Final report: Southern Greenlee County small area transportation study

              TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS......................................... 1 PURPOSE AND VISION ............................................................................. 1 BACKGROUND ........................................................................................ 1 STUDY PROCESS ..................................................................................... 1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS.......................................................................... 6 RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................. 8 2. REVIEW OF PREVIOUS STUDIES AND PLANS AND CURRENT PROGRAMS ........................................................................... 10 PREVIOUS STUDIES AND PLANS .............................................................. 10 COUNTY TRANSPORTATION NEEDS, PROGRAMS, AND FUNDING .............. 21 STATEWIDE AND AREA PROGRAMMED IMPROVEMENTS ........................... 25 3. SUMMARY OF EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS ............................... 27 SOCIOECONOMIC AND PHYSICAL CONDITIONS......................................... 27 CURRENT TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS............................................... 37 TRANSPORTATION ISSUES ...................................................................... 53 FUTURE SOCIOECONOMIC AND TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS ............... 57 4. MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN ................................................ 61 EVALUATION OF DEFICIENCIES AND NEEDS ............................................ 61 CANDIDATE TRANSPORTATION PROJECT CRITERIA .................................. 63 ROADWAY PROJECTS ............................................................................. 63 IMPROVEMENTS AND ADDITIONS TO TRAIL SYSTEM ................................ 72 5. TRANSIT ELEMENT ............................................................................... 78 MULTIMODAL INVENTORY ..................................................................... 78 TYPES OF TRANSIT VEHICLES AND SERVICES .......................................... 81 ESTIMATING TRANSIT DEMAND.............................................................. 84 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT ............................................ 87 EXCURSION RAIL ................................................................................... 90 6. BEST PRACTICES IN RURAL TRANSPORTATION...................................... 95 ANALYSIS OF LOW VOLUME DIRT ROADS ................................................ 95 PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR RURAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS......... 96 ANALYSIS OF HIGHWAY-RAIL GRADE CROSSINGS .................................... 98 ACTIVITY BASED BUDGETING................................................................. 98 NEW PARADIGMS FOR RURAL AND SMALL URBAN TRANSIT SERVICE DELIVERY.............................................................................. 100 RURAL TRANSIT ITS ............................................................................. 101



ii



TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Page 7. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN..................................................................... 104 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ...................................................................... 104 8. REVENUE SOURCES............................................................................. 111 FEDERAL FUNDS ................................................................................. 111 ARIZONA STATE SHARED REVENUE ...................................................... 117 OTHER FUNDING SOURCES ................................................................... 121 REVENUE ESTIMATES .......................................................................... 125 9. COUNTY ROAD STANDARDS AND ACCESS MANAGEMENT ..................... 127 ROADWAY CRITERIA............................................................................ 127 EXAMPLE ROADWAY CROSS-SECTIONS.................................................. 129 DEFINITION OF ACCESS MANAGEMENT ................................................. 129 LEGAL ISSUES OF ACCESS CONTROL ..................................................... 133 BENEFITS OF ACCESS MANAGEMENT .................................................... 133 ACCESS MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND TECHNIQUES.......................... 134 RECOMMENDED ACCESS MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES ............................ 136 10. GOALS AND POLICIES FOR CIRCULATION ELEMENT............................ 141 APPENDIX A - ESTIMATING TRANSIT DEMAND.......................................... 143 APPENDIX B - FREEPORT-MCMORAN EMPLOYEE SURVEY......................... 147 APPENDIX C - SAMPLE RIDESHARE APPLLICATION................................... 149 APPENDIX D - SAMPLE ON-BOARD SURVEY............................................... 151 REFERENCES........................................................................................... 154



iii



LIST OF TABLES

Page 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. PARTICIPANTS IN THE FIRST ROUND OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ............ 4 PARTICIPANTS IN THE SECOND ROUND OF PUBLIC INVOLEMENT .......... 5 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS STUDIES, PLANS, AND PROGRAMS ................. 10 HISTORY OF AIRPORT OPERATIONS .................................................... 13 FORECASTED AIRPORT OPERATIONS................................................... 14 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF HAZARDS................................ 16 SUMMARY OF GREENLEE COUNTY MITIGATION ACTIONS/ PROJECTS - SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY STUDY AREA .................... 17 CORRIDOR VISION - SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY STUDY AREA ........ 19 PRIORITY RECOMMENDATIONS OF ARIZONA TRAILS 2005 PLAN............ 20 GREENLEE COUNTY ROADS OIL PROJECT SEVEN-YEAR PLAN ............... 22 FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION/ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, FY 2006-2010 PROJECT REQUEST FORM ............................... 24 TOWN OF DUNCAN ROAD IMPROVEMENTS.......................................... 25 2007-2011 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM � GREENLEE COUNTY ................................ 26 SEAGO-ADMINISTERED TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROJECT APPLICATIONS IN STUDY AREA ............................................ 26 GREENLEE COUNTY SPECIES STATUS.................................................. 28 STATUS OF LAND OWNERSHIP IN SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY STUDY AREA ....................................................................... 30



12. 13. 14. 15. 16.



iv



LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Page 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. MAJOR EMPLOYERS........................................................................... 32 POPULATION..................................................................................... 33 MINORITY AND AGE 65 AND OVER DEMOGRAPHICS ............................. 35 DEMOGRPAHIC DATA FOR MOBILITY-LIMITED, POVERTYLIMITED, AND HOUSEHOLDS WITH NO AUTOMOBILES ......................... 36 SUMMARY OF CHARACTERISTICS OF REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT ROADS.......................................................................... 38 SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY BRIDGE SUFFICIENCY RATINGS � COUNTY AND LOCAL STRUCTURES .................................................... 43 BRIDGE SUFFICIENCY RATING METRICS.............................................. 45 DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES � COUNTY AND LOCAL ROADS SOUTHERN GREEENLEE COUNTY STUDY AREA ................................... 45 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC BY VEHICLE TYPE SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY STUDY AREA ..................................... 45 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES ARIZONA STATE HIGHWAYS IN SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY ........... 47 SUMMARY OF TRAFFIC CRASHES IN STUDY AREA ............................... 49 POPULATION ESTIMATES - GREENLEE COUNTY ................................... 57 ESTIMATED FUTURE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES COUNTY AND LOCAL ROADS IN STUDY AREA ..................................... 58 ESTIMATED FUTURE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES ARIZONA STATE HIGHWAYS IN STUDY AREA....................................... 58 ANALYSIS OF ROADWAY DEFICINCIES 2005-2010 SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY ......................................................... 60 CANDIDATE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY ........................................................ 71



v



LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Page 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. SUGGESTED ADDITIONAL TRAILS FOR SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY .......................................................................... 74 DRIVE TIMES AND DISTANCES BETWEEN GREENLEE COUNTY COMMUNITIES AND COMMERCIAL AIRPORTS ...................................... 80 GREENLEE COUNTY AIRPORT STATISTICS ........................................... 80 SUMMARY OF TRANSIT MARKETING DATA GATHERING TECHNIQUES..................................................................................... 90 SAMPLE LOW VOLUME UNPAVED ROADS EVALUATION MATRIX .......... 97 SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY - SHORT-TERM PROJECTS .................. 105 SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY - MID-TERM PROJECTS ...................... 107 SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY - LONG-TERM PROJECTS ................... 108 MATRIX OF KEY FUNDING SOURCES ................................................. 112 ESTIMATED FEDERAL AID HIGHWAY APPORTIONMENTS AND ALLOCATION FOR ARIZONA ............................................................ 113 FY 2005 ADOT REVENUE SOURCES � STATE ....................................... 117 ARIZONA HIGHWAY USER REVENUE FUND DISTRIBUTIONS TO GREENLEE COUNTY AND TOWNS OF CLIFTON AND DUNCAN, FY 2002 � 2006.................................................................................. 118 HIGHWAY USER REVENUE FUND REVENUE FORECAST....................... 119 HIGHWAY USER REVENUE FUND DISTRIBUTION FORECAST................ 119 LTAF II DISTRIBUTION - COUNTIES AND CITIES/TOWNS ...................... 120 HERITAGE FUND HISTORIC PRESERVATION GRANT AWARDS IN GREENLEE COUNTY .................................................................... 121 TYPES OF EXACTIONS AND POTENTIAL BENEFITS.............................. 124 COMPARISON OF NEEDS AND REVENUES STATEWIDE ........................ 125



45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50.



vi



LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Page 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. A-1. A-2. A-3. A-4. A-5. ADOT FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM RESOURCE ALLOCATIONS ................................................ 125 SUGGESTED CLASSIFICATION FOR GREENLEE COUNTY ROADS........... 128 MINIMUM ACCESS SPACING STANDARDS .......................................... 138 GUIDELINES FOR SPACING MEDIAN OPENINGS .................................. 138 PROPOSED SPACING FOR DRIVEWAYS ............................................... 139 CURRENT POPULATION OF SERVICE GROUPS IN SERVICE AREA ............................................................................ 144 CALCULATION OF VEHICLE MILES PER SQUARE MILE........................ 144 SERVICE FACTOR CALCULATIONS .................................................... 145 ESTIMATION OF TRANSIT DEMAND................................................... 145 ESTIMATION OF TRANSIT DEMAND - ALTERNATIVE METHOD............. 146



vii



LIST OF FIGURES

Page 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY STUDY AREA ...................................... 2 STUDY PROCESS................................................................................. 3 STATUS OF LAND OWNERSHIP IN GREENLEE COUNTY AND IN SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY STUDY AREA ..................................... 30 LAND OWNERSHIP SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY.............................. 31 TOTAL POPULATION DENSITY SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY............. 34 PERCENT CHANGES IN GREENLEE COUNTY POPULATION COMPARED TO PERCENT CHANGES IN VEHICLE REGISTRATION ........... 37 NUMBER OF LANES - SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY .......................... 41 SURFACE TYPE - SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY ................................ 42 EXAMPLE BRIDGE TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROJECT CANDIDATES .................................................................................... 44 2006 ADT FOR ROADS IN THE STUDY AREA.......................................... 46 SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY CRASH LOCATIONS ............................ 50 SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY FATAL CRASHES ................................ 51 YORK VALLEY PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY SITE....................................... 52 2026 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY ........................................................................................... 59 PROGRAMMED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS......................................... 64



16A. 2006 ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE .................................................... 65 16B. 2006 ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE DETAILS OF CLIFTON AND DUNCAN AREAS ........................................................................ 66 17A. SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY ACTIVITY CENTERS ............................ 68 17B. SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY ACTIVITY CENTERS DETAILS OF CLIFTON AND DUNCAN AREAS........................................................... 69



viii



LIST OF FIGURES (CONTINUED)

Page 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. A-1. CURRENT AND FUTURE ROADWAY CORRIDORS................................... 70 RECREATION AREAS AND TRAIL SYSTEM ADDITIONS........................... 73 STATEWIDE AND GREENLEE COUNTY PERCENTAGES OF POPULATION MORE LIKELY TO BE TRANSIT-DEPENDENT ................ 79 TYPES OF TRANSIT VEHICLES ............................................................ 83 HYPOTHETICAL BUS TRANSIT ROUTES................................................ 84 COUNTY RAILROADS WITH POTENTIAL EXCURSION ROUTE HIGHLIGHTED ................................................................................... 91 EXAMPLE EXCURSION TRAIN SERVICES .............................................. 93 LOCAL ROADWAY CROSS-SECTIONS ................................................. 130 RURAL COLLECTOR ROADWAY CROSS-SECTIONS .............................. 131 URBAN COLLECTOR ROADWAY CROSS-SECTIONS .............................. 132 TRIP RATES FOR ALTERNATIVE ESTIMATION PROCEDURE.................. 146



ix



1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

PURPOSE AND VISION This Report presents the findings and recommendations of the Southern Greenlee County Small Area Transportation Study, and provides the County with a long-range multimodal transportation plan and practical tools for day-to-day programming and funding of transportation improvements. Figure 1 depicts the study area. The Study developed 5-, 10-, and 20-year transportation plans for Southern Greenlee County by identifying deficiencies and recommending projects needed to improve mobility and safety and encourage tourism and development. The improvements were then prioritized to maximize project benefits within budget limitations. Funding strategies and potential funding sources are provided to enable the County to aggressively pursue local, regional, state, and federal funding. BACKGROUND Greenlee County is located in eastern Arizona bordering New Mexico. The county is 120 miles long and 20 miles wide, covers approximately 1,800 square miles and is sparsely populated with approximately 8,300 residents. The study area covers approximately 658 square miles. Clifton, the county seat, had an estimated 2005 population of 2,495. The 2005 estimated population of Duncan was 805 residents and the 2000 population of Morenci was 1,879. The majority of the land within the study area is owned by the U. S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, or the State of Arizona. Individual or corporate lands account for around 20 percent of land ownership in the study area. The topography in the southern and central parts of the County consists of desert terrain bisected by river valleys. Further north, the County is mountainous and forested. Mining has been important to Greenlee County since the 1800's and continues to be the dominant part of the economy focused around the Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc. (formerly Phelps Dodge) Mine in Morenci. STUDY PROCESS The study process is illustrated in Figure 2. The study was guided by a Technical Advisory Committee comprised of representatives from the County, the Towns of Clifton and Duncan, ADOT and the Southeast Arizona Association of Governments (SEAGO). An intensive public participation process was undertaken, including two rounds open houses to identify issues, solicit comments, and receive feedback on the study process and recommendations. The first step of the technical analysis was to analyze the existing conditions and Environmental Justice concerns. Open houses in Clifton and Duncan were held to identify issues and vision components for the transportation plan. Stakeholders included County



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 1



FIGURE 1. SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY STUDY AREA



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 2



FIGURE 2. STUDY PROCESS

Existing Conditions Public Involvement Round I Future Conditions Draft Transportation Plans Public Involvement Round II Short-, Mid-, & Long Range Transportation Plans Draft/Final Report Capital Improvement Program Implementation Plan



