Final report Graham County alternate route study

              DECEMBER, 2010
Arizona Department
of Transportation
Multimodal Planning Division
Prepared For
Parsons Brinckerhoff
Americas, Inc.
Prepared By
TASK ASSIGNMENT TPD O9-O8
ALTERNATE ROUTE STUDY
GRAHAM COUNTY
F I N A L R E P O R T
Final Report
December 2010
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
0 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................... 1
0.1 Current and Future Conditions ......................................................................................... 2
0.2 Determination of Need and Feasibility ............................................................................. 2
0.3 Preferred Corridor ............................................................................................................ 4
1 Current and Future Conditions ................................................................................................................ 6
1.1 Introduction...................................................................................................................... 6
1.1.1 Description of Study .................................................................................... 6
1.1.2 Study Objectives ......................................................................................... 6
1.1.3 Study Area .................................................................................................. 7
1.2 Studies and Source Data ................................................................................................. 9
1.2.1 Completed Studies ...................................................................................... 9
1.2.2 Ongoing Studies ......................................................................................... 9
1.2.3 Future Studies ............................................................................................. 9
1.3 Existing Conditions......................................................................................................... 10
1.3.1 Land Use ................................................................................................... 10
1.3.2 Socioeconomic Data ................................................................................. 11
1.3.3 Existing Street System .............................................................................. 18
1.3.4 Other Modes of Transportation ................................................................. 26
1.3.5 Traffic Accidents ....................................................................................... 27
1.3.6 Existing Traffic and Operating Conditions ................................................ 31
1.4 Future Conditions ........................................................................................................... 42
1.4.1 Growth Forecasts ...................................................................................... 42
Final Report
December 2010
ii
1.4.2 Travel Forecasting Model ......................................................................... 50
1.4.3 Travel Forecasts ....................................................................................... 57
1.4.4 Operating Conditions ................................................................................ 58
2 Determination of Need and Feasibility .................................................................................................. 68
2.1 Determination of Need for a New Alternate Route Corridor .......................................... 68
2.1.1 Need Criteria ............................................................................................. 68
2.2 Identify Potential Corridor Alternatives........................................................................... 70
2.2.1 Description of Resistance Model .............................................................. 70
2.2.2 Criteria For Resistance Model .................................................................. 73
2.2.3 Evaluation of Resistance Model ............................................................... 82
2.2.4 Proposed Corridor Alternatives ................................................................. 88
2.3 Evaluate Proposed Corridor Alternatives ....................................................................... 89
2.3.1 Evaluation Criteria ..................................................................................... 89
2.3.2 Alternative Evaluation ............................................................................... 90
2.3.3 Alternative Evaluation Matrix .................................................................. 114
2.3.4 Fatal Flaw Analysis ................................................................................. 118
2.4 Environmental Overview .............................................................................................. 118
2.4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................. 118
2.4.2 Physical and Natural Environment Topography/physiology ................... 118
3 Preferred Corridor ............................................................................................................................... 129
3.1 Identification of Preferred Alternative ........................................................................... 129
3.1.1 Selection of preferred Corridor Alternative ............................................. 129
3.1.2 Characteristics of Preferred Corridor ...................................................... 130
Final Report
December 2010
iii
3.1.3 Options Available Within the Preferred Corridor ..................................... 132
3.2 Preferred Corridor Analysis Findings ........................................................................... 136
3.2.1 Cost Table ............................................................................................... 136
3.2.2 Findings and Conclusions ....................................................................... 138
3.2.3 Project Phasing and Funding .................................................................. 138
3.2.4 Public Input ............................................................................................. 139
4 Appendix ............................................................................................................................................ 141
4.1 Appendix 1A: Existing Population ................................................................................ 142
4.2 Appendix 1B: Existing Employment ............................................................................. 144
4.3 Appendix 1C: Area Bicycle and Multiuse Plans ........................................................... 145
4.4 Appendix 2A: Previously Identified Study Corridors .................................................... 148
4.5 Appendix 3: Public Involvement summary reports ....................................................... 151
4.5.1 November 2008 Meeting 1 ...................................................................... 151
4.5.2 April 2009 Meeting 2 ............................................................................... 158
4.5.3 June 2009 Stakeholder Interviews .......................................................... 164
Final Report
December 2010
iv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1: Study Area .......................................................................................................................... 8
Figure 1-2: Study Area Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ) ......................................................................... 13
Figure 1-3: Study Area 2008 Population Density by TAZ ................................................................... 14
Figure 1-4: Study Area 2008 Employment by TAZ ............................................................................. 16
Figure 1-5: Study Area Roadway Functional Classification Map ........................................................ 21
Figure 1-6: Safford/Thatcher Area Functional Classification Map ...................................................... 22
Figure 1-7: Study Area Roadways Existing Number of Through Lanes ............................................. 24
Figure 1-8: Safford/Thatcher Area Roadway Existing Number of Through Lanes ............................. 25
Figure 1-9: Study Area Roadway Traffic Crashes 2006 ..................................................................... 28
Figure 1-10: Safford/Thatcher Area Roadway Traffic Crashes 2006 .................................................. 29
Figure 1-11: Crash Severity in Graham County .................................................................................. 30
Figure 1-12: Study Area Roadway Speed Limits ................................................................................ 32
Figure 1-13: Safford/Thatcher Area Roadway Speed Limits 2007 ..................................................... 33
Figure 1-14: Study Area Roadways Existing Traffic Volume 2007 ..................................................... 35
Figure 1-15: Safford/Thatcher Area Roadways Existing Traffic Volume 2007 ................................... 36
Figure 1-16: Study Area Existing Level of Service 2007 ..................................................................... 40
Figure 1-17: Safford/Thatcher Area Existing Level of Service 2007 ................................................... 41
Figure 1-18: Study Area 2040 Population Density by TAZ ................................................................. 44
Figure 1-19: Study Area 2040 Employment by TAZ ........................................................................... 45
Figure 1-20: Travel Forecasting Modeling Process ............................................................................ 51
Figure 1-21: External Stations ............................................................................................................. 54
Figure 1-22: Screen Lines ................................................................................................................... 56
Final Report
December 2010
v
Figure 1-23: Expected Number of Lanes 2040 ................................................................................... 59
Figure 1-24: Safford/Thatcher Area Expected Number of Lanes 2040 .............................................. 60
Figure 1-25: Study Area 2020 Operating Conditions .......................................................................... 62
Figure 1-26: Safford/Thatcher Area 2020 Operating Conditions ........................................................ 63
Figure 1-27: Study Area 2030 Operating Conditions .......................................................................... 64
Figure 1-28: Safford/Thatcher Area 2030 Operating Conditions ........................................................ 65
Figure 1-29: Study Area 2040 Operating Conditions .......................................................................... 66
Figure 1-30: Safford/Thatcher Area 2040 Operating Conditions ........................................................ 67
Figure 2-1: Resistance Model Graphic ................................................................................................ 70
Figure 2-2: Terminal Points ................................................................................................................. 72
Figure 2-3: Ground Slope Analysis- Source Values ........................................................................... 76
Figure 2-4: Ground Slope Analysis- Values Used In Model ................................................................ 77
Figure 2-5: Hydrology Analysis- Source Values ................................................................................. 78
Figure 2-6: Hydrology Analysis- Values Used In Model ...................................................................... 79
Figure 2-7: Land Ownership Analysis- Source Values ....................................................................... 80
Figure 2-8: Land Ownership Analysis- Values Used In Model ............................................................ 81
Figure 2-9: Preliminary Resistance Model Results ............................................................................. 83
Figure 2-10: Preliminary Proposed Corridor Alternatives - Second Refinement ................................ 84
Figure 2-11: Preliminary Proposed Corridor Alternatives - Third Refinement .................................... 85
Figure 2-12: Preliminary Proposed Corridor Alternatives – Fourth Refinement ................................. 86
Figure 2-13: Preliminary Proposed Corridor Alternatives- Fifth Refinement ....................................... 87
Figure 2-14: Study Area Level of Service 2040 – Alternative A .......................................................... 92
Figure 2-15: Safford/Thatcher Area Level of Service 2040 – Alternative A ........................................ 93
Final Report
December 2010
vi
Figure 2-16: Study Area Level of Service 2040 – Alternative B .......................................................... 94
Figure 2-17: Safford/Thatcher Area Level of Service 2040 – Alternative B ........................................ 95
Figure 2-18: Study Area Level of Service 2040 – Alternative C1 ....................................................... 96
Figure 2-19: Safford/Thatcher Area Level of Service 2040 – Alternative C1 ...................................... 97
Figure 2-20: Study Area Level of Service 2040 – Alternative C2 ....................................................... 98
Figure 2-21: Safford/Thatcher Area Level of Service 2040 – Alternative C2 ...................................... 99
Figure 3-1: Preferred Corridor Alternative ......................................................................................... 131
Figure 3-2: West Tie In ...................................................................................................................... 133
Figure 3-3: US Route 191 Connection .............................................................................................. 134
Figure 3-4: East Tie In ....................................................................................................................... 135
Final Report
December 2010
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1: Graham County Population Growth ................................................................................... 11
Table 1-2: Major Employers ................................................................................................................ 15
Table 1-3: Graham County 2000 Racial Demographics ..................................................................... 17
Table 1-4: Graham County 2000 Socioeconomic Data ...................................................................... 18
Table 1-5: Total Crashes in Graham County 1998-2006 .................................................................... 30
Table 1-6: Capacity/LOS Lookup Table .............................................................................................. 39
Table 1-7: Study Area Developments ................................................................................................. 47
Table 1-8: Transportation Improvement Projects ................................................................................ 49
Table 1-9: Trip Generation Rates........................................................................................................ 52
Table 1-10: Screenline Comparisons Existing Vs. Model ................................................................... 57
Table 2-1: Alternative ADT .................................................................................................................. 91
Table 2-2, A-D: Alternative D LOS Analysis (with proposed improvements to reach LOS D) .......... 101
Table 2-3: Alternative E Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................... 104
Table 2-4: Corridor Lengths .............................................................................................................. 105
Table 2-5: Drainage Structures ......................................................................................................... 108
Table 2-6: Preliminary Cost Estimates .............................................................................................. 109
Table 2-7: Preliminary Cost Estimates (Continued) .......................................................................... 110
Table 2-8: Preliminary Cost Estimates (Continued) .......................................................................... 111
Table 2-9: Preliminary Cost Estimates (Continued) .......................................................................... 112
Table 2-10: Preliminary Cost Estimates (Continued) ........................................................................ 113
Table 2-11: Evaluation Matrix ........................................................................................................... 115
Final Report
December 2010
viii
Table 2-12: Soil in Study Area .......................................................................................................... 119
Table 2-13: USFWS Federally Listed Species .................................................................................. 121
Table 2-14: Arizona Wildlife Special Concern ................................................................................... 123
Table 2-15: USDA FS Forest Sensitive Species ............................................................................... 124
Table 3-1: Summary of Estimated Costs .......................................................................................... 136
Table 3-2: Summary of Estimated Costs (Continued) ...................................................................... 137
0 EX
Grah
Tran
Rout
Thatc
locat
to ex
in thi
2040
trave
perfo
Thatc
Any i
route
incor
Advis
• A
• A
• A
• C
• F
• G
• T
• T
• S
• O
The s
previ
1. S
2. D
3. Id
XECUTIV
ham County is
sportation (A
te Study (GCA
cher and City
ted in the hea
xisting plannin
s study, both
0. This is mai
eling “through
orm this prelim
cher/Safford/
impacts to the
e have been s
rporated into t
sory Committ
Arizona Depar
Arizona Depar
Arizona State
City of Safford
ederal Highw
Graham Count
own of Thatc
own of Pima
outheastern A
Other Project S
o Arizon
o Bureau
study process
ious stage. T
tudy the curre
Determine the
dentify the pre
VE SUM
s located in so
DOT) manag
ARS) focuses
y of Safford. T
art of these co
ng/traffic stud
of these stat
nly due to the
” the study ar
minary assess
Pima area.
e local comm
seriously cons
the study pro
tee (TAC) com
rtment of Tran
rtment of Tran
Lands Depart
way Administra
ty
her
Arizona Gove
Stakeholders
na Game and
u of Land Ma
s was perform
The stage title
ent and future
need and fea
eferred alterna
MMARY
outheastern A
ed state route
s in the area s
The junction o
ommunities an
ies commissio
e routes are e
e projected gr
rea. Parsons
sment for the
unity’s future
sidered. In or
cess, the stud
mposed of me
nsportation Pl
nsportation Sa
tment
ation
ernmental Org
:
Fish
nagement
med in three s
es are as follo
e conditions o
asibility of a n
ate route corr
1
Arizona and is
es: US 191 an
surrounding th
of the two ma
nd serve as m
oned to exam
expected to e
rowth in the a
Brinckerhoff
development
viability due
rder to ensure
dy has been c
embers repre
lanning Divisi
afford District
ganization (SE
separate stag
ows:
of the area,
new alternate
ridor.
s serviced by
nd US 70. Th
he municipali
ajor state rout
major arterials
mine the area,
exceed their c
area and a gro
has been com
t of an alterna
to the potenti
e that local in
conducted wi
senting the fo
on
t
EAGO)
ges, all of whic
route corrido
2 major Arizo
his Graham C
ties of: Town
es, US 191 a
s for local trav
, as well as an
current capac
owing volume
mmissioned b
ate route thro
ial developme
put and direc
th guidance f
ollowing agen
ch built on the
r,
Final R
December
ona Departme
County Alterna
n of Pima, City
nd US 70 is
velers. Accor
nalysis perfor
ity before the
e of regional t
by ADOT to
ugh the
ent of an alter
ction has been
from a Techni
ncies:
e results of th
Report
r 2010
ent of
ate
y of
rding
rmed
year
raffic
rnate
n
ical
he
Each
revie
versi
0.1 CU
An e
perfo
resea
cond
use,
traffic
All of
deve
mode
traffic
was
GCA
impro
SATS
Ther
over
area
will b
betw
191 a
0.2 DE
The s
route
comp
route
need
• C
• ex
• en
h of these stag
ewed by the T
ons of the wo
URRENT
valuation and
ormed. The p
arched and in
ditions in the s
socioeconom
c accidents a
f these featur
eloped for the
el was run for
c volumes an
based on the
ARS and the 2
ovement proje
S recommend
re are current
capacity. By
. By 2040, m
be operating b
ween Bowie Av
almost the en
ETERMIN
second phase
e corridor in th
pilation of the
e corridor. Th
d for the new c
Capacity and l
xisting interse
nvironmental
ges were stud
TAC and revis
orking papers
AND FU
d documentat
proposed deve
ncluded in a tr
study area. In
mic data, emp
nd proposed
res were com
2009 Graham
r the following
d level of ser
e growth rate f
2009 SATS an
ects in the cu
ded projects s
tly a number
y the year 202
most segments
below the leve
ve and the US
ntire corridor w
NATION O
e of the study
he study area
characteristi
he following c
connector co
evel of servic
ection capacit
concerns
died and docu
sed to address
s are the majo
UTURE CO
ion of the exis
elopment info
raffic forecast
addition, oth
loyment, env
development
bined into the
m County Sm
g design year
rvice for each
forecasts agre
nd also includ
urrent Transpo
schedule.
of roadway se
20, US 70 and
s on collector
el of service g
S 70/US 191
within the stud
OF NEED
y evaluates an
a. The need
cs evaluated
haracteristics
rridor:
ce
ty
2
umented by p
s the input fro
or sections in
ONDITIO
sting street ne
ormation and
t model that w
er land use c
ironmental jus
t.
e traffic foreca
mall Area Tran
rs 2020, 2030
major roadw
eed upon by
des the additio
ortation Impro
egments with
d US 191 will
r and minor ar
goal of D. Eas
Split will expe
dy area.
