presented for both ADOT and the City of Casa Grande to consider as they develop their Transportation Improvement Programs (TIP). As the crash histories were assembled, the data from both the City and ADOT were compared to ensure that duplicate incidents were not recorded. The data obtained included information about accident date, time, location, and severity. Table 4-5 shows crash rates by year for the key study area facilities for 2002 to 2004. Table 4-6 shows average crash severity between January 1, 2002 and December 31, 2005. Table 4-7 shows the number of crashes that occurred at key intersections. Table 4-8 shows crashes on study area facilities by peak month.







07-02-07







29







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



TABLE 4-5 KEY STUDY AREA FACILITY CRASH RATE SUMMARY � 2002 TO 2004 Average Segment Crash Rate(2) 4.40 6.05 0.63 2.13 0.58 2.05 2.29 1.75 5.28 3.40 1.51







Facility Cottonwood Lane Florence Boulevard (SR 287) Henness Road Kortsen Road McCartney Road Peart Road Pinal Avenue (SR 387) Rodeo Road Gila Bend Hwy (SR 84)* Trekell Road Val Vista Road I-10







From Thornton Road Overfield Road







To







2002(1) 5.17 5.33 0.90 2.37 1.03 2.07 2.09 1.75 3.56 3.17 0.27







2003(1) 4.81 7.18 0.41 2.05 0.27 2.23 2.17 1.48 6.06 3.39 0.53







2004(1) 3.22 5.63 0.59 1.97 0.45 1.84 2.61 2.01 6.24 3.64 3.73







Center Avenue Cottonwood Lane I-10 I-10 Early Road Florence Boulevard I-10 Thornton Road Early Road I-10







Early Road Trekell Road Pinal Avenue (SR 387) McCartney Road I-10 Trekell Road Pinal Avenue (SR 387) McCartney Road Pinal Avenue (SR 387)







Note: (1) Segment crash rate per million vehicle miles of travel. (2) Three-year (2002-2004) average segment crash rate per million vehicle miles of travel. * ADOT AADT data between 2002 and 2003 shows a large discrepancy, data may be compromised. Sources: Arizona Department of Transportation, 2005; City of Casa Grande Police Department, 2005; Stantec, 2005







07-02-07







30







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



TABLE 4-6 KEY STUDY AREA FACILITY AVERAGE CRASH SEVERITY � 2002 TO 2004 2002 to 2004 Average Crash Severity Facility Cottonwood Lane Florence Boulevard (SR 287) Henness Road Kortsen Road McCartney Road Peart Road Pinal Avenue (SR 387) Rodeo Road Gila Bend Highway (SR 84) Trekell Road Val Vista Road From I-10 Center Avenue Cottonwood Lane I-10 I-10 Early Road Florence Boulevard I-10 Thornton Road Early Road I-10 To Thornton Road Overfield Road Early Road Trekell Road Pinal Avenue (SR 387) McCartney Road I-10 Trekell Road Pinal Avenue (SR 387) McCartney Road Pinal Avenue (SR 387) Property Damage Only 5.0% 19.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.5% 6.0% 2.0% 4.0% 5.0% 0.0% Possible Injury 67.0% 61.0% 50.0% 55.0% 54.0% 60.0% 62.0% 58.0% 69.0% 65.0% 59.0% Injury 28.0% 20.0% 50.0% 43.0% 46.0% 39.0% 32.0% 40.0% 25.0% 29.0% 41.0% Fatality 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 2.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0%







Sources: Arizona Department of Transportation, 2005; City of Casa Grande Police Department, 2005; Stantec, 2005







07-02-07







31







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



TABLE 4-7 CRASHES AT KEY STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS � 2002 TO 2004 Facility Intersection Pinal Avenue (SR 387) Trekell Road Peart Road Amarillo Road Trekell Road Colorado Road Pueblo Road Cottonwood Lane Florence Boulevard (SR 287) Early Road Trekell Road Pinal Avenue (SR 387) Thornton Road Trekell Road Peart Road Pinal Avenue (SR 387) Florence Boulevard (SR 287) Cottonwood Lane McMurray Boulevard Cottonwood Lane Rodeo Road Kortsen Road Florence Boulevard (SR 287) McMurray Boulevard Pinal Avenue (SR 387) Trekell Road Peart Road Thornton Road Florence Boulevard (SR 287) Cottonwood Lane Kortsen Road McMurray Boulevard Rodeo Road Pinal Avenue (SR 387) Trekell Road Control Type Signal Signal Stop Sign Stop Sign Signal Signal Signal Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Signal Signal Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Signal Stop Sign Stop Sign Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Stop Sign Signal Signal Signal Signal Stop Sign Signal Stop Sign Stop Sign Crashes1 73 56 34 13 97 86 72 4 4 1 38 36 8 14 8 4 55 34 20 60 33 31 28 22 34 17 6 9 97 56 38 32 17 16 1







Cottonwood Lane







Florence Boulevard (SR 287) Henness Road







Kortsen Road







McCartney Road







Peart Road







Pinal Avenue (SR 387)







Rodeo Road Gila Bend Highway (SR 84)







Trekell Road







Val Vista Road







Note: (1) Includes crashes reported to have occurred at key intersections. This total does not include mid-block accidents. Sources: Arizona Department of Transportation,2005; City of Casa Grande Police Department, 2005; Stantec, 2005







07-02-07 32







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



TABLE 4-8 KEY STUDY AREA FACILITY CRASHES BY HIGHEST AND LOWEST MONTH � 2002 TO 2004 Facility Highest Month November February August September December November February March No Apparent Trend June February January April February McCartney Road March March May February November February March February May October July October November November February January December November Crashes 31 30 29 29 100 97 90 90 NA 15 11 10 10 5 4 15 15 14 14 49 40 12 9 8 14 9 8 58 49 42 39 4 Lowest Month July







Crashes 10







Cottonwood Lane







Florence Boulevard (SR 287) Henness Road







June







67







No Apparent Trend







NA







Kortsen Road







August Several months, each showing one incident tied for the lowest number of crashes. June







5







NA







Peart Road Pinal Avenue (SR 387) Rodeo Road Gila Bend Highway (SR 84)







6







July December







18 2







September







2







Trekell Road







July Several months, each showing one incident tied for the lowest number of crashes.







