Chinle-Many Farms and
St. Michaels-Window Rock-Fort Defiance
Multimodal Long Range
Transportation Study
ADOT MPD Task Assignment 23-11
PG TD0728
Contract # T08-49-U0001
Chinle and Many Farms Study Area Corridor
Final Report
Prepared by:
Prepared for:
NAVAJO NATION
NAVAJO DIVISION OF TRANSPORTATION
May 2012
091374043
TABLE OF CONTENTS
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 i Chinle and Many Farms
1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1
1.1 Study Purpose ..................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Study Objectives ................................................................................................. 1
1.3 Study Area........................................................................................................... 1
1.4 Project Management Team and Technical Advisory Committee ......................... 4
1.5 Stakeholders ....................................................................................................... 4
2 PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION ......................................................... 5
2.1 Chinle Chapter .................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Many Farms Chapter ........................................................................................... 5
2.3 Land Use ............................................................................................................. 5
2.3.1 Current Land Use and Activity Centers ...................................................... 6
2.3.2 Future Land Use ......................................................................................... 8
2.4 Demographics and Socioeconomic ................................................................... 14
2.4.1 Population and Employment ..................................................................... 14
2.4.2 Major Employers ..................................................................................... 14
2.4.3 Tourism .................................................................................................... 16
2.4.4 Transportation Modes............................................................................... 16
2.4.5 Title VI Populations and Environmental Justice ........................................ 17
3 TRAFFIC AND ROADWAY ASSESSMENT ....................................... 19
3.1 Summary of Completed Plans and Studies ....................................................... 19
3.2 Summary of Stakeholder Interviews .................................................................. 20
3.3 Street Inventory – Indian Reservation Road Program ....................................... 26
3.3.1 Laneage and Right-of-Way ....................................................................... 26
3.3.2 Roadway Surface Type ............................................................................ 28
3.3.3 Shoulder Condition ................................................................................... 28
3.4 Traffic Control .................................................................................................... 39
3.5 Functional Classification .................................................................................... 39
3.6 Crash History..................................................................................................... 43
3.7 Existing Traffic and Level of Service ................................................................. 53
3.7.1 Roadway Level of Service ........................................................................ 56
3.8 Access Management ......................................................................................... 57
3.9 Scenic Roads .................................................................................................... 58
3.10 Planned and Programmed Transportation Projects .......................................... 61
3.11 Future Traffic Data ............................................................................................ 65
3.11.1 Growth Rates ........................................................................................... 65
3.12 Transit ............................................................................................................... 69
3.12.1 Current Routes and Stops ........................................................................ 69
3.12.2 Ridership .................................................................................................. 69
3.12.3 Future Plans ............................................................................................. 69
3.12.4 Transit Needs ........................................................................................... 70
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 ii Chinle and Many Farms
3.12.5 School Bus Transportation Needs ............................................................ 73
3.13 Bicycle Facilities ................................................................................................ 73
3.13.1 Shoulder Conditions on US 191 ............................................................... 73
3.14 Pedestrian Sidewalks, Crossings, and Paths .................................................... 75
3.14.1 Pedestrian Access to Schools .................................................................. 75
3.15 Trails and Equestrian Paths .............................................................................. 78
4 NEEDS AND DEFICIENCIES .............................................................. 81
4.1 General Transportation Needs .......................................................................... 81
4.2 Roadway, Street Lighting, and Traffic Control Needs ........................................ 83
4.2.1 Street Improvements – Paving and Repaving Needs ............................... 83
4.2.2 Street Improvements – Road Widening .................................................... 84
4.2.3 New Road Connections / Frontage Roads ............................................... 85
4.2.4 Street Lighting .......................................................................................... 85
4.2.5 Intersection Traffic Control ....................................................................... 85
4.2.6 Signing Needs .......................................................................................... 86
4.2.7 Bridge Needs ............................................................................................ 86
4.2.8 Airport Access Needs ............................................................................... 86
4.2.9 Transit Needs ........................................................................................... 86
4.3 Non-Motorized Transportation Needs ............................................................... 88
4.3.1 Pedestrian Needs ..................................................................................... 88
4.3.2 School Crossings ..................................................................................... 88
4.3.3 Sidewalks ................................................................................................. 88
4.3.4 Equestrian and Multiuse Trails ................................................................. 88
4.3.5 Bicycle Needs ........................................................................................... 89
5 CHINLE CHAPTER RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION
PROJECTS ............................................................................................... 91
5.1 Tribal Road Projects .......................................................................................... 91
5.2 Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Trail Projects ............................................................ 109
6 MANY FARMS CHAPTER RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION
PROJECTS ............................................................................................. 123
6.1 Roadway Projects .............................................................................................. 123
6.2 Recommended Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Trail Projects ...................................... 136
7 US 191 PROJECTS ........................................................................... 146
8 SCENIC ROAD PROJECTS ............................................................. 153
9 TRANSIT PROJECTS ....................................................................... 155
10 EVALUATION CRITERIA AND PROJECT PRIORITIZATION ........ 157
10.1 Criteria for Prioritizing Roadway Improvements .............................................. 157
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 iii Chinle and Many Farms
10.2 Project Prioritization – Short-Term Projects .................................................... 157
10.3 Project Phasing – Mid-Term Projects .............................................................. 159
10.4 Project Phasing – Long-Term Projects ............................................................ 162
11 FUNDING SOURCES ........................................................................ 164
APPENDIX A - TITLE VI AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE-PRELIMINARY
ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................... 178
APPENDIX B - PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT SUMMARY REPORT 1............................ 185
APPENDIX C - PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT SUMMARY REPORT 2............................ 186
APPENDIX D - ILLUSTRATION OF BIA IRR INVENTORY SECTION NUMBER
REFERENCE MAP ................................................................................................... 187
APPENDIX E - US 191 MP 444 TO 465 ROAD SAFETY ASSESSMENT ................ 188
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 iv Chinle and Many Farms
INDEX OF FIGURES
Figure 1 – Vicinity Map .................................................................................................... 2
Figure 2 – Chinle-Many Farms Study Area Corridor ....................................................... 3
Figure 3 – Existing Land Use – Study Area Corridor ....................................................... 7
Figure 4 – Study Area Employment............................................................................... 15
Figure 5 – Laneage and Right of Way ........................................................................... 27
Figure 6 – Pavement Surface ........................................................................................ 29
Figure 7 – Shoulder Type .............................................................................................. 30
Figure 8 – Percent of Road Section Meeting Passing Sight Deficiencies...................... 31
Figure 9 – BIA Roads with Deficient Curves and Stopping Sight Restrictions ............... 33
Figure 10 – Roadbed Condition .................................................................................... 35
Figure 11 – BIA Functional Classifications .................................................................... 42
Figure 12 – Crash Locations, 1999-2009 ...................................................................... 45
Figure 13 – Number of Motor Vehicle Crashes by year in the Chinle-Many Farms Study
Area Corridor, 1997-2009 .............................................................................................. 49
Figure 14 – Crash Trends by Month, Day of Week and Time of Day ............................ 50
Figure 15 – Traffic Volumes from BIA IRR Inventory..................................................... 55
Figure 16 – Navajo Scenic Road System ...................................................................... 60
Figure 17 – Navajo Nation CIP and TIP Projects .......................................................... 64
Figure 18 – 2030 Congested Road Segment ................................................................ 68
Figure 19 – Existing and Proposed Bus Stops .............................................................. 72
Figure 20 – Summary of Shoulder Conditions on US 191 within the Study Area Corridor
..................................................................................................................................... 74
Figure 21 – Sidewalk Locations .................................................................................... 76
Figure 22 – Example of a "Complete Street" ................................................................. 82
Figure 23 – Roadway Needs and Deficiencies .............................................................. 87
Figure 24 – Transit and Non-Motorized Transportation Needs and Deficiencies .......... 90
Figure 25 - Chinle Chapter Recommended Tribal Roadway Projects ........................... 93
Figure 26 – MUTCD Bike Lane Sign ........................................................................... 111
Figure 27 - Chinle Chapter Recommended Non-Motorized Projects........................... 112
Figure 28 - Many Farms Chapter Recommended Tribal Roadway Projects ............... 124
Figure 29 – Many Farms Recommended Non-Motorized Projects .............................. 137
INDEX OF TABLES
Table 1 – Land Use Issues, Goals and Objectives for Chinle and Many Farms Chapters
..................................................................................................................................................9
Table 2 – Chapter Capital Improvement Projects ............................................................... 13
Table 3 – Current Study Area Population ............................................................................ 14
Table 4 – Employers .............................................................................................................. 15
Table 5 – Recreational Visitors to Canyon De Chelly National Monument ...................... 16
Table 6 – Mode of Transportation for Workers 16 years and over .................................... 17
Table 7 – Racial Demographic Percentages ....................................................................... 17
Table 8 – 2000 Title VI Population Percentages ................................................................. 18
Table 9 – Comments Received from Stakeholder Interviews ............................................ 21
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 v Chinle and Many Farms
Table 10 – Road Sections with Passing Sight Deficiencies and Associated Head-on
Collisions ................................................................................................................................ 32
Table 11 – BIA Geometric Design Standards ...................................................................... 36
Table 12 – Geometric Design Deficiencies .......................................................................... 38
Table 13 – Indian Reservation Roads - Functional Classification Definition .................... 40
Table 14 – IRR Functional Classification ............................................................................. 41
Table 15 – Number of Motor Vehicle Crashes (MVC), Injuries and Fatalities by Road .. 44
Table 16 – Light Conditions for MVCs on Selected Roads and Locations in Chinle and
Many Farms, 1997 - 2009 ..................................................................................................... 47
Table 17 – Crash Locations, Severity and Types ............................................................... 51
Table 18 – Annual Average Daily Traffic Volumes – BIA Roads ....................................... 53
Table 19 – Annual Average Daily Traffic Volumes – State Highways .............................. 54
Table 20 – Examples of Level of Service ............................................................................. 56
Table 21 – Number of US 191 Access Points, By Milepost ............................................... 58
Table 22 – State Highway Project in State Transportation Improvement Program, 2011-
2014 ........................................................................................................................................ 61
Table 23 – Draft FY 2011 - 2048 Indian Reservation Roads Program Projects .............. 62
Table 24 - Future Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service – BIA Roads ............................ 65
Table 25 - Future Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service - US 191 .................................. 67
Table 26 - Transit Demand Forecast .................................................................................... 71
Table 27 - Tribal Roadway and Intersection Projects – Chinle Chapter ........................... 94
Table 28 – Chinle Chapter Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Trail Projects ................................. 113
Table 29 - Tribal Roadway and Intersection Projects – Many Farms Chapter............... 125
Table 30 – Many Farms Chapter Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Trail Projects ...................... 138
Table 31 – US 191 Road Safety Assessment Recommendations .................................. 148
Table 32 - Recommended Projects on US 191 for Consideration by ADOT.................. 150
Table 33 – Coordination of Projects with Scenic Byway CMP Recommendations........ 154
Table 34 – Proposed Transit Projects ................................................................................ 156
Table 35 – Short-Term (2012-2015) Projects .................................................................... 158
Table 36 – Mid-Term (2016-2020) Projects ....................................................................... 160
Table 37 - Long-Term (2021-2030 and beyond) Projects ................................................ 163
Table 38 – Road Project Funding Sources ........................................................................ 165
Table 39 - Funding for Safety Projects ............................................................................... 169
Table 40- Funding Programs for Scenic Byway Projects ................................................. 172
Table 41 - Funding for Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Equestrian Projects ............................. 173
Table 42 - Transit Funding Programs ................................................................................. 174
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 vi Chinle and Many Farms
ACRONYMS
AASHTO
American Association of State and Highway
Transportation Officials
ADOT Arizona Department of Transportation
ALISS Accident Location Information Surveillance System
APTNA Arkansas Public Transportation Needs Assessment
BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs
BIADOT Bureau of Indian Affairs Division of Transportation
BIA - NRO Bureau of Indian Affairs - Navajo Regional Office
CIP Capital Improvement Program
CDP Census Designated Place
EMT Emergency Medical Transport
FET Fuel Excise Tax
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FY Fiscal Year
HPMS Highway Performance Monitoring System
IHS Indian Health Service
IRR Indian Reservation Road Program
LOS Level of Service
MPD Multimodal Planning Division
MVC Motor Vehicle Crash
NAIPS National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems
NPS National Park Service
PAF Population Adjustment Factor
PARA Planning Assistance for Rural Areas
PLHD Public Lands Highway Discretionary Program
PMT Project Management Team
RIFDS Road Inventory Field Data System
RNDF Relative Need Distribution Factor
ROW Right-of-Way
STIP State Transportation Improvement Plan
STP Surface Transportation Program
TAC Technical Advisory Committee
TTIP Tribal Transportation Improvement Program
TWLTL Two Way Left Turn Lane
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 1 Chinle and Many Farms
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Study Purpose
The Chinle-Many Farms study is part of the Chinle-Many Farms and St. Michaels-
Window Rock-Fort Defiance Multimodal Long Range Transportation Study funded by
the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) Multimodal Planning Division’s
(MPD) Planning Assistance for Rural Areas (PARA) program. The PARA program
receives funding support through the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) State
Planning and Research program. PARA study projects assist non-metropolitan
communities for the purpose of conducting transportation planning studies.