D AND FE
nd determines
for a connect
identify bene
s were analyz
producing wor
om all of the s
this study (Se
ONS
etwork capac
planned arter
was develope
characteristics
stice, alternat
ast model for
nsportation St
0, and 2040. T
way in the area
the TAC durin
onal capacity
ovement Plan
hin the study l
be over capa
rterial streets
st of the Saffo
erience LOS
EASIBILI
s the need an
tor corridor ca
efits to the stu
ed within the
rking papers t
stakeholders.
ections 1, 2 a
city (current co
rial improvem
ed to project th
s were review
tive modes of
the study are
tudy (SATS).
The model re
a. The traffic
ng the develo
y gained from
n and 1998 Gr
imits that are
acity for much
within Safford
ord downtown
E. LOS F is
ITY
nd feasibility f
an be identifie
dy area due t
study area to
Final R
December
that were
The finalized
and 3).
onditions) wa
ments were als
he future
wed, such as,
f transportatio
ea originally
The forecast
esults provide
forecast mod
opment of the
the anticipate
raham County
operating at
h of the city ce
d and Thatch
n area, US 70
expected on
for an alterna
ed when a
to the alterna
o determine th
Report
r 2010
d
as
so
land
on,
t
d
del
ed
y
or
enter
her
0
US
te
te
he
• hi
• st
• A
The f
that t
and s
191 w
Othe
incre
of his
curre
optio
Saffo
outsi
with
The c
facilit
main
US 7
with
contr
and a
addit
at ea
woul
occu
I-10 b
After
poten
was
Resis
chara
hydro
corrid
igh truck perc
tate highway
And safety
future level of
the existing a
some form of
was analyzed
er concerns su
eased traffic v
storical prope
ent corridor, th
on. Typically t
ord/Thatcher c
de of the city
high truck tra
current ADOT
ties by develo
ntain regionall
70 and US 19
minimal acce
rolled access
allow ADOT t
tion of a new
ach of the pote
d also drama
rrence of a de
between Wilc
r determining
ntial alternate
developed us
stance Mode
acteristics. In
ology. Model
dor alternative
centages
access contro
f service anal
and currently p
f relief like an
d for capacity
uch as increa
volume and co
erties that curr
herefore, an a
there is a hig
city area deliv
would provid
affic through th
T access man
opment of Acc
y significant h
1 currently ac
ess control ch
policies will p
to turn back p
facility throug
ential traffic in
atically help de
etour route be
cox and the A
that an altern
e route corrido
sing spatial an
l evaluates th
puts to the m
outputs provi
e. Once thes
ol manageme
lysis performe
planned infras
alternate rou
and it shows
ased air pollut
ongestion can
rently exist in
alternate route
h percentage
vering to copp
de an opportu
he downtown
nagement pol
cess Manage
highway facili
ct as significa
aracteristics.
provide an ac
portions of the
gh undevelope
ntersections a
ecrease the tr
eing establish
Arizona/New M
nate route cor
or alternatives
nalysis tools i
he study area
odel include
ided conceptu
se preliminary
3
ent
ed in Section
structure will
te should be
to be deficie
ion and noise
n be mitigated
downtown S
e corridor can
e of truck traffi
per mines in t
nity to mitigat
area.
icies create a
ement Plans.
ties rather tha
ant arterial stre
The develop
ccess controlle
e US 70 and U
ed lands wou
and along cro
raffic delay in
hed through S
Mexico border
rridor is neede
s were develo
n a geograph
through a co
land ownersh
ual corridors,
y corridors we
1: Current an
be deficient fo
studied. The
nt in capacity
e pollution gen
d by an altern
afford that res
n be identified
ic using US 1
the area. An
te some of th
vision for de
This strateg
an portions of
eets within th
pment of an a
ed facility ser
US 191 faciliti
uld provide ne
ossroad conne
the study are
Safford when
r.
ed, the feasib
oped using a
hic information
llective accou
hip/property co
which may b
ere developed
nd Future Con
or the expect
e intersection
y as well.
nerated beca
nate route. Th
strict the optio
d as an efficie
91 that travel
alternate rou
e risk of haza
eveloping con
gy allows ADO
f a local arter
e Safford-Tha
alternate route
rving regional
ies to the loca
ew developme
ections. An a
ea caused by
there is a dus
bility of the co
Resistance M
n system (GIS
unt of environ
ontrol, ground
e suitable for
d they were re
Final R
December
nditions, show
ted traffic volu
of US 70 and
use of the
here are a nu
ons to upgrad
ent, cost effec
ls through the
te corridor fur
ards associate
ntrolled acces
OT to manage
rial street syst
atcher city are
e corridor with
and local traf
al agencies. T
ent opportunit
alternate route
y the common
st storm closu
rridor and the
Model. This m
S). The
nmental
d slope and
r further study
efined based
Report
r 2010
ws
umes
d US
mber
de the
ctive
e
rther
ed
s
e and
tem.
ea,
h
ffic
The
ties
e
n
ure of
e
model
y as a
on
input
altern
The a
as w
mem
cost,
Evalu
Addit
to ob
inform
chara
cons
envir
those
curre
0.3 PR
The f
ADO
Corri
numb
cons
desig
appro
deve
The r
prese
• A
th
th
T
de
pr
aw
t from the TAC
native routes
alternate rout
ell as quantita
mbers and the
implementat
uation Matrix.
tional public i
btain informat
mation was a
acteristics of
sidered in the
ronmental con
e analyses an
ent informatio
REFERRE
final compone
OT, with input
idor Alternativ
ber of options
sidered during
gn phases of
oximate mile
eloped.
rationale and
ented in the fo
Alternative B b
he various Alt
hat Alternative
his is becaus
estinations. A
roviding an al
way from the
C and the pub
(Alternatives
te corridor alte
ative analysis
public: Traffi
tion and supp
. A prelimina
nvolvement a
ion about the
also obtained
the study are
development
nsiderations i
nd documenta
n for each en
ED CORR
ent of the stud
from the pub
ve. In selectin
s for the impro
g the subsequ
the project de
wide corridor
justification b
ollowing para
balances the n
ernate Route
es C1 & C2 h
e of the proxi
Alternatives C
lternative or e
city center th
blic. The fina
A through E)
ernatives A th
s based on the
c Analysis (le
port. The resu
ry cost analys
and coordinat
environment
to define the
ea and assist t
t and prelimin
n detail, and
ation. Section
nvironmental i
RIDOR
dy involved th
lic and the pro
ng the preferr
ovement of an
uent Design C
evelopment.
r in which the
behind the se
agraphs:
needs of loca
e alternatives
ave a greater
imity of the ne
C1 & C2 will o
extension to t
hat it would be
4
al iteration is s
).
hrough E wer
e following fa
evel of service
ults of this ana
sis was also p
tion with feder
tal resources
existing socia
the study tea
nary analysis o
specific mitig
n 2.4 Environm
ssue.
he identificatio
oject’s TAC, s
red corridor, A
n alternate ro
Concept Repo
The Preferre
final recomm
election of Alte
al and regiona
LOS results (
r impact on th
ew routes to t
operate more
he local stree
e used for reg
shown in Figu
re evaluated f
actors and crit
e), safety, acc
alysis can be
performed for
ral, state, and
in the genera
al, economic,
m in identifyin
of alternatives
ation measur
mental Overv
on of the pref
selected Alter
ADOT stipula
oute corridor t
ort, Environme
d Corridor Alt
mended roadw
ernative B as
al traffic within
Figures 2.2-1
he US 191 LO
the trip gener
as a part of t
et system. W
gional trips rat
ure 2-13 and c
for feasibility u
teria develope
cess, environm
seen in Tabl
r each alterna
d local agenci
al study area.
and environm
ng particular c
s. Future ana
res will be ide
iew of the rep
ferred alterna
rnative B as t
ted that this s
hat will be fur
ental Analysis
ternative repr
way alignment
the preferred
n the study ar
through 2.2-
OS than Altern
ration location
he local arter
hile Alternativ
ther than loca
Final R
December
contains mult
using qualitat
ed by the TAC
mental impac
e 2-7(page 1
ative.
ies was condu
Specific
mental
constraints to
alyses will add
entified as par
port summariz
te route corrid
the Preferred
study present
rther analyzed
s, and prelimi
resents an
t may be
d corridor are
ea. As show
-8), you can s
native A does
ns and
rial street syst
ve A is far eno
al trips to the
Report
r 2010
tiple
tive,
C
cts,
14):
ucted
o be
dress
rt of
zes
dor.
ts a
d and
nary
n in
see
s.
tem
ough
ne
19
��� A
ex
pl
an
un
pr
so
• T
an
pr
A
co
The f
The c
Thatc
impro
2025
cong
The f
subs
Docu
The
in inc
Town
just a
Publ
meet
be fa
to pro
eighborhood
91 by being c
Alternative B p
xisting agricu
lan and devel
nd opportunit
ndisturbed fo
roperty. By a
ources in the
here is suppo
n Alternate R
referred. Alte
Alternative B is
ould still be u
following find
current and s
cher can be a
ovements alo
5, at which tim
gestion from th
final solution
sequent phase
ument.
improvement
cremental com
n of Thatcher
ahead of warr
ic involvemen
tings and inte
ar enough awa
omote develo
businesses.
close enough
provides oppo
ltural lands.
lop arterial str
ty for develop
othills/desert
avoiding the a
region will be
ort from the A
Route in the ar
ernative B wa
s far enough a
sed for local t
ings and conc
short term traf
addressed by
ong US 70. T
me the Preferr
he US 191 an
for the implem
es of the proje
s suggested a
mponent proje
r, Town of Pim
ranted traffic v
nt has been c
erviews with s
ay from the to
opment and in
Alternative B
for local traff
ortunity for in-
By identifying
reet extensio
pment. In add
areas that ex
agricultural pro
e minimized w
ADOT District,
rea. Based o
as the most pr
away from tow
traffic and wo
clusions can
ffic issues for
the ongoing
hese ongoing
red Corridor A
nd US 70.
mentation of t
ect developm
as a function
ects. This wi
ma and Graha
volumes to av
onducted thro
stakeholders.
own center to
n-fill opportun
5
maximizes t
ic to use, whi
fill developme
g the preferred
ns to connect
dition, the pro
xist generally
operties, the
when compare
local agencie
on the stakeho
referred of the
wn to provide
ould provide d
be made as a
US 191 and
US 191 DCR
g improvemen
Alternative sh
the alternate
ment; the Desi
of this Altern
ll allow ADOT
am County, to
void undue co
oughout the c
The general c
o provide high
ities.
he opportunit
le still providi
ent while min
d corridor, the
t to the new fa
posed alignm
to the south o
impacts to on
ed to some of
es and public
older interview
e two. The st
e for regional
development a
function of t
US 70 within
R study and cu
nts have been
ould be imple
route corridor
gn Concept R
ate Route Stu
T, in cooperat
o plan, design
ongestion.
course of this
consensus w
her speed faci
ty to provide r
ng for regiona
imizing the im
e local agenc
acility, thus p
ment is located
of the develop
ne of the majo
f the other alt
c to pursue the
ws, Alternativ
takeholder inp
traffic, but clo
and in-fill opp
this alternate
the City of Sa
urrently progr
n identified to
emented to re
r will be arrive
Report and En
udy can be ph
tion with the C
n and have co
study in the f
was that the al
ilities, but still
Final R
December
relief along U
al traffic.
mpact to the
cies will be ab
roviding acce
d in the
ped agricultur
or economic
ternatives.
e developmen
ves A & B wer
put suggested
ose enough th
portunities.
route study:
afford and To
rammed
reach capac
elieve the
ed at during th
nvironmental
hased in over
City of Safford
onstructed pro
form of public
ternate route
be close eno
Report
r 2010
S
le to
ess
ral
nt of
re
d that
hat it
own of
city in
he
r time
d,
ojects
c
must
ough
1 CU
1.1 IN
1.1.1 D
Grah
few d
roadw
deter
trans
Stud
prior
Tran
incor
The C
expe
Alter
conn
Saffo
inters
local
provi
corrid
regio
1.1.2 S
The g
geog
need
the v
due t
guida
follow
• A
URRENT
NTRODUC
DESCRIPTIO
ham County is
decades, prim
way infrastruc
rmine if it will
sportation nee
y (SATS), co
to the Graha
sportation. T
rporated into t
City of Saffor
ected to reach
nate Route S
necting US 19
ord, Town of T
section of US
traffic which
isions for a gr
dor addresse
on continues t
TUDY OBJE
goal of the st
graphic area o
d and feasibili
viability of the
to the alterna
ance from a T
wing agencies
Arizona Depar
T AND F
CTION
ON OF STUD
s expected to
marily in the in
cture in the he
support futur
eds in the Gra
mmissioned b
am County Alt
The research a
this study as
d is at the jun
h or exceed ca
Study is a prel
91 to US 70 th
Thatcher and
S 191 and US
will be disper
rowing volum
s the future tr
to grow throug
ECTIVES
udy was to ev
of US 191 and
ty of a route,
community b
te routes wer
Technical Adv
s:
rtment of Tran
FUTURE
DY
experience c
ncorporated c
eaviest utilize
re expected d
aham County
by Graham C
ternate Route
and analysis
the basis for
nction of two m
apacity as gro
iminary asses
hat would prov
Town of Pim
70. The rout
rsed over a la
e of regional
raffic congest
gh the 2040 h
valuate the ne
d US 70 by do
and providing
by accommod
re seriously co
visory Commi
nsportation Pl
6
E COND
continued pop
cities of Saffor
ed segments o
emand. Two
region. The
County, was ta
e Study, comm
completed fo
the traffic mo
major state ro
owth continue
ssment of the
vide an altern
ma, particularly
te was studie
arger geograp
“through“ traf
tion concerns
horizon year.
eed for an alte
ocumenting c
g recommend
dating traffic d
onsidered. T
ttee (TAC) co
lanning Divisi
ITIONS
pulation and e
rd, Thatcher a
of the commu
o studies were
Graham Cou
aking place co
missioned by
or the 2009 Gr
odeling.
outes, US 191
es in the area
e need for and
nate route cor
y the Safford
d to accomm
phic area whil
ffic. The dev
identified alo
ernate route c
current and fu
ded corridor a
demands. Co
he study proc
omposed of m
on
S
employment g
and Pima. Th
unity need to
e commission
unty Small Are
oncurrently an
the Arizona D
raham County
1 and US 70,
a. The Graha
d feasibility of
rridor around
city center ar
odate a grow
e at the same
velopment of t
ong US 191 a
corridor in the
uture condition
alternatives th
ommunity viab
cess was con
members repr
Final R
December
growth in the
he current
be evaluated
ned to evaluat
ea Transporta
nd was comp
Department o
y SATS was
both of which
m County
f a new route
the City of
rea and the
wing volume o
e time making
the alternate
nd US 70 as
e general
ns, determinin
hat would enh
bility and impa
nducted with
resenting the
Report
r 2010
next
to
te
ation
leted
f
h are
f
g
route
the
ng
ance
acts
• A
• A
• C
• F
• G
• T
• T
• S
• O
1.1.3 S
Grah
and S
repre
has t
as th
be as
shop
Arizona Depar
Arizona State
City of Safford
ederal Highw
Graham Count
own of Thatc
own of Pima
outheastern A
Other Project S
o Arizon
o Bureau
TUDY AREA
ham County is
Santa Teresa
esent the prin
traditionally b
he retail and s
ssociated with
pping and serv
rtment of Tran
Lands Depart
way Administra
ty
her
Arizona Gove
Stakeholders
na Game and
u of Land Ma
A
s composed o
a Mountains.
cipal center o
een a mainst
service hub in
h the expansi
vices center.
nsportation Sa
tment
ation
ernmental Org
:
Fish
nagement
of mostly high
The three inc
of population
ay of the regi
Southeaster
ion of Freepo
The study are
7
afford District
ganization (SE
h desert plains
corporated co
and economi
on, it has evo
rn Arizona. R
ort-McMoRan
ea for the Alte
t
EAGO)
s surrounded
ommunities of
c activity in th
olved into a ce
Recent popula
mines and re
ernate Route
by the Gila, P
f Safford, Tha
he County. W
enter for light
ation and econ
egional emerg
Study is show
Final R
December
Pinaleno, Ga
atcher, and Pi
While agricultu
t industry as w
nomic growth
gence as a
wn in Figure
Report
r 2010
liuro
ima
ure
well
can
1-1.