23







Val Vista Road







NA







Sources: Arizona Department of Transportation,2005; City of Casa Grande Police Department, 2005; Stantec, 2005







07-02-07 33







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



4.4.1 SAFETY TRENDS Annual crash rates are a key indicator of safety trends on a specific facility. These rates show the annual number of crashes for each 1 million vehicle miles traveled over a given roadway segment. This crash analysis shows that safety trends vary by facility. While recent data on the type of crashes was not available, the data does show that most accidents occur at intersections. The data also shows that most crashes occur in the higher traffic months of November, December, February, and March. A breakdown of the crash analysis by roadway facility is presented below. Cottonwood Lane In 2002, the crash rate was 5.17 per million vehicle miles of travel. In 2004, the rate had decreased to 3.22. The crash analysis shows that most accidents are occurring at or near an intersection. Florence Boulevard The analysis shows a small increase in the crash rate on Florence Boulevard between 2002 and 2004. Most of the crashes on this facility are intersection related. Henness Road From the intersection analysis, 90% of the accidents occurred at an intersection. Kortsen Road The 2002 crash rate was 2.37 per million vehicle miles of travel; in 2004 it was 1.97. McCartney Road In 2002, there were a total of 15 crashes, and in 2004 there were 7 crashes. The installation of nearby traffic control devices may have contributed to the decrease. Peart Road Over the three-year period between 2002 and 2004, there was one crash in the mile spanning from Early Road to Florence Boulevard, 78 crashes from Florence Boulevard to Cottonwood Lane, 40 crashes from Cottonwood Lane to Kortsen Road, and the remaining 8 crashes occurred over the remaining two-mile stretch. Pinal Avenue The analysis shows an increase in the crash rate in the three year period between 2002 and 2004 on Pinal Avenue. Between 2002 and 2004, there were 192 crashes in the first mile of the roadway spanning from SR-84 to Cottonwood Lane, 62 crashes from Cottonwood Lane to Kortsen Road, 50 crashes from Kortsen Road to Rodeo Road, and the rest of the 84 crashes occurred over the remaining 5.5 miles. One intersection of particular note is SR 387 and Val Vista Boulevard. In both 2002 and 2003, this intersection had only one crash. However, in 2004 the number of crashes increased to 15.







07-02-07 34







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



Rodeo Road The analysis shows an increase in the crash rate in the three year period between 2002 and 2004 on Rodeo Road. In 2002 there were 1.75 crashes per million vehicle miles of travel. In 2004 there were 2.01. SR 84 The crash rate on SR 84 almost doubled between 2002 and 2004. In 2002, the crash rate was 3.56 per million vehicle miles of travel. In 2004 that rate increased to 6.24. Trekell Road The analysis shows an increase in the crash rate in the three year period between 2002 and 2004 on Trekell Road. In 2002 there were 3.17 crashes per million vehicle miles of travel. In 2004 there were 3.64. Val Vista Road Val Vista Road showed a dramatic increase in the crash rate between 2002 and 2004. In 2002 the crash rate was 0.27 per million vehicle miles of travel. In 2004 that rate increased to 3.73. 4.4.2 CRASH REDUCTION EFFORTS







In addition to the crash summary above, ADOT has been monitoring crashes along their two primary surface arterials in Casa Grande, namely Pinal Avenue (SR-387) and Florence Boulevard (SR-287). The Tucson District prepared two studies in 2003 to better address the crashes along these roadways. Both studies concluded that better access management along Pinal Avenue and Florence Boulevard would improve safety and improve traffic flow along these routes, particularly within the more urbanized sections. Key recommendations from these studies include: � � Construct raised concrete median to restrict excess turning movements and alleviate high crash frequency; and, Improve sidewalk access, pedestrian crosswalks, and reduce driveway access.







To address access management issues on a statewide basis, ADOT is nearing the completion of a study to develop a Statewide Access Management Plan. When complete, this plan will contain specific access management strategies and recommendations for all state facilities based on the roadways functional classification. 4.4.3 SUMMARY







Although the depth of the safety and crash data for this Small Area Transportation Study does not include the level of detail shown in the ADOT studies, many of the same trends are evident. Therefore, to improve safety within the Casa Grande City planning area, Table 4-9 outlines the most frequent types of accidents, their probable cause and possible treatment. As further crash analysis occurs, Table 4-9 may assist transportation safety officials in identifying the types of treatments that may be implemented to decrease accidents and improve traffic flow.







07-02-07 35







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



TABLE 4-9 ACCIDENT COUNTERMEASURES Accident Type Right Angle Accidents at Unsignalized Intersections Possible Cause Ignoring traffic control devices. Improper judgment of gap size. Large total intersection volume. High approach speed. Restricted sight distance. Possible Strategies Retime adjacent signals to create gaps at stopcontrolled intersections. Provide targeted enforcement to control speed and stop sign violations. Provide traffic calming on intersections approaches through a combination of geometrics and traffic control devices, such as install raised median and eliminate two-way left turn lane. Remove sight obstructions. Install/improve street lighting. Install signal based upon Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Device (MUTCD) warrants. Reduce speed limit on approaches if justified by speed study. Provide right-turn acceleration lanes at intersections. Provide full-width paved shoulders in intersection areas. Clear sight triangles on stop- or yield-controlled approaches to intersections. Provide targeted speed enforcement. Provide traffic calming on intersection approaches through a combination of geometrics and traffic control devices, such as install raised median and eliminate two-way left turn lane. Install/Improve signing and/or marking for pedestrian facilities. Increase curb radii. Create left- or right-turn lanes. Conduct speed control study. Provide adequate drainage. Overlay existing pavement. Install/improve traffic barriers. Flatten slopes and ditches. Improve alignment/grade. Provide proper super elevation Widen lanes and shoulders. Improve/install pavement markings. Increase sign size. Improve roadway lighting. Improve channelization.







� � �







� � � � Rear-End Accident at Unsignalized Intersections Pedestrian crossing. Driver not aware of intersection. Slippery surface. Large numbers of turning vehicles. Excessive speed. Follow too close. � � � � �







� � � � � � � � � � � � � � �







Run-Off-Road







Slippery pavement/ponded water. Roadway design inadequate for traffic conditions. Poor delineation. Poor visibility. Improper channelization.







07-02-07 36







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



Accident Type Sideswipe or Head-On Possible Cause Inadequate road design and/or maintenance. Inadequate shoulders. Excessive vehicle speed. Inadequate pavement markings. Inadequate channelization. Inadequate signing. � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Possible Strategies Perform necessary road surface repairs. Sign and mark unsafe passing areas. Improve alignment/grade. Provide wider lanes. Provide passing lanes. Improve shoulders. Reduce speed limit if justified by speed study. Install raised median. Install reflectorized pavement markers. Install/improve channelization. Install acceleration and deceleration lanes. Provide turning bays. Provide advance direction and warning signs. Install advanced warning devices (see MUTCD). Install sun visors on traffic signals. Install back plates. Reduce speed limit on approaches if justified by spot speed study. Remove sight obstructions. Adjust amber phase. Provide all-red clearance phases. Coordinate signals. Install left turn lanes as appropriate. Install raised median on roadway to prevent left turning vehicles. Install two-way left-turn lanes. Regulate minimum spacing of driveways (access management). Regulate minimum corner clearance Install curbing to define driveway location where appropriate. Consolidate adjacent driveways Implement shared driveway philosophy. Restrict parking near driveways Increase the width of driveways Increase curb radii Provide right-turn lanes Widen through lanes Move driveway to side street Construct a local service road Provide acceleration and deceleration lanes Channelize driveway Reduce speed limit if justified by spot speed study Install/improve street lighting Remove sight obstructions







Right-angle collisions at signalized intersections







Poor visibility of signals Inadequate signal timing







Collision at driveways







Left-turning vehicles Improperly located driveway Right-turning vehicles Large volume of through traffic Large volume of driveway traffic Restricted sight distance







Sources: Traffic Engineering Handbook, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington D.C., 1999, Table 7-14. Transportation Research Board.NCHRP Report 500 � Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan, Volume 5: A Guide for Addressing Unsignalized Intersection Collisions, Washington D.C., 2003.