This study is comprised of two multimodal long range transportation plans, one for the
Chinle-Many Farms study area corridor, and one for the St. Michaels-Window Rock-Fort
Defiance study area corridor. “Multimodal” means multiple modes of transportation,
including roads, transit, bicycle, pedestrian and equestrian transportation. Access to
airports is also addressed. The plans recommend transportation improvements for five-,
10-, and 20-year planning horizons.
This final report is focused on transportation recommendations in the Chinle and Many
Farms study area corridor. A Final Report has also been prepared for the St. Michaels-
Window Rock-Fort Defiance study area corridor.
1.2 Study Objectives
Key study objectives are:
Promote travel safety and mobility, enhance economic vitality, and improve
community livability.
Support communities’ current and future planning for economic and community
development.
Address multimodal transportation needs for vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle
transportation.
Address intermodal connections between vehicular, airport, and transit systems
for commuter and emergency needs.
1.3 Study Area
The Chinle-Many Farms study area corridor is shown in its Arizona statewide context in
Figure 1. It is located in the northeast corner of the state. The study area corridor is
shown in Figure 2. The north-south boundaries for the Chinle-Many Farms study area
corridor run parallel to US 191 from milepost 444 to milepost 465. The east-west study
corridor boundaries extend for a width of approximately 6.4 miles, bisected by US 191.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 2 Chinle and Many Farms
Figure 1 – Vicinity Map
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 3 Chinle and Many Farms
Figure 2 – Chinle-Many Farms Study Area Corridor
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 4 Chinle and Many Farms
1.4 Project Management Team and Technical Advisory
Committee
A core Project Management Team (PMT) provided project direction and input to the
study to its completion. A Project Management Team comprised of the Navajo DOT
planners, and ADOT Project Manager, met monthly to discuss progress and issues and
guide the project to completion.
In addition to the PMT, a broader-based Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was
formed comprised of agency stakeholder officials including Chapter representatives,
Navajo DOT staff, ADOT staff, and others. The Committee held four meetings during
the study time line to contribute technical advice into the planning process. Members of
the TAC represented the following agencies:
Navajo Division of Transportation
Chinle Chapter
Fort Defiance Chapter
Many Farms Chapter
Saint Michaels Chapter
Navajo Transit System
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) Navajo Region
BIA Western Navajo Agency
Apache County
Northern Arizona Council of Governments
ADOT Multimodal Planning Division
ADOT Holbrook District
ADOT Communication and Community Partnerships
ADOT Environmental Planning Group
1.5 Stakeholders
Stakeholders were identified and interviewed during the course of the study. They
included representatives from the police and fire departments, school district
transportation staff, Chapter representatives, and others. The stakeholders, because of
their knowledge of transportation needs and the road system, provided a unique
knowledge of transportation needs. Further information on these interviews is provided
in Section 3.2.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 5 Chinle and Many Farms
Economic development
can be enhanced by a
good transportation
system
2 PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION
This chapter provides information on land use, demographic, and economic
characteristics of the Chinle and Many Farms areas.
2.1 Chinle Chapter
The Chinle Chapter is situated in the central region of the Navajo Nation near the
Canyon De Chelly scenic area. Chinle was noted for agriculture and grazing in the late
1800s and early 1900s; these trades are still practiced by the local Navajo farmers
influencing nearby areas such as Many Farms and the Chinle Valley. One of the main
tourist attractions is Canyon De Chelly, which was established as a National Monument
by President Herbert Hoover on February 14, 1931. The Tsegi (canyon) has several
Anasazi ruins, notably the White House, Mummy Cave, and Massacre Cave ruins.
Spider Rock is also an attraction within the canyon. The Canyon De Chelly National
Monument is within the boundaries of the Chinle Chapter, but is operated by the
National Park Service.
2.2 Many Farms Chapter
The Many Farms Chapter is located just
north and adjacent to the Chinle Chapter.
The Many Farms community began
emerging in 1937 when the reservoir dam
for irrigation was constructed. During this
period the community had a few clusters of
homes, a general store, and a
schoolhouse. Many Farms Lake is one of
the largest lakes within the Navajo Nation;
it contains over 25,000-acre feet of water
and related canals.
Recent development of the Many Farms
Chapter has included Many Farms
Boarding School campus, which
consolidated the Chinle Boarding School and the Many Farms High School. This school
compound, including the high school, accommodated the early stages of the Dine'
College before it found its permanent home at the Tsaile, Arizona campus. Both the
Chapter House and the preschool needed some renovation. The Chapter House needs
an addition to accommodate chapter-based services. A multi-purpose center is planned
for development at a future date.
2.3 Land Use
An understanding of land uses is important
because land use influences travel patterns. Land
Many Farms Lake
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 6 Chinle and Many Farms
use is integrated with transportation since land use decisions affect transportation
systems and can increase viable options for people to access opportunities, goods,
services, and other resources to improve the quality of their lives. In turn, multi-modal
transportation decisions may have effects on existing and future land use demand,
choices, and patterns. Coordinating land use and transportation planning and
development is imperative to "smart growth" and sustainable development of
communities.
This section provides an overview of existing and planned land use within the study
planning area. Existing land uses are shown in Figure 3 which also includes
enlargement insets of the Chapter growth areas.
2.3.1 Current Land Use and Activity Centers
Commercial
In Chinle the Tseyi’ Shopping Center, anchored by the Bashas supermarket, is located
near the intersection of US 191 and N7. The 65,000 square-foot Tseyi’ Shopping Center
expanded three times since it opened in 1981, and it has the largest sales volume of
any of the Navajo Nation shopping
centers. Further expansion of the center
would provide for additional space for
Navajo-owned businesses.
Across the highway (US 191), there is a
Coca Cola plant, and a sand and gravel
plant behind the Coca Cola plant.
Along US 191 and N7 there are
restaurants, motels, gas stations,
convenient stores, super markets, arts
and crafts store, video shops,
laundromats, insurance, gift shops,
bank, tire sales and repair, septic
services, and cellular phone services.
In Many Farms, there is a convenience store with gas station at the US 191 and N59
intersection.
Residential
There are ranchettes along US 191 between Chinle and Many Farms. These scattered
home sites have their own direct access to the highway. There are by Navajo Housing
Authority (NHA) subdivisions, Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) offices and schools off US
191, N7, N27 in Chinle and off of N59, US 191 and on Lake View Drive in Many Farms.
Tseyi’ Shopping Center
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 7 Chinle and Many Farms
Sources: Navajo Division of Transportation and visual inspection
Figure 3 – Existing Land Use – Study Area Corridor
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 8 Chinle and Many Farms
Health
The Chinle Comprehensive Health Care Facility is located on N102. The hospital was
opened in August 1983 and is a major employer in the Chinle area.
Public Facilities
There are tribal, state, and federal
government offices in Chinle along US
191 and N7. These uses are primarily
office space. The Chapter House in
Many Farms is located on N59 and the
Chinle Chapter House is located on N7.
Grazing
The Navajo Nation practices open
grazing of cattle, horses, and sheep in
Chinle and Many Farms. There are
animals along US 191 that sometimes
graze into the right of way causing
traffic accidents.
Agriculture
The Chinle and Many Farms Valley has been historically agricultural since 1937 when
the reservoir dam for irrigation was constructed at Many Farms Lake. The Chinle Wash
also conveys irrigation water for crops along the east side of US 191.
Recreation
Many Farms Lake is one of the largest lakes within the Navajo Nation. The lake is
located east of US 191 and is a resource for fishing and hiking. Canyon De Chelly
National Monument is a major tourism destination and recreation activities include
scenic drives, hikes, ranger-led programs, canyon tours, and camping.
2.3.2 Future Land Use
Goals for future transportation, safety, tourism, and development from the Chinle
Chapter Economic Development Land Use and Strategic Plan and Many Farms
Chapter Community Based Land Use Plan are summarized in Table 1.
Chapter capital improvement projects were obtained from the Navajo Division of
Community Development and are summarized in Table 2. These include development
of a community and veterans cemetery in Chinle and a new Chapter House in Many
Chinle Comprehensive Health Care Facility
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 9 Chinle and Many Farms
Farms. Other projects include a power line construction project in Chinle and a
construction project on County Road C566 in Many Farms.