Figur
8
re 1-1: Study Area
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
1.2 ST
Com
back
1.2.1 C
• 19
st
pr
• 20
es
es
• G
to
M
• U
pu
co
• G
th
• C
ch
• G
re
1.2.2 O
• U
re
1.2.3 F
• N
TUDIES A
pleted and on
kground inform
COMPLETED
998 Graham
tudy was to u
rojects to mee
007 City of Sa
stablish a tran
stablished.
Globe-New Me
o establish pri
Mexico.
US 191 Design
urpose of this
orridor from S
Graham Count
here was suffi
City of Safford
haracteristics
Graham Count
egional transp
ONGOING ST
US 191 Design
ecommendati
UTURE STU
None currently
AND SOU
n-going studie
mation for the
D STUDIES
County Regio
pdate the 199
et the growing
afford Transp
nsportation ba
exico Multimo
iorities and im
n Concept Re
s report was t
SR 366 to US
ty Transit Fea
icient need fo
General Plan
of the city.
ty Small Area
portation need
TUDIES
n Concept Re
ons for impro
UDIES
y identified.
URCE DA
es relevant to
e developmen
onal Transpo
92 transporta
g demands.
portation Stud
aseline by wh
odal Corridor
mprovement s
eport, Traffic P
o evaluate th
70.
asibility Revie
or the develop
n (2004) – Th
a Transportati
ds for Graham
eport– The pu
ovements to th
9
ATA
o the region he
t of the Altern
rtation Study
ation plan and
dy (Septembe
hich impact fe
Profile (Nove
strategies for t
Projections an
e traffic requi
ew (2007) – T
pment of trans
his plan provid
on Study (SA
m County ove
urpose of this
he US 191 co
elped guide t
nate Route st
(December 1
to identify an
er 2007) – The
ees for future
mber 2002) –
the US 70 co
nd Growth An
rements asso
The purpose o
sit facilities in
des informatio
ATS) (2009) –
er the next 15
report is to p
orridor from S
he process a
udy.
998) – The p
nd prioritize th
e purpose of t
development
The purpose
rridor from G
nalysis (Augu
ociated with th
of this study w
the area.
on for the land
This study id
year time ho
rovide prelim
R 266 to US
Final R
December
nd provided
purpose of this
he next set of
this study wa
t can be
e of this study
lobe to New
st 2007) – Th
he US 191
was to determ
d use and zon
dentified the
rizon.
inary design
70.
Report
r 2010
s
f
s to
y was
he
mine if
ning
1.3 EX
Exist
Grah
creat
selec
• La
• S
• E
• S
• O
• T
• E
Curre
1.3.1 L
An u
area
the tr
• R
• C
• In
• P
Loca
enco
• S
• In
• U
• S
XISTING
ting condition
ham County re
tes a basis fo
cted for docum
and use
ocioeconomic
nvironmental
treet system
Other modes o
raffic acciden
xisting traffic
ent conditions
AND USE
nderstanding
. Land use in
ravel modelin
Residential
Commercial
ndustrial
ublic
ated in the Gil
ompassing 4,6
an Carlos Ind
ndividual and
U.S. Forest se
tate of Arizon
CONDIT
s in the study
egion for the
or projecting fu
mentation and
c data
justice consi
inventory
of transportati
nt
and operatin
s related to ea
of land use i
nformation in
ng, which are
a Valley of so
630 square m
dian Reservat
corporate ow
rvice and Bur
na 18%
TIONS
y area are doc
study. It prov
uture conditio
d analysis inc
derations
ion
g conditions
ach measure
s important fo
conjunction w
discussed in
outheastern A
miles. Graham
tion: 34%
wnership acco
reau of Land
10
cumented to p
vides a review
ons. The mea
clude:
are discusse
or determining
with populatio
Section 1.4.2
Arizona, Grah
m County land
ounts: 10%
Management
provide basel
w of the curre
asures of exis
ed in subsequ
g and interpre
n and employ
2. Land use c
am County is
d ownership is
t: 38%
line comparis
nt operationa
sting condition
ent sections o
eting travel ch
yment data is
classifications
s a primarily ru
s composed o
Final R
December
sons of the
al conditions a
ns that have b
of this report.
haracteristics
used to deve
s include:
ural county
of:
Report
r 2010
and
been
in an
elop
1.3.2 S
Popu
Most
indus
peop
A sig
Cens
time,
the F
work
the u
Gra
Uni
Source
Histo
deve
mode
popu
To ta
have
the s
majo
by th
34,27
TAZ’
OCIOECON
ulation
t recently, pop
stry. Accordin
ple will move i
gnificant incre
sus, the popu
, the populatio
Freeport-McM
kers and their
unincorporate
Arizona
aham County
Safford
Thatcher
Pima
incorporated
e: US Census Bu
orical growth r
eloping traffic
el to determin
ulation produc
abulate existin
e been establi
study area tha
or transportati
he TAC and th
70 within the
s are shown
NOMIC DATA
pulation grow
ng to “Area in
into the Gila V
ease in the nu
lation of Grah
on growth wa
MoRan Coppe
families. Tab
d area in Gra
Table
199
3,665,
y 26,5
7,35
3,76
1,72
d 13,7
reau and Southe
rates can be a
forecasts. Po
ne the numbe
ces trips and e
ng and future
shed for the a
at are used in
on corridors d
he study of la
study area w
in Figure 1-2
A
wth in this area
n Focus”, a re
Valley by 201
mber of retire
ham County w
as reported to
er and Gold In
ble 1-1 provid
aham County.
e 1-1: Graha
90 20
,228 5,13
554 33,
59 9,2
63 4,0
25 1,9
707 18,
eastern Arizona G
an indication
opulation and
er of trips bein
employment a
population a
area. Traffic
the travel for
define the zon
nd use patter
as divided up
and the tabu
11
a has been pr
eport by Wick
0 to support m
ement commu
was reported
be relatively
nc. mine expa
des the popula
m County P
000 20
0,632
,498
232
022
989
,246
Governments Org
of future grow
d employment
ng made each
attracts trips.
nd employme
Analysis Zon
recasting mod
ne boundaries
rn by the proje
p and assigne
lated populat
recipitated by
Communicat
mine construc
unities is also
to have incre
flat. Howeve
ansion, the are
ation of the th
Population G
007 Estimat
6,500,194
37,338
9,460
5,235
2,233
20,410
ganization (SEAG
wth and, there
t are direct in
h day. Specif
ent data, a sy
nes (TAZs) are
del. Similar la
s. Based on t
ect team, the
ed to the 76 T
tion data is sh
y high growth
tions, it is pred
ction and per
o anticipated.
eased 26% sin
er, with the an
ea has experi
hree incorpora
Growth
te
%
Increa
(1990
2000
40%
26%
25%
7%
15%
33%
GO)
efore, are imp
puts to the tra
ically, in the t
stem of traffic
e geographic
and uses, phy
the local infor
current total
AZs. The bo
hown in Appe
Final R
December
in the mining
dicted that 7,0
ipheral servic
In the 2000
nce 1990. At
nnouncement
ienced an infl
ated towns an
ase
0-
0)
%
Incre
(20
200
% 27
% 11
% 2%
30
% 12
% 12
portant in
avel-forecasti
traffic model,
c analysis zon
subdivisions
ysical barriers
rmation provid
population of
undaries of th
ndix 1A.
Report
r 2010
000
ces.
that
of
lux of
nd
ease
000-
07)
7%
1%
%
0%
2%
2%
ng
nes
of
, or
ded
f
he
The h
City o
highw
show
highest popu
of Safford. M
ways, and be
wn in Figure 1
lation densitie
Most of the po
tween the citi
-3.
es in the stud
pulations in th
ies of Safford
12
y area are at
he study area
and Thatche
the junction o
as are clustere
er. Population
of US 70 and
ed around the
n density of th
Final R
December
US 191 withi
e two major
he study area
Report
r 2010
in the
a is
Figure 1-2: Study A
13
rea Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ)
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Figure 1-3: Study Are
14
a 2008 Population Density by TAZ
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Emp
Curre
jobs
Pima
popu
along
city c
prese
empl
Free
M
Sa
G
A
T
Bu
Az
T
Sourc
ployment
ently, there a
are located w
a; mining, edu
ulation distribu
g US 70 and
center. The m
ented in Figu
loyment coun
Emplo
port-McMoRa
Eastern Arizo
Mt Graham Reg
Safford
afford Unified
Wal-M
raham County
Safford City G
Arizona State
Impressiv
Federal
Thatche
Pima U
Thriftee Food
Infinia At
Home
Haralson’s Au
Bash
ureau of Land
Safe
z Dept Of Eco
Thatcher City
Graham Cou
US Forest Svc
ce: InfoUSA d
re approxima
within the juris
ucation, gover
ution, the grea
US 191. The
major employe
re 1-4. The S
nt. The detaile
oyer
an Copper & G
ona College
gional Medica
Prison
School Distric
Mart
y Governmen
Government
Government
ve Labels
Prison
r U.S.D.
U.S.D.
d & Drug-IGA
t Safford
Depot
uto and Tire
has’
d Managemen
way
nomic Securit
Government
unty Electric
c Warehouse
data and Free
ately 10,000 w
sdictions of th
rnment and re
atest concent
e number of jo
ers in the are
Safford prison
ed employme
Table 1-
Comm
Gold Sa
Tha
al Sa
Sa
ct Sa
Sa
nt Sa
Sa
Sa
Sa
Sa
Tha
P
Sa
Sa
Tha
Sa
Tha
nt Sa
Tha
ty Sa
Tha
P
Sa
eport-McMoRa
15
workers in the
e three incorp
etail comprise
trations of job
obs decreases
a are listed in
n is located in
ent distribution
-2: Major Em
munity E
fford
atcher
fford
fford
fford
fford
fford
fford
fford
fford
fford
atcher
ima
fford
fford
atcher
fford
atcher
fford
atcher
fford
atcher
ima
fford
an, 2008
labor force in
porated cities
e the majority
bs are in the S
s as the TAZs
n Table 1-2; th
TAZ 58, whic
n is shown in
mployers
Number of
Employees
1081
583
520
485
389
290
270
198
189
175
150
150
136
120
105
80
70
65
60
57
50
47
40
19
n the study ar
s of Safford, T
y of the emplo
Safford and T
s are distribut
he geographi
ch accounts f
Appendix B.
Employ
Mining
S
H
Gov
S
Gov
Gov
State
Ma
Federa
S
S
Groc
Nursing &
Hom
Groc
Federa
Groc
State
City G
U
Gov
Final R
December
rea. Most of t
Thatcher and
oyment. Like
hatcher area
ted away from
c distribution
for its high
yment Type
g Companies
Schools
Hospitals
vernment
Schools
Retail
vernment
vernment
Government
nufacture
l Government
Schools
Schools
cers-Retail
Convalesce
me Centers
Retail
cers-Retail
l Government
cers-Retail
Government
Government
Utilities
vernment
Report
r 2010
the
the
m the
is
e
t
ent
t
Figure
1-4: Study A
16
Area 2008 Employment by TAZ
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Envi
Title
to dis
Pres
in Mi
focus
incom
not s
targe
• T
• N
• S
• F
The
Orde
race,
progr
high
One
spec
Acco
predo
show
Gra
Source
ronmental J
VI of the Civi
scrimination o
ident Clinton
nority Popula
s attention on
me communit
supersede exi
eted populatio
itle VI of the C
National Enviro
ection 309 of
reedom of Inf
U.S. Departm
er 12898 on A
, color or natio
rams, policies
and adverse
of the first ste
cifically targete
ording to the 2
ominantly wh
wn in Table 1-
Area
aham County
Safford
Thatcher
Pima
: U.S. Census Bu
ustice
l Rights Act o
on the basis o
signed Execu
ation and Low
n the “environ
ties with the g
isting laws or
ons as manda
Civil Rights A
onmental Pol
f the Clean Ai
formation Act
ment of Transp
April 15, 1997
onal origin, a
s, and activitie
impacts on th
eps in assurin
ed by the Exe
2000 Census,
ite, with abou
-3.
Table 1-3
White
y 67.1%
75.2%
84.7%
87.0%
ureau, 2000 Cens
of 1964 and re
of race, color,
utive Order 12
w-Income Pop
mental and h
goal of achiev
regulations;
ated in previo
Act of 1964
icy Act of 196
r Act
t
portation issu
. This final or
nd income lev
es. It further
hese populati
ng environme
ecutive Order
, the racial co
ut 32.9 percen
3: Graham Co
African
American
1.9%
1.4%
0.8%
0.2%
sus
17
elated statute
national orig
2898, ���Federa
pulation.” The
uman health
ving environm
rather, it requ
us legislation
69 (NEPA)
ued its final or
rder requires
vel of populat
requires that
ons.
ental justice is
r – minority an
omposition of
nt minorities.
ounty 2000
Native
American
14.9%
1.0%
1.8%
0.8%
es assure that
in, age, sex, o
al Actions to A
e purpose of t
conditions in
mental justice.”
uires consider
, including:
rder to implem
that informat
tions served o
steps be take
s the identifica
nd low-income
the Graham C
Racial demo
Racial Dem
n
Asian or
Pacific
Islander
0.6%
1.0%
0.6%
0.1%
t individuals a
or disability.
Address Envi
the Executive
minority com
” The Execut
ration and inc
ment the prov
ion be obtain
or affected by
en to avoid di
ation of those
e populations
County study
ographics for t
mographics
Other
Race
Alone
13.3%
18.6%
9.9%
9.9%
Final R
December
are not subjec
In February 1
ironmental Ju
Order was to
mmunities and
tive Order doe
clusion of thes
isions of Exec
ed concernin
y proposed
isproportionat
populations
s.
y area was
the study are
Two or
more
races
2.1%
2.9%
2.2%
2.1%
Report
r 2010
cted
1994,
ustice
o
d low-es
se
cutive
g the
tely
a are
The
low in
Grah
level
Table
Fe
Ma
Pe
Pe
Pe
Source
1.3.3 E
The e
serve
study
the s
are fu
US 7
US 7
the w
recre
appro
curre
mino
US 1
US 1
with
arter
desig
Rope
Executive Ord
ncome popula
ham County is
. Socioecono
e 1-4.
Categ
emale
ale
ersons with di
ersons over ag
ersons living b
e: U.tS. lCensul s B
EXISTING ST
existing stree
ed by an arte
y area: US 70
street network
unctionally op
70
70 is an east-w
west. It is the
eational users
oximately 29
ently classified
or arterial outs
91
91 serves as
I-10. Accord
rial south of S
gnated as a s
er Lake State
der also requ
ations. Acco
s 60 years or
omic data for
Table 1-4
ory
sability
ge 60
below the
Bureau, 2000 Cen
TREET SYS
et system is de
rial street sys
0, US 191, SR
k within the st
perating as pr
west highway
main route th
s to access M
miles of US 7
d as a princip
side the urban
s the major re
ing to the Sta
afford and as
scenic route a
Park. Appro
ires the cons
rding to the 2
older. Nearly
Graham Cou
4: Graham C
Graham
County
47%
53%
30%
16%
21%
nsus
TEM
escribed in de
stem, collecto
R 366, and SR
udy area and
rincipal arteria
y that connect
hrough the G
t. Graham, S
70 in the stud
pal arterial in t
n area.
gional vehicu
ate Highway L
s principal arte
and provides a
oximately 15 m
18
ideration of p
2000 Census,
y 21% of Gra
unty and the th
County 2000
m
y Saffo
52%
48%
37%
21%
17%
etail in the fol
rs, and local s
R 266. These
d distribute loc
als.
ts the study a
raham Count
an Carlos La
y area. Acco
the Safford an
ular link within
Log System, it
erial within th
access to the
miles of the h
persons older
approximate
ham County r
hree incorpor
0 Socioecono
ord Thatc
% 53%
% 47%
% 23%
% 16%
% 19%
lowing sectio
streets. ADO
highways se
cal and region
area to New M
ty area and is
ke, and other
ording to the S
nd Thatcher u
n the Safford r
t is currently c
e Safford urb
Graham Cou
ighway is with
than 60 years
ly 16% of the
residents live
rated cities ar
omic Data
cher Pima
% 51%
% 49%
% 43%
% 18%
% 20%
ons. The stud
OT controls fo
erve as the ma
nal traffic. All
Mexico in the
used by visit
r area attractio
State Highway
urbanized are
region and co
classified as a
banized area.
unty Park, fair
hin the study
Final R
December
s of age as w
e population in
below the po
re listed in
a
%
%
%
%
%
dy area is curr
ur highways i
ajor roadways
of these high
east and Glob
tors and
ons. There a
y Log System
ea, and as a r
onnects Saffo
rural minor
The highwa
rgrounds, and
area.