07-02-07 37







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report 4.5 TRUCK TRAFFIC



The surface freight system within the City of Casa Grande's planning boundary includes interstates, selected state routes and local routes. Local truck routes are an important part of the freight system, and thus an important part of the local economy. In fact, "the total resource costs of urban goods movement are comparable to those of urban person movement ... In other words, about half of total urban transportation costs, in economic terms, are related to freight."1 "Passengers going to shop, going to work, coming from work, going to a restaurant for lunch or dinner, going to a movie, or just going for a drive are indeed making freight-related trips. If the trucks from the food and department store warehouses, from suppliers to manufactures, from restaurant and entertainment supply houses, and from highway paving and construction companies had not made their trips, passengers would not be making theirs."2 Therefore, nearly all of the vehicle movements in growing urban areas, like Casa Grande, are tied both directly and indirectly to truck movements. Vehicle classification count data used to quantify heavy vehicle traffic is only available on state facilities. City staff and residents have, however, observed significant volumes of heavy vehicles using Cottonwood Lane, Thornton Road, and Kortsen Road for access to I-10 and Phoenix. Table 4-10 summarizes the heavy vehicle volumes on the state roadways within the Casa Grande study area. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) classifies vehicles by size and number of wheels. Vehicles larger than a pick-up truck with more than four wheels are generally considered heavy vehicles.



TABLE 4-10 YEAR 2004 DAILY TRUCK VOLUMES Roadway I-8 I-10 SR-84 (Gila Bend Highway) SR-287 (Florence Boulevard) SR-387 (Pinal Avenue) Segment Stanfield to I-10 SR 387 to I-8 Stanfield to I-10 SR 84 & SR 387 Interchange to SR 87 SR 84 & SR 287 Interchange to SR 87 Average Daily Traffic 7,660 41,920 7,080 18,700 16,500 Heavy Vehicle Volume(1) 3,064 15,510 1,062 2,805 1,815 Percent Heavy Vehicles 40 37 15 15 11







Source: Arizona Department of Transportation, 2004 Note: FHWA vehicle class group 4 or higher. This includes vehicles larger than a pick-up truck with more than four wheels.







Within the Casa Grande study area, the highest truck volumes are found on the interstate system. Truck volumes along I-8 from Stanfield Road (milepost 161.53) to the I-10 interchange (milepost 178.33) account for 40% of total traffic on I-8. On I-10, truck traffic from the SR 387 interchange (milepost 185.26) to the I-8 interchange (milepost 199.08) accounts for 37% of total traffic.







Ogden, Kenneth Wade, "Urban Goods Movement and Its Relation to Planning" in Proceedings of the Urban Goods and Freight Forecasting Conference (Washington, D.C.: FHWA and TMIP, forthcoming, 1998, 2-1 to 2-14). 2 Capelle, Russell B., "Commodity Flows and Freight Transportation" in Chapter 3 of the Institute of Transportation Engineers Transportation Planning Handbook, 2nd Edition (Washington, D.C.: Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1999) pg. 25.



1







07-02-07 38







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



Three state routes intersect the study area, SR 84 (Gila Bend Highway), SR 287 (Florence Boulevard), and SR 387 (Pinal Avenue). The selected state routes are utilized by local trucking industries as a connection between local routes and the interstate system. SR 84 and SR 287 along with I-8 serve as major east/west routes for trucks, while SR 387 and I-10 serve as north/south routes. The truck volumes along SR 84 from Stanfield Road (milepost 165.92) to the I-10 interchange (milepost 196.08) account for 15% of total traffic. Along SR 287 from the SR 84-SR 387 interchange (milepost 111.72) to Central Avenue (Milepost 117.78) trucks account for 15% of traffic. From Central Avenue (milepost 117.78) to the SR 87 interchange (milepost 125.81) trucks account for 11% of total traffic. On SR 387 from the SR 84-SR 287 interchange (milepost 0) to the SR 87 interchange (milepost 15.72), trucks account for an average of 11% of total traffic.







4.6 MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION



4.6.1 TRANSIT Existing public transportation is provided by taxicab companies and by various public and private agencies that offer special transportation services. Taxi service is provided in the Casa Grande Valley as well as to Sky Harbor International Airport in Phoenix. No demand responsive transit service other than taxis is currently provided. Deviated fixed route public transit service is provided by Community Transportation on four separate routes linking Casa Grande and other municipalities in the region. Community Transportation is operated by Pinal Gila Community Child Services, Inc., and funded by the JOBS division of the Arizona Department of Economic Security. Greyhound bus service connects the City of Casa Grande with Phoenix, Tucson, and other major metropolitan areas. In addition to the transit service provided by Pinal Gila Community Child Services, Inc., Casa Grande is also participating in the Pinal Rides transportation coordination pilot project. This human services transit project is coordinated by the Pinal-Gila Council for Senior Citizens. This agency provides elderly and disabled with transportation along routes between Florence, Coolidge and Casa Grande and Eloy and Casa Grande. The Pinal Rides demonstration project is part of the Arizona Rides initiative undertaken by the Governor's Office in coordination with ADOT and other state agencies in 2005. 4.6.2 NON-MOTORIZED MODES







The current system of pedestrian and bicycle facilities is discontinuous and incomplete. However, the City has been incrementally developing a pedestrian/bicycle trail system. Bicycle lanes have been incorporated into the construction of new arterials and collector streets. The City's Roadway Design standards include bike lanes for both arterial and collector streets. In addition, the City has also implemented multi-use paths along canals and washes.







4.7 PROGRAMMED AND PLANNED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS



As the City of Casa Grande increases in size and planning area, the roadway network is also growing to meet the additional travel demands. Due to the high concentration of traffic around the City's downtown area, a number of street improvements are required. The convergence of I-10 and I-8, as well as the







07-02-07 39







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



adjacency of Casa Grande with the neighboring communities of Eloy and Coolidge, creates demand for additional capacity on arterial and collector roadways. Table 4-11 shows currently planned improvements to the City of Casa Grande roadway network:



TABLE 4-11 CITY OF CASA GRANDE PLANNED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS Facility Doan Street From Trekell Road To Start 3/6/07 3/2/06 3/1/08 12/1/04 3/2/06 3/2/06 3/1/08 3/1/08 3/1/08 3/2/10 End 9/11/08 9/8/07 9/2/09 10/29/06 9/1/07 9/8/07 9/2/09 9/2/09 9/6/09 9/3/11 Current Improved Lanes Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 Description New Road New Road New Road Rehab / Widen Rehab / Widen Rehab / Widen Rehab / Widen Rehab / Widen Rehab / Widen Rehab / Widen







Pottebaum Avenue Jimmie Kerr Hacienda Road Selma Highway Boulevard Kortsen Road Peart Road Hacienda Road Casa Grande Trekell Road Rodeo Road Avenue Trekell Road Rodeo Road McCartney Road Thornton Road SR 84 Cottonwood Lane McCartney Road Peart Road I-10 Cottonwood Lane Amarillo Street Peart Road Thornton Road SR 84 Peters Road McCartney Road Peart Road Pinal Avenue







Source: City of Casa Grande, 2005







4.8 TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL DEVELOPMENT



The travel demand model used for this study is an update of the TransCAD travel demand forecasting model used for the previous 2001 Casa Grande Multimodal Transportation Study. The model network was expanded to cover the current Casa Grande planning area and updated with year 2005 socioeconomic data and traffic count data. 4.8.1 MODEL VALIDATION







Model validation is the adjustment of model parameters through an iterative process until reasonable agreement is reached between the model-simulated traffic volumes and actual traffic counts. The Federal Highway Administration's (FWHA) Travel Model Validation and Reasonableness Checking Manual, Feburary 1997, provides several measures to evaluate model performance compared to observed traffic counts. The measure used for the City of Casa Grande travel demand model validation effort compared total year 2005 model volume estimates to total year 2005 traffic counts across screenlines. A screenline is an imaginary line across which traffic flows can be summed. Screenline analysis allows for ready evaluation of travel trends and model performance. The FHWA manual states that the maximum desirable deviation for total screenline volumes should be 20 percent. Three north-south and two east-west screenlines through the Casa Grande core were used for model validation. With the total screenline volume average deviation for the year 2005 Casa Grande model validation at 2 percent, the model was judged to be acceptable for forecasting future traffic with a high degree of confidence. Figure 4-8 illustrates the model network and the five screenlines used to validate model generated traffic flows.