Table 1 – Land Use Issues, Goals and Objectives for Chinle and Many Farms Chapters
Issue Goal Objectives
Chinle Chapter
Infrastructure Provide adequate
infrastructure to
accommodate and
stimulate economic
growth
Study and develop a street grid system that also
incorporates development and expansion of
infrastructure
Develop standards for building and expanding
infrastructure
Identify a location for and develop a waste treatment
facility
Enhance communications (land lines, cell towers, and
internet capabilities)
Explore getting business sites “infrastructure ready” to
attract businesses
Seek funding for infrastructure development
Business
Development
Encourage and
nurture startup
businesses,
business growth and
business retention
and expansion
Provide access to resources that will help those who
wish to develop and /or grow their businesses
Support current business activities that are compatible
with existing uses in the community and that produce
income and or contribute to the economy
Encourage and support family businesses
Support the sheep and livestock business
Encourage and support entrepreneurship
Commercial
Development
Create a diverse
business
environment that
provides commerce
for the local
community, region
and visitors
Support the development of retail businesses
Support regional commercial development
Create a historic business district at the old BIA
compound complete with walking trails and vendor
village
Support the development of a professional office park
Support the development of a medical office park
Develop an entertainment corridor
Support the development of a business district near the
airport and provide a link to the town of Chinle
Enhance the UPS and/or FEDEX service
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 10 Chinle and Many Farms
Issue Goal Objectives
Industrial
development
Encourage industrial
development that
supports sound
development of local
resources while
reducing the impact
on the environment
Analyze the economic, social and environmental
impacts of a trash facility.
Analyze the economic, social and environmental
impacts of a waste treatment facility.
Tourism
Development
Sustain and
enhance the
economic utilization
of Chinle’s natural
resources for
tourism development
Explore and develop innovative tourist activities that
preserve and enhance the unique qualities of the
community
Support the development of businesses that offer
services to tourists and encourage businesses to be
environmentally friendly (e.g. bed and breakfast near
Spider Rock, restaurant overlooking Chinle and /or
Canyon De Chelly, KOA campground)
Many Farms Chapter
Transportation Provide a safer
transportation
system
Provide better roads (improve dirt and paved roads)
Provide better pedestrian connections including all
weather access routes and sidewalks
Provide public transportation for senior citizens
Encourage ADOT to prioritize the expansion of US 191
and participate in long range planning
Explore creating a frontage road for US 191
Safety Have a safe
community
Develop emergency response capabilities (police, fire
station, EMS)
Develop better traffic controls, especially near schools
Get large animals out of right-of-way
Develop a night watch program that includes a reward
system
Tourism Create Tourist
Opportunities
Use location as a base for tourists to visit Canyon De
Chelly, Monument Valley and Mesa Verde
Develop a cultural center
Develop motel and RV parks
Provide horseback riding facility for tourists
Develop an Indian Market with arts and crafts (pavilion
for local artisans)
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 11 Chinle and Many Farms
Issue Goal Objectives
Commercial/
Economic
Development
Create more
commercial
development to
provide employment
opportunities and
support economic
development
Develop businesses that provide needed services for
the community
Provide a paved flea market
Develop office space that can be rented
Provide casino if possible
Industrial
Development
Expand employment
opportunities
through industrial
development
Encourage industrial development such as sewing
factories or computer parts assembly
Recreation Expand recreational
opportunities for
community members
and tourists
Develop more recreational uses of Many Farms Lake
Create a golf course
Create a recreation center / multipurpose building
Develop a park for four-wheelers
Sources: Chinle Chapter Economic Development Land Use and Strategic Plan, October 2006 and Many Farms
Chapter Community-Based Land Use Plan, September 2004
There are eight sites within the study area corridor designated for economic
development in Chinle, they are:
1. Old Town Business District, commercial and tourism development site – located
north of N7 less than one mile west of the entrance to Canyon De Chelly.
2. Davis Development, Inc., commercial and tourism development site – located on the
west side of US 191 immediately north of the Tsegi Shopping Center.
3. Chinle Fairgrounds Business Center, commercial and tourism development site –
located adjacent to the east side of N102 less than one mile southeast of the
hospital.
4. Canyon De Chelly Gateway Park, tourism development site – this site is located at
the entrance to and within the Canyon De Chelly National Monument just east of the
Holiday Inn, immediately north of N7.
5. Chinle Office and Commercial Park, commercial and industrial development site –
this site is located at the northeast corner of US 191 and N7.
6. Upper Red Clay Basin, commercial and tourism development site – this site is
approximately one-half mile west of the Chinle Chapter House just south of N7.
7. Canyon De Chelly Commercial Corridor, commercial and tourism development site –
This corridor is located along N7 along the south rim of Canyon De Chelly.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 12 Chinle and Many Farms
8. Airport Business Corridor, commercial and tourism development site – this site is
located at the southern entrance to Chinle adjacent to US 191, on the east side of
the street.
The Chinle Economic Development Land Use and Strategic Plan points to the
significance of US 191, N7, N102, and N8094 to future development, and the
importance of transportation to serve all road users on these routes.
Within the study area corridor, there were three sites in Many Farms proposed for future
residential development, which are:
1. Carson Mesa proposed housing site – 14 home sites are proposed on both sides of
N59. In addition to N59, unimproved dirt roads serve this area. As site plans are
developed, road improvements to the access roads would need to be implemented.
2. Proposed housing subdivision, Central Many Farms – This housing site is located
near the northwest corner of N59 and US 191. From N59, there is an east-west
unimproved dirt road that accesses the site. There is also a road connection from
the West Mesa subdivision to the west. As site plans are developed, road
improvements to the access roads would need to be implemented.
3. Proposed Community Facilities, Chapter House Compound – Additional community
facilities are proposed at the Chapter House compound, located near the southwest
corner of N59 and US 191.
The Many Farms Community Based Land Use Plan indicates that N59 is and will
continue to be an important route serving the community.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 13 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 2 – Chapter Capital Improvement Projects
*N/A = Not Available
Source: Navajo Division of Community Development, WIND System, Project Authorizations for Chinle and Many Farms Chapter,
http://wind.enavajo.org/PublicRecords.aspx, accessed 7/26/2011
Con-struc-tion
Year
Chapter Project Title Cate-gory
Funding
Sources
2012
($000)
2013
($000)
2014
($000)
2015
($000)
2016
($000)
2017
($000)
Total
($000)
Project
Location Route Mile-post
2012 Chinle
Planning,
Design,
Construction
Community /
Veterans
Cemetery
Real
Estate -
Block
General
Funds
Chapter
CIP
Funds
24 0 0 0 0 0 24
South of
Chinle
Airport; 1.1
miles
northeast
of US 191
US 191 443.0
5
2012 Chinle
Planning,
Design,
Construction
Porcupine
Ridge Power
line
Utilities-
Power -
Linear
CDBG
NTUA 412 0 0 0 0 0 412
About 6
miles west
of Chinle
Hospital N8090 9
2013 Many
Farms
New Chapter
House
Building-
Commun-ity
N/A 400 400 0 0 0 0 800
Southwest
of Junction
of US 191
and N59
N59 0.15
N/A* Many
Farms
C566 Apache
County Road
Transpor-tation
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0
Starts at
MP 1.05 of
N8086;
runs north
of Many
Farms
Lake; and
ends at MP
4.85 of
N8084
N8084
and
N8086
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 14 Chinle and Many Farms
2.4 Demographics and Socioeconomic
An analysis of population and economic data for both the Chinle and Many Farms
Chapters was conducted and is summarized below.
2.4.1 Population and Employment
Population data was obtained from the 2000 and 2010 United States Census. The
population estimates are summarized in Table 3. The census data was obtained for the
Chinle and Many Farms Census Designated Places (CDP). CDPs are defined as
closely settled, named, unincorporated communities that generally contain a mixture of
residential, commercial, and retail areas similar to those found in incorporated places of
similar sizes. The Census Bureau works with local areas to delineate boundaries for
CDPs.
Table 3 – Current Study Area Population
Area 2000 Population 2010 Population % Change in Annual
Growth
Chinle 5,568 4,518 -2%
Many Farms 1,617 1,348 -2%
Total 7,185 5,866 -2%
Sources: 2000 Census: Profile of General Demographic Characteristics (SF4), 2010 Census: Profile of General
Population and Housing Characteristics (2010 Demographic Profile Data)
As shown in Table 3, there is a 2% rate of decline in population between 2000 and
2010, with a total population of 7,185 in 2000 and 5,866 in 2010.
2.4.2 Major Employers
Employment data was obtained from the
2010 United States Census Longitudinal
Employer-Household Dynamics
(http://lehdmap.did.census.gov/). Figure 4
provides a breakdown of the different
types of employment within the Chinle-
Many Farms areas. Table 4 provides the
names of major employers in the area and
number of employees, where available.
Coca-Cola Bottling Plant in Chinle
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 15 Chinle and Many Farms
Figure 4 – Study Area Employment
Source: 2010 United States Census Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (http://lehdmap.did.census.gov/)
Table 4 – Employers
Public Employers How Many Persons are Employed?
Public Education 527
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) 150
National Park Service 29
Navajo Nation 600
Coca-Cola Bottling N/A
Navajo Tribal Utility Authority (NTUA) 44
Police and Fire N/A
Private Employers
Healthcare N/A
Various Commercial Businesses 155 (Tsegi Shopping Center)
Source: 2010 United States Census Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (http://lehdmap.did.census.gov/)
and ArcGIS land use shapefile data
Source of employee data is Chinle Chapter website,
http://chinle.nndes.org/content.asp?CustComKey=69532&CategoryKey=69533&pn=Newsletter&DomName=chinle.n
ndes.org
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 16 Chinle and Many Farms
2.4.3 Tourism
The corridor study area is home to the
Canyon De Chelly National Monument,
which attracts hundreds of thousands of
visitors each year. It is the fourth most
visited park in Arizona, after the Grand
Canyon, Glen Canyon National Recreation
Area, and Lake Mead. Annual recreational
visitors to Canyon De Chelly are
summarized in Table 5. Another tourism
resource is Many Farms Lake, which
attracts outdoor enthusiasts. No tourism
statistics are available for Many Farms
Lake.
Table 5 – Recreational Visitors to Canyon De Chelly National Monument
Year Recreational Visitors
2000 848,348
2001 833,202
2002 772,620
2003 866,498
2004 936,007
2005 830,253
2006 826,635
2007 825,320
2008 835,860
2009 826,425
2010 827,247
2011 (January- April 2011) 235,778
Source: http://www.nature.nps.gov/stats/park.cfm
2.4.4 Transportation Modes
Data on types of transportation that workers are using in the Chinle and Many Farms
areas were obtained from the 2000 Census Journey to Work Data. This data reflects
how workers 16 years of age and older are traveling to work. Table 6 summarizes this
information and shows how the modes of travel compare to the state as a whole. The
data shows that there are a higher percentage of walkers in both the Chinle and Many
Farms area compared to the state of Arizona as a whole. There is a lower percentage of
bicycle and transit usage compared to the state of Arizona as a whole.
Entrance to Canyon De Chelly National
Monument Visitor Center
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 17 Chinle and Many Farms
Looking at the effects of
new projects on minority
populations will ensure
that no discrimination
occurs.
Table 6 – Mode of Transportation for Workers 16 years and over
Mode of Transportation Arizona Chinle Many Farms
Percent of Workers 16 and over
Autos 89.5 77.9 91.2
Public Transportation 1.9 0.5 0.0
Bicycle 1.0 0.0 0.0
Walk 2.6 19.2 8.8
Source: 2000 Census, QT-P23: Journey to Work Data
Conversation with Chinle Chapter representatives indicated that there are workers from
other surrounding areas, such as Ganado, that commute to Chinle for work.