Report
r 2010
well as
n
overty
rently
in the
s in
hways
be to
are
m, it is
ural
rd
ay is
d
SR 3
SR 3
top o
well a
colle
SR 2
SR 2
Corre
Anot
Disco
The s
• F
• N
Func
Func
deve
Guid
types
which
defin
inclu
all te
the b
Class
Rura
trave
Rura
arter
and p
366
366 departs fr
of Mount Grah
as the Univer
ctor in the Sta
266
266 heads we
ectional Instit
her important
overy Park Bl
street system
unctional Cla
Number of Thr
ctional Class
ctional classifi
eloped for tran
elines”, urban
s of land use,
h all these ele
ned as an urba
des the Saffo
rritory outside
basic function
sification Guid
al Principal A
el and minima
al Minor Arte
rial system, pr
provide relativ
rom US 191 a
ham. The roa
rsity of Arizon
ate Highway
est from US 19
ution. It is cla
t arterial in the
lvd to US 70.
m inventory for
ssification
rough Lanes
sification
ication, the gr
nsportation pl
n and rural ar
density of st
ements are re
an cluster and
ord-Thatcher-e
of the urban
al systems fo
delines” publi
Arterial Highw
al interference
erial Road: S
rovide trip len
vely high trav
approximately
adway provide
na Binocular T
Log System.
91 to Bonita a
assified as a r
e network is 2
r the roadway
rouping of roa
anning purpo
reas have fun
reet and high
elated in the d
d/or urbanize
Pima metropo
n boundaries.
or both rural a
ished by the A
ways: Serve
e to through m
Serve most of
ngth and trave
vel speeds, wi
19
y eight miles s
es access to t
Telescope Fa
and Fort Gran
rural minor co
20th Ave, whi
ys within the s
adways by the
oses. Accordi
damentally d
way networks
definitions of h
ed area. With
olitan area. T
The followin
and urban are
Arizona Depa
e high volume
movement.
f the larger co
el density grea
ith minimum i
south of Saffo
the Safford F
cility. It is cla
nt, where it en
ollector in the
ich is a north-study
area inc
e character of
ing to “Arizon
ifferent chara
s, nature of tr
highway func
in the study b
The rural area
ng paragraphs
as as defined
artment of Tra
, long distanc
ommunities no
ater than thos
nterference to
ord and heads
ederal Correc
assified as a r
nds at the For
State Highwa
-south route t
cludes:
f service they
na Functional
acteristics as t
ravel patterns
ction. An “urb
boundary, the
a of the study
s describe the
d in the “Arizo
ansportation.
ce trips; provid
ot served by t
se served by
o-through mo
Final R
December
s westward to
ctional Facility
rural minor
rt Grant
ay Log System
that connects
y provide, was
Classification
to density and
s, and the way
an area” is
e urban area
area consists
e characterist
ona Functiona
de high speed
the principal
collector syst
ovement.
Report
r 2010
o the
y as
m.
the
s
n
d
y in
s of
tics of
al
d
tems,
Rura
impo
highw
rural
carry
intrac
Rura
roadw
Urba
spee
activ
Urba
spee
Urba
syste
Urba
and l
The c
Figur
illustr
in fut
area
arter
al Collector S
ortance. Serv
ways that are
collectors. R
y traffic over a
county traffic
al Local Road
ways. Tend to
an Principal A
ed for through
ity of a metro
an Minor Arte
ed limit than u
an Collectors
em.
an Local Stre
lowest posted
current functi
re 1-5. A clo
rate existing s
ture years as
is primarily s
rials within the
System: Ser
ve shorter trips
e not arterial h
Rural minor co
shorter dista
generators.
ds: Serve pr
o have lower
Arterials: Ca
movement. S
opolitan area.
erial: Provide
rban principa
s: Distribute t
eets: Provide
d speed limits
onal classifica
oser view of S
systems as c
land uses ev
erved by US
e Safford/Tha
rve travel of in
s and provide
highways will
ollectors tend
ance than a m
rimarily to pro
traffic speed
arry trips of lo
Serve the hig
e trips of mod
al arterials.
traffic from ar
e direct acces
s.
ation system
Safford/Thatch
urrently desig
volve and pop
70 and US 19
atcher city limi
20
ntracounty an
e more moder
be on the rura
to have lowe
major collecto
vide access t
limits and low
onger length;
hest traffic vo
derate length.
rterials and co
ss to the adjac
for the Graha
her area is sh
gnated and do
pulation increa
91. These tw
its and as Ru
d regional im
rate speed tha
al collector sy
er traffic volum
r, or carry traf
to land uses a
wer traffic volu
provide the g
olume genera
. Provide low
ollect traffic fr
cent land. Pr
am County stu
hown in Figure
o not reflect c
ases. As illus
wo routes gen
ral Minor Arte
portance, rath
an arterial rou
ystem as eith
me than rural
ffic on trips to
adjacent to co
umes.
greatest mobil
ators and the m
wer travel mob
rom local stre
rovide the low
udy area is sh
e 1-6. These
changes which
strated on the
nerally serve a
erials outside
Final R
December
her than state
utes. All rural
er major or m
major collect
o less importa
ollector and a
lity and highe
major centers
bility and lowe
ets into the a
west travel mo
hown in
two maps
h may take pl
map, the stu
as urban princ
of city limits.
Report
r 2010
ewide
state
minor
ors,
ant
rterial
est
s of
er
rterial
obility
lace
udy
cipal
Figure 1-5: Study Area Ro
21
oadway Functional Classification M
Final R
December
Map
Report
r 2010
Figure 1-6: Safford/Thatch
22
her Area Functional Classification M
Final R
December
Map
Report
r 2010
Num
Altho
lanes
the a
exist
study
US 7
cente
191 s
comp
have
mber of Thro
ough there are
s is the most
arterials and c
ing number o
y area, respec
70 and US 19
er of the Tow
south of Disco
prises four thr
e two through
ugh Lanes
e other factor
significant fac
collectors with
of through lane
ctively. Most
1, which have
n of Pima. Th
overy Park B
rough lanes p
lanes and a c
rs such as acc
ctor that affec
hin the study a
es is shown i
of the roads
e five lanes fr
he US 191 DC
lvd from two t
plus a continu
continuous ce
23
cess and traff
cts the capaci
area was inve
n Figure 1-7 a
in the area ha
rom the easte
CR study is c
to five lanes.
uous center le
enter two-way
fic control dev
ity of a street.
entoried for th
and Figure 1-
ave two throu
ern boundary
currently evalu
It should be
eft-turn lane. S
y left-turn lane
vices, the num
. The numbe
he capacity ca
-8 for the Saff
ugh lanes with
of the City of
uating the nee
noted that fiv
Similarly, thre
e.
Final R
December
mber of throu
r of lanes for
alculation. Th
ford/Thatcher
h the exceptio
Safford to the
ed to expand
ve-lane roadw
ee-lane roadw
Report
r 2010
gh
all of
e
r
on of
e
US
ways
ways
Figure 1-7: Study Area Road
24
dways Existing Number of Through
Final R
December
Lanes
Report
r 2010
Figure 1-8: Safford/Thatcher Area
25
a Roadway Existing Number of Thr
Final R
December
rough Lanes
Report
r 2010
s
1.3.4 O
Since
next
to the
roadw
comp
Tran
Curre
Sout
study
objec
comm
that t
route
by al
leade
Bicy
Grah
bicyc
enha
part o
categ
• S
an
• B
bi
• B
m
• W
ac
OTHER MOD
e the area is c
few decades
e street and h
ways and new
promising stre
nsit
ently, the only
hEastern Ariz
y was conduc
ctives were to
munity activity
there is subst
es. Investmen
leviating cong
ers continue t
ycle System
ham County, t
cle route syste
ance, facilitate
of the Alterna
gories:
hared-use Pa
nd other non-ike
Lanes – a
icyclists.
ike Routes –
markings. Bicy
Wide Curb Lan
ccommodate
DES OF TRA
currently in a
, it is critical t
highway syste
w developme
eet capacity s
y public trans
zona Commu
cted in 2007 to
o identify trans
y centers, and
tantial deman
nt in transit in
gestion along
to address the
the City of Sa
em plans. Th
e, or incorpora
ate Route Stu
aths –a paved
-motorized ve
bike lane loc
a roadway id
ycle traffic sh
nes – not offic
cyclists.
ANSPORTA
state of trans
hat land use
em. While the
nt designed t
should be enc
it service ava
nity Action Pr
o determine t
sit dependent
d funding alte
nd for public tr
nfrastructure a
g high density
e complexity
afford, and To
hese are inclu
ate the comm
dy. All bike fa
d pathway de
ehicles in scen
cated on the
dentified as a
ares the road
cially designa
26
ATION
sition due to t
design and in
ere may be lit
to support bot
couraged.
ailable in the G
rogram, Inc. (
the transit nee
t populations,
ernatives. The
ransit service
and pedestria
employment
of funding an
own of Thatch
uded as refere
munity’s bicycl
acilities in the
signated for t
nic recreation
paved area o
bicycle facility
dway with mo
ated as bikewa
the expected
nfrastructure s
ttle funding fo
th vehicular a
Graham Coun
SEACAP) us
eds of the com
, the need for
e results of th
s and recomm
an access can
t and resident
nd manageme
her have comp
ence in Appen
le and multius
e area are div
the exclusive
nal areas.
of a roadway s
y by guide sig
tor vehicles.
ays with at lea
influx of jobs
support multim
or these altern
and alternative
nty study area
sing one vehic
mmunity. Thi
r connections
he feasibility s
mended oper
n be an altern
tial corridors.
ent issues.
pleted a multi
ndix 1C. Opp
se plans will b
vided into the
use of pedes
shoulder for p
gnage only w
ast 14 feet wi
Final R
December
and people in
modal alterna
natives curren
e modes with
a is provided
cle. A feasibi
is study’s
between maj
study indicate
ating various
ative to roadw
Community
i-use path and
portunities to
be evaluated
following four
strians, bicycle
preferential us
ithout special
ide to
Report
r 2010
n the
atives
ntly,
out
by
lity
jor
ed
fixed
ways
d/or
as
r
es
se by
l lane
The b
syste
Pede
The t
elem
and p
syste
conti
signa
wher
1.3.5 T
The h
obtai
recor
The d
The h
This
were
crash
Alcoh
fatal
The d
throu
local
bicycle, if ade
em to enhanc
estrian Syste
two types of p
ment along urb
public recreat
em, priority sh
nuity of the s
alization or ot
re warranted.
TRAFFIC AC
historical traff
ined from the
rds. The thre
data also sho
highest conce
is not unexpe
e no crashes w
hes in the stu
hol-related cr
crashes. Fig
data identifies
ugh Safford a
improvemen
equately plan
ce mobility and
em
pedestrian fac
ban roadways
tion areas tha
hould be give
ystem. Since
her protection
CCIDENTS
fic accident d
ADOT Motor
ee incorporate
owed that Sta
entration of tr
ected given th
with fatalities
dy area are s
rashes accoun
gure 1-11 show
s the areas of
nd Thatcher.
ts and/or an a
ned for and u
d recreationa
cilities are sid
s and near loc
at attract sign
n to segment
the need to c
n of pedestria
ata (1998 to 2
r Vehicle Dep
ed cities acco
te Rural Road
raffic accident
he high traffic
within the city
shown in Figu
nt for more th
ws the severi
f concern with
By reviewing
alternate rout
27
utilized, can p
al riding.
dewalks and m
cal activity ce
ificant pedest
ts that would p
cross major s
an crossings a
2006) for Gra
partment, whic
unt for about
ds have more
ts were gener
volume along
y, only outsid
ure 1-9 and Fi
han 10 percen
ity of crashes
hin the study
g the data, we
te corridor ma
lay an import
multi-use path
nters such as
trian travel. In
provide safe s
streets often d
at these locat
aham County
ch includes a
50 percent o
e accidents th
rally within the
g this roadwa
e and at the e
gure 1-10.
nt of total cras
s over the last
area to be alo
e can determi
ay provide.
ant role in the
hs. Sidewalks
s schools, com
n developing
school routes
discourages w
tions should b
as shown in T
ll city and cou
f total crashe
han Other Rur
e study area
ay segment.
edge of city b
shes and abo
t five years.
ong the state
ine the potent
Final R
December
e transportatio
s are an impo
mmercial cent
a pedestrian
s or to enhanc
walking,
be considered
Table 1-5, wa
unty accident
s in the count
ral Roads.
along US 191
In 2006, there
boundaries. T
ut 50 percent
highway syst
tial benefits th
Report
r 2010
on
ortant
ters
ce
d
as
ty.
1.
e
Traffic
t of
tem
hat
Figure 1-9: Study Are
28
ea Roadway Traffic Crashes 2006
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Figure 1-10: Safford/Thatch
29
her Area Roadway Traffic Crashes
Final R
December
2006
Report
r 2010
Gra
Pim
Saf
Tha
Sta
Oth
aham Count
ma
fford
atcher
ate Rural Ro
her Rural Ro
Source: Arizo
PDO – Prop
Source: Ari
ty
oads
oads
ona Departmen
perty Damage
izona Departm
Table 1-5:
1998
1999
395 35
23 12
103 85
55 5
135 10
76 67
nt of Motor Veh
Figure
Only
ent of Motor V
: Total Crash
2000
56 376
2 14
5 113
1 48
06 117
7 79
hicles Crash Fac
e 1-11: Cras
Vehicles Crash F
30
hes in Graha
2001
336
3
70
50
131
82
cts Summary 1
sh Severity i
Facts Summary
am County 1
2002
318
0
80
70
102
66
1998-2006
in Graham C
y 1998-2006
1998-2006
2003
2004
340 28
3 3
115 9
64 6
98 6
60 5
County
Final R
December
2005
85 300
4
93 111
63 63
67 77
59 45
Report
r 2010
2006
310
9
90
58
93
60
1.3.6 E
This
utilize
cond
Spee
The s
35 to
limits
Coun
EXISTING TR
section prese
ed in the ana
ditions of the s
ed Limits
speed limits w
o 45 miles per
s on US 70 an
nty study area
RAFFIC AN
ents the exist
lysis of netwo
street system
within the stud
r hour on the
nd US 191 inc
a speed limits
ND OPERAT
ing traffic and
ork performan
in the study a
dy area gene
collectors and
creases to 55
s. A closer loo
31
TING CONDI
d roadway cha
nce. Included
area.
rally range fro
d arterials in t
5 or 65 miles p
ok at the Saffo
ITIONS
aracteristics a
d is a discussi
om 25 miles p
the urban are
per hour. Figu
ord/Thatcher
and defines th
ion of the exis
per hour on th
ea. In the rura
ure 1-12 show
area is show
Final R
December
he methodolo
sting operatin
he local street
al area, the sp
ws the Graham
n in Figure 1-
Report
r 2010
ogies
ng
ts, to
peed
m
-13.