07-02-07 40







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



4.8.2 TRIP GENERATION Table 4-12 shows the vehicle trip generation characteristics used in the travel demand model. These quick response trip generation rates are based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, 7th Edition, 2002.



TABLE 4-12 VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION CHARACTERISTICS Land Use Category Residential Retail Office General Socioeconomic Variable Dwelling Units Employee Employee Employee Average Daily Vehicle Trips per Unit 13.5 22.0 12.0 5.0







Source: Casa Grande Multimodal Transportation Study, Lima & Associates, 2001.







4.8.3







EXTERNAL TRIPS







External trips are trips with one or more trip ends outside the study area. There are primarily two types of external trips. The first are external-internal, internal-external trips. These are regional trips with one trip end inside the study area and the other outside the study area. This would include travel between the cities of Maricopa and Casa Grande, for example. The other type of external trips does not stop within the study area, such as an interstate trip between Phoenix and Tucson, for example. Updated external trip estimates were based upon traffic counts at study area cordon crossings at the exterior boundaries of the planning area. Table 4-13 shows the year 2005 external trip estimates used in the model validation.







07-02-07 41







FINAL REPORT







Midway Rd







N Avalon St







Screenline 1 2 3 4 5 Total







17,900 [20,000]







Burris Rd







Cox Rd







Thornton Rd







Trekell Rd







Estimated Observed Model Volume Traffic Count Ma ri 31,80c0 a 33,100 op 17,470 Casa 18,100 Gr an 56,000 50,100 de Hi gh 39,500 33,600 wa y 26,600 26,100 165,470 166,900







Volume-toCount Ratio 0.96 0.97 1.12 0.85 1.02 0.99







Trading Post Rd







Casa Grande Current Year 2005 Model Validation Screenline Summary



W Waverly Dr







2, 27 0 [2,300]







N Cox Rd







NTS







�







YEAR 2005 MODEL VALIDATION SUMMARY







I10







Woodruff Rd







Woodruff Rd







3,20 0 [3,100]







Ratio of Model Volume Estimates to Observed Traffic Counts



(Daily Traffic Volumes) 0.86 - 0.95 0.96 - 1.05 1.06 - 1.15 1.15+



Cottonwood Ln



S Tweedy Rd N Tweedy Rd







0 ,00 ] 40 ,900 [3 8







Mc Cartney Rd







23,300 [21,900]







21,500 [22,200]







Randolph Rd







Randolph Rd







Rodeo Rd







Pinal Ave







Kortsen Rd







Anderson Rd







Kleck Rd







19,500 [ 2 0, 50 0 ]







N Fuqua Rd







Burris Rd







Clayton Rd







14,100 [13,900]







3



Storey Rd







6, 00 0 [6,000]







S Fuqua Rd







Ethington Rd







I - 10







5, 00 0 [5,200]







Montgomery Rd







Russell Rd







41 ,0 00 [40,900]







Peters Rd







Henness Rd







Peters Rd







Earley Rd







Curry Rd







4







8 [8, ,100 60 0]



Peart Rd







Toltec Buttes Rd







5







Signal Peak Rd







3, 70 0 [3,700]







Gila Bend Highway







4,800 [2,900]







9, 80 0 [10,400]







Mc Murray Blvd







Florence Blvd







20,800 [20,900]







7,300 [8,000]



Hacienda Rd







Overfield Rd







2







7,243 [8,200]







Toltec Buttes Rd







1







00 43,0 00] 0 [48,







La Palma Highway







4,600 [4,000]







Arizola Ave







Base Map Features



Model Volume [Traffic Count]







Arterials StudyArea







Stanfield Rd







Midway Rd







Burris Rd







Selma Highway







Selma Highway







SR







84







Thornton Rd







Bianco Rd







I-8







5,200 [5,900]



Hanna Rd







I-8







10 [9, ,80 10 0 0]



1



Sunland Gin Rd







Screenline Location Screenline Reference Number







Shedd Rd



Chuichu Rd







Houser Rd







Battaglia Dr







Sources: InfoUSA, 2005; City of Casa Grande, 2005; Wilson & Company, 2005.







FIGURE 4-8 2006 Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study



42







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



TABLE 4-13 YEAR 2005 CASA GRANDE EXTERNAL TRIPS 2005 Traffic Count 40,000 11,800 3,380 3,700 4,024 1,710 38,320 6,000 700 4,025 1,160 3,480 Portion ExternalExternal 82% 15% 30% 35% 90% 52% 90% 45% 13% 24% 13% 13% ExternalExternal Vehicles 32,600 1,770 1,014 1,295 3,622 890 34,500 2,700 91 965 151 452 InternalExternal Vehicles 7,400 10,030 2,366 2,405 402 820 3,820 3,300 609 3060 1,009 3,028







Location I-10 S of SR 387 Pinal Ave S of I-10 Maricopa-Casa Grande Hwy NW of Anderson Rd Gila Bend Hwy W of Fuqua Rd I-8 W of Stanfield Rd Chuichu Rd S of Battaglia Rd I-10 S of Sunland Gin Rd SR 84 S of Sunland Gin Rd Selma Hwy E of Tweedy Rd SR 287 E of Tweedy Rd McCartney Rd E of Toltec Buttes Rd Woodruff Rd E of Toltec Buttes Rd







Source: Wilson & Company, 2006.







07-02-07 43







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report







5.0 FUTURE CONDITIONS



The City of Casa Grande expects unprecedented growth within its planning area through the year 2030 planning horizon. The section outlines the approach used to develop future year travel demand forecasts. It begins with a discussion of the process used to develop the future population, employment, and travel demand forecasts. Next, it outlines the approach used to identify transportation improvement needs for the years 2010, 2020, and 2030.







5.1 POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT FORECASTS



Population and employment forecasts for the years 2010, 2020, and 2030 were developed using the City of Casa Grande General Plan 2010 in consultation with the City of Casa Grande staff and the Technical Advisory Committee. Population forecasts were based on an annual growth assumption of 3,000 new dwelling units per year between 2005 and 2030 for the Casa Grande planning area. The magnitude of this growth is consistent with the the 2006 Pinal County Small Area Transportation Study and corresponds to recent growth trends. To estimate population, the average number of people per dwelling unit for Casa Grande was estimated at 2.83. Employment growth was predicted to increase commensurate with the growth in population. In 2005, the ratio of jobs per person was approximately 1:3, or one job for every three residents. By year 2030, this ratio is expected to increase to approximately 1:2, or one job for every two residents to reflect Casa Grande's expected evolving role as a regional employment center. Table 5-1 shows the population and employment projections for the years 2010, 2020, and 2030, along with the year 2000 census data and the year 2005 population and employment estimates.