Supervisors, County Public Works Department personnel, elected officials from the Towns of Clifton and Duncan, town staffs, ADOT and SEAGO representatives, and citizens. The next major step in the technical process was to analyze alternative roadway improvements. Based on the results of this analysis, a draft transportation plan was developed including a transit element. A second series of open houses were held to review the draft transportation plan and identify constraints to the plan. Public Involvement First Round The first round of public involvement included a series of two Public Open Houses, held in conjunction with a Technical Advisory Committee meeting. Open Houses were scheduled for Duncan on September 19, 2006, and Clifton on September 20. Prior to that date, flyers were mailed to a list of County stakeholders that was provided by the County. Eight persons attended the Duncan Open House--in addition to two members of the consultant team--and four persons attended the Clifton Open House. Participants in the first round of public involvement are listed in Table 1.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 3



TABLE 1. PARTICIPANTS IN THE FIRST ROUND OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Duncan Open House Clifton Open House



Participant Alan Baker Jon Goeking Randy Norton Rudy Perez Philip Ronnerud Ysidro Solima Joe Schwer Eugene Weeks Paul R. David Larry Leach Walt Mares Pete Lima Rob Bohannan



Affiliation Town Manager, Town of Duncan Town of Duncan Mayor, Town of Duncan ADOT Transportation Planning Department (ADOT TPD) Greenlee County Public Works Director ADOT TPD ADOT Construction Southeast Arizona Association of Governments (SEAGO) ADOT Safford District Greenlee County Health Department The Copper Era Lima & Associates (Consultant Team) Lima & Associates (Consultant Team)



At each Open House, a presentation was given that summarized the findings of the project to date. After the presentation, attendees commented on the project and participated in a roundtable discussion regarding the transportation-related issues in Southern Greenlee County and the local jurisdictions within the County. The top three issues identified at the Duncan Open House were:

� �



�



Condition of major area roadways and the effect on economic development efforts Need for improved access to recreation, improved trails, and tourism Transit service, carpooling, and vanpooling



The top three issues identified at the Clifton Open House were: � � � Funding for Transportation Projects and Area Population Growth Need for emergency access in case of flooding and wildfires Mobility, Transit and Tourism



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 4



Second Round The second round of public involvement was scheduled as a series of two Public Open Houses, held in conjunction with a TAC meeting as the first round had been. Open Houses were scheduled for Duncan on September 19, 2007, and Clifton on September 20. Prior to that date, flyers were mailed to a list of County stakeholders that was provided by the County. Eight persons attended the Duncan Open House on September 19th--in addition to two members of the consultant team. On September 20, at 1:30 pm, a Technical Advisory Committee meeting was held at the Greenlee County Courthouse in Clifton. At 5:00 pm, a Public Open House had been scheduled; however, all but one of the stakeholders who participated attended the TAC meeting in the afternoon. Hence, the bulk of the discussion and stakeholder feedback took place at the TAC meeting, and the individual who arrived later was briefed on the proceedings and interviewed for additional input. Participants in the second round of public involvement are listed in Table 2. TABLE 2. PARTICIPANTS IN THE SECOND ROUND OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

Duncan Open House Clifton Events



Participant Alan Baker Paul R. David Tom Engel Charlene FitzGerald Robert Obregon Richard Lunt Sharon R. Mitchell Mike Allen Espie Castaneda Mark Hoffman Philip Ronnerud Pete Lima* Rob Bohannan*



Affiliation Town Manager, Town of Duncan ADOT Safford District ADOT Safford District ADOT TPD ADOT TPD Greenlee County Supervisor Southeast Arizona Association of Governments (SEAGO) Public Works, Town of Clifton Town of Clifton ADOT Public Transportation Division Greenlee County Public Works Director Lima & Associates (Consultant Team) Lima & Associates (Consultant Team)



Discussions of TAC members and stakeholders in both Duncan and Clifton focused on several key areas: Funding for transportation projects, Trail issues, Dial-a-Ride issues, and other modifications or additions to the draft Transportation Plan.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 5



SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Previous Studies, Plans, and Programs � � � The 2003 Greenlee County Comprehensive Plan identified a series of transportation goals and objectives to improve transportation in Greenlee County. The Greenlee County Wildfire Protection Plan (GCWPP) identified lands at-risk from severe wildfire threat and strategies for reducing fuels on wild lands. The Greenlee County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan (GCMHMP) was prepared to assess the County's vulnerability to natural and human caused hazards, and to develop mitigation strategies that reduce the risks associated with those hazards. Approximately $421,200 is programmed for 2006-2013 for the County oil program, a maintenance program using chip seal. A total of $2 million has been programmed for the County Airport from Fiscal Year 2006 to 2010. The Town of Duncan has identified approximately $5.6 million in proposed road improvements. Approximately $38 million are programmed for improvements to state highways in the study area.



� � � �



Current Socioeconomic Conditions � � Eighty percent of the land in the study area is publicly owned. The 2000 population of the study area was approximately 8,500 residents. The Department of Economic Security (DES) estimated the 2005 County population slightly decreased to approximately 8,300 residents. The minority population in the study area is approximately 46 percent compared to 36 percent statewide. The percent of people age 65 and older in the study area is about 10 percent compared to 13 percent statewide. Within the study area, approximately 21 percent of the population is mobility-limited compared to 11.6 percent statewide. The percent of the study area population below poverty level is about 10 percent compared to 12.6 percent statewide. The percent of households without an automobile is about 1.8 percent compared to 2.7 percent statewide.



� � � � �



Current Roadway Conditions � Approximately 96 miles of roads in the town and unincorporated areas have been identified as regionally significant roads within the study area. Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 6



Lima & Associates



� � �



�



� � �



�



�



Approximately 41 miles of the regionally significant roads are paved while 55 miles are unpaved. Thirty-six bridges and culverts are on county roads within the Study Area. Six of the 36 bridges have been identified to be replaced. An analysis of road deficiencies for statewide road needs indicates that $5.8 million are required to improve county roads including right-of-way acquisition, minor widening, and reconstructing portions of county roads. Roads in the study area lack continuity and connectivity without a full road network. Currently, these roads are a system of finger or tributary roads tied to the State Highway System. Travel in Southern Greenlee County is reliant on the State Highway System because a local parallel road system does not exist. Emergency access is a critical issue in this large, spread out region, both in terms of limited alternative routes and inclement weather. With the exception of the segment of US 191 beginning at Three Way and extending through Clifton, no roadway capacity issues exist in the study area. However, the Study Area is dependent on the function of the US and State Highways as alternate routes are non-existent in most areas. From May 2001 through April 2006, 300 traffic crashes occurred in Southern Greenlee County. Three-fourths of these, or 225 crashes, took place on US or State Highways, including the five fatalities recorded. A number of federal and state sources of funding for transportation improvements exist. However, the distribution of these funds is based on area population, and the amounts received by the County and local jurisdictions in the Study Area are insufficient to meet the transportation needs.



Multimodal Conditions � A trail system within the study area does not exist. Abandoned rail lines provide opportunities for trails. The County is interested in establishing a Countywide system of multi-use trails, perhaps using utility corridors and abandoned railroad rights-ofway. Maintenance issues and costs are a major consideration and must be addressed. The scenic beauty and comparatively mild climate of Southern Greenlee County are very conducive to outdoor activities including bicycling, hiking, and horseback riding and a number of recreation areas and activity centers are identified in the study area, including locations on private lands and State Trust lands. Multiuse Pathways are needed in urban and suburban areas. Candidate improvements to existing roadways are recommended, in addition to future consideration of additional alignments. Suggested improvements include roadway construction or reconstruction, minor roadway widening, and bridge replacement or rehabilitation. A number of opportunities exist within the study area for adding trails for pedestrian, equestrian, or bicycle use. Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 7



�



�



�



Lima & Associates



�



Resources for use in the planning, design, and construction of trails and multiuse paths are available from the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials and other sources.



Transit Element � No scheduled intercity public transportation exists in the Study Area. The "Arizona Rides" concept for the efficient use of special transportation needs should be implemented in the area. A replacement for the intercity bus service discontinued by Greyhound may be needed. Two vans are operated by the Southeast Arizona Community Action Program service for seniors and mobility-limited persons. Seniors are given priority, but remaining seats are made available to the general public on a first come, first served basis. The County would like to see more service for the general public. The two vans currently being operated in the Study Area may be meeting a significant percentage of estimated transit demand. In addition, Freeport-McMoRan currently operates free commute buses from Safford to the Morenci Mine for use by mine employees. The County and local jurisdictions should consider the implementation of additional ridesharing programs to complement the Freeport-McMoRan service and meet the needs of persons needing rides to Safford and other destinations for shopping, medical, and other reasons. Funding for expanding service to seniors and mobility-limited persons in the afternoons and on weekends may be needed. Some sort of surface transportation is needed at the airport for arriving general aviation pilots and passengers who have not made arrangements to be met. Activation of the O'Connor Airport facility in Duncan would need to be accompanied by improvements to the roadways serving the airfield. Potential may exist to develop an excursion passenger train operation on the rail line between Clifton and Duncan.



� �



�



�



� � � �



RECOMMENDATIONS � The draft Capital Improvement Program includes over 70 miles of right-of-way acquisition, preservation, and surveying; 58 miles of minor roadway widening; and 38 miles of roadway construction and reconstruction. Of the total of $49.6 million in projects, $27.5 million is estimated for the Clifton area, $4.7 million for the Duncan area, and $17.4 million for the remainder of the Study Area. Despite the funding shortfall, the County should establish an implementation Task Force to oversee initial steps toward implementation. The Task Force would work Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 8



�



�



Lima & Associates



�



� �



with ADOT and SEAGO to ensure that projects that mitigate critical safety concerns-- such as locations where multiple crashes or fatal crashes have occurred--are included in the agencies' current Transportation Improvement Programs. The County should adopt road standards as a guide for use when widening and reconstructing roadways. Uniform roadway standards should be developed by the County and the Towns of Clifton and Duncan. The County should adopt access management techniques, some of which are comparatively inexpensive to implement and will enhance mobility and safety. Policies recommended in this paper should be adopted in anticipation of possible acceleration of the rate of population growth triggered by activity in neighboring Graham County and the growing appeal of the area's scenery and location by retirees.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 9



2. REVIEW OF PREVIOUS STUDIES AND PLANS AND CURRENT PROGRAMS

PREVIOUS STUDIES AND PLANS This chapter presents a review of previous studies and plans and current programs related to transportation in the study area. A summary of the review is presented in Table 3. TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS STUDIES, PLANS, AND PROGRAMS Title

Plans and Studies

County Comprehensive Plan 2003 Presents a long-range plan for addressing land use, economic environmental, physical, and transportation needs with the County. Presents transportation related goals. Discusses future land use and presents goals, objectives, and policies for land use, transportation, public utilities and services, and economic development. Identifies a 20-year improvement program for the County's Airport. Prepared to assess the County's vulnerability to natural and human caused hazards and to develop mitigation strategies. Identified lands at risk from severe wildfire threat and strategies for reducing fuels and improving forest and rangeland health. Established priorities for improvement strategies and projects on state highways within the corridor, including US 70, US 191, and SR 75 within the Southern Greenlee County study area. Presents a Statewide motorized and nonmotorized trails plan. Presents a program for oil projects on county roads by Fiscal Year, from FY 2006 to FY 2012. Transportation Enhancement Projects for sidewalks and bridge rehabilitation Presents the Greenlee County request for capital improvements for the County airport for FY 2006 to 2010. Presents complete, current, and proposed road improvements for the Town of Duncan. Presents the five-year program for capital projects from FY 2007 through 2011.



Year



Summary



Duncan Comprehensive Plan Greenlee County Airport Master Plan (2000 -2020) Greenlee County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Greenlee County Wildfire Protection Plan Globe-New Mexico Corridor Profile



2004 2002 2006 2005 2002



Arizona State Parks Department, Arizona Trails 2005.



2004



Programs

Greenlee County Roads Oil Project Seven-Year Program SEAGO-Administered Applications County Airport Program Request Town of Duncan Road Program ADOT Five-Year Transportation Facilities Construction Program (FY 2007 � 2011) 2006 2007 2006 Undated 2006



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 10



County Comprehensive Plan The County Comprehensive Plan, adopted in March 2003, presents a plan for addressing land use, economic environmental, physical, and transportation needs within the County. The plan included the following topics: � � � � � History Regional Setting Population Goals Implementation Strategy � Plan Elements o Commercial/Infrastructure o Economic o Environmental o Land Use o Recreation/Health o Residential/Natural Hazards o Statistics/Demographic



Transportation Related Goals The following are transportation related goals that were defined in the plan: � � � � � � � � � � � � Develop a Master County Road Plan. Bring state highways up to current standards. Develop the County highway system to fullest potential. Encourage private property road owners to provide emergency access to the property. Promote alternatives to strip commercial development along major transportation routes. Adopt and enforce codes and standards for structure. Conserve and improve wildlife habitat to avoid specie depletion and encourage diversity of species. Preserve and improve riparian communities. Develop baseline of ecological processes and functions. Develop hiking and equestrian trail system for recreation and tourism. Clean up main corridors coming into and through the County to improve County's image. Preserve and enhance such facilities as mountain roads, bridges, scenic overlooks and landscape views for public enjoyment.



Transportation Recommendations The comprehensive plan developed a set of recommendations in regard to the county's transportation system for state highways, county roads, other access ways, railroads, transit, bicycle and pedestrians, and airports. These recommendations are discussed in more detail in the Transportation Issues section of Chapter 3.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 11



Duncan Comprehensive Plan The draft Town of Duncan Comprehensive Plan 2004 presents an inventory of land use socioeconomic, economic, physical, and public facility conditions and a plan to address future needs. The plan discusses future land use and presents goals, objectives, and policies for land use, transportation, public utilities and services, and economic development. Transportation Goals, Objectives, and Policies The draft plan includes the following transportation goals, objectives, and policies Goal To develop and maintain an adequate transportation system for residential and commercial access, as well as transit access for the special needs population of the community. Rehabilitate and maintain all public streets and roads to appropriate Town standards. The Town should identify and inventory all public and private streets within the municipal limits. The Town should adopt standards for the development and maintenance of its streets and roads. The Town should develop a street program which will adequately maintain all public streets. The Town should assume maintenance responsibility for additional roads when those roads are constructed to the Town's standards. Provide adequate and reliable public transit for the elderly and handicapped population of the Town. The Town should continue to support a special needs public transit system for the community.