2.4.5 Title VI Populations and Environmental Justice
Transportation projects that utilize United States
federal aid are required to certify non-discrimination
under the requirements of Title VI
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Also, in 1997, the
U.S. Department of Transportation issued the
DOT Order to Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations to summarize and expand upon the requirements of Executive Order 12898
on Environmental Justice. In accordance with the intent of these federal requirements,
analysis was completed to identify impacted populations within the study area and any
affects to those populations by proposed transportation improvements.
According to the 2010 U.S. Census, the racial composition of both the Chinle and Many
Farms areas is predominantly Native American as shown in Table 7.
Table 7 – Racial Demographic Percentages
Area
White
Not
Hispanic
African
American
Native
American Asian
Native
Hawaiian Other
Two or
More
Races
Hispanic
or Latino
Chinle 6% 0% 90% 0% 0% 0% 1% 3%
Many
Farms 4% 0% 93% 0% 0% 0% 2% 1%
Source: 2010 Census DP-1
The Executive Order also requires the consideration of persons older than 60 years of
age. According to the 2010 U.S. Census, approximately 11 percent of the population in
Chinle and Many Farms combined is 60 years or older. Title VI population data for the
year 2010 for both Chinle and Many Farms is shown in Table 8.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 18 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 8 – 2000 Title VI Population Percentages
Population Category Chinle Many Farms Average
Females 53.3% 52.4% 52.9%
Males 46.7% 47.6% 47.2%
Minority Races 94.3% 96.1% 95.2%
Persons over age 60 10.7% 11.7% 11.2%
Source: 2010 Census DP-1
2.4.5.1 Study Recommendation Implications
Since the study area is entirely situated within Navajo lands, all areas have high
percentages of impacted populations. Therefore, the transportation improvement
projects recommended through this study may differentially affect community members
of the Navajo Nation.
Appendix A, Title VI and Environmental Justice: Preliminary Assessment, identifies the
recommended projects and provides an initial assessment of the potential effects, both
positive and negative, that these projects may have on the community members. As the
recommended projects are implemented, additional efforts will be conducted in order to
identify activities that can avoid, minimize, or mitigate the impacts.
For this study, consideration was given to the Title VI and Environmental Justice factors
to ensure that impacted populations were included in the study public participation
process. Efforts were made to reach minority and low-income populations when
advertising this study’s public involvement meetings, which included two public
meetings in the Chinle and Many Farms areas. Public outreach efforts are summarized
in Appendix B, Public Involvement Summary Report 1 and Appendix C, Public
Involvement Summary Report 2.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 19 Chinle and Many Farms
3 TRAFFIC AND ROADWAY ASSESSMENT
This chapter presents data on current and future transportation conditions to identify
needs and deficiencies of the transportation system.
3.1 Summary of Completed Plans and Studies
Several plans and studies that addressed transportation were reviewed in the
preparation of this study. The documents are listed below.
ADOT Studies and Plans
Arizona Bicycle Safety Plan
Arizona Pedestrian Safety Plan
Arizona Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
Arizona Rural Transit Needs Study
Navajo Transit System Five Year Plan
US 191 Corridor Profile Study
State Transportation Improvement Plan
Area Transportation Plans and Studies
Chinle Street Plan
Chinle Chapter Economic Development Land Use and Strategic Plan
2009 Navajo Nation Long Range Transportation Plan
Navajo Transit System Long Range Plan
Many Farms Chapter Community Based Land Use Plan
Land Use and Economic Development Plans
2009-2010 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy - the Navajo Nation
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 20 Chinle and Many Farms
Stakeholders include staff
and representatives of:
Chapter Houses
Navajo DOT
Bureau of Indian Affairs
ADOT District
School Districts
National Park Service
Navajo Transit System
Police Department
3.2 Summary of Stakeholder Interviews
Interviews with stakeholders were held to
obtain information on transportation needs.
Stakeholders are defined as persons whose
jobs involve the transportation system. These
persons have knowledge of the transportation
system gained from on the job experience,
knowledge, and expertise. Input from these
stakeholders carries more weight for this
reason.
A summary of comments appears in Table 9.
Interviews were completed with
representatives of:
Many Farms Chapter House
Chinle Chapter House
Chinle Unified School District Transportation Department
BIA Maintenance
ADOT Holbrook District
Navajo Division of Transportation
Navajo Transit System
Navajo Division of Economic Development
National Park Service
Chinle Police District
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 21 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 9 – Comments Received from Stakeholder Interviews
Comment Summary
Comment Category Chinle Area Many Farms Area Study Area Corridor
Airport access Provide pavement striping on
section of N8094.
Provide a pedestrian crossing sign
where the trail crosses N8094.
Provide signal at the intersection
of US 191 / N8094 if warranted.
Perimeter fencing along the road
and around the airport. Animal
crossings can be a problem.
Improved snow removal needed.
Animals on Roads Sand and tumbleweeds build up on the US 191 right-of-way fencing, allowing animals into the right-of-way. There is
a need to back fence the area.
A fencing and cattle guard replacement project on US 191 will start soon. The old cattle guards were hard to clean.
Emergency Access There are emergency access concerns in the area - ADOT encourages use of local routes
New Pedestrian
and Equestrian
trails
Provide equestrian trails in the
Chinle area, particularly north of
N7, and east of US 191.
Provide trails to Many Farms
Lake.
Provide walking trail between
Canyon De Chelly Visitor Center,
Thunderbird Lodge, and Holiday
Inn.
Provide trail at foot of the hill west
of Many Farms High School.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 22 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 9 – Comments Received from Stakeholder Interviews (continued)
Comment Summary
Comment Category Chinle Area Many Farms Area Study Area Corridor
Drainage and
Flooding Issues
N8087- fix low water crossing.
US 191 from Elementary School to
Basha’s
US 191 acts like a dam, and there
are flooding issues – BIA is
planning a drainage study and
ADOT will act as a partner.
During monsoon season wash
crossing can be impassible.
Frontage Roads Provide a system of frontage
roads in the Many Farms area.
ADOT supports frontage roads,
but not new access points to the
right-of-way.
Intersection Needs Provide turn lanes on US 191 near
milepost 449 and milepost 450.
Street Lighting Provide lighting on N7, either on
one or both sides of the street.
Provide street lighting between the
Many Farms Public School and the
High School turnoff
Maintenance
Issues
Sand and tumbleweeds encroach on the right-of-way fence.
Funding has been cut for maintenance on BIA roads, resulting in a lack of funding to keep up with maintenance
needs.
Secondary roads are all dirt and are not always maintained.
New Road
Connections
Provide new roads (and trails) to
Many Farms Lake.
Provide new frontage road
connections.
New Developments Make the Old Flea Market a
permanent site.
New commercial development is
desired in the Many Farms area.
Possible plan for Navajo Nation
Shopping Center – 10-acre site
along US 191.
Development to support tourism
and improve economic
development.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 23 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 9 – Comments Received from Stakeholder Interviews (continued)
Comment Summary
Comment Category Chinle Area Many Farms Area Study Area Corridor
Paving Pave N27. School District has
been asking for paving on N27 for
over 30 years.
In Many Farms, paving or
resurfacing was requested on
N59, N8086, N8084, N8085, and
Lake View Road.
Gravel N27 by the Rodeo
Grounds.
In Chinle, paving or re-surfacing
was requested on N102, N8091,
N27, N8086, N8094, N8095, and
N8096.
Pedestrian Issues Use Safe Routes to School
program to provide for sidewalks
at Sunset Housing.
Provide flashing device for the
school crosswalks.
Provide a pedestrian overpass to
Many Farms Public School.
Provide pedestrian trails to Many
Farms Lake.
Pedestrian crossings are needed
on US 191 near the schools/
connect residential areas to
schools.
Provide sidewalks to complete
missing links of sidewalks
between Canyon De Chelly and
the Holiday Inn.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 24 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 9 – Comments Received from Stakeholder Interviews (continued)
Comment Summary
Comment Category Chinle Area Many Farms Area Study Area Corridor
Pedestrian crossings are needed on N7 near US 191.
Provide pedestrian trails to the Canyon De Chelly Visitor Center / Thunderbird Lodge/Holiday Inn.
A pedestrian crossing is needed in front of Bashas in Chinle.
Road Widening Widen US 191 between Chinle and Many Farms. US 191 is congested during rush hour times and there are rear
end and head on accidents.
N102 (road to Chinle Hospital) is
congested during the morning
peak hour. Signal planned at US
191 /N102 should improve
congestion.
Safety of People
and Property
Request DPS to patrol more
during bus run periods.
Reduce speeds on US 191
through town.
Provide speed monitors on US
191. Provide more patrols on this
route. The Chinle Police requests
more radar, traffic monitors, and
speed monitors.
N102 needs more speed limit
signs.
Reduce the speed limit on US 191
between Chinle and Many Farms.
More highway patrol officers are
needed
School Bus Route
Transportation
Issues
School bus pullouts are needed between Chinle and Many Farms.
Widen the turnoff or entrance to
the Chinle Junior High School.
A pedestrian overpass is needed
on US 191 near Many Farms
Public School.
By law, a bus has to pull off the
road when five or more vehicles
are following. Between Chinle and
Many Farms this is difficult.
Provide signage to warn drivers to stop when a school bus has its lights flashing.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 25 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 9 – Comments Received from Stakeholder Interviews (continued)
Comment Summary
Comment Category Chinle Area Many Farms Area Study Area Corridor
Signage Speed limit signs on road to
Chinle Airport (N8094).
Provide more destination signage
to the airport, chapter house,
public services, and tourism
destinations.
Provide more advance school bus
stop signage on US 191.
Provide signage to discourage
drivers from passing a school bus
when it has its lights flashing.
Provide signage to discourage
drivers from passing a school bus
when it has its lights flashing.
Replacement program for the
signage, because graffiti and
bullets through the signs are a big
problem.
Signage,
Continued
There should be warning signs
regarding animal crossings on N
8094 (road to airport).
Provide more destination signage
to the airport, chapter house,
public services, and tourism
destinations.
Traffic Signal
Installation
Provide a flashing signal at the
airport turnoff, if warranted.
Provide a traffic signal at the
intersection of US 191 and N59
A new traffic signal is planned at
the intersection of US 191 and
N102 to provide better access to
the Chinle Hospital.
Transit Navajo Transit System (NTS) indicated a desire to try local transit service again in the Chinle and Many Farms area.
NTS has a plan of bus stop locations and transit center location.
Other Comments There is a need for “Main Street”
type improvements, such as
sidewalks and bike paths.
N64 is a good route and is paved.
There are a number of commuters
from other areas, e.g. Many
Farms, Nazlini, Ganado, Tsaile,
that travel to Chinle to work.
There is lots of traffic at the Friday
Flea Market in Chinle.