Figure 1-12: Stud
32
dy Area Roadway Speed Limits
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Figure 1-13: Safford/Thatch
33
er Area Roadway Speed Limits 200
Final R
December
07
Report
r 2010
Exis
Exist
Figur
traffic
2007
As sh
US 1
US 1
locat
ting Traffic
ting daily traff
re 1-15. The
c count. Othe
7 City of Saffo
hown in the fi
91. US 70 ca
91 also has n
tions include 2
fic volumes on
volumes on U
ers were obta
ord Transporta
gure, the high
arries nearly
near 10,000 a
20th Ave, 8th
n the street sy
US 70 and US
ained from HP
ation Study.
hest daily traf
20,000 vehic
average daily
Ave and 8th
34
ystem in the s
S 191 were o
PMS annual a
ffic volumes a
les on an ave
traffic south o
St in the Saff
study area ar
btained from
average daily
are on the two
erage daily ba
of the Safford
ford city vicin
re shown in F
ADOT 2007 s
traffic counts
o principal art
asis inside the
d area. Other
ity.
Final R
December
igure 1-14 an
state highway
s (2006) and t
terials: US 70
e Safford city
high volume
Report
r 2010
nd
y
the
and
area.
Figure 1-14: Study Area R
35
Roadways Existing Traffic Volume 2
Final R
December
2007
Report
r 2010
Figure 1-15: Safford/Thatcher Are
36
ea Roadways Existing Traffic Volum
Final R
December
me 2007
Report
r 2010
Oper
A rev
resul
used
The v
being
• LO
in
ex
• LO
sp
tr
• LO
us
• LO
T
• LO
F
ex
• LO
Road
the ro
forec
cong
and w
for ac
areas
With
Leve
Highw
param
The e
thres
rating Condi
view of existin
lts of the anal
d to describe t
various levels
g the worst op
OS A: Best, f
nterrupted flow
xtremely high
OS B: Flow i
peeds is relat
affic.
OS C: Flow i
sers. Maneu
OS D: High d
he driver is ex
OS E: Flow i
reedom to ma
xtremely poor
OS F: Worst
dway segmen
oadway, max
casted averag
gestion. Road
warrant furthe
cceptable roa
s transitioning
the coordina
el of Service (
way Capacity
meters. It pro
existing and f
shold volumes
tions
ng traffic cond
lysis are expr
the degree of
s of service ra
perating cond
free flow ope
w facilities). F
h.
s stable, but
tively unaffect
is stable, but
vering within
density but st
xperiencing a
s at or near c
aneuver withi
r.
, facility has f
nt level of serv
ximum desired
ge daily traffic
dways having
er review for p
adway perform
g from rural to
tion of TAC m
LOS)/ Capac
y Software+, H
ovides a more
future year fo
s shown in Ta
ditions include
ressed in term
f traffic conge
ange from A t
ditions. LOS i
rations (on un
Freedom to se
presence of o
ted, but there
the operation
traffic require
able flow. Sp
generally po
capacity. All s
n traffic is ext
failed, or a bre
vice is based
d level of serv
c volume. Ro
a level of se
possible impr
mance, and L
o urban.
members and
ity lookup tab
HighPlan Mod
e detailed LOS
recasted traff
able 1-6 to ob
37
es an analysis
ms of Level of
stion.
o F, with A be
is generally d
ninterrupted f
elect desired
other users is
e is a slight de
n of users is b
es substantial
peed and free
oor level of co
speeds are re
tremely difficu
eakdown has
on the numb
vice capacity,
adway LOS is
rvice in the D
rovements. In
LOS D is gene
ADOT Regio
ble. The upda
dule. The Hig
S criterion for
fic volumes w
btain the oper
s of road seg
f Service (LOS
eing the best
efined as foll
flow facilities)
speeds and t
s noticeable.
ecline in the fr
becoming affe
vigilance on
edom to mane
omfort and co
educed to a lo
ult. Comfort a
s occurred.
ber of lanes, th
roadway geo
s used to des
D, E or F range
n rural areas,
erally conside
onal Traffic, th
ted lookup ta
ghPlan Module
r various types
were compare
ating conditio
ment traffic o
S). Level of s
operating con
ows:
and very low
to maneuver
Freedom to s
reedom to ma
ected by the p
the part of th
euver are sev
nvenience.
ow, but relativ
and convenie
he functional
ometrics, and
scribe the deg
e are conside
LOS C is the
ered acceptab
he project tea
ble was deve
e takes into a
s of rural and
d with the up
on and LOS o
Final R
December
perations. Th
service is the
nditions and F
w delay (on
within traffic i
select desired
aneuver within
presence of ot
he user.
verely restricte
vely uniform v
ence levels ar
classification
d the existing
gree of traffic
ered congeste
e general stan
ble for roadwa
m updated th
eloped by usin
account local
d urban faciliti
dated capacit
f the roadway
Report
r 2010
he
term
is
d
n
ther
ed.
value.
e
of
or
ed
ndard
ays in
he
ng
traffic
es.
ty
ys.
Figur
road
desti
res 1-16 and
system. Tra
nation studie
1-17 present
ffic projection
s.
the updated
ns are based o
38
LOS for the e
on standard t
existing and fu
traffic projecti
uture years fo
on technique
Final R
December
or Graham Co
s without orig
Report
r 2010
ounty
gin-
123
Source: AAD
. Functional c
2. A five-lane s
3. Assumptions
and D-factor
Ro
Urban Loca
Rural Major
Rural Minor
Urban Princ
Urban M
Rural Pr
Rural
Rural M
Urban Colle
DT based Level o
classification cod
segment and a th
s: PHF 0.88 for r
rs are generalize
oadway
al Street
r Collector
r Collector
cipal Arterial
Minor Arterial
incipal Arterial
Local Street
Minor Arterial
ector
Ta
of Service Criteri
e from ADOT HP
hree-lane segme
rural area; 0.90 f
ed from ADOT HP
Functional
Code 1
22
6
6
666
66
66
666
777777
77
88
8
88
9
99
14
14
14
14
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
17
17
17
17
17
17
19
19
able 1-6: Ca
ia from Highway
PMS database
ent include a two-for
urban area; 10
PMS database.
Speed
Limit
45 MPH
45 MPH
35 MPH
35 MPH
45 MPH
50 MPH
55 MPH
55 MPH
55 MPH
55 MPH
65 MPH
65 MPH
65 MPH
65 MPH
25 MPH
35 MPH
45 MPH
45 MPH
50 MPH
55 MPH
55 MPH
65 MPH
25 MPH
35 MPH
45 MPH
55 MPH
65 MPH
45 MPH
45 MPH
45 MPH
35 MPH
35 MPH
45 MPH
55 MPH
25 MPH
35 MPH
35 MPH
35 MPH
35 MPH
45 MPH
45 MPH
45 MPH
55 MPH
55 MPH
25 MPH
25 MPH
25 MPH
35 MPH
35 MPH
45 MPH
25 MPH
35 MPH
39
apacity/LOS
Capacity Softwa
-way left-turn lan
0% Heavy Vehic
Two Way
# of Lanes
C
5 lanes
7 lanes
3 lanes 2
5 lanes 2
5 lanes 2
2 lanes
2 lanes
3 lanes 2
4 lane divided
5 lanes 2
2 lanes
3 lanes 2
4 lane divided
5 lanes 2
2 lanes
2 lanes
2 lanes
4 lanes
2 lanes
2 lanes
3 lanes 2
2 lanes
2 lanes
2 lanes
2 lanes
2 lanes
2 lanes
2 lanes
3 lanes
4 lanes
3 lanes 2
5 lanes 2
5 lanes 2
5 lanes 2
5 lanes 2
2 lanes
3 lanes 2
4 lanes
5 lanes 2
2 lanes
3 lanes 2
5 lanes 2
2 lanes
5 lanes
2 lanes
3 lanes
4 lanes
2 lanes
3 lanes 2
2 Lanes
2 lanes
2 lanes
Lookup Tab
are (HCS+) Vers
ne.
cle percentage; 0
Capacity
LOS A
Capa
LO
15,200 24,
22,800 36,
- 3,1
13,400 22,
15,200 24,
2,000 4,2
2,000 4,2
2,500 5,2
15,200 24,
18,000 29,
2,000 4,2
2,500 5,2
17,900 29,
21,200 35,
- 3,1
- 3,1
2,300 5,9
14,100 22,
2,300 6,4
2,300 7,0
2,900 8,8
2,200 4,7
- 2,0
- 2,0
- 1,8
1,400 3,0
1,400 3,0
- 2,8
- 3,5
15,900 26,
- 1,8
13,400 22,
15,200 24,
17,900 29,
13,400 22,
- 1,5
- 1,8
10,600 17,
13,400 22,
1,100 3,6
1,400 4,5
15,200 24,
1,300 5,3
17,900 29,
- 1,8
- 2,2
10,600 17,
- 1,8
- 2,2
1,300 4,2
- 2,0
- 2,0
ble
ion 5.21, HIGHP
0.90 Local Adjust
acity
S B
Capacity
LOS C
400 35,300
600 52,900
100 7,600
200 32,000
400 35,300
200 6,900
200 6,900
200 8,600
800 35,400
400 42,000
200 6,900
200 8,600
400 39,900
000 47,500
100 7,700
100 7,700
900 9,700
700 32,800
400 10,700
000 11,600
800 14,500
700 7,800
000 4,900
000 4,900
800 4,400
000 5,000
000 5,000
800 6,900
500 8,600
000 37,100
800 6,900
200 32,000
400 35,300
300 41,800
200 32,000
500 5,500
800 6,900
500 25,200
200 32,000
600 7,900
500 9,900
400 35,300
300 10,100
300 41,800
800 6,400
200 8,000
500 25,200
800 6,400
200 8,100
200 9,300
000 6,500
000 6,500
Final R
December
PLAN Module
tment Factor; K-f
y Capacity
LOS D
C
46,700
70,000
12,200
42,300
46,700
11,000
11,000
13,700
45,500
54,000
11,000
13,700
47,300
56,200
10,500
10,500
13,100
43,400
14,400
15,700
19,700
12,400
6,700
6,700
7,000
8,000
8,000
10,900
13,700
47,700
11,000
42,300
46,700
53,700
42,300
8,800
11,000
33,400
42,300
11,500
14,400
46,700
14,000
53,700
10,300
12,800
33,400
10,300
12,900
13,600
10,600
10,600
Report
r 2010
factor
Capacity
LOS E
54,300
81,400
22,200
51,600
54,300
17,700
17,700
22,200
50,500
60,000
17,700
22,200
52,600
62,400
13,200
13,200
16,500
50,400
18,100
19,800
24,700
20,000
8,500
8,500
12,900
12,900
12,900
19,900
24,900
53,000
14,400
51,600
54,300
59,700
51,600
11,500
14,400
40,700
51,600
14,700
18,400
54,300
17,900
59,700
13,500
16,900
40,700
13,600
17,000
17,400
14,300
14,300
Figure 1-16: Study Ar
40
rea Existing Level of Service 2007
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Figure 1-17: Safford/Thatc
41
cher Area Existing Level of Service
Final R
December
2007
Report
r 2010
1.4 FU
The G
years
nece
years
The f
base
resid
impro
1.4.1 G
The p
popu
empl
forec
Base
Popu
betw
were
the U
expe
deve
will a
of a n
no po
The e
ratio
grow
traffic
antic
Furth
appro
Sierr
UTURE C
Graham Cou
s. The impact
essary improv
s for this alter
future conditio
ed on the mod
dential and em
ovements, inc
GROWTH FO
primary meas
ulation in the s
loyment in the
cast model.
ed on the Ariz
ulation Model
ween year 202
e applied to th
US 191 corrid
ected to exper
elopment is pl
also experienc
new subdivisi
opulation grow
employment
as the popula
wth rates were
c projection d
cipated to be 2
her adjustmen
oved. Higher
ra Del Sol dev
CONDITIO
nty area popu
t of this growt
vements can b
rnate route st
ons projection
del developed
mployment de
cluding the TI
ORECASTS
sures of grow
study area is
e study area i
zona Departm
, the populatio
23 and year 2
he study area
or, base popu
rience higher
anned. The n
ce slightly hig
ion. Farm co
wth in the futu
projection ass
ation growth i
e applied to ge
done by the C
2.3%, and slig
nts were mad
r growth rates
velopment is e
ONS
ulation and em
th on the tran
be identified a
udy are 2020
ns discussed
d for the Grah
evelopments,
IP, 1998 Grah
wth used in thi
34,270 and th
is tabulated b
ment of Econo
on for Graham
030; and 0.66
to form a bas
ulation and la
growth rates
north-western
gher than base
mmunities in
ure.
sumes that th
in the majority
et the baselin
CK Group in 20
ghtly higher a
e in areas wh
s are applied
expected to c
42
mployment ha
sportation sys
and programm
0, 2030, and 2
in the followi
am County S
as well as an
ham County S
s study were
here are 10,1
by 76 Traffic A
omic Security
m County will
69% between
seline project
and availability
, with the high
n boundaries
eline growth p
the study reg
he future emp
y of the study
ne employmen
007, the annu
along the US
here high dev
in the southe
create high re
as steadily inc
stem needs to
med for imple
2040.
ng section ha
SATs. The SA
ny currently id
SATs and the
population an
32 employee
Analysis Zone
Demographic
grow at an a
n year 2030 a
ion. Based on
y, the souther
hest in the are
of the study a
projections du
gion are proje
ployment grow
y area. There
nt projection f
ual growth in
191 corridor w
velopments ar
rn boundaries
esidential deve
creased over
o be quantifie
mentation. Th
ave been dete
ATs study inc
entified roadw
e US 191 DCR
nd employme
es. The popu
es (TAZs) for
c Cohort-Com
average annu
nd year 2040
n the future g
rn portion of t
eas where the
area, around
ue to the plan
ected to exper
wth will keep a
efore, the 0.78
for all the TAZ
most of Grah
where it is ant
re planned an
s of the study
elopment eas
Final R
December
the past ten
ed so that
he future hori
ermined and
luded all plan
way
R.
ent. The curre
lation and
use in the tra
mponent
al rate of 0.78
0. These rates
rowth trends
the study area
e Sierra Del S
Klondyke Ro
nned developm
rience very litt
about the sam
88% and 0.66
Zs. Based on
ham County is
ticipated to be
nd have been
y area since th
st of US 191 a
Report
r 2010
zon
nned
ent
avel
88%
s
along
a is
Sol
ad
ment
tle or
me
69%
the
s
e 3%.
he
and
comm
no in
Over
secti
in the
expe
the S
High
show
furthe
locat
locat
mercial devel
ncrease in the
rall, as shown
ons of the inc
e city center a
ected along U
Sierra Del Sol
employment
wn in Figure 1
er away from
tions in the ar
ted at TAZ 58
opment west
e future.
n in Figure 1-1
corporated Ci
areas in the T
S 191 at the s
developmen
corridors are
-19. The tota
the city cente
rea. New min
8.
of US 191. F
18, population
ty of Safford a
TAZs adjacen
south end of
t.
e projected to
al employmen
er, with the ex
nes will be loc
43
Farm employm
n density is ex
and Town of
t to and south
the study are
be on the ma
nt by TAZ num
xception of gr
cated in TAZ 1
ment is expec
xpected to be
Thatcher. Th
h of US 70. A
ea; this is expe
ajor highways
mbers decrea
rowth in the th
16 and TAZ 5
cted to experi
e the highest i
he highest de
Also, high po
ected to be p
s along US 70
ase as the TA
hree major em
54 and the Sa
Final R
December
ience very litt
in the souther
nsity is expec
pulation dens
rimarily driven
0 and US 191
AZs are distrib
mployment
afford Prison i
Report
r 2010
tle or
rn
cted
sity is
n by
as
buted
s
Figure 1-18: Study Are
44
ea 2040 Population Density by TAZ
Final R
December
Z
Report
r 2010
Figure 1-19: Study
45
Area 2040 Employment by TAZ
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Prop
Acco
Augu
propo
1-7.
empl
• W
• T
• B
si
• H
• M
• H
• N
• B
One
191 b
and i
Base
TAC
the fu
posed Develo
ording to an A
ust 2007 and
osed land use
Additional pla
loyment figure
Welker Farm in
he Safford M
ear Creek Re
ingle family h
Holiday Inn Ex
Motel 6 in TAZ
Hampton Inn E
Napa Car Care
lasias Family
of the major
between Qua
is expected to
ed on the size
, the populatio
uture analysis
opments
ADOT Traffic P
additional info
e developmen
anned projec
es are:
n TAZ 48, 40
all in TAZ 68,
esort in TAZ 1
omes. To be
xpress in TAZ
Z 68, 67 room
Express in TA
e in TAZ 43, 1
y Steak House
planned deve
ail Trail & P Ra
o contain 5,54
e, status and l
on increase b
s years.