Objective 1 Policy 1 Policy 2 Policy 3 Policy 4 Objective 2 Policy 1



Greenlee County Airport Master Plan (2000-2020) The Airport Master Plan Update was conducted by the County with funding assistance from the Federal Aviation Administration and ADOT Aeronautics Division in order to document existing facility conditions and identify the future role of the airport. The following goals were adopted at the outset of the study: Goal: To provide airport facilities and services in a fiscally responsible manner that maximizes safety, efficiency, and opportunity for use. Goal: To develop aviation demand forecasts that are responsive to expected socioeconomic factors and demand levels in the Greenlee County area. Goal: To produce a plan for airport development that meets the needs and desires of the Greenlee County area. Lima & Associates Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 12



Key issues identified by the Planning Advisory Committee include: � � � � � � � � Potential need for a crosswind runway Need for Automated Weather Observation Systems (AWOS) Need for ground transportation services Potential need for a fixed base operator (FBO) Potential need for self-service fueling facilities Need to improve airport maintenance Need to correct drainage problem at east end of the runway Need defined landing zones for helicopters



The airport is classified by ADOT as a General Utility II airport serving "all small airplanes plus some small business and air taxi type twin engine airplanes." The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has assigned the airport an Airport Reference Code (ARC) of B-II, meaning that the facility is designed for aircraft having a landing approach speed of 91 knots or more, but less than 121 knots, and wingspans of 49 feet up to, but not including, 79 feet. Table 4 presents a history of airport operations. TABLE 4. HISTORY OF AIRPORT OPERATIONS Year (Source) 1992 (1993 Master Plan) 1995 (1995 State Aviation Needs Study) 1998 (1998 Terminal Area Forecast) 2000 (FAA 5010, Air Nav 2000) 2000 (Airport Staff)

Source: Greenlee County Airport Master Plan (2000-2020)



Total Aircraft Operations 4,320 3,784 6,000 6,604 6,726



The 2000 estimate of 6,726 operations was used as a baseline operations figure in the Master Plan. A breakdown by type of operation is presented in Chapter 5. Forecasted Future Operations The consultant developed a forecast of future operations based on historical data for the facility, input from the PAC, airport users, airport staff, national trends for the general aviation industry, pertinent socioeconomic activity data and trend information, existing federal state, and local forecasts, and forecasting models. The net result of evaluating these different approaches was the prediction of a one percent growth in operations, as presented in Table 5.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 13



TABLE 5. FORECASTED AIRPORT OPERATIONS Year 2000 2005 2010 2020 Annual Growth Rate (%) 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Aircraft Operations 6,726 7,070 7,430 8,210



Source: Greenlee County Airport Master Plan (2000-2020)



Contingency Demand A proposal exists to develop a Federal Prison operation at the airport, as discussed among the County and Federal Prison staff members. This operation would consist of the arrival and departure of aircraft carrying prisoners. The proposal includes the following assumptions: � � � � � � Prisoners will arrive and depart on Boeing 727-200 or comparable aircraft Aircraft will not be based at the airport Aircraft will operate as a charter and not as a scheduled service Aircraft will arrive twice weekly, resulting in more than 32 additional operations per month Aircraft will primarily be transporting prisoners--the number of prisoners will average 40 to 60 per flight Aircraft may carry cargo in addition to the prisoners



The facility would have to be certified by the FAA to handle this type of traffic. In addition, significant improvements to the airport would need to be made, including lengthening the runway to over 8,000 feet to accommodate the 727 aircraft. Airport Master Plan for O'Connor Field Airport, Duncan, Arizona This Airport Master Plan was conducted by the Town of Duncan in 1998 with funding assistance from the Federal Aviation Administration and the ADOT Aeronautics Division. The Master Plan provides a concept for developing and modernizing the airfield. O'Connor Field is located in Duncan, approximately 1.5 miles southwest of the Town Hall at an elevation of 3,867 feet above sea level. The field has not been in operation since 1987 and no facilities exist except for two dirt runways, the longest of which is 2,750 feet in length. The goal of the Town is to create a safe and efficient facility for area aviation users. Anticipated users include medivac, business, agricultural, recreational, and training flights. Lima & Associates Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 14



The objectives of the study were defined as follows: � � � � � Inventory existing air operations and facilities Develop a forecast of aviation demand based on socioeconomic and population information and available historical air traffic data Determine the types of aircraft that will use the facility and identify the appropriate improvements and facilities indicated. Propose a development schedule, including cost estimates Prepare a new Airport Layout Plan Drawing Set



New improvements and facilities included in the Master Plan include extending and paving the runways to a minimum length of 5,600 feet, and the provision of taxiways, apron space and tie-downs, hangars, airfield lighting, and visual aids. The Plan includes an analysis of the actions necessary to implement the proposed improvements and projects. The study recommended that the Town of Duncan designate an Airport Advisory Committee to establish policy and procedures for the operations and management of the airport as well as the establishment of rates and charges for leases and services. All proposed construction projects in the vicinity of the airport should be reviewed to ensure than none violates Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) rules concerning airspace obstructions. The study recommended that the Town acquire and zone abutting property as needed to ensure future Runway Protection Zones, Safety Areas, and Object Free Areas, as well as ensure compatible land uses near the airport. The study recommended that O'Connor Field continue to be included as a secondary airport in the Arizona State Aviation System Plan, and that the Town submit a Notice of Landing Area Proposal to the FAA to reactivate the airport. Greenlee County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan (GCMHMP) The Greenlee County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan was prepared to assess the County's vulnerability to natural and human caused hazards, and to develop mitigation strategies that reduce the risks associated with those hazards. The primary purpose of this plan is to: � � � � Identify natural and human-caused hazards that impact Greenlee County Assess the vulnerability and risk posed by those hazards to community-wide human and structural assets Develop strategies for mitigation of those identified hazards and present future maintenance procedures for the plan Document the planning process



Four significant hazards were identified in the study area: These are: Flooding; Wildfire; Dam Levee Failure; and Hazardous Materials Incidents. Table 6 presents a summary of potential economic loss and human exposure for these hazards for the entire County. Lima & Associates Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 15



TABLE 6. SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF HAZARDS Hazard Potential Economic Lossa Potential Human Exposureb



Flooding $5.9 million 982 Wildfire $360.4 million 124 Dam/Levee Failure $15.3 million 115 HAZMAT Incident $631,000 4,197 a These numbers represent estimates of the losses that may be realized assuming the hazard occurs to all facilities within the hazard impact area b These numbers represent the total human population potentially exposed to the hazard and are based on 2000 Census data as distributed with the HAZUS program by FEMA.

Source: Greenlee County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan (GCMHMP)



Flooding Two perennial rivers, the Gila River and San Francisco River, traverse Southern Greenlee County. Areas between Clifton and Duncan are rated as medium to high potential flood hazards. Both Duncan and Clifton have been hit with heavy flooding in the past. Floods in southern Greenlee County in 1978, 1983, 1993, and 2005 severely impacted homes, businesses, farm land, roadways, and utilities. Wildfire Since the mid-1990s the majority of wildfire starts have occurred in the northern portion of the County, resulting in 71,500 acres burned. Large scale fires have not been frequent in the lower elevations and desert vegetation zones. The vegetation in Southern Greenlee County is rated as low flammable vegetation. A separate Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) has been prepared by the County and is reviewed separately. Dam/Levee Failure Five regulatory or recognized dams and/or levees are located within the Study Area, all of which are associated with the Freeport-McMoRan Morenci mine. Of the five, two are classified as "High Hazard," which means that loss of human life due to a failure is probable, with one or more fatalities expected. One of the High Hazard dams (Columbine Dam) has been decommissioned by Freeport-McMoRan and will be completely removed within the next couple of years. The other High Hazard dam (Lower Chase Creek) is also owned and maintained by Freeport-McMoRan and is located just upstream of Clifton.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 16



Hazardous Materials Incidents The GCMHMP analyzed incidents for Extremely Hazardous Substances (EHS) that include chlorine gas, sulphuric acid, and hydrogen fluoride. There were at least six reported incidents of EHS HAZMAT releases that have occurred since 1990 within Greenlee County that involved at least one injury/fatality or some amount of property damage. Four of the spills were traffic accident related and located within the Morenci area. Five of the incidents involved sulphuric acid and one chlorine gas. Two hazard classifications, high and medium, were developed for profiling EHS hazards. High hazard exposure areas are assumed to be located within a one-mile radius or offset of any Tier II EHS facility or roadway/railway transportation corridor where EHS materials are known to be stored or transported on a somewhat regular basis. Similarly, the medium hazard exposure areas are assumed to be located within a second one-mile wide band that is offset from the high hazard area. State highway corridors within Southern Greenlee County have been rated as high potential EHS HAZMAT Hazard within a one mile radius and as moderate potential from one mile to two miles. Mitigation Actions/Projects A summary of transportation related mitigation actions/projects is presented in Table 7 below. TABLE 7. SUMMARY OF GREENLEE COUNTY MITIGATION ACTIONS/PROJECTS - SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY STUDY AREA

Action/Project Name

Burma Road Bridge



Description



Cost



Estimated Losses Due to Hazard

$5,900,000 $5,900,000 $631,000 N/A



Percent of Hazard Mitigated

N/A N/A N/A N/A



B/C Ratio

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00



Design and construct a bridge at the $9,000,000 Burma Road crossing of Gila River. Design and construct hardened Juan Miller $320,000 crossing at the Juan Miller Crossing Crossing of the Lower Blue River. Emergency Review and update the Emergency $10,000 Response Plan Response Plan on at least an annual Update basis. Duncan Rural Build and equip a new fire substation $500,000 Fire District in the area north of Duncan to service Substation areas north of Gila River. Develop and implement a floodplain management and land-use plan for Lower Chase Lower Chase Creek, from the PD Creek Dam to the San Francisco River $2,000,000 Watercourse confluence. The management plan Master Plan will consider socio-economic factors as well as standard floodplain and erosion hazard management elements. Source: Greenlee County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan (GCMHMP)



$5,900,000



N/A



1.00



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 17



Greenlee County Wildfire Protection Plan (GCWPP) The Greenlee County Wildfire Protection Plan identified lands at-risk from severe wildfire threat and strategies for reducing fuels on wildlands while improving forest and rangeland health, supporting local industry and local economies, and improving public and firefighter safety and response capabilities. The ten primary goals of the GCWPP were: � � � � � � � � � � Improve fire prevention and suppression Reduce hazardous forest fuels Restore forest health Promote community involvement and education Recommend measures to reduce structural ignitability in the GCWPP area Encourage economic development and stability in the community through protection of the ecosystem and utilization of forest products Identify watersheds at-risk and potential impacts to downstream communities Identify funding needs and opportunities Expedite project planning Prioritize high risk projects



The plan included an analysis of the Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) to delineate the "area in or adjacent to an at-risk community." The WUI is commonly described as the zone where structures and other features of human development meet and intermingle with undeveloped wildland or vegetative fuels. Communities in the WUI face substantial risk to life, property, and infrastructure. Wildland fire in the WUI is one of the most dangerous and complicated situations firefighters face. Within the analysis area, a single WUI boundary was delineated that surrounds the communities of Blue, Eagle Creek, Morenci, Duncan, and Clifton; significant community infrastructures; and roadways used as evacuation/fire fighting resource distribution routes. The study identified high-risk areas, including the economic corridors that line US 191, SR 75, and SR 78 that have been and continue to be the focus of community development. Evacuation/resource response routes and significant infrastructures were also identified to provide for firefighter safety and to ensure the protection of life and property. Greenlee County has recently developed "Evacuation Plans" to be included in the current County Evacuation Plan for the Blue and Eagle Creek intermix communities. Evacuation/resource response routes and significant infrastructures were also identified to provide for firefighter safety and to ensure the protection of life and property. Three of areas from which needed escape routes were identified are adjacent to or intersect US 191: � Federal land north of Beaverhead adjacent to US 191 evacuation route in area of high fuel hazard



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 18



� �



Area including private and federal land south of Hannagan Meadow Lode adjacent to US 191 evacuation route Area including private and federal land southeast of the community of Eagle Creek along FR 217 and intersecting US 191



Globe-New Mexico Corridor Profile, BRW November 2002 The Globe-New Mexico Corridor Profile established priorities for improvement strategies and projects on state highways within the corridor. The corridor included the following state highways: US 70 from Globe to the New Mexico line, SR 191 from I-10 to US 70, SR 366, SR 191 from US 70 to SR 75, SR 266, and SR 191 from SR 78 to Morenci. The following issues were identified within the Southern Greenlee County study area: � � � � � � � � � � � Cut ditches and slopes on US 70 east of Safford do no meet current standards. US 70 roadway not constructed to current standards and loadings. Backups occur in Duncan when traffic is detoured to US 70 from I-10. Flooding issues were identified for US 70 in Duncan, SR 75 Gila River Bridge, and the US 191 bridge over the San Francisco River in Clifton. The Morenci tunnel on US 191 has a substandard design and low vertical clearance. UPRR Clifton Branch has poor shoulders and occasional congestion in Clifton Yard. The Three-Way intersection with SR 75 has poor sight distance due to vertical geometrics. The US 70/Duncan rail crossing needs to be improved. US 191/SR 75 intersection � raise Cold Creek Bridge and lower intersection, widen shoulders. Greenlee County Airport is without transit or taxi service. Intercity bus or rail service in the study area does not exist.