07-02-07 44







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



TABLE 5-1 CASA GRANDE POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT ESTIMATES Year 2000 2005 2010 2020 2030 Population 25,2241 51,2273 91,8585 174,5005 258,8715 Employment 11,4562 15,7304 32,0895 66,3925 130,9695







Source: Wilson & Company, 2006. Notes: 1. U.S. Census Bureau 2. US Census Bureau ZIP Code Business Patterns, 2000, for ZIP Code 85222. 3. Includes 5,309 single- and multi-family building permits issued by the City of Casa Grande between 2002 and 2005. Data for 2000 to 2002 permit activity was not readily available. 4. Estimate based on August 2005 InfoUSA employment data. 5. Estimate based on growth projection.







The above population and employment estimates show that, the study area is anticipated to grow at approximately seven percent per year from 2005 to 2030. In 2005, the estimated population is 51,200. In 2030, the population projection is 258,900. Employment is estimated at 15,730 in 2005, and it is projected to increase to 131,000 in 2030. Several recent transportation planning studies provided a context for the current 2030 growth scenario developed for the Casa Grande planning area: � � � � Pinal County Corridor Definition Study, ADOT, 2005. Maricopa Association of Governments 2030 Placeholder Projections, MAG, 2003. Casa Grande Multimodal Transportation Study, Lima & Associates, 2001. Pinal County Small Area Transportation Study, Kirkham Michael Consulting Engineers, 2006.







The planning area considered within the previous Casa Grande 2001 Multimodal Transportation Study was smaller than the current Casa Grande planning area. While the geographic area of the 2001 and 2006 study areas are different, Table 5-2 shows that the level of growth considered for the current study is over three times more than that of the 2001 study. This table also shows the current socioeconomic forecasts in the context of other similar projections for the Casa Grande planning area.







07-02-07 45







FINAL REPORT







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



TABLE 5-2 CASA GRANDE POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT ESTIMATE COMPARISON Source Casa Grande Multimodal Transportation Study (2001) Pinal Small Area Transportation Study (2006) Maricopa Association of Governments (2003) ADOT Pinal County Corridor Definition Studies ( 2005) Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study (2006) Forecast Year 2020 2025 2030 2030 2030 Socioeconomic Forecast Population Employment 81,061 27,412 302,810 135,000 94,485 69,025 207,843 105,898 258,871 130,969



Source: Wilson & Company, 2006.







5.1.1







POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATION







Working closely with the City of Casa Grande, population and employment for each forecast horizon year were allocated throughout the study area based on currently planned and approved developments and the land use densities and intensities shown in the Casa Grande General Plan 2010. Figures 5-1 to 5-3 show the population forecasts by traffic analysis zone for each forecast horizon: 2010, 2020, and 2030. The traffic analysis zone geography was updated to reflect the anticipated roadway network improvements required to satisfy future travel demand. Population was allocated primarily to key growth corridors, namely Pinal Avenue, Florence Boulevard, Val Vista Road, and Montgomery Road. Employment was allocated using both planned and approved developments and the land use element of Casa Grande General Plan 2010. Figures 5-4 to Figure 5-5 show the employment forecasts by traffic analysis zone for each forecast horizon: 2010, 2020, and 2030. The General Plan identifies future industrial corridors along Thornton Road and Maricopa-Casa Grande Highway and future commercial centers along Florence Boulevard, Pinal Avenue, and Val Vista Road. Employment growth is expected concurrently with population growth, with new stores and businesses opening to serve the needs of the growing population throughout the study area. Table 5-3 summarizes the year 2010, 2020, and 2030 population and employment projections by TAZ. Appendix E shows the estimated population and employment growth rates by TAZ between year 2006 and year 2030.







07-02-07 46







FINAL REPORT







Trekell Rd







Burris Rd







Pinal Ave







Peart Rd







op a







-C a







sa G







ran







de







Hw







y



16 24







206 136







2 65 13 17 19 42 10 493







1 609 6 434 9 777







3 2,91 2 15 3,50 1 20 0







Val Vista Blvd







18 422 25 27 28 788







27 118







36 55







30 73







e A



31 3







32 72







26 3,15 8







29 1,198







$ a " !



45 760 54 2,69 1 70 1,87 4 38 8







21 8







Overfield Rd







7 136







11 1,41 5 14 17 192 1,02 4







Toltec Buttes Rd







Sunland Gin Rd







Trading Post Rd







4 1,12 0







8 156







5 96 12 62 23 99 37 6 39 0 22 219 35 321 42 4 57 144 76 34 88 229 124 1,92 4 144 1,21 4 68 34 93 243 122 252 151 235







Cox Rd







Ma ri c







NTS







�







Indian Valley Rd







Anderson Rd







Montgomery Rd







Thornton Rd







Russell Rd







Henness Rd







Midway Rd







Bianco Rd







YEAR 2010 ESTIMATED POPULATION DENSITY BY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE







24 0 34 45 41 7 33 119







Woodruff Rd







Population Density per Square Mile



0 - 1,500 1,500 - 4,000 4,000 - 6,500







Stanfield Rd







McCartney Rd



49 353 59 6 78 8 91 246 123 2,04 6 149 0 165 79 94 18 121 23 148 0







46 62 65 11 209 11 101 408 120 20 155 17 163 15 177 0 181 0 207 11 208 11 105 17 125 0 152 0 62 7 81 0 106 6 61 0 80 0 103 0 89 0 134 4 143 21







40 16 50 117 52 87 63 11 75 61 95 3 132 48 142 6 69 61 96 150 129 714 141 344 67 31 97 6 128 54 158 8 82 17 51 60







44 1,25 5 60 171 66 7 79 201 104 622 119 11 156 19







47 2,22 0 56 1,41 4







43 1,41 5 55 756







48 3,627 58 1,843







Rodeo Rd



64 10







Signal Peak Rd







53 2,04 0 71 34 102 4,76 3 115 1,19 3







Cottonwood Ln







210 10 90 204 126 26







72 74 73 77 1,501 2,0182,824 1,319 100 3,79 0 130 169 157 25







Gila Bend Hwy







� ?



131 0 153 11







98 20 127 34 154 12







Peters Rd Selma Hwy



159 0 162 0 179 0 137 34







85 84 83 86 887 1,80 6 914 528 92 107 111 109 108 110 931 673 1,15 6 834 919 96 113 114 112 1,742 116 1,220 776 133 2,628 136 135 995 504 461 138 147 25 170 20 180 215 182 186 195 0 199 22 201 17 202 0







Curry Rd







Kortsen Rd







87 9







� A



118 25 146 31







99 4 117 20







Tweedy Rd







6,500 +







Florence Blvd







Base Map Features



Earley Rd







205 19







172 0







171 8







175 163







174 0 186 0 197 27







173 0 183 0







167 68 184 3







168 23 185 116 194 44 200 42







191 6







190 0







$ ` " !