Projections an
ormation from
nt projects wi
ts which were
acre industria
, 200 acre co
15, 700 room
e completed b
Z 68, 100 room
s.
AZ 46, 64 room
12,524 sq ft.
e in TAZ 47, 4
elopments in t
anch Road. T
45 single fam
locations of th
based on thes
46
nd Growth An
m the cities in
thin the study
e included in t
al and 760 ac
mmercial, to
hotel, 20,000
by 2018.
ms
ms.
4,376 sq ft.
the study area
This developm
ily housing un
he proposed p
se developme
nalysis report
the study are
y area has be
the existing a
cre residentia
be completed
0 sf commerc
a will be Sierr
ment is plann
nits.
projects and a
ent projects w
prepared by
ea, a list of ex
een developed
and future pop
l
d by 2018
ial, 300 townh
ra Del Sol loc
ned for build-o
additional dis
was projected
Final R
December
The CK Grou
xisting and
d, shown in T
pulation and
homes and 50
cated along U
out by year 20
cussion with
for each TAZ
Report
r 2010
up in
Table
00
US
025
the
Z for
TAZ
15
47 Blasi
24 C
25
47
18
25
25
39 E & C
24 EA
23
11
3
15
27 G
28 Go
21 G
42
27
46 H
68 H
20 H
46
Name
Bear Creek Resort
ias Family Steak Hou
Casa Blanca Condos
Comfort Inn
Copper Canyon
Cota Ranches
Diamond Springs
Double D Ranch
homes (Cota Ranch
AC Cota Town Homes
Eagle Meadows
Elmer Estates
Fred Web Park
Frye Mesa
olf Course RV Park I
olf Course RV Park II
oodman Apartments
Greenberg I
Greenberg II
ampton Inn Express
Holiday Inn Express
Howard Apartments
Kreigs Comfort Inn
use
hes)
s
N
S
N
Table 1-7: S
Stadium Ave
Hwy
East of US 70
1st
Chur
8th
23rd St betw
Reay L
1st
Centra
H
North of Golf Course R
South of Golf Course
Colle
Relation St bet
North of Golf Course R
High S
450 E
47
Study Area Dev
Address
4,376 sq ft
e and the Highline Ca
70 and Allred Ln
0 South of E Hollywoo
t St & Porter Ln
rch St & Allred Ln
h St & Railroad
ween 8th Ave & 2nd A
Ln and Ball Park Rd
Ave & Eagle Dr
al Rd & Webster Rd
ot Springs Rd
Rd between 20th Ave
Rd between 20th Ave
ege Ave & 4th St
tween 14th Ave & 20t
Rd between 20th Ave
School Ave & 1st St
Entertainment Ave
velopments
anal
od Dr
Ave
e & S 1st Ave
e & S 1st Ave
th Ave
e & S 1st Ave
# of Units
700
192
88
380
129
14
24
81
175
35
29
92
49
92
40
83
140
64
100
48
88
Dec
Sta
Under Co
Com
Com
Homes Unde
Homes Unde
Homes Unde
Com
Under Co
Homes Unde
Homes Unde
Final Pla
Com
Constructio
Final Pla
Final Pla
Under Co
Com
Final Report
cember 2010
atus
onstruction
mpleted
mpleted
er Construction
er Construction
er Construction
mpleted
onstruction
er Construction
er Construction
t Approved
mpleted
on Completed
t Approved
t Approved
onstruction
mplete
TAZ
22
39
49 Mo
68
15
43
42
54
38
27
52
46
27
68
31
25
42
29
8
27
39
49
48
Name
Marriot Hote
Mesa Vista Subd
ontana Vista Estates,
Subdivision
Motel 6
Mountain Vista e
Napa Car Ca
Palomino Ran
Phelps Dodge M
Pinaleno Foot
Quail Ridge Pha
Ranch at River Vie
River View Develo
Safford Hills Town
Safford Ma
Sierra Del Sol Deve
Spring Canyon E
Stone Willow
Swift Trail
Tempe View
The Village
Tierra Bonita
Township
Welker Farm
Ta
el
division
Eldon Angle
n
estates
are
nch
Mining
hills
ase II
ew LTD
opment
nhomes
ll
elopment
Estates
w
w
e
a II
m
ble 1-7: Study A
C
West Discovery P
US 191
Valley Vie
Relation S
Bowie to Miam
26th St b
Firs
East of U
Sunflower Canal
20t
US 191 bet
1
8th St b
Near southwe
24th St
S 1st Av
48
Area Developm
Address
Church St and Hwy 70
Park Blvd between 8th
1 between 24th St & 2
ew Dr & Pinaleno Mou
12,524 sq ft
t between 14th Ave &
i Going Parallel to US
between 17th Ave & 2
st Ave & Quail Ridge
US 70 North of E Holly
l between 8th Ave & G
th Ave South of Hosp
tween Quail Trail & P
st Ave & Union Cana
etween 20th Ave & 14
US 191 & Swift Trail
est corner of Webster
between 8th Ave & 14
ve between 27th St &
ments (continue
0
h Ave & 14th Ave
26th St
untain Rd
20th Ave
S 191 & US 70
20th Ave
Dr
ywood Dr
Graveyard wash
ital
Ranch Rd
al
4th Ave
r Rd & US 70
4th Ave
24th St
ed)
# of Units
70
70
220
67
192
40
0
62
120
227
231
104
200
2133
148
64
90
64
11
30
150
760
Dec
Stat
Comple
Comple
Comple
Final Plat A
Final P
Conceptua
Comple
Homes Under C
Rezon
Conceptua
Pending Appro
Conceptua
Final Plat A
Under Cons
Pre-Applicati
Homes Under C
Under Cons
Final P
Final Report
cember 2010
us
eted
eted
eted
Approved
Plat
al Phase
eted
Construction
ning
al Phase
oval of Plans
al Phase
Approved
struction
ion Phase
Construction
struction
Plat
Plan
In ord
base
exist
Tran
The t
listed
Rou
Disco
Pa
8th A
Brid
8th A
Brid
Pete
Wa
20th
Sidew
US
US
US
US
US
Sourc
ned street sy
der to perform
e street system
ing street sys
sportation Im
transportation
d in Table 1-1
ute
overy
ark
Ave
dge
8th
Ave
dge
8th
rson
ash Sa
Ave
walks
20th
191 Te
C
191 Dial W
191 I-10
191
70 H
ce: ADOT and
ystem
m an analysis
m must be es
stem with the
provement P
n improvemen
0.
Table 1
Location
Safford
h Ave – Gila R
Bridge, Saffo
h Ave – Gila R
Bridge, Saffo
afford-Bryce R
Ave from US
Relation St
en Ranch to O
Canyon (SEG I
Wash to Ten
(SEG II)
0 to Jct US 70
IV – 8th St)
8th St – US 7
Hollywood Dr
Solomon
SouthEastern
s of future traf
stablished. Th
schedule of a
rogram (TIP)
nt projects tha
1-8: Transpo
S
EN
River
rd H
River
rd BR
Road
70 to
Owl
III)
Ranch
0 (SEG
70
to
Arizona Gover
49
ffic operations
he future base
all the confirm
and 1998 Gr
at were incorp
ortation Imp
Fund
Source
HNCMNT
HPP/BR
R/SEC 115
HES
TE
STP
STP
State
State
State
rnments Organ
s for the final
e network wa
med projects l
raham County
porated in the
provement P
Type of
Enhance
Bridge Con
Bridge D
Widen to
Sidewalk, Mu
and Stree
Constru
Construct
Road
Construct
Road
Widening to
Upgrade to
Widening to
with a contin
left-tur
ization (SEAG
horizon year
as obtained by
isted in the cu
y SATS recom
e future based
Projects
f Work
ements
nstruction
Design
o 4 lanes
ultiuse Path,
et Lights
uction
t Parallel
way
t Parallel
way
o four-lane
four lanes
o four-lanes
uous center
n lane
O)
Final R
December
2040, a futur
y updating the
urrent
mmended pro
d network are
Program
Year
2008
2008
2008
2008
2010
2008
2011
NP
NP
2011
Report
r 2010
e
e
ojects.
e
1.4.2 T
The t
gene
attrac
deve
netw
capa
betw
The p
the in
acco
gravi
the d
trips
minim
of the
TRAVEL FOR
transportation
eration rates f
ctions for eac
elopment of th
work data inclu
acity. Using th
ween zones ar
productions a
nputs to the th
omplished usin
ity model whic
distance betw
distributed to
mum paths (b
e modeling pr
RECASTING
n modeling pr
for the study a
ch zone. Con
he highway ne
udes the Traff
he street segm
re determined
and attraction
hird set of tas
ng a mathem
ch assumes t
een zones. T
o/from each zo
based on time
rocess is show
G MODEL
rocedure invo
area are com
ncurrently, the
etwork to repr
fic Analysis Z
ment lengths a
d.
s for each zo
sks, the trip di
atical model.
that the attrac
The result of t
one. These t
e) to produce
wn in Figure
50
olves a numbe
plied and the
e street system
resent the stre
Zones (TAZs),
and speeds in
ne and the m
istribution and
The most co
ction of trips b
the gravity mo
trips are then
traffic forecas
1-20.
er of steps. L
n used to calc
m to be includ
eet system ne
, street segme
n the network
minimum paths
d assignment
ommonly used
between zone
odel is a trip t
assigned to t
sts for the net
Land use data
culate trip pro
ded in the mo
eed to be ide
ent lengths, s
k, the minimum
s between zo
t process. Trip
d distribution
es is inversely
table matrix re
the street sys
twork. A grap
Final R
December
a and trip
oductions and
odel and the
ntified. The
speed, and
m time paths
nes are used
p distribution
model is the
y proportional
epresenting a
tem, via the
phical illustrat
Report
r 2010
d
d as
is
to
all
tion
Figure 1-20: Trave
51
l Forecasting Modeling Process
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Mod
The d
integ
gene
enco
assig
forec
Befo
of ex
TP+
assig
comp
Trip g
from
chara
numb
of the
el Calibratio
demand mod
grated comput
eral framewor
ompassing sim
gnment for bo
casting metho
re the transpo
xisting traffic c
and to develo
gnment are pe
puter-simulate
generation ra
Graham Cou
acteristics an
ber of trips ge
e zones.
n
els were crea
ter package f
rk for impleme
mple 4-step m
oth highway a
odology was a
ortation mode
conditions mu
op the existin
erformed usin
ed volumes.
ates develope
unty 1998 SAT
d travel patte
enerated in ea
Trip
Dwel
Unit
Retai
Office
Gene
ated using Tra
for traffic forec
enting a wide
models of trip
and transit sys
applied withou
el can be used
ust be validate
g land use da
ng the modeli
ed for the stud
TS with the a
ern as determ
ach internal z
Table 1-9:
Rates
Ho
Ba
W
ling
1
il 5
e 2
eral 2
52
ansportation P
casting proce
variety of trav
generation, tr
stems. In this
ut the mode c
d to forecast
ed. The first s
ata for each z
ng software.
dy model, pres
adjustments m
ined from the
zone calculate
Trip Genera
ome
ased
Work
Hom
Bas
Offi
1.48 3.8
5.2 16.1
2.73 2.9
2.03 4.0
Planning Plus
ess developed
vel demand fo
rip distribution
s study, the co
choice consid
traffic volume
step was to b
zone. Then, tr
The result is
sented in Tab
made based o
e new model.
ed to identify t
ation Rates
me
ed
ce
Non-
Home
Based
85 1.09
12 4.68
93 2.34
06 0.91
s (TP+) prog
d by Citilabs.
orecasting pr
n, mode choic
onventional fo
eration.
es, the model
build the highw
rip generation
a loaded hig
ble 1-11, were
on the small c
Using those
the relative tr
e
d
Final R
December
ram, which is
TP+ provide
rocesses
ce, and trip
our-step dem
's representa
way network i
n, distribution
hway network
e initially deriv
ommunity
rates, the tot
ip intensity of
Report
r 2010
s an
s a
and
tion
into
and
k with
ved
al
f each
In ad
zone
from
exter
(espe
ident
south
Sanc
The t
restra
stree
then
ddition to eval
es represent tr
external zone
rnal TAZ. Ba
ecially mining
tified for this s
h of Artesia R
chez Rd and C
traffic assignm
ained assignm
ets. If the volu
re-assigned t
uating interna
raffic entering
es is distribut
sed on the di
g locations) ar
study. These
Rd, US 191 ea
Cluff Ranch R
ment was acc
ment is an eff
ume on a roa
to the shortes
al trips, trips g
g and exiting t
ted as through
stribution of r
round the are
e external stat
ast of the US
Rd as shown
complished us
fort to replicat
d reaches ca
st time path.
53
generated by
the model are
h traffic to ano
regional traffic
ea and previou
tions are loca
70/US191 sp
in Figure 1-2
sing a capaci
te the actual t
pacity, the pa
the external z
ea from outsid
other externa
c, locations of
us studies, se
ted on west U
plit, SR 366 w
1.
ty restrained
traffic conditio
ath times are
zones are est
de the plannin
al zone or as i
f major emplo
even external
US 70, east U
west of US 191
process. The
on based on t
re-calculated
Final R
December
timated. Exte
ng area. Traf
internal trips t
oyment cente
zones were
US 70, US 191
1, San Jose
e capacity
the capacity o
and the traffi
Report
r 2010
ernal
ffic
to an
r
1
of the
ic is
Figure 1-
54
-21: External Stations
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Calib
The c
exist
adjus
facto
intraz
zone
the tr
Initia
addit
Scre
Anot
scree
summ
remo
segm
In the
the to
volum
scree
betw
exist
all of
bration Facto
computer sim
ing conditions
sted to improv
ors which can
zonal trip time
es has on the
rip within a zo
lly, coarse ad
tional check w
eenlines
her means of
enlines. A sc
med. This tec
oves the discr
ments. The sc
e calibration p
otal simulated
mes, then a p
enline. This p
ween existing a
ing volumes a
f the screenlin
ors
mulated volum
s were being
ve the simula
be adjusted
es. The frictio
relative attrac
one so that a
djustments we
was made of t
f analyzing tra
creenline is an
chnique provi
repancies tha
creenlines us
process, scre
d traffic volum
percentage ad
percentage is
and simulated
are being rep
nes are within
mes were com
simulated. A
ation. This adj
include the st
on factors are
ctiveness of t
certain perce
ere made to t
the overall tra
affic moveme
n imaginary lin
ides a conven
at are inherent
sed for this an
eenlines are u
me across a sc
djustment is m
s then applied
d volumes ind
plicated well.
n 10 percent o
55
mpared to the
number of m
ustment proc
treet segment
used to defin
rips between
entage of trips
he model to s
affic in the are
nt in an area
ne across wh
nient means f
t in model ge
nalysis are sho
sed to verify
creenline is lo
made to the co
to adjust the
dicates that th
As shown in
of existing traf
existing traffic
odel paramet
cess is the cal
t speed and c
ne the effect t
zones. The i
s must leave a
shift traffic and
ea using scree
is by examin
ich all the tra
for examining
nerated volum
own in Figure
the total amo
ower (or highe
omputer simu
e individual for
he model resu
Table 1-12, th
ffic counts.
c to determin
ters and facto
libration of the
capacity, fricti
that the distan
ntrazonal trip
zone to be s
d replicate tra
enlines.
ing volumes a
ffic flows can
g major travel
mes on individ
e 1-22.
ount of traffic o
er) than the e
ulated volume
recasts. The
ults are reaso
he simulation
Final R
December
e how well th
ors can be
e model. The
ion factors, an
nce between
times add tim
satisfied.
avel patterns.
across
be counted a
trends and
dual street
on area stree
existing traffic
es across the
comparison
onable and tha
n volumes acr
Report
r 2010
e
nd
me to
An
and
ts. If
at
ross
Figure
56
1-22: Screen Lines
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
1.4.3 T
With
horiz
mode
and f
popu
addit
The v
the y
Tran
The d
throu
appro
remo
The m
and a
191 w
191 w
see g
to se
Screenl
Gila Riv
E-W
E-W 2
E-W 3
E-W 4
E-W 5
N-S 1
N-S 2
TRAVEL FOR
the travel for
zon years to b
eled for this s
final horizon y
ulation and em
tion, traffic at
volumes at th
year 2040 in a
sportation at
daily forecast
ugh Figure 1-3
opriate. The
ove discontinu
most heavily
along US 191
within incorpo
will exceed 30
growth as dra
ee increases.