Table 8 summarizes the vision developed by the study for state highways in the southern Greenlee County study area: TABLE 8. CORRIDOR VISION SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY STUDY AREA Route

US 70 from US 191 to New Mexico line US 191 from MP 139.0 to SR 75 US 191 between SR 75 and Clifton US 191 in Clifton/Morenci area US 191 � Morenci Tunnel



Vision

Two-lane rural highway with widened shoulders. Within Duncan, widen to 3 lanes. Install signal at SR 75 junction when warranted. Two-lane rural highway with continuous climbing lane. Four-lane section with minor improvements. Three-lane section. Rehabilitate tunnel.



Source: Globe-New Mexico Corridor Profile, BRW November 2002



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 19



The corridor study did not address local/state highway interface access management issues. However these issues are discussed in a subsequent chapter of this Report. Arizona Trails 2005 The Arizona Trails 2005 Plan was completed by the Arizona State Parks Department (ASPD) in November 2004, and provides information and recommendations for the ASPD and other agencies regarding the management of motorized and nonmotorized trail resources. The Plan is specifically designed to guide the distribution and expenditure of the Arizona Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Recreation Fund, the trails component of the Arizona Heritage Fund, and the Federal Recreational Trails Program. The priority recommendations developed from the Plan's public involvement process are summarized in Table 9. TABLE 9. PRIORITY RECOMMENDATIONS OF ARIZONA TRAILS 2005 PLAN Motorized Trail Use Nonmotorized Trail Use First Level Priority Recommendations Develop New Trails And Motorized � Renovation and Maintenance of Existing Recreation Opportunities Trails Protect Access To Trails/Keep Trails � Protect Access to Trails/Acquire Land Open for Public Access Renovation And Maintenance Of � Develop Signage and Support Facilities Existing Trails Education And Trail Etiquette Second Level Priority Recommendations Enforcement of existing rules and � Comprehensive Planning regulations/monitoring Trail information and maps � Trail Information/Maps Comprehensive planning � Education and Trail Etiquette Other Priority Recommendations Reduce Cultural And Environmental � Reduce Cultural And Environmental Resource Impacts Resource Impacts Seek Additional Funding Sources � Seek Additional Funding Sources Interagency Coordination � Interagency Coordination Develop Signage And Support Facilities � Develop New Trails � Coordinated Volunteerism � More Accessible Trails for Individuals with Physical Disabilities � Enforcement of Existing Rules and Regulations/Monitoring



� � � � � � � � � � �



Source: Arizona Trails 2005 Plan, Arizona State Parks Department, November 2004



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 20



COUNTY TRANSPORTATION NEEDS, PROGRAMS, AND FUNDING This section discusses County road needs identified by the Arizona Association of County Engineers and presents current programmed improvements for Greenlee County, Duncan, and State highways. County Road Needs and Funding The Arizona Association of County Engineers (AACE) prepared the Year 2004 Roadway Needs Study Update in cooperation with Arizona Counties for unincorporated areas. Improvement costs were determined by comparing the existing conditions of County roads within the unincorporated areas with a uniform state standard established by the AACE. Order of magnitude unit costs for historic ADOT costs were applied to resulting deficiencies. The resulting costs may vary significantly from actual project costs. According to the study update, the estimated cost of transportation needs in Greenlee County for the years 2005-2014 was $29.6 million. The breakdown of these needs includes an estimated $16.5 million for maintenance, $3.9 for bridges, $4.7 for upgrading existing roads, and about $3.7 for safety and operations. A table summarizing roadway deficiencies is presented later in this Report. Additional funding information is provided in Chapter 7. County Maintenance Program Table 10 presents the Greenlee County Roads Oil Project Seven-Year Program. Approximately $421,200 is programmed over a seven-year period for maintaining County roads.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 21



TABLE 10. GREENLEE COUNTY ROADS OIL PROJECT SEVEN-YEAR PLAN

Start

FY 2006 Stevens Loop Rd Country Club Rd Ward Canyon Rd Skyline Rd FY 2007 Virden Rd Burma Rd Old Virden Rd Airport Rd Corral Rd FY 2008 Franklin Rd Foster Lane Plantsite Rec. Rd Morenci Park Parking Lot Sheldon Loop Rd FY 2009 Apache Grove Rd Fairway Drive Rd Tee Street Caddy Lane Calloway Rd Ping Drive - Green Lane Birdie Street Driver Avenue Cart Street Cosper Rd Intersection Highway 75 at Apache Grove Rd Intersection Highway 75 at Fairway Drive Intersection Fairway Drive at Tee Street Intersection Fairway Drive at Caddy Lane Intersection Fairway Drive at Calloway Rd Ping Drive end of pavement Intersection Fairway Drive at Birdie Intersection Fairway Drive at Cart Street Intersection Highway 75 at Cosper Loop Rd Total Cost $57,658.00 Apache Grove Rd end of pavement Fairway Drive end of pavement Tee Street end of pavement Caddy Lane end of pavement Calloway Lane end of pavement Driver end of pavement Driver Avenue End of pavement Intersection Cosper Loop Rd at Highway 75 Intersection Country Club Rd at Highway 75 Soap Box Cattle Guard Skyline Rd at Calle Del Rio Total $1,10307.50 Intersection Highway 75 at Virden Rd Intersection Highway 70 at Burma Rd Intersection Highway 75 at Old Virden Rd Intersection Highway 78 at Airport Rd Intersection Highway 75 at fence entering Park Total $77,867.04 Intersection Highway 70 at Franklin Rd Intersection Highway 70 at Foster Lane Intersection Reservation Rd at Plantsite Rec. Rd Parking Lot Intersection Highway 75 at Sheldon Loop Rd Total $95,682.00 Intersection Stevens Loop Rd at Highway 75 Country Club Rd end of pavement Intersection Skyline Rd at Ward Canyon Rd Intersection Skyline Rd at Highway 191



Stop



Virden Rd at New Mexico State Line Burma Rod end of pavement Intersection Virden Rd at Old Virden Rd End of Rd



Franklin Rd at New Mexico State Line Foster Lane end of pavement Plantsite Rec. Rd end of pavement Parking Lot Intersection Sheldon Loop Rd at Highway 75



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 22



TABLE 10. GREENLEE COUNTY ROADS OIL PROJECT SEVEN-YEAR PLAN (CONTINUED)

FY 2010 Calle Alta Vista N. Calle Del Sol S. Calle Del Sol Calle Del Rio S. Calle Luna Calle Contento Calle Placita Calle Chico Calle Conquista N. Calle Luna Tot Lot Walkway Ward Canyon Rd FY 2011 Bobcat Drive Mountain Lion Drive Wildlife Drive Whitetail Rd Quail Run Lynx Rd Elk Rd Buckhorn Rd Falcon Rd Hackberry Drive Hemlock Street Birch Street Spruce Street Lake Drive Ward Canyon Rd FY 2012 Fairgrounds Rd McCarty Trail Cherokee Drive Muscalero Comanche Seminole Pawnee Shoshone Cheyenne Lane Carrol Loop End of Skyline Rd Start: Int. Calle Alta Vista Curve at Calle Del Rio End of Calle Del Sol Stop: Rattlesnake Int. Stop: Int. Calle Del Sol at Rattlesnake Rd Calle Alta Vista Intersection End of Rd



Soapbox at cattle guard Total $60,588.00 Int. Wards Canyon at Bobcat Drive Int. Mountain Lion Drive at Whitetail Rd Int. Wildlife Drive at Lynx Rd Int. Whitetail Rd at Bobcat Drive



At Cemetery



Int. Bobcat Drive at Cougar Rd Int. Mountain Lion Drive at Bobcat Drive Int. Wildlife Drive at Elk Rd End of Whitetail Rd



Int. Wards Canyon Rd at Hackberry Drive



End of Rd



Cemetery Total $91,436.25 Int. Highway 75 and Fairgrounds rd. Int. Highway 75 and McCarty Trail



End Bluff at bottom of Rd



Int. Fairgrounds Rd and Highway 75 End of Rd



Total $45,936.90 Source: Greenlee County Public Works



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 23



County Airport Program Request Table 11 presents the Greenlee County request for capital improvements for the county airport for FY 2006-2010. TABLE 11. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION/ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, FY 2006-2010 PROJECT REQUEST FORM

Fiscal Year Project Description Project Component Federal Funding (with or without ADOT match funding)

Rehab Apron (11,000 sy) (Apron - 01GR) FSL Fiscal Year Totals Design Drain./Erosion Control Imp. Design Apron Rehabilitation (11,000 sy) (Apron - 01GR)



Total

10 0% $200,00 0 $200,00 0 100% $50,00 0 $30,00 0 $80,00 0 $280,00 0



$ Federal Participation

95.00 % $1 90,000 $0 $1 90,000



$ State Participation

2.50% $5,000 $0 $5,000 90% $45,000 $27,000 $72,000



$ Local Participation

2.50 % $5,00 0 $0 $5,00 0 10% $5,00 0 $3,00 0 $8,00 0 $13,00 0



2006 Rehabilitate Apron - Reconstruction



State - Local funding only

2006 Runway Construct 2006 Apron Reconstruct



SL Fiscal Year Totals TOTAL FOR THE FISCAL YEAR



$1 90,000



$77,000



Federal Funding (with or without ADOT match funding)

Install miscellaneous 2007 <NAVAIDS/Approach Aids> - Standards Improve Airport <Drainage/Erosion Control/miscellaneous improvements> 2007 Standards



10 0%



95.00 %



2.50%



2.50 %



GPS Approach Equip.



$50,00 0



$ 47,500



$1,250



$1,25 0



Drain./Erosion Control Imp FSL Fiscal Year Totals Design Rel. of Power Poles & Structures to comply with Part 7 Acquire approx. 198 acres for RPZ Protection & Fac. Expan.



State - Local funding only

2007 Obstruction Removal (Part 77) 2007 Land (Protection) Acquisition



$250,00 0 $300,00 0 100% $50,00 0 $100,00 0 $150,00 0 $450,00 0



$2 37,500 $2 85,000



SL Fiscal Year Totals TOTAL FOR THE FISCAL YEAR



$6,250 $7,500 90% $45,000 $0 $90,000 $0 $ 135,000 $ 142,500



$6,25 0 $7,50 0 10% $5,00 0 $0 $10,00 0 $0 $15,00 0 $22,50 0



$2 85,000



Federal Funding (with or without ADOT match funding)

2009 Construct Taxiway - Capacity Conduct <Environmental Assessment/Environmental Impact 2009 Statement/Feasibility> <study/update> Constr. Parallel Taxiway Ph II (west - 2600



10 0% $750,00 0



95.00 % $7 12,500



2.50% $18,750



2.50 % $18,75 0



E.A for 291' Rwy/Twy Extension FSL Fiscal Year Totals Design 291' Taxiway Extension Design 291' Runway Extension



State - Local funding only

2009 Taxiway Construct 2009 Runway Construct



$100,00 0 $850,00 0 100% $50,00 0 $50,00 0 $900,00 0



$ 95,000 $8 07,500



SL Fiscal Year Totals TOTAL FOR THE FISCAL YEAR



$2,500 $21,250 90% $45,000 $0 $45,000 $66,250



$2,50 0 $21,25 0 10% $5,00 0 $0 $5,00 0 $26,25 0



$8 07,500



Federal Funding (with or without ADOT match funding)

2010 Construct Taxiway - Capacity 2010 Construct Runway - Capacity Construct 291' Taxiway Extension Construct 291' Runway Extension FSL Fiscal Year Totals Airfield Signage



State - Local funding only

2010 Signage Install



SL Fiscal Year Totals TOTAL FOR THE FISCAL YEAR



10 0% $50,00 0 $200,00 0 $250,00 0 100% $100,00 0 $100,00 0 $350,00 0



95.00 % $ 47,500 $1 90,000 $2 37,500



2.50% $1,250 $5,000 $6,250 90% $90,000 $90,000 $96,250



2.50 % $1,25 0 $5,00 0 $6,25 0 10% $10,00 0 $10,00 0 $16,25 0



$2 37,500



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 24



Town of Duncan Road Program The road improvement for the Town of Duncan is present in Table 12. TABLE 12. TOWN OF DUNCAN ROAD IMPROVEMENTS

Phase I Complete Current Proposed Phase II Complete Current Proposed Phase III Complete Current Proposed Phase IV Complete Current Proposed Source: Town of Duncan Duncan Proper Length Width 775.00 30.00 723.00 30.00 8467.00 30.00 East Duncan Length Width 2,340.00 30.00 3,156.00 30.00 5,759.00 30.00 Hunter Estates Length Width 2,592.00 30.00 2,790.00 30.00 17,682.00 30.00 Babbitt/Duncan Heights Length Width None None 9,453.00 30.00 1,270,365.04 Total 104,150.31 97,162.16 1,137,858.96 Total 314,466.75 424,126.95 773,937.61 Total 348,332.40 374,941.13 2,376,239.78 Total



STATEWIDE AND AREA PROGRAMMED IMPROVEMENTS Arizona Department of Transportation The Arizona Department of Transportation Five-Year Transportation Facilities Construction Program (FY 2007�FY 2011) includes over $36 million in programmed major construction projects for Greenlee County as shown in Table 13. In addition to the major projects listed, a $3 million pavement preservation project will be undertaken for SR 78. This project is scheduled for FY 2009 and begins at MP 154.6 (at Three Way) and continues to the USFS boundary at MP 165.50. Current plans are for a 2-inch overlay with an emulsion chip seal surface course. A guardrail run at a hairpin turn near the end of the project will be extended and reconstructed. Costs are estimated at $2.5 � $3.0 million. The Initial Project Assessment estimate from 2005 was $1.75 million. SouthEastern Arizona Governments Organization (SEAGO) SEAGO is currently administering four Transportation Enhancement Project applications in Greenlee County for ADOT as shown in Table 14: Town Of Clifton Pedestrian Sidewalk; Greenlee County Concrete Arch Bridge Project; Greenlee County Rehabilitate Four Wood Bridges Project; and the Greenlee County York Valley Pedestrian Walkway Project. Lima & Associates Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 25