211 30 139 140 145 37 160 1,06 0 671 258 37 161 11 164 166 150 54 176 65 178 14







150 12







Arterials



Selma Hwy







Study Area XX X,XXX Traffic Analysis Zone Population Estimate







169 38







188 23







189 161 192 308







187 2,59 4 193 0







Arica Rd







Jim m



0







198 47







ie Ke 196 r r







Blv d







Shedd Rd







Chuichu Rd







203 6







Houser Rd







204 0







Battaglia Rd



Source: Wilson & Company, June 2006.







FIGURE 5-1 2006 Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study



47







Trekell Rd







Burris Rd







Pinal Ave







Peart Rd







op a







-C as a







Gr an







de Hw y



16 346







206 3,56 6







2 1,538 7 3,56 6 19 1,39 4 27 2,79 2 13 1,309 10 2,59 3







1 3,20 2 6 2,28 2







3 2,91 2 9 4,08 3 15 3,50 1 20 0 32 1,07 4 28 1,22 3







Val Vista Blvd







18 2,21 7 25 404







14 278







36 802







30 1,09 0







e A







31 3







26 4,15 0







29 4,23 4







$ a " !



45 1,13 9 54 3,211 70 2,72 0







21 251







Overfield Rd







11 1,41 5 17 1,04 0







Toltec Buttes Rd







Sunland Gin Rd







Trading Post Rd







4 1,29 9







8 1,234







5 1,14 2 12 1,10 8 23 357 37 279 39 38 283 153 53 3,15 1 71 490 76 187 88 461 124 2,96 3 144 1,87 2 22 475 35 619 42 453 57 344 68 133 93 483 122 496 151 478







Cox Rd







Ma ri c







NTS







�







Indian Valley Rd







Anderson Rd







Montgomery Rd







Thornton Rd







Russell Rd







Henness Rd







Midway Rd







Bianco Rd







YEAR 2020 ESTIMATED POPULATION DENSITY BY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE







24 256 34 322 41 7







Woodruff Rd



33 164







Population Density per Square Mile



0 - 1,500 1,500 - 4,000 4,000 - 6,500







Stanfield Rd







McCartney Rd



49 353 59 6 78 8 91 492 123 3,15 6 149 0 165 441 94 18 121 125 148 0







46 1,46 4 65 709 209 695 101 704 120 20 155 17 163 15 177 0 181 0 207 11 208 11 105 116 125 0 152 0 62 705 81 690 106 6 61 706 80 694 103 709 89 703 134 693 143 21







40 234 50 1,70 5 52 1,26 7 63 164 75 1,44 8 95 695 132 694 142 6 69 1,43 2 96 150 129 952 141 1,39 8 67 447 97 6 128 156 158 701 51 892







44 2,26 4 60 283







47 2,39 4 56 2,15 9







43 2,61 8 55 946







48 3,714 58 2,425







Rodeo Rd



64 10







Signal Peak Rd







Cottonwood Ln







210 10 90 223 126 26







79 378 104 741 119 11 156 205 70 70







72 74 73 77 1,586 2,0182,824 2,491 100 3,79 0 130 273 157 125







Gila Bend Hwy







� ?



131 701 153 11







98 280 127 136 154 12







Peters Rd Selma Hwy



159 0 162 0 179 0 137 34







172 0







171 8







175 250







174 2,119 186 0 197 27







173 2,08 1 183 0







167 158 184 3







168 113 185 116 194 62 200 62







191 6







190 0







$ ` " !







85 84 83 86 102 909 1,80 6 914 528 92 107 111 109 108 110 931 673 4,763 844 919 724 1,15 6 112 113 114 1,742 116 1,2201,089 115 133 2,628 136 135 1,371 1,04 6 971 888 138 211 61 139 140 145 147 75 160 1,5611,209 525 125 75 161 23 164 170 166 371 119 156 176 648 178 180 42 222 182 235 195 0 199 22 201 17 204 0 202 0 192 801







� A



118 127 146 31







87 9







Curry Rd







Kortsen Rd







66 97 82 17







99 4 117 122







Tweedy Rd







6,500 +







Florence Blvd







Base Map Features



Earley Rd







150 12







Arterials



Selma Hwy







Study Area XX X,XXX Traffic Analysis Zone Population Estimate







169 1,127







188 23







189 458







Arica Rd







193 0







Jim m







187 3,75 0







198 47







196 0







ie Ke rr







Blv







d







Shedd Rd







Chuichu Rd







203 6







Houser Rd







Battaglia Rd



Source: Wilson & Company, June 2006.







FIGURE 5-2 2006 Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study



48







Trekell Rd







Burris Rd







Pinal Ave







Peart Rd







op a







-C as a







Gr an







de Hw y



16 712







206 6,80 6







2 2,929 7 6,80 6 19 2,66 0 27 4,83 3 13 2,523 10 4,61 0







1 5,69 3 6 4,05 6







3 2,94 9 9 7,26 0 15 3,50 1 20 0 32 2,01 9 28 1,24 6







Val Vista Blvd







18 3,94 1 25 759







36 1,64 8







30 2,05 0







e A







31 3







26 5,62 2







29 7,28 6







$ a " !



45 1,66 4 54 3,64 5 70 3,83 6







21 1,02 6







Overfield Rd







11 1,47 5 14 17 1,571 1,40 9







Toltec Buttes Rd







Sunland Gin Rd







Trading Post Rd







4 2,32 6







8 1,509







5 1,88 6 12 1,85 2 23 1,34 6 37 1,47 3 39 38 585 289 53 4,54 3 71 919 76 350 88 673 124 4,26 8 144 2,69 8 22 677 35 868 42 896 57 559 68 238 93 706 122 719 151 704







Cox Rd







Ma ri c







NTS







�







Indian Valley Rd







Anderson Rd







Montgomery Rd







Thornton Rd







Russell Rd







Henness Rd







Midway Rd







Bianco Rd







YEAR 2030 ESTIMATED POPULATION DENSITY BY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE







24 463 34 550 41 7







Woodruff Rd



33 202







Population Density per Square Mile



0 - 1,500 1,500 - 4,000 4,000 - 6,500







Stanfield Rd







McCartney Rd



49 353 59 6 78 8 91 720 123 4,54 8 149 0 165 432 94 18 121 233 148 0







46 2,53 3 207 11 208 11 105 221 125 0 152 0 62 1,22 0 81 1,19 4 106 6 61 1,22 2 80 1,20 2 103 1,22 7







40 440 50 3,50 3 52 2,60 3 63 337 75 2,50 7 89 1,21 7 134 1,19 9 143 21 95 1,204 132 1,201 142 6 69 2,47 8 96 150 129 1,19 4 141 2,41 9 67 918 97 6 128 264 158 1,21 3 51 1,67 8







44 3,18 3 60 538







47 2,51 7 56 2,82 9







43 3,71 7 55 1,111







48 3,722 58 2,932







Rodeo Rd



64 10







Signal Peak Rd







Cottonwood Ln







210 10 90 237 126 26







209 1,20 3 101 1,21 9 120 20 155 17 163 15 177 0 181 0







79 542 104 858 119 11 156 205 124 124







72 74 73 77 1,638 2,0182,824 3,564 100 3,79 0 130 381 157 230







Gila Bend Hwy







� ?