Table 1-10
line
ver
1
RECASTS
recasting mod
be analyzed. T
study, and the
years. The m
mployment da
the external z
he external zo
accordance w
those areas.
t volumes for
30. The forec
adjustments
uities in mode
utilized roadw
1 leading up to
orated areas w
0,000 extend
amatic as the
0: Screenlin
Existing
Daily
Volumes
5,567
4,632
9,812
21,288
28,174
2,919
10,337
21,810
del properly c
The early hor
e interim year
model inputs fo
ata, and the p
zones was inc
ones were gen
with the histori
the horizon y
casts were de
were made to
el-generated n
ways in the st
o Safford. In
will be near 3
ing past SR 3
previous dec
57
e Compariso
Mod
Vo
2
2
2
alibrated, traf
rizon year 202
2030 was int
or the future c
lanned street
creased to ac
nerally increa
cal traffic gro
years of 2020
erived from th
o account for
numbers.
tudy area are
the year 202
30,000. By the
366 and 20,00
cade, the sam
ons Existing
del Daily
olumes
5,421
4,285
9,494
22,319
28,626
2,876
9,685
23,179
ffic forecasts
20 and final h
terpolated ba
conditions we
t system as p
ccount for gro
ased by 27% b
owth from the
, 2030, and 2
he model outp
known estim
along US 70
20, daily traffic
e year 2030,
00 outside of
me high traffic
g Vs. Model
Model/
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
can be develo
orizon year o
sed on the re
ere based on
reviously des
owth outside t
by the year 2
Arizona Depa
2040 are show
puts and adjus
ation errors in
within Saffor
c volume alon
daily traffic vo
city limits. W
volume segm
Final R
December
/Existing
.97
.93
.97
.05
.02
.99
.94
.06
oped for the f
of 2040 were b
esults for the e
the projected
scribed. In
the study area
020 and 88%
artment of
wn in Figure 1
sted where
n the model a
rd and Thatch
ng US 70 and
olumes along
While 2040 wil
ments will con
Report
r 2010
future
both
early
d
a.
% by
1-25
and
her,
US
g US
l not
ntinue
1.4.4 O
A rev
opera
previ
To ex
comp
depe
rural
trave
Serv
beco
OPERATING
view of future
ations. The r
iously describ
xamine the o
pared to LOS
endent on roa
roadways. B
el speed will b
ice standards
omes more de
G CONDITIO
traffic condit
results of the
bed in Section
perating cond
D threshold
adway classific
Based on roa
be greatly red
s are based o
eveloped and
ONS
ions involved
analysis are e
n 1.3.6.
ditions of arte
volumes for v
cations, with
adway classifi
uced and the
on current clas
employment
58
the analysis
expressed in
rial street seg
various types
urban roads r
cation standa
e ability to pas
ssifications, w
and populatio
of projected r
terms of Leve
gments, the d
of roadway.
reaching capa
ards, if capaci
ss will be rest
which may be
on increases
roadway segm
el of Service
aily traffic vol
The Level of
acity at lower
ity is exceede
ricted. The c
come obsolet
.
Final R
December
ments traffic
(LOS) as
lumes are
f Service is
r volumes tha
ed on a roadw
current Level o
te as the area
Report
r 2010
n
way,
of
a
Figure 1-23: Expec
59
cted Number of Lanes 2040
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Figure 1-24: Safford/Thatcher
60
r Area Expected Number of Lanes 2
Final R
December
2040
Report
r 2010
Figur
future
opera
are c
• 8t
• 8t
• U
• U
Until
cond
Road
2020
wide
not b
Alter
By th
opera
70 w
addit
Rela
deve
In 20
Road
to a 4
Artes
LOS
F bet
The a
show
Saffo
and U
corrid
re 1-25 throug
e horizon yea
ating at accep
currently oper
th St between
th Ave betwe
US Route 191
US Route 70 b
2014, the roa
dition. In 2014
d and Lone S
0, it is anticipa
ned to a four
be determined
nate Route S
he year 2020,
ate as, will be
will also be ove
tional capacity
tions St, 20th
elopment, Arte
030, the segm
d. Although th
4-lane divided
sia Rd. More
E or F. Stock
tween Quail T
assumed imp
wn in Figure 1
ord will be ope
US 70/US 19
dor within the
gh Figure 1-3
ars. The exis
ptable levels
rating at or ov
n 20th Avenue
en 10th Stree
between 11th
between Barn
adway numbe
4 or 2015, it is
tar Road will
ated by the tra
lane divided
d until comple
Study.
the principal
e over capacit
er capacity. T
y for the incre
h Ave, and 8th
esia Road wo
ment of US 70
he model assu
d highway, th
segments on
kton Road wil
Trail and Arte
provements th
-23 & 1-24. B
erating at LOS
1 Split will ex
e study area.
30, illustrates
sting LOS res
of services in
ver capacity:
e and 14th Av
et and 8th Str
h Street and
ney Lane and
er of lanes in
s anticipated b
be widened t
affic model th
highway, alth
etion of the US
arterial roads
ty in much of
The widened
eased traffic.
h St. With th
ould experienc
0 is anticipated
umes that US
e increased c
n the previous
l share the tra
esia Rd.
hat will be com
By 2040, mos
S E or F. Eas
xperience LOS
61
the Level of S
sults show tha
n the current y
ve
reet
US Route 70
Bowie Avenu
the study are
by the traffic m
o a 4-lane roa
at US Route
hough the act
S 191 Design
s in Safford a
the city cente
US191 on the
Other segme
e almost fully
ce LOS E.
d to be at LO
S 191 south o
capacity seem
s congested a
affic from US
mpleted by 20
st segments o
st of Safford d
S E. LOS F is
Service on the
at most of the
year 2007. Th
ue
ea remains the
model that US
adway with a
191 south of
ual northern t
n Concept Re
and Thatcher,
er area. US 1
e south of Arm
ents expected
y completion o
S E between
f Armory Roa
ms inadequate
arterials and u
191 to the so
040 are show
on collector a
downtown are
s expected on
e planned stre
study area ro
he following s
e same as the
S Route 70 be
center left tu
Armory Road
terminus of im
port and the G
which US 70
191, at the int
mory Road w
d to be at cap
of the Sierra D
Bowie Ave a
ad to SR 266
e for most seg
urban collecto
uth, which wi
wn in the numb
nd minor arte
ea, US 70 betw
n US 191 alm
Final R
December
eet system fo
oadways are
street segmen
e existing
etween Hollyw
rn lane. By y
d to SR 266 w
mprovements
Graham Coun
0 and US 191
tersection of U
will provide
pacity include
Del Sol
nd San Jose
has been wid
gments north
ors would be
ll expect LOS
ber of lanes a
erial streets w
ween Bowie A
most the entire
Report
r 2010
or the
nts
wood
year
will be
will
nty
US
dened
of
at
S E or
as
within
Ave
e
Figure 1
-25: Study A
62
Area 2020 Operating Conditions
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Figure 1-26: Safford/Thatch
63
her Area 2020 Operating Condition
Final R
December
ns
Report
r 2010
Figure 1
-27: Study A
64
Area 2030 Operating Conditions
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Figure 1-28: Safford/That
65
tcher Area 2030 Operating Conditio
Final R
December
ons
Report
r 2010
Figure 1
-29: Study A
66
Area 2040 Operating Conditions
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Figure 1-30: Safford/Thatch
67
her Area 2040 Operating Condition
Final R
December
ns
Report
r 2010
2 DE
2.1 DE
CO
2.1.1 N
In ord
numb
corrid
study
area
inters
mana
follow
Capa
The e
and U
analy
within
defic
191,
Exis
Using
70/U
inters
inade
with f
traffic
Envi
With
envir
ETERMIN
ETERMIN
ORRIDOR
NEED CRITE
der to determ
ber of criteria
dor can be ide
y area due to
to determine
section capac
agement, and
wing sections
acity and Lev
existing and f
US 191 opera
ysis was for th
n the study a
cient. This cre
possibly in th
ting Intersec
g the future tr
S 191 interse
section in Saf
equate capac
future traffic v
c and the eas
ronmental C
in the city lim
ronmental con
NATION
NATION O
R
ERIA
mine the need
must be eva
entified when
the corridor.
e the need for
city, environm
d safety. Eac
s.
vel of Servic
future level of
ating at a LOS
he No Build c
rea. Based o
eates a need
he form of an
ction Capacit
raffic model a
ection level of
fford is a cons
city available t
volumes has
stbound to so
Concerns
its there are s
ncerns. Incre
N OF NE
OF NEED
for a new alte
luated for cur
n a compilatio
The followin
the new conn
mental concer
ch of these ch
ce
f service anal
S of E, which
condition, ass
on standard e
for providing
alternate rou
ty
and turning mo
f service was
striction point
to handle futu
identified the
uthbound traf
several prope
easing traffic v
68
EED AN
D FOR A
ernate route c
rrent and futu
n of the chara
g characteris
nector corrido
ns, high truck
aracteristics a
ysis complete
is worse than
uming that an
ngineering pr
congestion re
te corridor.
ovement cou
analyzed for
t for traffic flow
ure traffic volu
need for dive
ffic.
erties and cha
volume create
D FEAS
NEW AL
corridor within
re conditions
acteristics eva
tics have bee
or: capacity a
k percentages
are generally
ed in Section
n the LOS D g
n alternate ro
ractices a LO
elief for sever
nts previously
capacity. It w
w along US 7
umes. Capac
erting the high
aracteristics th
es environme
SIBILITY
TERNAT
n the project s
. The need fo
aluated identi
en analyzed w
nd level of se
s, state highw
y described an
1 identified s
goal. The dev
ute corridor w
S of E or F is
ral segments
y collected, th
was determin
70 and US 19
city analysis fo
h northbound
hat can be rel
ental concerns
Final R
December
Y
TE ROUT
study area, a
or a connecto
ify benefits to
within the stud
ervice, existing
way access co
nd evaluated
egments of U
velopment of
was not devel
considered
of US 70 and
he existing US
ed that this
1 due to
or this interse
to eastbound
lated as
s, such as no
Report
r 2010
E
or
o the
dy
g
ontrol
in the
US 70
f this
oped
d US
S
ection
d
ise
and a
cons
the U
some
High
Ther
copp
of the
deve
traffic
State
The A
deve
regio
and U
minim
contr
ADO
Prov
The a
oppo
corrid
exist
Deto
Histo
and t
US 1
inters
decre
air pollution.
straints they p
US 70/US 191
e of these con
h Truck Perce
re is a large p
per mines in th
e area and is
elopment of an
c, and particu
e Highway A
ADOT access
elopment of A
onally significa
US 191 curre
mal access co
rolled access
OT to turn bac
vide Develop
addition of a
ortunities at ea
dor. There w
ing local stree
our Route for
orically once o
the Stateline.
91 and US 7
state traffic w
ease the trave
Other concer
place on the e
1 intersection
ncerns can be
entages
ortion of truck
he area. This
hazardous in
n alternate ro
ularly for the t
Access Manag
s manageme
ccess Manag
ant highway f
ently act as sig
ontrol charact
policies will p
k portions of
pment Oppor
new facility th
ach of the pot
will also be an
et system is e
r I-10
or twice a yea
When these
0. By develo
would not have
el time throug
rns are relate
existing roadw
in downtown
e mitigated.
k traffic that tr
s traffic can be
n nature due t
oute corridor w
ruck traffic co
gement
nt policies cre
gement Plans
facilities rathe
gnificant arter
teristics. The
provide an ac
the US 70 an
rtunity
hrough the cu
tential traffic i
opportunity to
extended to th
ar, a significan
e closures occ
oping the alter
e to affect the
gh the study a
69
d to the proxi
way facilities.
Safford. By
ravels through
e considered
to the size of
would genera
ontinuing to th
eate a vision f
. This strate
er than portion
rial streets wit
e developmen
ccess controlle
nd US 191 fac
rrently undev
intersections
o develop alo
he new altern
nt dust storm
cur, the inters
rnate route co
e Safford and
area.
mity of histor
These histor
developing a
h the Safford-inconsistent
vehicles and
lly provide a b
he Clifton/Mor
for developing
egy allows AD
ns of a local a
thin the Saffo
nt of an altern
ed facility ser
cilities to the lo
veloped lands
or interchang
ong the crossr
ate route cor
forces the clo
state traffic is
orridor as a co
Thatcher dow
rical propertie
ical properties
an alternate ro
-Thatcher are
with downtow
types of load
bypass oppor
renci area fro
g controlled a
DOT to manag
arterial street
ord-Thatcher c
ate route corr
rving regional
ocal agencies
s will provide n
ges along the
road connect
ridor.
osure of I-10
detoured thro
ontrolled acce
wntown areas
Final R
December
s and the
s are located
oute corridor,
ea servicing th
wn characteris
ds they carry.
rtunity for the
m I-10.
access facilitie
ge and mainta
system. US
city area, with
ridor with
traffic and al
s.
new developm
proposed
ions as the
between Will
ough Safford
ess facility, th
s, as well as
Report
r 2010
near
he
stics
The
truck
es by
ain
70
h
low
ment
cox
along
e
Safe
Curre
and U
altern
impro
2.2 ID
2.2.1 D
Pote
spati
study
land
corrid
The s
area
For in
than
2.2.2
ety
ently, there a
US 191. The
nate route co
oved.
DENTIFY
DESCRIPTIO
ential corridor
al analysis to
y area throug
ownership/pr
dors, which m
specifics of h
is split into th
nstance, pixe
pixels in flat a
2.
0 - 5% Sl
5 -10% Sl
> 15% Slo
Unnamed
Named wa
Model
re numerous
ese conflict po
rridor with co
POTENT
ON OF RESI
r alternatives
ools in a geog
h a collective
roperty contro
may be suitab
ow the resista
housands of p
els in a steep
areas. The w
F
ope
ope
ope
water feature
ater feature
l Inputs
intersections
oints increase
ntrolled acces
TIAL COR
ISTANCE M
have been de
raphic inform
e account of e
ol, ground slo
le for further s
ance model w
pixels. For ea
slope area ca
weighting proc
igure 2-1: R
3 6
6 3
6 7
7 3
3 3
3 3
Ter
Re
70
, driveways a
e the potential
ss characteris
RRIDOR A
ODEL
eveloped usin
mation system
environmental
pe and hydro
study as a co
works can bes
ach criteria se
an be given a
cess is repeat
Resistance M
3 3 7
3 7 3
7 3 3
5 6 6
5 6 9
5 6 9
rminal Points
End point
Start point
esistance Values
and conflict po
for accidents
stics, the gen
ALTERN
ng a resistanc
(GIS). The r
characteristi
ology. Model o
orridor alterna
st be describe
elected the pix
higher weigh
ted for all of t
Model Graph
3 2
3 3
3 3
3 3
6 2
3 2
End
oints existing
s and by deve
neral safety of
NATIVES
ce model deve
resistance mo
cs. Inputs to t
outputs provid
ative.
ed by assumin
xels are assig
hting (on a sc
the criteria dis
hic
27 27 24 21
30 24 21 22
35 30 25 18
33 29 23 18
29 26 23 18
29 26 23 18
Least Resistan
Final R
December
along the US
eloping an
f the region ca
eloped using
odel evaluate
the model inc
de conceptua
ng that the st
gned a weight
ale of 1 to 10
scussed in Se
25 21
18 18
15 15
15 12
12 9
12 3
nt Path
Start
Report
r 2010
S 70
an be
s the
clude
l
udy
t.