TABLE 13. 2007-2011 FIVE-YEAR TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM � GREENLEE COUNTY

Dollars in Thousands ($000) FY FY FY FY 2008 2009 2010 2011

$0 $0 $0 $0 $200 $200 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0



Route BMP

70 191 191 191 191 378.4 151 151 175 175



Location

Duncan-State Line MP 151 � THREE WAY MP 151 � THREE WAY Coronado Trail Coronado Trail



Leng th

6.85 3.20 3.20 50.00 50.00



Type of Work

RR 3" + ARFC Construct Rdwy & Bridge Approaches Construct Rdwy & Bridge Approaches District Force Account District Force Account



Funding

STP BR NH STATE STATE Total



FY 2007



$3,000 $4,146 $29,000 $200 $0 $36,346



Source: ADOT 2007-2011 Five-Year Transportation Facilities Construction Program



TABLE 14. SEAGO-ADMINISTERED TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROJECT APPLICATIONS IN STUDY AREA

Project Reference Clifton TE App 2007s Greenlee Concrete Greenlee TEA Wood Bridge Greenlee York Bridge Description 1,898 feet of 5-foot sidewalk and pedestrian bridge along US 191 in Clifton Rehabilitate two Old Safford Highway arch bridges � structure #'s 8150 and 8151 Rehabilitate four wood bridges: #8146 on Sheldon Loop, #8144 on Stevens Loop, #8145 on Stevens Loop, and #8142 on Fairgrounds Road Second Phase, York Valley Pedestrian Walkway: 150-foot pedestrian bridge over Cottonwood Creek upstream of and parallel to SR 75 at MP 395.7 in York Valley Federal Funds $262,055 $331,108 $302,797 $514,638 Matching Funds $15,840 $31,778 $26,000 $52,519 Total $277,895 $362,886 $328,797 $567,157



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 26



3. SUMMARY OF EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS

Chapter 3 describes the current physical and socioeconomic conditions within the study area. This chapter also discusses the current transportation conditions within the study area, including roadways, structures, traffic conditions, crashes, and multimodal facilities. A discussion of issues that have been identified through a review of the 2003 Greenlee County Comprehensive Plan and other documents and conversations with stakeholders follows. Information on future population growth in Greenlee County and estimated future traffic volumes is presented. SOCIOECONOMIC AND PHYSICAL CONDITIONS Natural Environment The Peloncillo Mountains extends in a northwesterly direction along the Greenlee County/Graham County boundary ranging in elevation of about 5,000 feet to 6,600 feet. The mountain range slopes easterly down to the Gila River with elevations ranging from 3,300 to 3,500 feet east of the river. The Freeport-McMoRan Morenci Copper Mine is located at the north end of the study area. The mine property covers approximately 60,000 acres and is the largest copper mine in North America and one of the largest open pit mines in the world. South of Morenci, the town of Clifton is at an elevation of about 3,500 feet with canyon walls stretching up around the town and the San Francisco River meandering through the town from northeast to southwest. Further south, along the Gila River southern Greenlee County has diverse agricultural production, including dairy and traditional cotton farming, vegetable production, alfalfa, corn, wheat, and other crops. Working cattle ranches operate throughout the county. Vegetation and Hydrology Vegetation within the study area ranges from desert scrub along the Gila River to Grassland north of Clifton and Morenci. The study area includes three perennial streams: the Gila River, San Francisco River, and Eagle Creek. A significant number of tributaries flow into these streams. Species Status and Habitat Table 15 presents the species status within Greenlee County. Three perennial streams; Gila River, Eagle Creek, and San Francisco River, in the study provide riparian habitats. The Federal, State, and private lands are also important wildlife areas.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 27



TABLE 15. GREENLEE COUNTY SPECIES STATUS

Common Name

Apache (Arizona) Trout California Brown Pelican Chiricahua Leopard Frog Gila Chub Gila Trout Lesser Long-Nosed Bat Loach Minnow Mexican Gray Wolf Mexican Spotted Owl Razorback Sucker Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Spikedace Yellow-Billed Cuckoo Gooddings Onion



Status

Threatened Endangered Threatened Endangered Endangered Endangered Threatened Endangered Threatened Endangered Endangered



Elevation

>500 0ft Varies 3,300-8,900 ft 2,000-5,500 ft 5,000-10,000 ft <6,000 ft <8,000 ft 4,000-12,000 ft 4,100-9,000 ft <6,000 <8,500 ft



Habitat

Cold mountain streams with many low gradient meadow reaches Found around many Arizona lakes and rivers. Streams, rivers, backwaters, ponds, and stock tanks that are mostly free from introduced fish, crayfish, and bullfrogs. Pools, springs, cienegas, and streams. Desert scrub habitat with agave and columnar cacti present as food plants.



Threatened <6,000 ft Candidate <6,500 Conservation Agreement >7,500 ft Source: Arizona Species Database, May 17, 2006



Wilderness Area: The Peloncillo Mountain Wilderness Area extends across the southern Greenlee County/Cochise County line. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Web page describes the Peloncillo Mountain Wilderness as follows: The wilderness lies within the rugged Peloncillo Range, which stretches from Mexico to the Gila River. This remote and primitive area flanking the New Mexico state line shows little signs of human activity. The Peloncillo Mountain Wilderness offers outstanding opportunities for primitive recreation, including hiking, backpacking, rock scrambling, hunting and sightseeing. The higher country offers long-distance views; and excellent scenery enhances wilderness values in the rugged mountains and canyons. Desert bighorn sheep have been recently reintroduced to the region and share their home with peregrine falcons and four other sensitive animal species. Vegetation ranges from desert shrub grasslands in the surrounding flatlands to oak juniper woodlands in the higher reaches. The area is also rich in archaeological sites with the historic Butterfield Stage route forming the southern boundary of the wilderness. For four years from 1857 to 1861, the Butterfield Stage line operated twice weekly between St. Louis and San Francisco on a 25-day schedule using Concord Stage Coaches or spring wagons pulled by four-horse teams. The route through Northern Cochise County roughly paralleled that of today's Interstate 10, passing through San Simon, Dragoon, and Benson. Lima & Associates Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 28



Air Quality In general, air quality in the County is very good. The following information on air quality in Greenlee County was stated in the 2003 Comprehensive Plan. � � Visibility is generally excellent within the County. The county experiences some haze, particularly when wild fires are burning. The Federal Government designated the Morenci area of Greenlee County as a nonattainment area for SO2. Significant SO2 emissions ceased in 1982 when the copper smelter in Morenci closed; effective June 25, 2004, the area was reclassified as a "maintenance area" by the EPA. Dust and PM10 have been significantly reduced by armor coating (macadam paving) roads within populated areas. Some issues have been raised from wind blown material from the tailings dams and agricultural activities. Freeport-McMoRan is working on the rehabilitation of the tailings dump surface.



� �



Water Quality Water quality is generally good in the County. The 2003 Comprehensive Plan noted the following in regard to water quality. � � � Some areas do have poor quality water with naturally occurring, high mineral content. We do not see contamination from basic industry or mining. Streams and rivers are "clean," although after storms evidence of sediment transport is seen. The Arizona Department of Water Resources has established several areas to monitor water quality.



Floodplains As noted in the review of the GCMHMP, there have been a number of significant floods in southern Greenlee County resulting in severe damage to property and infrastructure. Flooding of the San Francisco River has stopped traffic on U.S. 191 and the railroad through Clifton. Flooding of the Gila River in Duncan Valley has also stopped traffic on SR 75, as well as US 70 and the railroad. Current Socioeconomic Environment Land Ownership The status of ownership of major land parcels in the study area is presented in Table 16 and illustrated in Figure 3. Twenty percent of the land area in the study area is privately owned compared to 6 percent countywide. Figure 4 is a map of the land ownership. Lima & Associates Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 29



TABLE 16. STATUS OF LAND OWNERSHIP IN SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY STUDY AREA

Percent Area (Square miles) Study Area* County** 16.47 64 27.16 15 36.35 15 20.02 6 0 < 0.5***



Agency US Forest Service US Bureau of Land Management State of Arizona Private (Individual or corporate) Other public



Total 100 100 * Lima & Associates ** Greenlee County Comprehensive Plan *** The County owns approximately 700 acres, or a little over one square mile, of land within the Study area.



FIGURE 3. STATUS OF LAND OWNERSHIP IN GREENLEE COUNTY AND IN SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY STUDY AREA

Study Area* County**



* Lima & Associates ** Greenlee County Comprehensive Plan



Communities The Towns of Clifton and Duncan are incorporated areas in the study area, while Morenci is a company-owned town. However, a part of Morenci is within the incorporated Town of Clifton. Verde Lee and Loma Linda are also unincorporated areas that lie east of the Clifton limits. The Guthrie/3-Way/York area is near the center of the County and may be an area suitable for incorporation. The Apache Grove, Sheldon, and Sweetwater areas are smaller places along SR 75 going toward Duncan. Duncan includes an area around US 70 and SR 75. Franklin is a small community southeast of Duncan.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 30



FIGURE 4. LAND OWNERSHIP SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 31



The Town of Clifton began as a mining town and is the County Seat and the center of government, trade, tourism, and mining. The town sits at an elevation of 3,464 feet and the San Francisco River flows through the town. Clifton is sometimes referred to as the "Gateway to the Coronado Trail" that following US 191 from Clifton north to the town of Springerville and is noted as one of the most scenic drives in Arizona. The Coronado Trail was recently designated a National Byway. The estimated 2005 population of Clifton was 2,495. Morenci As previously mentioned, Morenci is a company-owned town that is not incorporated and a part of Morenci is within Clifton. The town sits at an elevation of 4,838 feet. The Morenci mining district has evolved into a world class operation providing approximately 18% of the world copper production. Morenci's 2000 population was 1,879 residents. The Town of Duncan lies in the County's primary agricultural area of Duncan Valley. The Gila River flows through the Town. US 70 and SR 75 traverse the Town. The estimated 2005 population was 805 residents. The Town is at an elevation of approximately 3,500 feet. Economy Mining is the predominant economic sector in the study area. Farming in the southern portion of the study area is another important economic sector. Public government comprises a third major sector. Southern Greenlee County is becoming increasingly important as a travel attraction in the State of Arizona. Table 17 presents the major employers in the study area. TABLE 17. MAJOR EMPLOYERS

Clifton Clifton Elementary Clifton High School Greenlee County Town of Clifton Morenci Fairbanks School - Morenci Morenci Health Care Center Morenci Morenci High School - Morenci Morenci Public Schools - Morenci Freeport-McMoRan - Morenci Duncan Duncan Public Schools Lunt's Dairy Union Pacific Railroad Freeport-McMoRan Greenlee County Duncan Valley Electric Coop State of Arizona Town of Duncan



Source: Greenlee County Public Works, Lima & Associates



Demographic and Environmental Justice Considerations Population Table 18 presents the 2000 population and the estimated 2005 population. Figure 5 shows the total population distribution within the study area. Even though the overall population of the



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 32



TABLE 18. POPULATION 2000 Population 2,596 812 1,879 8,547 8,476 5,130,632 2005 Population 2,495 805 NA 8,300 8,231* 6,044,985



Area Clifton Duncan Morenci Greenlee County Southern Greenlee County Study Area Arizona



Source: 2000 US Census and July 1, 2005 DES Population Estimates Estimated by Lima & Associates



study area is quite small; the population densities by Census block can easily be identified on the map. Most of the study area has a very low population density, while the highest population densities are found in Morenci and Clifton. The highest concentrations are within Morenci in an area bounded by Fairbanks Road, Coronado Drive, and Burro Alley and a strip located east of Reservation Road south of Mountain View. Many persons in Clifton live between 2nd and 7th Streets east of US Highway 191. Duncan's population is mostly low density, with a populated area on the north side of town along Chaparral Road and McGrath Avenue, and one bordering US Highway 70 north and south of its intersection with Main Street. A few scattered pockets of low density population also exist along State Route 75 in the York Valley area. Title VI and Environmental Justice Considerations This section presents information on population subgroups that needs to be considered to ensure that these groups are not disproportionately impacted by transportation improvements. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related statutes ensure that individuals are not discriminated against based on race, color, national origin, age, sex, or disability. Executive Order 12898 on Environmental Justice dictates that any programs, policies, or activities to be implemented are not to have disproportionately high adverse human health and environmental effects on minority populations. Thus, in relation to this study, transportation improvements should not adversely impact such groups disproportionately. 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. To ensure that Title VI and Environmental Justice considerations are implemented during the conduct of a project, including the conduct of Environmental Assessments and the development of Environmental Impact Statements, ADOT issued a document entitled Guidance on Title VI and Environmental Justice. Even though the precise measures outlined in the Guidance may only apply directly to projects in the development and environmental stage, the same general approach can be utilized in this study to help identify any related issues involved in the planning stage of potential projects.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 33



FIGURE 5. TOTAL POPULATION DENSITY SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 34



Demographic statistics are discussed below population subgroups for minorities, elderly, mobility-limited, poverty level, and householders with no automobile. Minority and Elderly Population Most of the study area has a very low density minority population; Morenci and Duncan are the areas with the highest density of minorities. As Table 19 shows, the minority population is nearly 60 percent in Clifton and 48 percent in Morenci. The minority population in these areas is focused in the most densely populated parts of the towns. Therefore, Title VI and Environmental Justice factors need to be considered for these areas. TABLE 19. MINORITY AND AGE 65 AND OVER DEMOGRAPHICS Total Minority 1,856,374 3,943 3,923 1,548 276 916 Percent Minorities 36.18% 46.13% 46.28% 59.63% 33.99% 48.75% Total Age 65+ 667,839 849 842 283 88 12 Percent Age 65+ 13.02% 9.93% 9.93% 10.90% 10.84% 0.64%