131 1,21 4 153 11







98 524 127 247 154 12







Peters Rd Selma Hwy



159 0 162 0 179 0 137 34







172 0







171 8







175 341







174 3,66 8 186 0 197 27







173 3,60 2 183 0







167 255 184 3







168 211 185 122 194 80 200 83







191 6







190 0







$ ` " !







85 84 83 86 102 912 1,80 6 914 528 92 107 111 109 108 110 931 673 4,763 837 919 1,30 8 1,15 6 112 113 114 1,742 116 1,2201,368 115 133 2,628 136 135 1,515 1,08 3 1,3981,281 138 211 89 139 140 145 147 115 160 2,0101,701 770 230 115 161 33 164 166 170 577 227 264 176 1,19 8 178 180 73 227 182 438 195 0 199 22 201 17 204 0 202 0 192 5,14 0







� A



118 236 146 31







87 9







Curry Rd







Kortsen Rd







66 182 82 17







99 4 117 230







Tweedy Rd







65 1,22 8







6,500 +







Florence Blvd







Base Map Features



Earley Rd







150 12







Arterials



Selma Hwy







Study Area XX X,XXX Traffic Analysis Zone Population Estimate







169 1,151







188 23







189 773







Arica Rd







193 0







Jim m







187 3,67 5







198 47







196 0







ie Ke rr







Blv







d







Shedd Rd







Chuichu Rd







203 6







Houser Rd







Battaglia Rd



Source: Wilson & Company, June 2006.







FIGURE 5-3 2006 Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study



49







Trekell Rd







Burris Rd







Pinal Ave







Peart Rd







op a







-C as a







Gr an







de Hw y



16 14







206 160







2 242 7 160 19 50 27 68 13 211 10 219







1 270 6 193







3 378 9 345 15 416 20 150 32 265 28 354







Val Vista Blvd







18 187 25 100







14 6 21 0







36 32







30 269







e A







Overfield Rd







11 219 17 77







Toltec Buttes Rd







Sunland Gin Rd







Trading Post Rd







4 60







8 0







5 13 12 33 23 16 37 5 45 238 54 214 70 281 92 107 585 1,24 1 113 246 136 62 114 93 135 64 39 0 22 0 35 6 42 0 57 60 76 12 88 2,18 4 124 238 144 200 68 9 93 2 122 76 151 55







Cox Rd







Ma ri c







�



NTS



Signal Peak Rd



94 0 121 0 148 0







Indian Valley Rd







Anderson Rd







Montgomery Rd







Thornton Rd







Russell Rd







Henness Rd







Midway Rd







Bianco Rd







YEAR 2010 ESTIMATED EMPLOYMENT DENSITY BY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE







31 508







26 317







29 605







$ a " !







24 0 34 0 41 0







Woodruff Rd



33 31







Employment Density per Square Mile



0 - 500 500 - 1,000 1,000 - 3,000



Tweedy Rd Curry Rd







Stanfield Rd







McCartney Rd



49 0 59 0 78 0 91 2 123 255 149 0 165 3







46 36 65 0 209 0 101 17 120 0 155 0 163 0 177 0 181 0 207 0 208 0 105 0 125 0 152 0 62 0 81 0 106 0 61 0 80 0 103 6 89 6 134 0 143 0







40 58 50 68 52 50 63 6 75 35 95 6 132 0 142 4 69 35 96 103 129 140 141 4 67 18 97 46 128 107 158 0 51 220







44 1 60 56







47 258 56 289 77 325 100 493 130 921 157 303







43 219 55 221 74 73 320 552 85 519 111 450







48 467 58 442 72 211







38 0







Rodeo Rd



64 2







53 11 71 0 102 373 115 299 145 255 164 358







Kortsen Rd



210 2 90 17 126 0







Cottonwood Ln







66 24 82 34 98 46 127 115 154 322







3,000 +







79 978 104 963 119 329 156 205 162 162







Gila Bend Hwy







� ?



131 0 153 0







Peters Rd Selma Hwy



159 0 162 0 179 0 137 0







84 83 86 317 153 120 109 108 110 415 788 240 112 116 1332,072 636 750 138 211 78 147 26 160 33 26 170 33 180 18 182 20 195 0 199 2 201 0 204 0 202 0 166 33 178 9







� A



118 0 146 0







87 0







99 0 117 0







Florence Blvd







Base Map Features



Earley Rd







139 140 123 99 161 2 176 252







150 0







Arterials



Selma Hwy







Study Area XX X,XXX Traffic Analysis Zone Employment Estimate







172 0







171 0







175 15







174 0 186 0 197 0







173 0 183 0







167 327 184 140







168 357 185 167 194 1 200 0







169 30







191 0







190 0







$ ` " !







188 0







189 388 192 53







Arica Rd







193 12







Jim m







187 775







198 0







196 0







ie Ke rr







Blv







d







Shedd Rd







Chuichu Rd







203 0







Houser Rd







Battaglia Rd







Source: Wilson & Company, June 2006.







FIGURE 5-4 2006 Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study



50







Trekell Rd







Burris Rd







Pinal Ave







Peart Rd







op a







-C as a







Gr an







de Hw y



16 57







206 774







2 750 7 774 19 302 27 815 13 634 10 409







1 505 6 360







3 835 9 645 15 921 20 736 32 752 28 1,02 7







Val Vista Blvd







18 349 25 283







14 83 21 75







36 130







30 764







e A







Overfield Rd







11 394 17 312







Toltec Buttes Rd







Sunland Gin Rd







Trading Post Rd







4 388







8 370







5 118 12 332 23 107 37 232 39 38 88 705 53 554 71 566 102 570 115 670 145 670 164 560 76 26 88 2,18 4 124 519 144 436 22 142 35 10 42 143 57 87 68 26 93 6 122 144 151 144







Cox Rd







Ma ri c







�



NTS



Signal Peak Rd



94 35 121 30 148 0







Indian Valley Rd







Anderson Rd







Montgomery Rd







Thornton Rd







Russell Rd







Henness Rd







Midway Rd







Bianco Rd







YEAR 2020 ESTIMATED EMPLOYMENT DENSITY BY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE







31 1,31 2







26 700







29 1,32 5







$ a " !



45 341 54 588 70 619







24 78 34 97 41 0







Woodruff Rd



33 31







Employment Density per Square Mile



0 - 500 500 - 1,000 1,000 - 3,000



Tweedy Rd Curry Rd







Stanfield Rd







McCartney Rd



49 0 59 0 78 0 91 7 123 554 149 0 165 240







46 427 65 207 209 204 101 206 120 0 155 0 163 0 177 0 181 0 207 0 208 0 105 52 125 0 152 0 62 206 81 201 106 0 61 206 80 204 103 207 89 205 134 203 143 0







40 164 50 277 52 206 63 26 75 423 95 204 132 204 142 26 69 417 96 297 129 179 141 408 67 72 97 132 128 107 158 204 51 625







44 894 60 122







47 713 56 802 77 583 100 860 130 1,17 8 157 909







43 601 55 535 74 73 386 552 85 570 111 468







48 832 58 891 72 576







Rodeo Rd



64 2







Kortsen Rd



210 2 90 52 126 0







Cottonwood Ln







66 67 82 99 98 132 127 346 154 322







3,000 +







79 1,12 7 104 963 119 970 156 205 487 487







Gila Bend Hwy







� ?