Turnouts to streets are narrow in
general.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 26 Chinle and Many Farms
3.3 Street Inventory – Indian Reservation Road Program
The Indian Reservation Road (IRR) Program Road Inventory is a basic
requirement for transportation funding through the BIA IRR Program. The BIA
IRR Inventory is vital since it is used in determining each BIA Region’s road
funding.
The Navajo Division of Transportation maintains a comprehensive database of all
transportation facilities eligible for IRR funding. The inventory is approved by both
the BIA and the Navajo Nation.
The BIA IRR Inventory or Road Inventory Field Data System (RIFDS) includes
information such as route number, location length, width, surface type and
needs, pavement ratings, class of road, adequacy of design standard,
construction needs, and maintenance needs.
The following sections provide a brief overview of the BIA IRR Inventory data,
including information about characteristics and needs of the roadway system in
the study area corridor. Roads in the Inventory are divided into numbered
sections, which are also shown graphically in Appendix D.
3.3.1 Laneage and Right-of-Way
In general, roads in the Chinle and Many Farms study area are two-lane
roadways with the exception of sections of US 191 and N7. US 191 has a five-lane
section consisting of four through lanes (two in each direction) and a center
turn lane from approximately Milepost 447 to Milepost 448. A state project is
planned in 2013 to extend the US 191 five-lane section south to N102 and install
a traffic signal at the intersection of US 191 and N102.
Laneage and right-of-way widths (where available) are shown on Figure 5.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 27 Chinle and Many Farms
Source: BIA IRR Inventory, 2010
Figure 5 – Laneage and Right of Way
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 28 Chinle and Many Farms
3.3.2 Roadway Surface Type
The IRR Inventory categorizes roads in the study area corridor as four types:
Bituminous Material (<2" thick)
Bituminous Material (>=2" thick)
Earth Road
Proposed Roads - Not Open to Traffic
Figure 6 shows the pavement surface for roads in the IRR Inventory in the study area
corridor. Paved roads are provided on N7, N59, N102, N64, part of N27, and US 191.
3.3.3 Shoulder Condition
Shoulder conditions are shown in Figure 7. Shoulder conditions include whether the
roads have no shoulders, paved shoulders, or curb. Paved shoulders are provided on
US 191, N59, and segments of N64 and N102. Curbed areas are located on segments
of N7 and N27.
3.4 Roadway Deficiency Information in the Indian Reservation Road
Program Inventory
The IRR Program has a number of categories that provide information on roadway
deficiencies. These categories are:
Passing Sight Deficiencies – This category represents the percent (by length) of the
section being inventoried that meets the passing sight distance requirements set out in
the assigned BIA design standard. Each roadway section is categorized by a
percentage range that meets or exceeds requirements.
In this study, roads with a small percent (lower than 50%) that met passing sight
distance was reviewed with respect to crash history to determine if a passing section
was justified. This involved determining if there was a history of head-on collisions.
Eight BIA roads were examined, as summarized in Table 10. These road segments are
shown in Figure 8. The results of the crash data review showed that there was not a
history of head-on collisions at any of the locations.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 29 Chinle and Many Farms
Source: BIA IRR Inventory 2010
Figure 6 – Pavement Surface
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 30 Chinle and Many Farms
Source: BIA IRR Inventory 2010
Figure 7 – Shoulder Type
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 31 Chinle and Many Farms
Source: BIA IRR Inventory 2010
Figure 8 – Percent of Road Section Meeting Passing Sight Deficiencies
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 32 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 10 – Road Sections with Passing Sight Deficiencies and Associated
Head-on Collisions
Route Sections
Percent Meeting
Passing Sight Distance
Requirements
Number of Head –
on Collisions,
1997-2009
N27 183,186 30-49% 0
N8084 10,30,35 0-9% 0
N8084 40,60,66,80 30-49% 0
N8086 All 30-49% 0
N8087 10,30,34,36 30-49% 0
N8090 62 30-49% 0
N8090 66,80 30-49% 0
N8091 10,15 30-49% 0
N8094 23,26 0-9% 0
N8095 10,30,33,36 30-49% 0
Source: BIA IRR Inventory, 2010
Number of deficient curves – These data shows the number of curves with a degree
of curvature that is sharper than allowed by BIA design standards. There were two
locations in the study area which had deficient curves:
N8090 – 14 deficient curves
N8095 – 11 deficient curves
These areas are shown in Figure 9. In areas with curves sharper than allowable, it may
be desirable to sign the curve at a lower speed, or place warning signs at the curves.
Numbers of stopping restrictions – These data are the actual number of instances
where stopping sight distances, in the area being inventoried, are less than the
minimums allowed under the BIA design standard. There were three locations which
were inventoried as having less than minimum stopping sight distance:
N8090 – Section 62– 16 locations
N8095 – Section 33 – 5 locations
N8095 – Section 36 – 8 locations
These segments are shown in Figure 9, which also shows areas with deficient curves.
Both N8090 and N8095 had a very low incidence of reported crashes—N8095 had two
crashes and N8090 had no reported crashes in the time period 1997-2009.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 33 Chinle and Many Farms
Source: BIA IRR Inventory 2010
Figure 9 – BIA Roads with Deficient Curves and Stopping Sight Restrictions
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 34 Chinle and Many Farms
Roadbed Condition – These data describes the roadbed condition for the section of
road being inventoried. Roads that were characterized as “bladed, unimproved road,
poor drainage, poor alignment” were:
N8086 – Sections 10,30,35,50
N8087 – Sections 10,30,34,36
N8095 – all sections
These areas are shown in Figure 10.
Highway Geometric Design Deficiencies - To meet the Navajo IRR program
objectives, construction of roads, bridges, and other transportation facilities must be
done to current acceptable BIA engineering standards for anticipated 20-year traffic
volume.
Table 11 summarizes these standards.
A review of the BIA IRR Inventory data and projected traffic volumes indicates the
geometric design deficiencies, as shown in Table 12. Many of the study area roads are
in need of improvement in the areas of surface upgrades, shoulder widening or
upgrades, or roadway widening to meet BIA design standards.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 35 Chinle and Many Farms
Source: BIA IRR Inventory 2010
Figure 10 – Roadbed Condition
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 36 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 11 – BIA Geometric Design Standards
Adequate
Design
Standard
Number
Future
ADT
Functional
Classification
Needs Surface
Upgrade
Needs Shoulder
Widening
Needs Roadway
Widening
Needs Shoulder Type
Upgrade
1,2,3 N/A 1-Major Arterial Surface Type<5 Shoulder Width<6 ft.
Roadway Width<66
ft. Shoulder Type<3
4,5,6 >=400 2-Rural Minor Arterial Surface Type<5 Shoulder Width<6 ft.
Roadway Width<36
ft. Shoulder Type<3
7,8,9 <400 2-Rural Minor Arterial Surface Type<4 Shoulder Width<4 ft.
Roadway Width<32
ft. Shoulder Type<3
10,11,12
>=400
>250<400 4-Rural Major Collector
Surface Type<5
Surface Type<4 Shoulder Width<4 ft.
Roadway Width<32
ft.
Shoulder Type
<3 for ADS10;
<2 for ADS1 1;
<1 for ADS1 2
50-250 4-Rural Major Collector Surface Type<3 Shoulder Width<4 ft.
Roadway Width<32
ft.
Shoulder Type
<3 for ADS1 0;
<2 for ADS1 1;
<1 for ADS1 2
<50 4-Rural Major Collector Surface Type <1 Shoulder Width<4 ft.
Roadway Width<32
ft.
Shoulder Type
<3 for ADS1 0;
<2 for ADS1 1;
<1 for ADS1 2
13,14,15
>400 5-Rural Local Surface Type <4 Shoulder Width<2 ft.
Roadway Width<28
ft.
Shoulder Type
<3 for ADS1 3;
<2 for ADS1 4;
<1 for ADS1 5;
50-400 5-Rural Local Surface Type <3 Shoulder Width<2 ft.
Roadway Width<28
ft.
Shoulder Type
<3 for ADS1 3;
<2 for ADS1 4;
<1 for ADS1 5
<50 5-Rural Local Surface Type <1 Shoulder Width<2 ft.
Roadway Width<28
ft.
Shoulder Type
<3 for ADS1 3;
<2 for ADS1 4;
<1 for ADS1 5
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 37 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 11 – BIA Geometric Design Standards (continued)
Adequate
Design
Standard
Number
Future
ADT
Functional
Classification
Needs Surface
Upgrade
Needs Shoulder
Widening
Needs Roadway
Widening
Needs Shoulder Type
Upgrade
16,17,18
>=400
>250<400
6-City Minor
7-City Collector
3-City Local
Surface Type <5
Surface Type <4
N/A
Roadway Width
<50 for ADS 16,
<(21-38) for ADS 17
or 18
N/A
50-250
6-City Minor
7-City Collector
3-City Local Surface Type <3
N/A
Roadway Width
<50 for ADS 16,
<(21-38) for ADS 17
or 18
N/A
Under 50
6-City Minor
7-City Collector
3-City Local Surface Type <1
N/A
Roadway Width
<50 for ADS 16,
<(21-38) for ADS 17
or 18
N/A
Source: 25 CFR Part 170, Table 1 – Adequate Standard Characteristics, 7/19/2004, page 43123.
Notes: Surface Type Codes: 6, 5, 4=Paved; 3=Gravel; 1=Earth;
Shoulder Type Codes: 4=Curb; 3=Paved; 2=Gravel; 1=Earth.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 38 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 12 – Geometric Design Deficiencies
Route Number
Needs Surface
Upgrade
Needs Shoulder
Widening
Needs Roadway
Widening
Needs Shoulder
Upgrade
Section Number Section Number Section Number Section Number
N7 10,50,52,54 10,50,52,54 15,30,40,50,52,54 50,52,54
N27 183, 186 183, 186 183, 186 183, 186
N59 - - 230,240,245 -
N64 10 10 10 10
N102 10 - - -
N8082 10 10 10 10
N8084
10,30,35,40,60,66,
80
10,30,35,40,60,66,
80
10,30,35,40,60,66,
80
10,30,35,40,60,66,
80
N8086 10,30,35,50,70 10,30,35,50,70 10,30,35,50,70 10,30,35,50,70
N8087 10,30,34,36 10,30,34,36 10,30,34,36 10,30,34,36
N8090 62,66,80 62,66,80 62,66,80 62,66,80
N8091 10,15 10,15 10,15 10,15
N8094 23,26 23,26 23,26 23,26
N8095 10,30,33,36 10,30,33,36 10,30,33,36 10,30,33,36
Source: BIA IRR Inventory 2010, analysis by Kimley- Horn and Associates
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 39 Chinle and Many Farms
Functional
classification is used
in planning, design,
and to allocate federal
funding.
3.4 Traffic Control
In general, traffic in the study area corridor is controlled using stop signs. In Chinle
there is a traffic signal at the US 191 / N7 intersection. A traffic signal is planned at the
intersection of US 191 and N102.