Arizona Greenlee County Study Area Clifton Duncan Morenci



Sources: US Census 2000 Summary File 1 (SF 1) US Census 2000 Summary File 3 (SF 3)



Overall, the population density within the study area of persons aged 65 and older is very low--similar to the density for the total population. Table 19 shows that approximately 10 percent of the population is in this age group and that less than one percent of Morenci's population is aged 65 and over, and that the percentages of persons in this category living in the Clifton and Duncan areas are virtually identical. Mobility-Limited and Below Poverty-Level Population and Households with No Automobile Based on the percentage of mobility-limited population, Environmental Justice considerations must be taken into account for the study area. Table 20 reveals the County has a 21.14 percent mobility-limited population, which is greater than Arizona's total of 11.63 percent. Clifton, Duncan, and Morenci each have percentages very close to the state's percentage. The percentage of the population living below poverty level and the number of households with no automobile must also be considered when evaluating Environmental Justice. The percentage of Morenci's population living below poverty level, as seen in Table 20, is much



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 35



TABLE 20. DEMOGRPAHIC DATA FOR MOBILITY-LIMITED, POVERTYLIMITED, AND HOUSEHOLDS WITH NO AUTOMOBILES

Total MobilityLimited Arizona Greenlee County Clifton Duncan Morenci 596,787 1,792 334 90 228 Percent Mobility -Limited 11.63% 21.14% 12.87% 11.08% 12.13% Total Below Poverty Level 698,669 842 292 133 56 Percent Below Poverty Level 13.62% 9.93% 11.25% 16.38% 2.98% Households with No Automobile 140,579 153 64 26 18 Percent Households with No Automobile 2.74% 1.81% 2.47% 3.20% 0.96%



Sources: US Census 2000 Summary File 1 (SF 1) US Census 2000 Summary File 3 (SF 3)



lower than the statewide percentage of 13.62. However, 16.38 percent of Duncan residents live below the poverty level, a higher percentage than that of the state as a whole. A correlation appears to exist between the population living below poverty level and the number of households with no automobile, because similar trends can be seen for this data. Duncan has the highest percentage of households with no automobile, and Morenci has the lowest, with less than one percent. Clifton remains close to the state's 2.74 percent of households with no automobile. County Population Trends The Arizona Department of Economic Security population estimates and projections indicate a steady decline in County population from 8,547 in the 2000 Census to a projected figure of 8,259 in 2007. County and local agency officials question whether these estimates and projections over-estimate the rate of population decline, and an analysis of the change in the numbers of motor vehicles registered in the County suggest that area population may have actually increased in recent years. Figure 6 presents a comparison of the percent changes in County population and motor vehicle registration. The ADOT Motor Vehicle Division records show that motor vehicle registration in the County declined from 10,436 vehicles in 2000 to a low of 9,747 vehicles in 2003 and has been increasing since then. ADOT MVD reports that 11,727 vehicles are registered in the County in Fiscal 2007, even more than were registered in 2000.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 36



FIGURE 6. PERCENT CHANGES IN GREENLEE COUNTY POPULATION COMPARED TO PERCENT CHANGES IN VEHICLE REGISTRATION



*DES Population Estimates for Years 2001 through 2005, DES Projections for 2006 and 2007 Sources: Arizona Department of Economic Security; Arizona Department of Transportation, Motor Vehicle Division



CURRENT TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS Roadways Figure 1, presented earlier, illustrates the 90.75 miles of regionally significant roads that have been identified for this study. Table 21 summarizes characteristics of the regionally significant roads. The existing Greenlee County roadway system consists of a network of state highways, county roads, and local roads connecting communities and providing access to land uses throughout the region. State highways serving the study area include US 70, US 191, SR 78, and SR 75. US 70 cuts through the southern tip of the county, connecting west to Safford, and east into New Mexico. US 191 and SR 78 travel generally northeast through the County providing a northern route to Safford. US 191 continues from Morenci into the Apache National Forest and ultimately to the community of Alpine and Apache County. SR 75 serves as the main north/south corridor between the Clifton and the Duncan areas.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 37



TABLE 21. SUMMARY OF CHARACTERISTICS OF REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT ROADS

Road Frisco Avenue San Francisco River Road Chase Creek Street East Bridge Street Park Avenue Burro Alley Coronado Drive Fairbanks Road Ball Park Drive Indian Road Mountain Avenue Mountain View Reservation Road Plantsite Rec. Road Riverside Drive Shannon Road 2nd Street Leonard Street Turner Avenue Table Top Mesa Road Wards Canyon Road Black Hills Back Country Byway Bobcat Drive Hackberry Drive Rattlesnake Road Skyline View Road From US 191 Frisco Avenue US 191 Frisco Avenue East Bridge Street US 191 Burro Alley Burro Alley Fairbanks Road Ball Park Drive US 191 Mountain Avenue Mountain View Reservation Road US 191 Riverside Drive US 191 2nd Street Leonard Street US 191 Table Top Mesa Road US 191 Wards Canyon Road Bobcat Drive Wards Canyon Road US 191 To Clifton Limits End US 191 Park Avenue US 191 Aristata Drive Fairbanks Road Coronado Drive Indian Road Reservation Road Mountain View Reservation Road Plantsite Rec. Road San Francisco River Shannon Road Inca Drive Leonard Street Turner Avenue 7th Street Wards Canyon Road SR 78 Hot Springs Road Hackberry Drive Wards Canyon Road Forest Service Bndy Wards Canyon Road Length (Miles) 1.33 7.01 0.83 0.06 0.65 0.59 0.94 0.95 0.4 0.29 0.33 0.28 0.5 2.56 0.24 0.19 0.09 0.16 0.16 3.34 6.2 2.07 1.08 0.67 5.5 2.46 Jurisdiction Clifton Unincorporated Clifton Clifton Clifton Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Clifton Clifton Clifton Clifton Clifton Clifton/Unincorp Clifton Clifton Clifton Clifton Clifton Clifton Clifton/Unincorp Clifton/Unincorp Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Clifton/Unincorp Lanes 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Miles Surface Type Paved Unpaved 1.33 0 0 7.01 0.83 0 0.06 0 0.65 0 0.59 0 0.94 0 0.95 0 0.4 0 0.29 0 0.33 0 0.28 0 0.5 0 1.52 1.04 0.24 0 0.19 0 0.09 0 0.16 0 0.16 0 0 3.34 0.43 5.77 1.19 0.88 1.08 0.67 0 2.46 0 0 5.5 0



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 38



TABLE 21. SUMMARY OF CHARACTERISTICS OF REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT ROADS (Continued)

Miles Surface Type Road Guthrie Road Guthrie Road Greenlee Substation Road County Airport Road Carrell Loop Cosper Loop Apache Grove Road Bittercreek Road Goatcamp Loop Sheldon Loop Burma Road Stevens Loop McCarty Trail Cherokee Drive Chaparral Road McGrath Avenue Cambell Street Ocotilla Avenue Carlisle Road Fairgrounds Road Virden Road Stadium Street High Avenue Skyline Drive 4th Street Airport Road Franklin Road From US 191 US 191 SR 78 SR 78 SR 75 SR 75 SR 75 SR 75 SR 75 SR 75 SR 75 SR 75 SR 75 McCarty Trail SR 75 Chaparral Road McGrath Avenue McGrath Avenue SR 75 SR 75 SR 75 US 70 Stadium Street High Avenue US 70 Skyline Drive US 70 To Wards Canyon Road Gila River End End SR 75 SR 75 Gila River End (State Line) End (State Line) SR 75 US 70 SR 75 Cherokee Drive Shoshone Lane McGrath Avenue Cambell Street Carlisle Road End End (State Line) SR 75 End (State Line) High Avenue US 70 4th Street Skyline Drive End End (State Line) Length (Miles) 2.14 2.14 1.32 0.31 0.59 1.48 0.41 9.58 9.45 1.63 8.68 2.8 0.29 0.24 0.59 0.37 0.51 0.26 3.81 1.19 3.75 0.15 0.6 0.93 0.5 2.56 1.92 Jurisdiction Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Duncan Duncan Duncan Duncan Duncan/Unincop Unincorporated Unincorporated Duncan Duncan Duncan Duncan Unincorporated Unincorporated Lanes 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Paved 0 0 0 0.31 0.59 1.48 0.41 9.58 9.45 1.63 8.68 2.8 0.29 0.24 0.59 0.37 0 0.26 0 1.19 3.75 0.15 0.6 0.93 0.5 0 1.92 Unpaved 2.14 2.14 1.32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.51 0 3.81 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.56 0



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 39



Figure 7 illustrates the number of lanes for state highways and county and local roads on the study area network. The majority of roads are two lanes except for portions of SR 75 where there are climbing lanes or four lanes. Approximately 40.75 miles of county and local roads on the study area network are paved and 55 miles are unpaved roads (see Figure 8). Other significant streets in the study area are located in the Towns of Duncan and Clifton and are generally paved roads. Structures The National Bridge Inventory includes 36 bridges and culverts in the study area within the County. Bridge sufficiency ratings for County and locally owned bridges and culverts are presented in Table 22. Six bridges have been identified to be replaced. Examples of bridges the County wishes to improve, for which Transportation Enhancement Funds have been applied through SEAGO, are shown in Figure 9. The condition categories for ranges of sufficiency ratings are shown in Table 23. Traffic Characteristics Average Daily Traffic for various county and local roads in the southern Greenlee County study area is presented in Table 24 for the years 2000, 2003, and 2006. Estimated 2006 ADT varies from about 50 vehicles per day on Sheldon Loop west of SR 75 to approximately 950 vehicles per day on Ward Canyon Road east of US 191. As shown in Table 25, the traffic mix on three county roads in the year 2000 varied from 21.0 percent trucks on Carroll Loop to 29.1 percent trucks on Wards Canyon Road. Figure 10 presents the 2006 ADT for roads in the study area. Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) for state highways in the study area is presented in Table 26. The estimated 2006 AADT on US 70 varies from 1,125 vehicles per day from SR 191 to 1,430 vehicles per day at the New Mexico line. The 2006 estimated AADT on US 75 varies from 1,340 to 2,550 vehicles per day between Virden Road and the US 191/SR 78 intersection. The SR 78 2006 AADT was approximately 265 vehicles per day. The SR 191 AADT was approximately 2,755 vehicles per day from US 70 to the SR 78/SR 75 intersection. From the SR 78/SR 75 intersection to UX 191, the SR 191 AADT varied from 6,120 to 6,935 vehicles per day.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 40



FIGURE 7. NUMBER OF LANES - SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 41



FIGURE 8. SURFACE TYPE - SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 42



TABLE 22. SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY BRIDGE SUFFICIENCY RATINGS � COUNTY AND LOCAL STRUCTURES

Structure Name

SPRR UP San Francisco River Bridge Chase Creek Bridge #1 Chase Creek Bridge #2 Chase Creek Bridge #3 Chase Creek Bridge Rosenbaum Bridge Abandoned RR OP Medium Wash Bridge Packer Wash Bridge SPRR Overpass Waters Wash Bridge Goat Camp Canyon Bridge Gila River Bridge Soap Box Canyon Bridge Pumroy Canyon Bridge RCB RCB Rocky John Cyn RCB Burleson Canyon RCB Willow Creek RCB



Road Name

SPRR UP Park Avenue Frisco Avenue Coomb Street Chase Creek Road City Parking Lot Patterson Road Old Safford Road Stevens Loop Road Fairgrounds Road Old Safford Road Stevens Loop Road Sheldon Loop Road Old Safford Road Wards Canyon Road Old Safford Road Virden Highway Virden Highway Cosper Loop Road Virden Highway Carrell Loop Road



Location

300 ft E of Jct US 191 100'W of US 191 0.1 mi N of Park Ave 50'S Jct US 191 200'S Jct US 191 adjacent to # 307 on 191 0.6 mi N US 191 2.71 mi W Jct US 191 0.7 mi W Jct SR 75 0.4 mi N Jct SR 75 1.05 mi W Jct US 191 0.5 mi S Jct SR 75 1.0 mi S Jct SR 75 3.97 mi W Jct US 191 3.39 mi E Jct US 191 6.4 mi W Jct US 191 1.14 mi E of SR 75 1.94 mi E of SR 75 1.0 mi S Jct SR 75 0.57 mi E of St Rt 75 0.5 mi S Jct SR 75



Year Built

1900 1917 1901 1900 1920 1915 1987 1917 1935 1935 1907 1935 1934 1918 1915 1921 1949 1948 1900 1948 1941



Year Reconstr

----------1925 ----------------1975 -------------



Agency

Clifton Clifton Clifton Clifton Clifton Clifton Clifton Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Unincorporated Greenlee Co Greenlee Co Greenlee Co Greenlee Co Greenlee Co



Sufficiency Rating

-1.00 24.55 38.37 56.21 56.41 79.48 92.26 39.84 42.13 42.21 55.76 60.31 61.33 67.26 68.92 70.43 87.96 82.71 95.91 96.50 100.00



Condition

Replacement Replacement Replacement Rehabilitation Rehabilitation Rehabilitation Good Replacement Replacement Replacement Rehabilitation Rehabilitation Rehabilitation Rehabilitation Rehabilitation Rehabilitation Good Good Good Good Good



Source: 2003 Greenlee County Comprehensive Plan, 2003 Rehabilitation � indicated bridge needs some type of treatment such as paving deck Replacement � indicates that bridge may need to be replaced.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 43



FIGURE 9. EXAMPLE BRIDGE TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROJECT CANDIDATES



Structure 8150 shown here is an active railroad overpass on the Old Safford Highway. It and a companion Structure 8151, which spans an abandoned railroad right-of-way, are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The Southeastern Arizona Governments Organization has submitted an application for Transportation Enhancement funds to rehabilitate both bridges. --Lima & Associates photo



Pictured is one of four wood bridges on County roadways proposed to be rehabilitated by means of a Transportation Enhancement grant that has been applied for through SEAGO. Two of the bridges are on Stevens Loop, one is on Sheldon Loop, and one is located on Fairgrounds Road in Duncan. --Lima & Associates photo



As the second phase of the York Valley Pedestrian Walkway project, a 150-foot pedestrian bridge will be built on the near side of this SR 75 highway bridge over Cottonwood Creek. A future phase III will continue the Walkway south from the south end of the bridge. --Lima & Associates photo



Source: Greenlee County Public Works, Southeastern Arizona Governments Organization



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 44



TABLE 23. BRIDGE SUFFICIENCY RATING METRICS

Bridge Sufficiency Rating (BSR) > 80 50 - 80 < 50 Category Good Condition Eligible for rehabilitation Eligible for replacement



Source: ADOT 1999 Status Condition and Report of the Arizona Highway System Rehabilitation � indicated bridge needs some type of treatment such as paving deck Replacement � indicates that bridge may need to be replaced.