)
ection
In ad
along
be co
selec
Once
as th
softw
resis
ddition to weig
g the existing
onducive for c
cted are show
e all of the pix
he corridor alte
ware connects
stance.
ghting the pixe
state routes.
connecting th
wn in Figure 2
xels are weigh
ernative trave
s the terminal
els, the termi
These point
e corridor alte
2-2.
hted and the t
erses from on
points select
71
nal points for
ts represent lo
ernatives to th
terminal point
ne terminal po
ted by linking
the corridor a
ocations alon
he existing sy
ts are identifie
oint to anothe
the pixels wi
alternative mu
ng the existing
ystem. The te
ed, total point
r terminal poi
th the lowest
Final R
December
ust be identifi
g roads that m
erminal points
ts are calcula
nt. The mode
values, or lea
Report
r 2010
ed
may
s
ated
el
ast
Figure 2
72
2-2: Terminal Points
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
2.2.2 C
Thre
are L
great
resis
prelim
inclu
avoid
Input
curre
the s
Grou
The e
footh
As sh
steep
weig
• G
• 5%
• Le
The g
By ev
extre
along
footh
Hydr
The e
wash
CRITERIA FO
e primary crit
Land Ownersh
test constrain
stance (minim
minarily selec
de earthen da
ding conflicts
t from the TAC
ently selected
study team.
und Slope
existing topog
hills, to the fla
hown in the S
p at 26%. As
htings have b
Greater than 1
% to 10% slo
ess than 5%
graphical rep
valuating the
eme slopes, w
gside the corr
hills and chara
rology
existing wate
hes, canals, w
OR RESIST
teria have bee
hip/Property C
nts to construc
al conflict/cos
cted for the in
ams and exis
with dams an
C members h
, as well as th
graphy within
t agricultural
Source Values
a function of
been assumed
0% slope = 9
ope = 6 points
slope = 3 poi
resentation o
ground slope
which increase
ridor. The cri
acter within th
r and hydrolo
water bodies a
ANCE MOD
en selected to
Control, Grou
ctability. A sc
st) and 10 be
itial runs of th
sting bridges.
nd selecting e
has been solic
he addition of
the study are
areas of the v
s exhibit on F
f the Resistan
d:
points
s
nts
of these points
e criteria, the
e construction
teria will also
he study area
ogy features w
and wetland a
73
DEL
o be included
und Slope and
cale factor on
ing high resis
he model. Sec
These secon
existing Gila R
cited to confir
f any other cr
ea ranges fro
valley floor.
Figure 2-3, the
nce Model dev
s is shown in
corridor altern
n costs and d
help to prese
.
within the stud
areas.
in the Resist
d Hydrology. P
a scale of 1
stance (high c
condary criter
ndary criteria a
River crossing
rm and/or adju
iteria that ma
m the steep s
e existing slop
velopment, th
the Analysis
natives can b
ecrease the d
erve public int
dy area consis
tance Model e
Primary criter
to 10 with 1 b
conflict/cost) h
ria included in
allow the mod
gs when optim
ust the weigh
y be consider
slopes of the
pes vary from
he following ra
Values exhib
be developed
development
terest by pres
st of rivers, st
Final R
December
evaluation; th
ria impose the
being low
has been
n the model
del to conside
mal.
hting of the cri
red important
Mount Graha
m flat at 0% to
anges and
it on Figure 2
to avoid the
potential
serving natura
treams, creek
Report
r 2010
ey
e
er
iteria
t to
am
2-4.
al
ks,
As sh
categ
wash
follow
• W
bo
• W
• N
• U
The g
By ev
bodie
ditch
avoid
savin
Land
The t
throu
Bure
Rese
show
Pres
Guar
As sh
contr
and w
• A
• M
• C
hown in the S
gorized into w
hes, canals, d
wing ranges a
Water body pro
ody in an atte
o Less
o 2-5 a
o Grea
Wetlands area
Named River/S
Unnamed Rive
graphical rep
valuating the
es and riparia
crossings alo
ding areas co
ngs by minimi
d Ownership
type of existin
ughout the stu
eau of Land M
ervation, with
wn on the exh
ident Calvin C
rd of Arizona
hown in the S
rol limits are s
weightings ha
Arizona Game
Military Reserv
Coronado Nati
Source Values
wetland areas
ditches, and p
and weighting
otection = 5 p
empt to create
s than 2 acres
acres = 200 ft
ater than 5 ac
a protection =
Stream/Wash
er/Stream/Wa
resentation o
hydrology cri
an areas, as w
ong a corrido
ommonly know
izing drainage
p/Property Co
ng land owne
udy area. Sig
Management,
the remaining
ibits has bee
Coolidge on D
as a rifle rang
Source Values
shown. As a
ave been ass
and Fish Are
vation = 10 po
ional Forest P
s exhibit on F
s, lakes and re
pipelines. As
gs have been
points – this c
e a variable b
s = 100 ft buff
t buffer dimen
cres = 500 ft b
5 points
h/Canal/Ditch/
ash/Canal/Ditc
of these points
iteria, the cor
well as minim
r. The criteria
wn as areas o
e crossings.
ontrol
rship and age
gnificant prope
Coronado Na
g lands being
n provided by
December 17
ge.
s exhibit on F
function of th
umed:
eas = 10 poin
oints
Property = 10
74
Figure 2-5, the
eservoirs, and
a function of
assumed:
category has b
buffer and pro
fer dimension
nsion
buffer dimens
/Pipeline = 4 p
ch/Pipeline =
s is shown in
ridor alternati
ize the numbe
a will help to
of concern, as
encies respon
erty is manag
ational Forest
g privately ow
y the State La
, 1927 declar
Figure 2-7, the
e Resistance
ts
points
e existing hyd
d named and
the Resistanc
been subdivid
tection area.
n
sion
points
2 points
the Analysis
ves can be d
er of river, str
minimize env
s well as prov
nsible for the
ged by agenci
t, Arizona Gam
wned. As a no
ands, based o
ring the prope
e existing land
e Model devel
rologic featur
unnamed riv
ce Model dev
ded by the siz
Values exhib
eveloped to a
ream, creek, w
vironmental co
viding an oppo
property cont
ies, such as S
me and Fish,
ote, the militar
on Executive O
erty for use of
d ownership a
opment, the f
Final R
December
res can be
ers, streams,
velopment, the
ze of the wate
it on Figure 2
avoid the wate
wash, canal,
oncerns by
ortunity for co
trol varies
State Trust La
and Military
ry reservation
Order 4786 fr
f the National
and property
following rang
Report
r 2010
e
er
2-6.
er
and
ost
and,
n
rom
ges
• C
• P
• U
• S
• B
The g
By ev
seek
of-wa
corrid
lands
Currently Deve
lanned Devel
Undeveloped P
tate Trust Lan
ureau of Land
graphical rep
valuating the
k the more cos
ay. The evalu
dor alternative
s without dram
eloped Private
lopment of Pr
Private Lands
nd = 1 points
d Manageme
resentation o
land ownersh
st effective rig
uation of this
es, which can
matically affec
e Lands = 10
rivate Lands =
s = 1 points
ent Land = 1 p
of these points
hip and prope
ght-of-way co
ownership inf
n provide the
cting the exis
75
points
5 points
points
s is shown in
erty control, th
orridors when
formation will
best opportun
ting developm
the Analysis
he corridor alt
evaluating th
also help to
nities for futur
ment areas.
Values exhib
ternatives can
e cost of purc
identify areas
re developme
Final R
December
it on Figure 2
n be develope
chasing the ri
s along the
ent of the age
Report
r 2010
2-8.
ed to
ight-ency
Figure 2-3: Ground
76
d Slope Analysis- Source Values
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Figure 2-4: Ground Slo
77
ope Analysis- Values Used In Model
Final R
December
l
Report
r 2010
Figure 2-5: Hydro
78
ology Analysis- Source Values
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Figure 2-6: Hydrolog
79
y Analysis- Values Used In Model
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Figure 2-7: Land Ow
80
wnership Analysis- Source Values
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Figure 2-8: Land Owner
81
rship Analysis- Values Used In Mod
Final R
December
el
Report
r 2010
2.2.3 E
Base
the c
gene
With
resul
have
EVALUATIO
ed on the term
computer and
eral guidance
the resistanc
lts shown in F
e continued to
ON OF RESIS
minal points a
provided the
for potential c
ce model resu
Figure 2-10. T
o be refined as
STANCE MO
nd point crite
e results show
corridors that
ults, prelimina
Then based o
s shown in Fi
82
ODEL
ria discussed
wn in Figure 2
t warranted fu
ary corridor alt
on input from
gure 2-11 thr
d above, the R
-9. Compute
urther evaluat
ternatives hav
the TAC and
rough Figure 2
Resistance Mo
er generated r
tion.
ve been ident
public, the co
2-13.
Final R
December
odel was run
results provid
tified with the
orridor alterna
Report
r 2010
on
ed
e
atives
Figure 2-9: Pre
83
eliminary Resistance Model Results
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Figure 2-10: Preliminary Pro
84
posed Corridor Alternatives - Second Refinement
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Figure 2-11: Preliminary Pro
85
oposed Corridor Alternatives - Third Refinement
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Figure 2-12: Preliminary Pro
86
posed Corridor Alternatives – Fourth Refinement
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
Figure 2-13: Preliminary Pr
87
roposed Corridor Alternatives- Fifth Refinement
Final R
December
Report
r 2010
2.2.4 P
Figur
point
Alter
Alter
Alter
Alter
PROPOSED
re 2-13 shows
ts to US Rout
rnative A: Th
an
alo
(1
co
rnative B: Th
an
ru
70
cro
70
rnative C: Th
alt
the
(3
an
rnative D: Ra
ma
str
ad
im
•
•
•
•
CORRIDOR
s the final ref
te 70 and US
is alternative
nd east of the
ong the edge
). To the eas
onnect at the e
is alternative
nd east of the
ns along the e
0 (1). To the e
osses the Ariz
0 at the US 70
is alternative
ternative conn
en traverses t
). The C2 alt
nd connects w
ather than dev
aking significa
reet system w
ddition to incre
mprovements i
Constructio
2009 Graha
Extend Sto
Widen Rela
Extend and
and Artesia
R ALTERNA
inements of t
Route 191.
connects US
City of Saffo
of Mount Gra
st, the corrido
existing US 7
connects US
City of Saffo
edge of Moun
east the corrid
zona Eastern
0 / US 191 int
has two road
nects US Rou
to the north a
ernative conn
with the C1 alt
veloping a new
ant improvem
within the com
easing the sp
include:
on of the road
am County Sm
ckton Road a
ation Street to
d widen 20th A
a Road.
88
ATIVES
he preliminar
S Route 191 w
rd. It navigat
aham and the
r travels along
70 / US 191 in
S Route 191 w
rd. It navigat
nt Graham an
dor runs alon
n Railroad and
terchange (6)
dway compon
ute 191 from P
and west to co
nects with US
ternative.
w alternate ro
ments to existi
mmunities of S
peed limits in v
dway and inte
mall Area Tra
as a 4 lane ro
o 4 lanes betw
Ave as a 2 lan
ry alternate ro
with US Route
tes to the wes
en north wher
g Swift Trail,
nterchange (6
with US Route
tes to the wes
nd then north
ng Powerline R
d San Simon
.
nents that can
Powerline Ro
onnect with U
S Route 191 fu
oute corridor,
ng US Route
Safford, Thatc
various sectio
rsection reco
ansportation S
adway to Sol
ween US 191
ne roadway b
oute corridors
e 70, west of t
st from Swift T
re it connects
then crosses
).
e 70, west of t
st from Power
where it conn
Road turning
River, conne
n be built sepa
oad (7) travels
S Route 70 a
urther south a
this alternativ
e 191, US Rou
cher and Grah
ons. The loca
mmendations
Study (SATs)
omon Road;
and 14th Ave
between Disco
Final R
December
and connect
the Town of P
Trail (8) and r
to US Route
BLM propert
the Town of P
rline Road (7)
nects to US R
northeast as
cting to US R
arately. The C
s to the west,
at Webster Ro
at Swift Trail (
ve involves
ute 70 and loc
ham County,
al street
s provided in
;
e;
overy Park B
Report
r 2010
ion
Pima
runs
70
ty to
Pima
) and
Route
it
Route
C1
and
oad
8)
cal
in
the
lvd
Alter
With
exist
highw
enha
The ‘
moda
‘Com
scale
confl
desig
Retro
can a
owne
natio
lead
2.3 EV
2.3.1 E
The l
contr
that t
may
• T
• S
• A
• E
• C
• Im
• S
rnative E: Th
ali
US
the impleme
ing US 70 an
way traffic rem
ance the multi
Complete Str
al transportat
mplete Streets
ed environme
icts. ‘Comple
gn, and minim
ofitting existin
also attract ne
ers are willing
on are finding
to revitalizatio
VALUATE
EVALUATIO
listing below s
rast the choic
the TAC, ADO
be a hybrid o
raffic analysis
afety
Access
nvironmental
Cost
mplementation
upport
is alternative
gnment from
S 191. SR 36
ntation of any
d US191 road
moved from th
i-modal chara
reets’ movem
ion conditions
s’ integrates in
ents. Typically
ete Streets’ a
mizing environ
ng streets into
ew businesse
g to pay a pre
that creating
on of a comm
E PROPO
ON CRITERI
sets forth the
ces. The obje
OT and the pr
of the alternat
s (Level of Se
Impacts
n
involves the
south of Arte
6 will be exte
y of Alternativ
dways back t
he existing ro
acteristics and
ment is a conte
s through the
nfrastructure
y, these stree
lso offer com
nmental impac
o ‘Complete S
es within the c
mium to live i
human-scale
munity.
OSED CO
IA
criteria used
ective of the a
roject team ca
ives presente
ervice)
89
realignment o
esia Road to P
ended along S
ves A, B, C1,
to the local ag
oadways, a ‘C
d circulation t
ext sensitive d
inclusion of f
improvement
et improveme
munity benef
cts through m
Streets’ can im
corridor. Ofte
in ‘walkable’ c
ed environme
ORRIDOR
to evaluate a
alternatives an
an determine
ed in this pape
of US 191 to t
Powerline Ro
Swift Trail to c
C2 or E, there
gencies to be
Complete Stre
hrough and a
design, which
facilities for b
ts and provide
nts offer phys
its such as tra
more compreh
mprove condit
en property va
communities.
nts allows pe
R ALTERN
alternatives a
nalysis is to d
a recommen
er.
the existing S
ad, where it w
connect to the
e is an opport
used as city
eets’ approach
around the do
h focuses on
icyclist and p
es bicycle- an
sical separatio
affic calming t
hensive desig
tions for exist
alues increase
Communitie
eople to safely
NATIVES
nd to fairly co
evelop suffici
nded solution.
Final R
December
Stockton Road
will reconnect
e new US 191
tunity to turn
streets. With
h can be used
wntown area
creating mult
edestrians.
nd pedestrian
on to minimiz
through stree
n processes.
ting business
e, since land
es throughout
y connect and
S
ompare and
ient informatio
That solutio
R