3.5 Functional Classification
Roadway functional classification groups roads
that have similar design and traffic
characteristics. One functional class differs
from another according to the degree of
access and mobility. Collector and local streets
provide land access and carry local traffic to
the neighborhoods and distribute traffic to the
arterials. Arterial streets provide mobility over
long distances with minimal access to adjoining properties.
However, the basic idea is the same regardless of the method of measurement: more
important roads or more critical needs deserve the most attention. In the context of
roads, that usually means more funding. The functional classification definitions are
summarized in Table 13.
US 191 at the N7 Intersection
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 40 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 13 – Indian Reservation Roads - Functional Classification Definition
Name /
Class
Description Example
Major
arterial /
Class 1
Major arterial roads providing an
integrated network with characteristics for
serving traffic between large population
centers, and having average daily traffic
volumes of 10,000 vehicles per day or
more with more than two lanes of traffic.
N7, near US 191
Rural Minor
arterial /
Class 2
Rural minor arterial roads serving traffic
between large population centers. May
also link smaller towns and communities
to major resort areas that attract travel
over long distances and generally provide
for relatively high overall travel speeds
with minimum interference to through
traffic movement.
N27
Rural Major
collector /
Class 4
Rural major collector road is collector to
rural local roads.
N8094, east of US 191
Source: Indian Reservation Roads Coding Guide and Instructions for the IRR Inventory, 2007
Navajo Nation roadways are functionally classified in the IRR Program Inventory.
Table 14 summarizes the IRR functional class of each roadway that is functionally
classified in the study area corridor. The road classifications are shown graphically in
Figure 11.
It should be noted that US 191 is designated as an Arizona major collector with the
segment through Chinle designated a minor arterial and IRR Class 1.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 41 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 14 – IRR Functional Classification
Road Name Section Numbers
IRR Program Functional
Classification
N7 10,15,30,40 Major Arterial
N7 42,44,46,48,50,52,54 Rural Minor Arterial
N27 183,186,190,193,196,200 Rural Minor Arterial
N59 230,240,245 Rural Minor Arterial
N64 10 Rural Minor Arterial
N102 10 Rural Major Collector
N8082 10 Rural Major Collector
N8084 10,30,35,40,60,66,80 Rural Major Collector
N8086 10,30,35,50,70 Rural Major Collector
N8087 10,30,34,36 Rural Major Collector
N8090 62,66,80 Rural Major Collector
N8091 10,15 Rural Major Collector
N8094 23,26 Rural Major Collector
N8095 10,30,33,36 Rural Major Collector
Source: Indian Reservation Road Program Inventory, 2010
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 42 Chinle and Many Farms
Source: BIA IRR Inventory 2010
Figure 11 – BIA Functional Classifications
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 43 Chinle and Many Farms
3.6 Crash History
Motor vehicle crash (MVC) data were available from the Navajo Police Department and
the ADOT Accident Location Information Surveillance System (ALISS). Data were
available for 816 MVCs in the Chinle/Many Farms study area during the 13-year period
from 1997 through 2009. Data for 238 of the Chinle/Many Farms crashes were
extracted from the Navajo Police database and 578 of the crashes from the ALISS
database.
Table 15 provides an overview of the number of MVCs and associated injuries and
fatalities by road for the study area corridor. Two-thirds of all crashes and three-quarters
of all crash-caused injuries and fatalities occurred on US 191. Twenty-one
percent of all crashes, 16 percent of crash injuries and eight percent of crash fatalities
occurred on N7. In total, these two roads accounted for about 88 percent of the
crashes, 90 percent of the crash injuries, and 82 percent of the crash fatalities in the
study area. Figure 12 shows the location of crashes between 1999 and 2009, based on
the Navajo Police Department database.
There were a large proportion of animal / vehicle crashes in the study area corridor. This photo,
taken off of US 191 near Many Farms, shows how wind and tumbleweeds encroach on the
right-of-way fence, which allows livestock to enter the road.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 44 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 15 – Number of Motor Vehicle Crashes (MVC), Injuries and Fatalities by Road
Road # of MVCs % of All
MVCs
# of
Injuries
% of All
Injuries
# of
Fatalities
% of All
Fatalities
N7 171 21.0 109 15.8 4 8.2
N27 18 2.2 9 1.3 2 4.1
N59 30 3.7 22 3.2 2 4.1
N64 20 2.4 19 2.8 3 6.1
N102 13 1.6 9 1.3 0 0
N191 543 66.6 516 74.6 36 73.5
N203 2 0.2 3 0.4 0 0
N462 1 0.1 0 0 0 0
N520 1 0.1 0 0 0 0
N552 1 0.1 1 0.1 0 0
N8082 3 0.4 6 0.9 0 0
N8084 3 0.4 1 0.1 0 0
N8085 1 0.1 4 0.6 0 0
N8086 4 0.5 0 0 0 0
N8090 2 0.2 1 0.1 0 0
N8094 1 0.1 2 0.3 2 4.1
N8095 2 0.2 0 0 0 0
Totals 816 100 692 100 49 100
Note: Shaded areas indicate roads with high motor vehicle crashes and fatalities
Source: ALISS and Navajo Police Department, analysis by Kimley-Horn and Associates
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 45 Chinle and Many Farms
Source: Navajo Police Department
Figure 12 – Crash Locations, 1999-2009
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 46 Chinle and Many Farms
This study reviewed characteristics of the crashes based on data in the accident reports
for each accident. A summary of these crash characteristics are summarized as
follows.
Driver State of Origin - The study area is a major tourist destination, which leads to the
question of whether a large percentage of the crashes involve drivers from outside the
study area. The ALISS database provides the driver’s license state of origin for many
crashes. Only 42 of 1,196 (3.5%) drivers whose license state of origin was reported
were from outside Arizona. Although drivers from other parts of Arizona are not
identified in the database, it would appear, based on the out-of-Arizona driver data that
a high percentage of the drivers involved in study area crashes are local.
Pedestrians and Bicyclists / Pedalcyclists - There were 15 crashes involving 17
pedestrians. Seven of the pedestrians were fatally injured and the remaining 10
suffered some injury. Four of the pedestrian crashes occurred on N7; one on N59; and
the remaining 10 on US 191. Seven of the US 191 crashes occurred in the Chinle
urban area and three occurred between Chinle and Many Farms. Five of the
pedestrians had been drinking. Three of these five were fatally injured. The one
pedalcylist crash reported occurred in Many Farms.
Weather and Road Conditions - Adverse weather and road conditions can be causal
factors for MVCs. Weather was clear, with no other conditions shown for 86% of the
crashes, and the road was dry, with no other factors listed, for 74% of the crashes.
Weather might have been a factor for 14% of the crashes, and road condition might
have been a factor for 26% of the crashes. Somewhat surprising is the fact that wind
and dust do not seem to play a major factor in MVCs.
Light Conditions - Light conditions can be an important factor in MVCs. Typically, it is
more difficult to see factors impacting the safety of the road at night and during
dawn/dusk conditions. Table 16 shows the light conditions for MVCs in the urban
portions of the Chinle-Many Farms study area. Crashes archived in the ALISS
database provide information about light conditions. Crashes archived in the Navajo
Police Department database do not include information about light conditions.
However, night time conditions were estimated using the astronomical definition of
twilight for Chinle, which occurs when the sun is 12 degrees below the horizon. This
time occurs about one hour before sunrise and one hour after sunset. Dawn/dusk were
assumed to be the hour between twilight and sunrise or sunset. The almanac of
date/time matches was specific for Chinle.
Note that the number of nighttime and dawn/dusk crashes in Many Farms on US 191
and N59 (49%) were higher than on US 191 and N7 in Chinle (33%), although on N7
between US 191 and the Holiday Inn, about 38% of the crashes occurred during
nighttime or dawn/dusk.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 47 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 16 – Light Conditions for MVCs on Selected Roads and Locations in Chinle and
Many Farms, 1997 - 2009
Road/Location Total MVCs Daylight MVCs Dawn/Dusk MVCs Nighttime MVCs
US191 in Chinle (total) 221 155 10 56
At N7 59 45 4 10
Other Locations 141 104 4 33
US 191 In Many Farms 71 31 3 37
N7 (total) 170 106 7 57
MP 0 - 2.3 157 97 7 53
MP 2.3 - 5.0 13 9 0 4
N59 30 14 4 12
Note: Shaded areas indicate roads with high motor vehicle crashes and fatalities
Source: ALISS and Navajo Police Department, analysis by Kimley-Horn and Associates
Crash Location by Road - Information regarding crash locations will be important in
the development of road improvement needs. Table 17 provides data for the number of
crashes, vehicles involved, injuries, and fatalities for several sections of road within the
study area. It also provides data on the number of crashes involving intersections or
driveways, running off the road, and emergency medical transport (EMT). Data for the
last two fields were not available for crashes that were documented only in the Navajo
Police Department database.
Not surprisingly, US 191 in Chinle and Many Farms and N7 experienced high numbers
of intersection and driveway related MVCs. US 191 between Chinle and Many Farms
experienced larger percentages of running off the road crashes and more severe
crashes as evidenced by the large number of crashes requiring EMT.
Types of Crashes - The type of crash (Collision Manner) is described as a single
vehicle or if involving multiple vehicles, how the interaction among the vehicles can be
described, e.g. head-on, backing, angle. Typically, single vehicle crashes involve
running off the roadway or hitting some object on the roadway, such as animals. Single
vehicle crashes account for more crashes than all of the other crash types combined.
Rear end crashes, the second most common crash type, frequently involve following too
close and driver inattention. Rear end crashes often occur at intersections. Table 17
provides information on types of crashes by location.
Crash Causes - There are many causal factors, including drivers’ actions that lead to
crashes. A review of the data indicates that driver inattention, speed, failure to yield
right-of-way, and improper lane changes were significant factors leading to MVCs in the
study area. Driving under the influence, particularly of alcohol, is an important factor in
MVCs.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 48 Chinle and Many Farms
Often the crash cause is not well identified in the data. For example, there were more
than 120 animal crashes in the 814 total MVCs in the study area; however, animals on
the road were shown to be a causal factor for only 23 crashes.
Harmful Crash Events - Harmful crash events are the aspect of a MVC that results in
physical harm or property damage. Data on first harmful events, i.e. the first event that
causes physical harm or property damage, was reviewed. Sometimes there is a second
harmful event. For example, a vehicle might overturn, which is a harmful event, but
then it might hit a guard, a second harmful event. Collisions with other vehicles account
for 60 percent of the first harmful events. Collisions with animals account for about 20
percent of the first harmful events, with vehicle overturning resulting in about 12 percent
of the first harmful events. Note that only about 600 first harmful events have been
identified for the 814 crashes in the database.
Motor Vehicle Crash Time Data - Understanding when MVCs occur can provide
valuable insight as to why they occur. Crash peaks at the beginning and end of the
work day can mean there is a relationship between work traffic and the number of
MVCs. Weekend peaks might be associated with recreational travel. A reduction in
yearly trends might mean safety improvements have been effective or crash reporting
procedures have changed.
Figure 13 shows the number of crashes by year over the 13-year period. The number
of MVCs reported beginning in 2005 is about one-half of those reported in earlier years.