TABLE 24. DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES � COUNTY AND LOCAL ROADS SOUTHERN GREEENLEE COUNTY STUDY AREA

Location 7th St. North of US 191 Carroll Loop 0.2 mi. South of Hwy 75 Chase Creek St. West of US 191 Fairgrounds Rd. 0.5 mi. North of Hwy 75 Franklin Rd. Btwn. McGrath & Model Old Virden Rd. Btwn. Hwy. 75 & Clesa R Park Ave. 0.1 mi. North of Coronado Blvd. Riverside Rd. South of US 191 Rocky John Loop 0.1 mi. West of Hwy 75 Sheldon Loop 0.1 mi. North of Sheldon Swinging Skyline View 0.2 mi. North of Hwy 191 Stephens Loop 0.1 mi. West of Hwy 75 Virden Rd. S/O Btwn. Clesa & Luntville Wards Canyon Rd. East of Hwy. 191 2000 NA 139 NA 115 150 60 318 NA 76 27 441 45 677 510 2003 345 42 290 198 277 92 323 323 94 77 729 17 303 794 2006 380 100 330 250 355 110 325 365 100 125 890 50 500 950



Source: 2000 traffic counts: 2000 ADOT Special Counts for Air Quality & Rural HPMS Programs, March 2000 2003 traffic counts: TRA, 2003 2006 Estimated Traffic Volumes, Lima & Associates



TABLE 25. AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC BY VEHICLE TYPE SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY STUDY AREA

Road Wards Canyon Rd, East of SR 191 Carroll Loop, South of SR 75 Old Virden Rd, Between SR 75 & Clesa Cars & Trailers 70.6% 78.7% 73.3% 2-Axle 28.0% 18.7% 25.0% Trucks Multi-Axle 1.1% 2.3% 1.6% Total 29.1% 21.0% 26.6%



Source: 2000 traffic counts: 2000 ADOT Special Counts for Air Quality & Rural HPMS Programs, March 2000



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 45



FIGURE 10. 2006 ADT FOR ROADS IN THE STUDY AREA



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 46



TABLE 26. AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES ARIZONA STATE HIGHWAYS IN SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY

Route US 70 US 70 US 70 US 70 SR 75 SR 75 SR 78 US 191 US 191 BMP 349.48 378.48 378.91 379.79 379.46 391.85 154.55 130.64 154.52 US-191 (North) Wilson St SR-75 (Duncan) 7th St Virden Rd Apache Grove Rd US-191/SR-75 (South of Clifton) US-70 (E of Safford) SR-78/SR-75 (Guthrie) Start EMP 378.48 378.91 379.79 385.25 391.85 398.43 174.73 154.52 163.07 163.95 Wilson St SR-75 (Duncan) 7th St New Mexico State Line Apache Grove Rd US-191 / SR-78 New Mexico State Line SR-78/SR-75 (Guthrie) 7th St UX-191 End Length 29.00 0.43 0.90 5.42 12.36 6.49 19.46 23.77 8.45 0.99 2002 1,100 1,300 2,200 1,500 1,400 2,100 390 2,600 4,300 5,400 2003 1,100 1,200 1,500 1,400 1,200 2,,200 250 2700 4,400 5,600 2004 1,100 1,300 1,600 1,400 1300 2500 260 2700 6000 6800 2006 1,125 1,325 1,630 1,430 1,340 2,550 265 2,755 6,120 6,935



US 191 163.07 7th St Source: ADOT Data Team � 2002 -2004 counted volume Lima & Associates � estimated 2006 volumes



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 47



Crash Analysis From May 2001 through April 2006, 300 traffic crashes occurred in Southern Greenlee County, according to the Accident Location Identification Surveillance System (ALISS) Database. Table 27 presents a summary of the crashes. Figure 11 depicts the crash locations and Figure 12 shows the fatal crashes. Depending upon the speed involved, roadway geometrics at the crash location, road and weather conditions, driver reaction, and other issues, a traffic crash may involve one or more phases. For example, two cars may first collide; subsequently one or both may overturn, strike a third vehicle, or strike a fixed object. The First Harmful Definition is the first action that causes damage to a motor vehicle, its occupants, a pedestrian, or a fixed object. Of the crashes reported during the time period, 100, or one-third of the total, began as a collision of a motor vehicle with a fixed object. The second most frequent "first harmful definition" was a collision with another motor vehicle, of which 80 crashes, or 26.67 percent of the total, were recorded. Most crashes on Greenlee County roads did not take place at intersections. However, 15.33 percent of the crashes were intersection related and another 4.33 percent were driveway access related. Over one-fourth of the motorists involved in crashes were cited for "Speed Too Fast for Conditions" and another 13 percent were cited for "Inattention." Over one-fourth were not cited. In summary, 60 percent of the crashes were caused by either collision with a fixed object or with another motor vehicle 72 percent of the crashes were of the single vehicle type. "Speed Too Fast for Conditions" was the most common violation listed. Most of the crashes (225), and the five fatal crashes took place on State or US Highways. Three of the fatal crashes involved a collision with another motor vehicle and two involved a collision with a fixed object. Of the 300 crashes reported during the period, 54 occurred on SR 75, 28 on SR 78, 26 on US 70, and 117 on US 191. Other Study Area roadways experiencing multiple crashes include Burro Alley, Skyline View Road, and Ward Canyon Road in Clifton, each of which had five crashes. Cholla Road experienced four, as did Skyline Drive in Duncan. Duncan's Main Street had three crashes. Several of the roadways experiencing multiple crashes, such as Burro Alley and Coronado Drive, are private local roadways.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS � Page 48



TABLE 27. SUMMARY OF TRAFFIC CRASHES IN STUDY AREA

Relationship of Crash to Intersection Occurred at Intersection Non-Intersection Related Driveway Access Related Total Injury Severity Non-injury Accident Non-incapacitating Injury Accident Unknown Incapacitating Injury Accident Possible Injury Accident Fatal Accidents Total No. of Crashes 46 241 13 300 No. of Crashes 206 48 2 21 18 5 300 Percentage 15.33% 80.33% 4.33% 100.00% Percentage 68.67% 16.00% 0.67% 7.00% 6.00% 1.67% 100.00% Predominant Violation No Improper Driving Speed Too Fast for Conditions Inattention Other Unknown Failed to Yield Right-Of-Way Drove in Opposing Traffic Lane Exceeded Lawful Speed Made Improper Turn Other Unsafe Passing Followed Too Closely Knowingly Operated with Faulty or Missing Equipment Unsafe Lane Change Ran Stop Sign Total No. of Crashes 77 76 39 26 24 20 10 10 7 4 2 2 2 1 300 Percentage 25.67% 25.33% 13.00% 8.67% 8.00% 6.67% 3.33% 3.33% 2.33% 1.33% 0.67% 0.67% 0.67% 0.33% 100.00%



Type of Crash Single Vehicle Angle Backing Head-On Left Turn Non-Contact (mc) Other Rear-End Sideswipe (Opposite Direction) Sideswipe (Same Direction) U-Turn Total



No. of Crashes 216 17 9 5 2 3 9 15 4 17 3 300



Percentage 72.00% 5.67% 3.00% 1.67% 0.67% 1.00% 3.00% 5.00% 1.33% 5.67% 1.00% 100.00%



First Harmful Definition Overturning Collision with other Motor Vehicle Collision with Pedestrian Collision with Pedalcyclist Collision with Animal or Livestock Collision with Fixed Object Miscellaneous Total



No. of Crashes 40 80 1 2 42 100 35 300



Percentage 13.33% 26.67% 0.33% 0.67% 14.00% 33.33% 11.67% 100.00%



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS � Page 49



FIGURE 11. SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY CRASH LOCATIONS



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 50



FIGURE 12. SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY FATAL CRASHES



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 51



Access Roads and Trails In addition to the county roads, various roads and trails provide access to utilities, ranches, mines, natural resources, and residential properties. Many of these facilities are used for recreation; however, the facilities are privately owned. Although many access roads and trails are privately owned, there may be opportunities for public use. Several abandoned railroad right-of-ways (ROW) in the County may be opportunities for recreational purposes. Non-Motorized Travel Greenlee County has not developed specific facilities for pedestrian, equestrian, or bicycle travel. A number of private trails and abandoned rail lines exist that could become part of a County multiuse path or trail system. The Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest contains a number of trails. Outside the Forest, pedestrians and bicyclists simply use the edges of the roadways. A trail system should be connected to the Forest System and trail maps should be prepared. Multiuse Pathways A multiuse pathway is being designed in the York Valley area on the east side of SR 75 and extends from Sexton's County Store to Cottonwood Creek. Figure 13 depicts a portion of the area where this pathway would be located. The County would like to improve the pathway and extend it south of Cottonwood Wash by means of adding a pedestrian walkway to the east side of the SR 75 Cottonwood Creek Bridge. The bridge was previously depicted in Figure 9. FIGURE 13. YORK VALLEY PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY SITE



Lima & Associates Photo



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 52



The Sandra Day O'Connor Walkway is a Transportation Enhancement Project in the Town of Duncan of approximately 1,600 feet in length on the southeast side of US 70. The Walkway will begin near the Duncan Town Limits and continue east to Wilson Street. The 5foot concrete walkway will be paralleled by a 4-foot strip for landscaping, and will include benches and drinking fountains. Total funding for the Walkway project is $217,600. scheduled for the fourth week of January 2008. Final assessment of the project is



A Clifton Enhancement Project will consist of a 1,898 foot pedestrian sidewalk on the north (east) side of US 191 (North Coronado Boulevard) in the Clifton area. The ADA-compliant sidewalk will extend from the end of the existing sidewalk at the Baldarama Hair Salon and connect to the sidewalk at the Copper Crystal Park. The project will include a new prefabricated concrete pedestrian bridge over Chase Creek, as well as provision for bicycles and landscaping. Total cost of the project is $277,895. TRANSPORTATION ISSUES The following is a discussion of issues that have been identified through a review of the 2003 Greenlee County Comprehensive Plan and other documents and conversations with stakeholders. Traffic and Access Issues � Southern Greenlee County roads lack continuity and connectivity with a limited county network. Currently, the County roads are a system of finger or tributary roads tied to the State Highway System. Travel in Greenlee County is reliant on the State Highway System with regional travel conflicting at times with local access needs. Emergency access is a critical issue in this large, spread out region, both in terms of limited alternative routes and inclement conditions. Access to private development, provided by a number of secondary roadways within the study area, must be balanced with environmental and cost issues. The improvement of roads and rights-of-way for access and safety reasons must be weighed against increases in traffic and potential impacts. Need to support access to the Morenci mine and mining activities on both local and state roadways. Improve access to the Clifton Morenci Airport (CFT) and access to the future redeveloped O'Connor Field in Duncan. Railroad crossings cause vehicular delays daily.



� � � � � � �



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 53



Planning and Coordination Issues � Greenlee County must develop partnerships to coordinate transportation improvements among ADOT, State Lands, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), FreeportMcMoRan, and other private land owners. This would establish a foundation for good management of the transportation system. Partnering would include identifying land ownership, defining right-of-way ownership, surveying where needed, and inventorying. As with any jurisdiction there is a deficiency in roadway construction and maintenance funding. Road maintenance, including maintenance of private roads, is an important element in providing good travel conditions. Coordination is important to target maintenance funds where they are most needed. Uniform roadway standards among the County and the Towns are needed.



� � � �



Trails Issues � � � � Funding options must be identified for trails and other pedestrian, equestrian, and recreational facilities. Policies need to be developed regarding designating trails for all-terrain vehicle use. Trail system needs to accommodate different types of users (e.g. equestrian, offhighway vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian). Policies need to be adopted for avoiding or resolving conflicts between different types of trail use.



Dial-a-Ride Issues � � � Plans for implementing increased dial-a-ride service as warranted need to be developed. Marketing strategies for dial-a-ride service need to be developed. Additional park-and-ride lot sites need to be identified.



Environmental Issues � � � � � Environmental goals need to be defined for the transportation plan. Wildfire danger and road closures can impact travel in Greenlee County due to the limited number of overall routes available. All weather property accessibility is important for emergency access, but requires roads with larger footprints that impact surrounding environment. Access to development in rural and remote locations may conflict with environmental goals. A larger foot print by improved or new roads may impact the environment. Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 54



Lima & Associates



Funding Issues � � The County needs a method to identify and prioritize projects in order to seek funding. The County, Town of Clifton, and Town of Duncan need to seek opportunities, adopt plans, and aggressively pursue alternative funding sources.



Economic Issues � � � Improvement in mobility could improve economic development. Transit service is needed to improve mobility. Excursion train from Duncan to Clifton might spur tourism.



Constraints Environmental issues, including environmental sensitivity, topography, and cultural resources, must be addressed when developing the transportation plan and improvement program. Funding is a significant constraint. This study will define funding strategies and identify funding sources in order for the County to aggressively pursue revenue. In addition, transportation improvements must be prioritized in order to maximize benefits from individual projects within the limited revenue sources.