131 204 153 0







Peters Rd Selma Hwy



159 0 162 0 179 0 137 5







84 83 86 450 385 258 109 108 110 422 796 335 112 116 1332,072 870 750 138 211 123 147 45 160 96 45 170 96 180 49 182 48 195 0 199 2 201 0 204 0 202 0 166 96 178 27







92 107 653 1,34 2 113 370 136 171 114 166 135 168







� A



118 30 146 0







87 0







99 0 117 29







Florence Blvd







Base Map Features



Earley Rd







139 140 325 274 161 7 176 749







150 0







Arterials



Selma Hwy







Study Area XX X,XXX Traffic Analysis Zone Employment Estimate







172 0







171 0







175 42







174 618 186 0 197 0







173 608 183 0







167 963 184 418







168 989 185 434 194 1 200 0







169 338







191 0







190 0







$ ` " !







188 0







189 391 192 101







Arica Rd







193 18







Jim m







187 1,08 0







198 0







196 2







ie Ke rr







Blv







d







Shedd Rd







Chuichu Rd







203 0







Houser Rd







Battaglia Rd







Source: Wilson & Company, June 2006.







FIGURE 5-5 2006 Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study



51







Trekell Rd







Burris Rd







Pinal Ave







Peart Rd







op a







-C as a







Gr an







de Hw y



16 222







206 2,30 0







2 1,567 7 2,30 0 19 899 27 1,95 5 13 1,350 10 1,28 9







1 1,59 2 6 1,13 5







3 1,57 8 9 2,03 1 15 1,74 0 20 1,37 6 32 1,62 2 28 1,93 3







Val Vista Blvd







18 1,10 3 25 610







14 485 21 317







36 515







30 1,64 6







e A







Overfield Rd







11 481 17 437







Toltec Buttes Rd







Sunland Gin Rd







Trading Post Rd







4 720







8 466







5 583 12 572 23 415 37 455 39 38 180 1,35 6 53 1,06 6 71 1,13 7 76 51 88 2,18 4 124 998 144 852 22 207 35 12 42 278 57 130 68 51 93 12 122 295 151 295







Cox Rd







Ma ri c







NTS







�







Indian Valley Rd







Anderson Rd







Montgomery Rd







Thornton Rd







Russell Rd







Henness Rd







Midway Rd







Bianco Rd







YEAR 2030 ESTIMATED EMPLOYMENT DENSITY BY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE







31 2,39 7







26 1,39 1







29 2,51 6







$ a " !



45 509 54 1,15 4 70 1,21 4







24 142 34 168 41 1







Woodruff Rd



33 31







Employment Density per Square Mile



0 - 500 500 - 1,000 1,000 - 3,000







Stanfield Rd







McCartney Rd



49 0 59 0 78 0 91 13 123 1,06 6 149 0 165 133 94 68 121 61 148 0







46 1,02 5 65 496 209 487 101 494 120 0 155 0 163 0 177 0 181 0 207 0 208 0 105 50 125 0 152 0 62 494 81 483 106 0 61 494 80 486 103 496 89 492 134 485 143 0







40 353 50 1,09 4 52 813 63 106 75 1,01 4 95 487 132 485 142 46 69 1,00 2 96 572 129 204 141 979 67 286 97 254 128 109 158 491 51 1,34 8







44 1,70 5 60 207







47 1,34 6 56 1,51 4 77 935 100 1,73 9 130 2,34 3 157 2,08 1







43 1,17 9 55 1,03 8 74 73 658 613 85 688 111 577







48 1,330 58 1,568 72 1,129







Rodeo Rd



64 2







Signal Peak Rd







Cottonwood Ln







210 2 90 96 126 0







79 1,70 2 104 1,46 1 119 2,19 4 156 1,09 8 205 1,09 8







Gila Bend Hwy







� ?



131 491 153 0







98 254 127 663 154 322







Peters Rd Selma Hwy



159 0 162 0 179 0 137 0







84 83 86 623 719 479 109 108 110 578 870 623 112 116 1332,072 1,379 750 138 211 194 147 74 160 184 74 170 184 180 94 182 84 195 0 199 2 201 0 204 0 202 0 166 184 178 53







92 107 102 775 1,29 8 1,09 7 113 532 136 338 114 330 135 325 115 1,26 3 145 1,26 3 164 1,05 3







� A



118 61 146 0







87 0







Curry Rd







Kortsen Rd







66 146 82 191







99 0 117 59







Tweedy Rd







3,000 +







Florence Blvd







Base Map Features



Earley Rd







139 140 656 555 161 14







150 0







Arterials



Selma Hwy







Study Area XX X,XXX Traffic Analysis Zone Employment Estimate







172 0







171 0







175 75







174 1,48 3 186 0 197 0







173 1,45 6 183 0







167 2,17 8 184 1,16 8







168 2,19 5 185 1,16 9 194 1 200 0







176 1,39 6 189 399 192 173







169 352







191 0







190 0







$ ` " !







188 0







Arica Rd







193 24







Jim m







187 1,09 3







198 0







196 3







ie Ke rr







Blv







d







Shedd Rd







Chuichu Rd







203 0







Houser Rd







Battaglia Rd



Source: Wilson & Company, June 2006.







FIGURE 5-6 2006 Casa Grande Small Area Transportation Study



52







City of Casa Grande SATS Final Report



TABLE 5-3 CASA GRANDE POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT ESTIMATES BY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE 2010 TAZ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Dwelling Units 215 23 1,029 400 34 153 48 63 274 174 500 22 6 58 1,232 8 400 149 15 0 3 78 35 0 10 1,116 37 315 479 26 1 26 42 16 117 18 2 3 Employment Population 609 65 2,912 1,120 96 434 136 156 777 493 1,415 62 17 192 3,501 24 1,024 422 42 0 8 219 99 0 27 3,158 118 788 1,198 73 3 72 119 45 321 55 6 8 Retail 116 85 125 45 0 83 34 0 148 94 94 29 68 6 137 5 33 81 10 0 0 0 9 0 10 116 24 29 153 28 120 27 1 0 0 11 5 0 Office 51 78 79 7 6 37 68 0 66 42 42 0 68 0 87 7 15 36 21 9 0 0 1 0 28 46 33 36 196 77 37 76 1 0 2 16 0 0 General 76 55 150 0 7 54 46 0 97 61 61 4 55 0 165 0 22 52 14 141 0 0 6 0 60 106 3 274 197 161 287 158 8 0 4 2 0 0 Government 27 24 24 8 0 19 14 0 34 22 22 0 20 0 27 1 7 19 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 49 7 15 59 4 64 4 21 0 0 3 0 0 Total 270 242 378 60 13 193 160 0 345 219 219 33 211 6 416 14 77 187 50 150 0 0 16 0 100 317 68 354 605 269 508 265 31 0 6 32 5 0 Dwelling Units 1,221 586 1,029 497 435 870 1,354 539 1,557 989 500 422 499 91 1,232 132 438 846 529 0 102 183 136 98 154 1,583 1,071 528 1,828 416 1 409 63 123 244 307 100