Causes that have been suggested to explain the drop in crashes are:
More coordination between Navajo Division of Transportation and ADOT, especially
with respect to measures to reduce animal crashes.
Less travel because of the economy, which led to fewer crashes.
Fatalities - There were 48 fatal crashes in the study area, 35 occurred on the US 191,
12 on BIA routes and one (1) on County road. High fatalities occurred on US 191 in
Chinle between MP 447.9 - MP 448.8, between Chinle and Many Farms from MP 448.8
- MP 458.2 and in Many Farms from MP 460.5 - MP 464.4. Four fatalities occurred on
N7 from US 191 intersection to MP 2.8, two on N27 at N7 intersection, two on N59 from
US191 intersection to MP 2.5, and three on N64 from N7 intersection to MP 2.1. See
Table 17.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 49 Chinle and Many Farms
Source: ALISS and Navajo Police Department, analysis by Kimley - Horn and Associates
Figure 13 – Number of Motor Vehicle Crashes by year in the Chinle-Many Farms
Study Area Corridor, 1997-2009
Other crash time data findings, depicted in Figure 14 are:
Monthly crashes - The month minimum point for MVCs occurs in June, while the
maximum occurs in August, only two months later. The August peak might be
explained by recreational travel, but June would also be an expected recreational travel
month. Possibly some special events occur in August, resulting in the sharp peak.
Chinle Fair and school starting may have contributed to the August MVC spike.
Weekday crashes - There is a slight peaking of MVCs on Friday and Saturday,
suggesting a relationship between possibly more leisure and recreational-related
vehicle travel on the weekends.
Time of Day for crashes - There is clear peaking of time of day MVCs during the hours
that would be associated with travel to and from work and lunch hour travel. There is a
general upward trend starting at 2 am and ending at the 9 pm hour, with spikes at 8 am,
noon, and 6 pm.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 50 Chinle and Many Farms
Source: ALISS and Navajo Police Department, analysis by Kimley - Horn and Associates
Figure 14 – Crash Trends by Month, Day of Week and Time of Day
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 51 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 17 – Crash Locations, Severity and Types
Road MP Location Number
of MVCs
Number of
Vehicles
Number of
Injuries
Number of
Fatalities
Number of
Intersection
/ Driveway
MVCs
Number of
Run Off
Road
MVCs*
Collision
with
Animal
Collision
with
Pedestrians
Comment
US 191
445 - 446.5 26 39 35 2 9 2 6 0 Mainly single vehicle crashes. Potential speeding issues.
446.5 - 446.8 N102 11 22 15 0 11 0 0 0 Primarily intersection or driveway crashes, single-vehicle and
sideswipe.
446.8 - 447.1 26 48 33 0 13 2 0 0 Half the crashes are intersection crashes, mainly angle
crashes.
447.1 - 447.7 34 65 34 1 17 0 1 0 Half of the crashes are intersection or driveway related.
447.7 - 447.9 N7
Intersection Area 56 112 42 1 49 1 0 0 Intersection and driveway crashes Single vehicle, left turn, and
rear end crashes.
447.9 - 448.8 73 136 31 4 39 3 6 7 Highest number of pedestrian crashes. Access management,
speeding issues.
448.8 - 450.5 59 91 53 2 9 5 20 1 Animal fencing issues.
450.5 - 452.2 41 59 38 6 11 10 5 0 61% single vehicle crashes,
452.2 - 455.8 85 124 93 7 5 17 22 1 Animal fencing issues.
455.8 - 458.2 30 49 53 6 8 7 2 1 57%single vehicle crashes.
458.2 - 460.5 30 37 33 1 1 9 9 0 87% single vehicle crashes – relatively high proportion of
animal crashes (30%),
460.5 - 464.4 Many
Farms 70 100 45 5 19 7 20 0 Animal fencing issues. Access management concerns,
N7
0 -0.2 US 191
Intersection Area 31 56 33 1 18 0 3 3
Three pedestrian crashes. 58% intersection or driveway
crashes. 68% of crashes were single vehicle. Access
management concerns.
0.2 -1.0 61 115 17 0 32 2 8 0
52% intersection or driveway crashes. 48% single vehicle
Access management concerns. 13% animal crashes. Animal
fencing issues.
1.0 -1.7 29 46 20 1 12 3 6 1 72% of crashes are single vehicle crashes. 21% animal
crashes.
1.7 - 2.1 N27
Intersection Area 25 43 29 1 16 3 3 1 64% of crashes are intersection or driveway crashes. 60% of
crashes are single vehicle crashes.
2.1 - 2.8 20 33 10 1 11 3 0 0 55% are intersection or driveway related, 65% are single
vehicle.
2.8 - 5.0 5 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 No crash trends.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 52 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 17 – Crash Locations, Severity and Types (continued)
Road MP Location Number
of MVCs
Number of
Vehicles
Number of
Injuries
Number of
Fatalities
Number of
Intersection
/ Driveway
MVCs
Number of
Run Off
Road
MVCs*
Collision
with
Animal
Collision
with
Pedestrians
Comment
N27
35.3 - 37.3 13 24 4 0 4 2 0 0 62% were single vehicle crashes.
37.3 at N7 Intersection 5 8 2 2 4 0 0 0 No crash trends.
N59 0 - 2.5 30 46 22 2 7 3 8 1 67% were single vehicle crashes. Animal fencing issues.
N64
N7 Intersection 7 9 5 0 7 0 1 0 All were intersection or driveway related and single vehicle
crashes.
0 - 2.1 13 18 13 3 0 0 0 0 92% of crashes are single vehicle crashes.
N102
0 - 0.95 11 19 9 0 3 0 1 0 No crash trends.
0.95 US 191
Intersection 2 4 0 0 2 0 0 0 No crash trends.
N203 0 - 0.68 2 3 3 0 2 0 0 0 No crash trends.
CR462 0.01 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 No crash trends.
CR520 1.66 - 2.1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 No crash trends.
CR552 0 - 0.5 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 No crash trends.
N8082 0 - 0.5 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 No crash trends.
N8084
0 - 5.0 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 No crash trends.
22.20 N64 Intersection 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 No crash trends.
N8085 0 - 1.0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 No crash trends.
N8086
0 - 1.0 near N64
intersection 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 No crash trends.
15.6 - 17.6 near US
191 Intersection 3 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 No crash trends.
N8094 0 - 0.8 1 1 2 2 0 1 0 0 No crash trends.
N8095 0 - 2.4 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 No crash trends.
Source: ALISS and Navajo Police Department, analysis by Kimley- Horn and Associates
*No data in these fields from the Navajo Police Department
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 53 Chinle and Many Farms
Traffic Volume data can
show congested areas
and help justify
improvements.
3.7 Existing Traffic and Level of Service
Traffic volume data is important because it shows how busy a road is and it can help
justify transportation project needs.
Daily traffic volumes for the Chinle and Many
Farms areas were collected from two sources: the
BIA IRR Program database and the ADOT
Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS)
database. These data are shown in Table 18 and
shown graphically in Figure 15.
Table 18 – Annual Average Daily Traffic Volumes – BIA Roads
Road Name Section Number ADT Year ADT Count 2011 ADT 2011 LOS
N7 10 2007 12,780 13,833 B
N7 15 2007 12,780 13,833 B
N7 30 2007 11,287 12,217 B
N7 40 2007 10,386 11,242 B
N7 42 2000 8,806 10,949 B
N7 44 2007 8,806 9,532 B
N7 46 2000 7,161 8,904 B
N7 48 2000 7,161 8,904 B
N7 50 2000 7,161 8,904 C
N7 52 1996 4,988 6,713 C
N7 54 2000 1,024 1,273 B
N27 183 1999 730 926 B
N27 186 1999 730 926 B
N27 190 1999 2,854 3,620 B
N27 193 1999 2,854 3,620 B
N27 196 1999 2,854 3,620 B
N27 200 1999 2,854 3,620 B
N59 230 2000 1,580 1,965 B
N59 240 2000 1,580 1,965 B
N59 245 1995 3,751 5,149 C
N64 10 1997 3,437 4,535 C
N102 10 1998 4,142 5,358 C
N8082 10 2004 60 69 B
N8084 10 0 0 0 -
N8084 30 0 0 0 -
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 54 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 18 – Annual Average Daily Traffic Volumes – BIA Roads (continued)
Road Name Section Number ADT Year ADT Count 2011 ADT 2011 LOS
N8084 35 0 0 0 -
N8084 40 2001 101 123 B
N8084 60 2001 101 123 B
N8084 66 2001 101 123 B
N8084 80 2001 101 123 B
N8086 10 2001 76 93 B
N8086 30 2001 76 93 B
N8086 35 2001 185 226 B
N8086 50 2001 185 226 B
N8086 70 1999 455 577 B
N8087 10 2005 263 296 B
N8087 30 2001 213 260 B
N8087 34 2001 213 260 B
N8087 36 2001 213 260 B
N8090 62 1998 89 115 B
N8090 66 1999 527 668 B
N8090 80 1999 527 668 B
N8091 10 2001 243 296 B
N8091 15 2001 243 296 B
N8094 23 0 0 0 -
N8094 26 1997 332 438 B
N8095 10 2000 445 553 B
N8095 30 2000 445 553 B
N8095 33 2000 445 553 B
N8095 36 2000 445 553 B
Source: BIA IRR 2010 Inventory, Level of Service analysis by Kimley-Horn
Traffic counts for locations on US 191 were obtained from ADOT and are shown in
Table 19.
Table 19 – Annual Average Daily Traffic Volumes – State Highways
Road Name Section ADT Year ADT Count 2011 ADT 2011 LOS
US 191 MP 444 to N102 2008 4,225 4,484 B
US 191 N102 to N7 2008 8,781 9,318 B
US 191 N7 to 4/2 Lane Transition 2008 4,451 4,723 A
US 191 4/2 Lane Transition to N59 2008 4,451 4,723 B
US 191 N59 to MP 465 2008 1,479 1,570 A
Source: ADOT HPMS Database, LOS analysis by Kimley-Horn
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 55 Chinle and Many Farms
Source: BIA IRR 2010 Inventory
Figure 15 – Traffic Volumes from BIA IRR Inventory
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 56 Chinle and Many Farms
3.7.1 Roadway Level of Service
Roadway traffic operations are defined and categorized by the delay experienced by an
average driver. The operations are categorized by a grading system called level of
service (LOS), which is a letter designation ranging from A (no delay) to F (severe
congestion). These levels are illustrated in Table 20.
Existing LOS of major roads in the study area corridor are summarized in Table 18 for
BIA routes and Table 19 for US 191. All of the roadways are currently operating at an
acceptable LOS.
Table 20 – Examples of Level of Service
Level of Service Examples of Road Conditions
A-B
SR 264 looking east from N12 south
C-D
SR 264 looking east, approaching N12
north intersection in vicinity of Bashas
E-F
Traffic during Thursday afternoon rush
hour at N12 north/SR 264 intersection
Source: Kimley- Horn and Associates
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 57 Chinle and Many Farms
Access management can
increase safety and
reduce congestion.