Recommendations of 2003 Greenlee County Comprehensive Plan The 2003 Greenlee County Comprehensive Plan process identified various transportation issues to be addressed and developed the following recommendations in regard to the county's transportation system. State Highways � � � � � � Bring all roads up to current standards. Continue an aggressive maintenance program with a particular emphasis on ride quality. Continue marketing efforts for U.S. 70, the "Old West Highway." Move U.S. 191 away from the Morenci Mine. Extend AZ 75 to I-10. Construct bypasses to avoid the San Francisco River and Gila River floodplains.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 55



County Roads � � � � � Develop a road right-of-way inventory. Prove ownership of significant right-of-ways. Consider abandoning those roads that we do not or cannot maintain. Encourage property owners to develop access ways to property and to petition the County for inclusion of access ways into the County's Road System. Continue maintenance on those roads already being maintained.



Other Access Ways � � � Develop an inventory of access ways. Work to make these ways part of road or trail systems. Encourage responsible use of roads.



Railroads � � � Provide track roadway grade separations for train crossings, particularly in Clifton. Continue to support the primary use of the railroad for freight. Consider a scenic railroad use.



Transit � � � Maintain bus service. Continue transportation for the elderly. Encourage private transit, including taxi service for residents.



Bicycle and Pathways � � � � Develop opportunities to increase bicycling, both on highways and on trails, within the county. Connect trails and other routes. Coordinate efforts with the Department of Transportation to make state highways "friendly" for cyclists. Develop trails, or pedestrian paths, along State Highways and "developed" ways.



Airports � Encourage regularly scheduled airline service.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 56



FUTURE SOCIOECONOMIC AND TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS Future Population Table 28 shows the DES population projections for Greenlee County. The County is projected to lose population through 2020 and then begin to slightly regain population. However, members of the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) dispute the DES projected numbers and believe that there has been steady growth in southern Greenlee County and that this growth will continue. TABLE 28. POPULATION ESTIMATES - GREENLEE COUNTY Year 2005 2006 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Population % Change 8,300 8,281 -0.23% 8,209 -0.87% 8,188 -0.26% 8,189 0.01% 8,205 0.20% 8,289 1.02%



Source: DES March 31, 2006



Future Traffic Volumes Table 29 presents the daily traffic volumes for county and local roads for the years 2011, 2016, and 2026 based on locations where previous traffic counts were taken. Table 30 gives future daily traffic volumes on state highways within the study area. Figure 14 presents the 2026 future traffic volumes for the roads in the study area. Future roadway needs As part of the Year 2004 Roadway Needs Study Update conducted by the Arizona Association of County Engineers, Greenlee County identified county road deficiencies. The 2005 to 2010 county roadway deficiencies are shown in Table 31. A total of $4,569,517 is needed for rightof-way acquisition, minor widening, and reconstruction for this five-year period.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 57



TABLE 29. ESTIMATED FUTURE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES COUNTY AND LOCAL ROADS IN STUDY AREA Location

Carroll Loop 0.2 mi. South of Highway 75 Fairgrounds Rd. 0.5 mi. North of Highway. 75 Franklin Road Btwn. McGrath & Model Old Virden Road Btwn. Highway 75 & Clesa R Park Ave. 0.1 mi. North of Coronado Blvd. Rocky John Loop 0.1 mi. West of Highway 75 Sheldon Loop 0.1 mi. North of Sheldon Swinging Skyline View 0.2 mi. North of Highway 191 Stephens Loop 0.1 mi. West of Highway 75 Virden Road S/O Btwn. Clesa & Luntville Wards Canyon Road East of Highway 191 7th Street North of US 191 Chase Creek Street West of US 191 Riverside Road South of US 191

Source: Lima & Associates



2011

110 270 391 119 357 112 137 976 55 272 1,036 420 363 401



2016

120 295 426 130 390 122 149 1,065 60 297 1,130 458 396 438



2026

140 344 497 152 455 142 174 1,243 70 346 1,318 535 462 511



TABLE 30. ESTIMATED FUTURE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES ARIZONA STATE HIGHWAYS IN STUDY AREA

Route US 70 US 70 US 70 US 70 SR 75 SR 75 SR 78 US 191 US 191 Bmp 349.48 378.48 378.91 379.79 379.46 391.85 154.55 130.64 154.52 Start US-191 (North) Wilson St SR-75 (Duncan) 7th St Virden Rd Apache Grove Rd US-191/SR-75 (South of Clifton) US-70 (E of Safford) SR-78/SR-75 (Guthrie) Emp 378.48 378.91 379.79 385.25 391.85 398.43 174.73 154.52 163.07 163.95 End Wilson St SR-75 (Duncan) 7th St New Mexico State Line Apache Grove Rd US-191 / SR-78 New Mexico State Line SR-78/SR-75 (Guthrie) 7th St UX-191 2011 1,234 1,459 1,795 1,571 1,459 2,805 292 3,029 6,732 7,630 2016 1,346 1,591 1,958 1,714 1,591 3,060 318 3,305 7,344 8,323 2026 1,571 1,856 2,285 1,999 1,856 3,570 371 3,856 8,568 9,710



US 191 163.07 7th St Source: Lima & Associates



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 58



FIGURE 14. 2026 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 59



TABLE 31. ANALYSIS OF ROADWAY DEFICINCIES 2005-2010 SOUTHERN GREENLEE COUNTY

Improvement Type: 1 Right-of-Way Acquisition On Street From To Reference County Club Road SR 75 - 394.3 E End Pvmt Franklin Road U.S. 70 - 382.1 E N.M. State Line Improvement Type: 2 Minor Widening On Street From Apache Grove Road SR 75 - 391.8 W Billingsly Loop SR 75 - 379.4 E Billingsly Loop SR 75 - 379.4 E Carlisle Road SR 75 - 380.1 E Carlisle Road SR 75 - 380.1 E Clesa Drive 67002 S Dairy Street 67002S Hails Road SR 75 - 385.0 W Lower Eagle Road U.S. 191 - 171.6 W Luntville Road 67002 S Old Virden Road SR 75 - 379.3 E Upper Eagle Road U.S. 191 - 187.2 W Wilbur Lunt Road 67002 S Length 0.70 2.00 Improvement Length 0.30 1.40 1.40 3.80 3.80 1.40 0.70 1.00 5.90 0.40 0.90 22.80 0.80 Improvement Total Cost $4,327 $74,170 $78,496 Total Cost $12,544 $49,884 $62,354 $169,248 $135,398 $85,175 $50,901 $49,172 $395,229 $29,086 $54,755 $1,421,682 $58,173 $2,573,600 Comment Fails Right-of-Way Width Fails Right-of-Way Width



To Reference End 67027 S 67027 S N.M. State Line N.M. State Line 67002 - S 67006 End End Eagle Creek 67007 End 67008 End - Honeymoon 67002 S



Comment Fails Roadway Width, Right-of-Way Width Fails Roadway Width Fails Roadway Width Fails Roadway Width Fails Roadway Width Fails Roadway Width, Right-of-Way Width Fails Roadway Width, Right-of-Way Width Fails Roadway Width, Right-of-Way Width Fails Roadway Width, Right-of-Way Width Fails Roadway Width, Right-of-Way Width Fails Roadway Width, Right-of-Way Width Fails Roadway Width Fails Roadway Width, Right-of-Way Width



Improvement Type: 3 Reconstruct to the Correct Surface Type On Street From To Reference Calle Alta Vista 67099A 67099A (E) Plantsite Rec. Road Reservation Morenci Railroad Tracks Skyline View Road U.S. 191 - 157.2(E) 67003 Skyline View Road 67003 67099A Wards Canyon Road U.S. 191 MP 162.8 - E Skyline View Road



Length Total Cost 0.30 $89,150 1.30 $693,419 2.40 $783,172 0.30 $87,296 0.50 $264,383 Improvement $1,917,421 County $4,569,517 Source: Year 2004 Roadway Needs Study Update. Arizona Association of County Engineers



Comment Fails Surface Type, Right-of-Way Width Fails Surface Type, Roadway Width, Right-of-Way Width Fails Surface Type, Roadway Width Fails Surface Type, Roadway Width Fails Surface Type, Roadway Width



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS - Page 60



4. MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN

EVALUATION OF DEFICIENCIES AND NEEDS County Roadways During the conduct of the Small Area Transportation Study, the consultant team made the following observations regarding existing deficiencies and needs in the County transportation system: � � With the exception of urban areas and State Highway segments, no significant traffic congestion or level of service issues exist on roadways within the County in 2006. The mobility of Southern Greenlee County residents is dependent upon the maintenance and improvement of the US and State Highways that traverse the County and function as "spines" that tie the County roadway network together. In many areas of the County, alternative routes are inconvenient or non-existent. This could cause problems when the main route is closed due to a traffic crash or natural causes such as high water, floods, or wildfires. Specific areas of concern are: Congestion on US 191 within the Town of Clifton during peak Morenci Mine employee shift-change periods Lack of alternate routes for use in case of traffic congestion, floods, or wildfires, particularly within the Town of Clifton and along the SR 75 corridor between Clifton and Duncan The County Public Works Department is well-informed regarding the deficiencies and needs of the roadway system and programs maintenance, improvement, or reconstruction projects as funding permits. All of the subgroups living within the County will benefit from the roadway projects already programmed by the County, as well as additional projects proposed in this Report. Continued levels of mobility for County residents and visitors are almost entirely dependent on private automobile travel, the maintenance of good roads, and the availability of affordable gasoline.



�



�



�



�



Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Equestrian The scenic beauty and comparatively mild climate of Southern Greenlee County are very conducive to outdoor activities including bicycling, hiking, and horseback riding. The Apache Sitgreaves National Forest, which begins in the northern part of the study area and extends northward, has a number of hiking and equestrian trails, several of which are located in the study area.



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS � Page 61



A number of recreation areas and activity centers are identified in the non-Forest parts of the study area, including locations on private lands and State Trust lands. The eastern portion of the Gila Box Riparian Area is located in the study area, and the Black Hills Back County Byway bisects the southwestern portion of the study area. Other than the Back Country Byway, few trails are specifically identified within the study area for bicycle, pedestrian, or equestrian use. For purposes of both safety and recreation, trails need to be provided outside the National Forest. Multiuse Pathways Multiuse Pathways are needed in urban and suburban areas. The York Valley Walkway needs to be completed and ultimately extended to three miles in length as originally planned. The Sandra Day O'Connor Walkway needs to be completed in the Duncan area. As population and development increase, portions of the rural trail system may need to be brought up to multiuse pathway standards and additional alignments for both pathways and trails identified. Preservation of connectivity among the trails and accessibility to the trails from the urban areas is important. Aviation The identification of aviation needs and services, per se, is beyond the scope of this project. However, the roadway access to the Greenlee County Airport is adequate for the current low volume of activity at the airport. Airport activity could increase dramatically due to the introduction of commercial air service or the establishment of some other traffic-generating activity on the airport property such as the proposed satellite prison operation or aviation training. The increased traffic may necessitate improvements to the airport access road itself, the entrance to the airport from SR 78, or possibly the nearby SR 75, SR 78, US 191 intersection at Three Way. Proposed airside improvements to the O'Connor Field facility in Duncan would need to be accompanied by improvements to the roadways serving the airfield. Public Transportation � � � Intercity transit services provided by Greyhound Lines along the US 70 corridor through Duncan have ceased. No alternative transportation is provided. No scheduled public transportation exists between Duncan, the County's second largest concentration of population, and Clifton, the County seat. The County, together with Graham County, the City of Safford, the Towns of Clifton and Duncan, ADOT, the Southeast Arizona Association of Governments (SEAGO), and the Southeast Arizona Community Action Program (SEACAP), needs to



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS � Page 62



implement "Arizona Rides" concepts for ensuring the efficient use of special needs transportation vehicles and operating personnel among the agencies and organizations responsible for seeing to the needs of the clients of these services. Excursion Rail The consultant believes that the potential may exist to develop an excursion passenger train operation on the rail line between Clifton and Duncan. The route is scenic, and the beautifully-restored Clifton Depot is a potential asset to such an operation. Special needs transportation and future excursion rail services are discussed in more detail in Chapter 5. CANDIDATE TRANSPORTATION PROJECT CRITERIA Candidate projects were identified by considering the need and the feasibility of implementation. The following criteria were evaluated: Need � � � Potential to address travel demand Potential to serve residents Potential to provide connectivity and/or improve mobility between places and major roads Feasibility � � � Environmental and physical impacts Topographical constraints Constructability



ROADWAY PROJECTS The consultant reviewed key characteristics of the existing roadway system including the surface type of the roadway, the number of lanes, and the AADT. Study area roadway projects that were identified by previous studies or have already been programmed were also evaluated. These programmed roadway projects are depicted in Figure 15. The sufficiency ratings of County and local bridge structures in the study area were also reviewed. Functional Classification and Level of Service Roadway Level of Service is a measurement of how well a roadway operates. An LOS of "A" indicates a free flow condition and an LOS of "F" indicates forced traffic flow or breakdown. No capacity problems exist on County-maintained roadways. The only capacity concerns within the study area exist on US 191. As Figures 16A and 16B show, US 191 has two areas with an LOS of "C"--one within the Town of Clifton and one just north of the



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS � Page 63



FIGURE 15. PROGRAMMED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS � Page 64



FIGURE 16A. 2006 ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS � Page 65



FIGURE 16B. 2006 ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE DETAILS OF CLIFTON AND DUNCAN AREAS



Lima & Associates



Southern Greenlee County SATS � Page 66



Three Way junction. The remainder of US 191 between the Three Way area and Clifton operates at LOS "B." All other roadways within the study area are at LOS "A." With the exception of the segment of US 191 beginning at Three Way and extending through Clifton, no future capacity issues are anticipated on roads in the study area. Improvements to Existing Roadways The consultant reviewed the existing roadway alignments in the study area and identified key future roadway corridors for construction or improvement as warranted by future population growth and development. First, activity centers that serve as attracto