3.8 Access Management
Access management is a set of techniques that state and local governments can use to
control access to highways, major arterials, and other roadways. Access management
can increase the capacity of these roads,
manage congestion, and reduce crashes.
Techniques include:
Increasing spacing between signals and
interchanges;
Driveway location, spacing, and design;
Use of exclusive turning lanes;
Median treatments, including two-way left turn lanes (TWLTL) that allow turn
movements in multiple directions from a center lane and raised medians that prevent
movements across a roadway;
Use of service and frontage roads; and
Land use policies that limit right-of-way access to highways.
Navajo Nation Access Management
The Navajo Nation currently does not have an access management policy or program in
place. The Navajo Division of Transportation and the Bureau of Indian Affairs - Navajo
Regional Office (BIA-NRO) agree that access management is an important
transportation planning issue. Currently the Navajo Department of Transportation and
BIA work with the State DOT district engineers to comply with the state highway access
permitting policies and requirements. Access permitting agreements are negotiated
between the State DOTs and Navajo Nation departments; and the BIA is required to be
included in the communication with both parties.
BIA Access Management
The BIA access management includes control of over-size and overweight vehicles as
well as utility crossing and roadway access permitting.
Arizona Access Management
Access permitting is currently carried out pursuant to Arizona Revised Statute 28-7053,
(http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/28/07053.htm&Title=28&DocT
ype=ARS) which prohibits unauthorized encroachments in state highways. For an
encroachment to be lawful, it must be authorized by the State DOT Director. The
Director has adopted administrative rules (regulations) governing encroachments.
These rules are published as Arizona Administrative Code, R17-3-501 Highway
Encroachments and Permits,( http://www.azsos.gov/public_services/Title_17/17-03.pdf)
which includes access connections to state highways. The rule states that each
encroachment requires a permit. Permits for driveways (encroachments) onto a state
highway may be granted by ADOT's Engineering Districts, a delegation from the
Director.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 58 Chinle and Many Farms
Consider extending the
scenic byway designation
to Chinle.
Currently the number of driveways between mileposts on US 191 can be summarized In
Table 21 as follows:
Table 21 – Number of US 191 Access Points, By Milepost
US 191
Milepost Range
Driveways on
West side of Road
Driveways on East
side of Road
Comments
444-445 0 0
445-446 0 0
446-447 8 2
447-448
14 9
Relatively high numbers of
intersection/driveway crashes in
these areas
448-449 7 8
All driveway access between
Chinle and Many Farms are very
narrow thus vehicles have to
slow way down to turn,
dangerous maneuvering, need
widening.
449-450 4 4
450-451 2 1
451-452 4 2
452-453 3 5
453-454 9 2
454-455 6 1
455-456 4 2
456-457 2 2
457-458 1 3
458-459 1 5
459-460 2 2
460-461 2 5
461-462 12 7 27% of crashes were intersection
or driveway related.
462-463 1 3
463-464 3 4
Source: Kimley-Horn and Associates, analysis based on aerial review
The areas between mileposts 447 to 448 and 461 to 462 have the highest numbers of
intersecting driveways.
3.9 Scenic Roads
The Tse’nikani Scenic Road was established on
US 191, from Milepost 467, near Many Farms,
north to Milepost 510.4 at the junction with US
160, near Mexican Water. It was established as
an Arizona Byway in 1995. The Draft Corridor
Management Plan for the byway provided the following goals that affect the study area
corridor.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 59 Chinle and Many Farms
Goal #1: Maintain and improve roadway conditions to safely accommodate
residents and travelers.
Action Items:
Add a pullout at MP 466.0/MP 467.0; tourists often stop here to take photographs.
Widen gate at cattle guard at MP 466.3.
Develop more signs to identify amenities along the corridor.
The adopt-a-highway program does not seem to provide the necessary maintenance
for this area. More funding may be needed to initiate additional means to keep the
roadway clean.
Right-of-way fences should be respected. Signs and education to promote keeping
these intact should be initiated.
Goal #2: Promote economic
opportunity and tourism
management.
Action Items:
Develop a visitor center along
the corridor.
Support development projects
(i.e. Many Farms truck stop
near lake).
Support and encourage arts
and crafts and food vendors
but grouped together in areas
where safe pull off and parking
can be provided.
Consider guided tours including hiking, rock climbing, camping, and jeep tours.
Consider extending the byway designation to Chinle.
It should be noted that if the byway is extended to Chinle, it will be very close to the
Dine Biitah Scenic Byway, shown in Figure 16.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 60 Chinle and Many Farms
Source: http://www.navajoscenicroads.com/
Figure 16 – Navajo Scenic Road System
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 61 Chinle and Many Farms
3.10 Planned and Programmed Transportation Projects
Planned and programmed projects were obtained from two main sources: the
Arizona Statewide Transportation Improvement Program, Fiscal Year 2011-2014
and the Draft Navajo Nation Indian Reservation Road Program 38 Year Plan,
Fiscal Years 2012-2049. These projects are shown in Table 22 and Table 23,
respectively. Projects in the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and
Capital Improvement Program (CIP), for draft fiscal years 2012-2049 are shown
in Figure 17.
Table 22 – State Highway Project in State Transportation Improvement
Program, 2011-2014
Route Location Project
Description
Cost
($ million)
Funding Fiscal Year
191 MP 448 Chinle to
Many Farms-
Replace and
Install Fencing
and Cattle
Guards, 14
miles
$1.65 M STP* 2011
191 MP 446 Roadway
Widening
$2.375 STP* 2013
* STP= Surface Transportation Program
Source=State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), Fiscal Year 2011-2014
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 62 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 23 – Draft FY 2011 - 2048 Indian Reservation Roads Program Projects
Area FY Route
No. Project Number* Project Name/Description Comment Length
(miles)
Chinle
2013 N27
N27(2-2)1,2,&4
Nazlini North to Chinle,
Bridge,
Grade and Drain and Paving
D- Surveying Data Needed
W- Within existing ROW
4.2
2022 N27
N27(2-3)1,2,&4 Nazlini North to Chinle
Bridge,
Grade and Drain and Paving
D- Surveying Data Needed
W- Within existing ROW
5.3
2015 N27 N27(4-2)4
Chinle Streets
Chip Seal
D- Surveying Data Needed
W- Within existing ROW
0.45
2015 N7 N7(3-1)/N7A(1-1)4
Chinle Streets
Chip Seal
D- Surveying Data Needed
W- Within existing ROW
2.46
2041 N8086
N8086(1)2,3 Many Farms to Chinle,
Grade and Drain and Gravel
A- ROW Needed
B- Environmental Assessment Needed
C- Archeological Clearance Needed
D- Surveying Data Needed
8.8
2042 N8086
N8086(2)2,3 Many Farms to Chinle,
Grade and Drain and Gravel
A- ROW Needed
B- Environmental Assessment Needed
C- Archeological Clearance Needed
D- Surveying Data Needed
8.8
2015 N8095 /
N8081 N8095(1) / N8081(1)1,2,&3
Chinle Valley Road,
Grade and Drain and Gravel
A- ROW Needed
B- Environmental Assessment Needed
C- Archeological Clearance Needed
D- Surveying Data Needed
1
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 63 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 23 – Draft FY 2011 - 2048 Indian Reservation Roads Program Projects (continued)
Area FY Route
No. Project Number* Project Name/Description Comment Length
(miles)
Many
Farms
2020 N8084** N8084(1)1,2,3
Many Farms US 191 to
Windmill
Grade and Drain and Gravel
A- ROW Needed
B- Environmental Assessment Needed
C- Archeological Clearance Needed
D- Surveying Data Needed
4.0
2022 N8084** N8084(2)1,2,3
Many Farms US 191 to
Windmill
Grade and Drain and Gravel
A- ROW Needed
B- Environmental Assessment Needed
C- Archeological Clearance Needed
D- Surveying Data Needed
6.0
2024 N8084** N8084(3) 2,3
Many Farms US 191 to
Windmill
Grade and Drain and Gravel
A- ROW Needed
B- Environmental Assessment Needed
C- Archeological Clearance Needed
D- Surveying Data Needed
6.0
2045 N8085 N8085(1)2,3
N27 to N7 Nazlini
Grade and Drain
A- ROW Needed
B- Environmental Assessment Needed
C- Archeological Clearance Needed
D- Surveying Data Needed
4.9
Source: Navajo Division of Transportation
*= numbers in parentheses indicate the project phase, numbers to the right of the parentheses indicate the type of work, e.g.,1=bridge, 2=grade and drain, 3=gravel,4=paving
Source: Data in this table was obtained from the GIS shapefiles "FTTIP.shp" and "CTTIP.shp" and the "Draft FY 2011-2048 38 Year Plan - Indian Reservation Road Program
(hr-121510)"
** Noted as project needing to be moved to FY 2012-2015 TTIP
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 64 Chinle and Many Farms
Source: Navajo Division of Transportation
Figure 17 – Navajo Nation CIP and TIP Projects
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 65 Chinle and Many Farms
3.11 Future Traffic Data
3.11.1 Growth Rates
A number of sources use a 2% annual growth rate in estimating future traffic for all
Navajo-BIA roads. These include the Navajo Nation Long Range Transportation Plan,
and the 2008 Navajo Region Road Inventory Field Data Module (RIFDS). Similarly,
ADOT also estimates and uses a 2% annual traffic growth rate for all state routes on the
Navajo and Hopi reservations.
Table 24 summarizes the future traffic volumes and levels of service assuming a 2%
compound annual growth rate for BIA routes. Table 25 summarizes US 191 traffic
growth and LOS through 2030. The analysis indicates that the current laneage will
provide adequate capacity through 2030 on all routes, although a road segment on BIA
7 will be at LOS D in 2030, as shown in the shaded row in Table 24. This road segment
is shown in Figure 18.
Table 24 - Future Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service – BIA Roads
Road
Name
Section
Number
ADT
Year
ADT
Count
2011
ADT
2015
ADT
2020
ADT
2030
ADT
2015
LOS
2020
LOS
2030
LOS
N7 10 2007 12,780 13,833 14,974 16,532 20,153 B B C
N7 15 2007 12,780 13,833 14,974 16,532 20,153 B B C
N7 30 2007 11,287 12,217 13,225 14,601 17,798 B B C
N7 40 2007 10,386 11,242 12,169 13,435 16,378 B B B
N7 42 2000 8,806 10,949 11,852 13,085 15,951 B B B
N7 44 2007 8,806 9,532 10,318 11,391 13,886 B B B
N7 46 2000 7,161 8,904 9,638 10,641 12,971 B B B
N7 48 2000 7,161 8,904 9,638 10,641 12,971 B B B
N7 50 2000 7,161 8,904 9,638 10,641 12,971 C C D
N7 52 1996 4,988 6,713 7,267 8,023 9,780 C C C
N7 54 2000 1,024 1,273 1,378 1,522 1,855 B B B
N27 183 1999 730 926 1,002 1,106 1,349 B B B
N27 186 1999 730 926 1,002 1,106 1,349 B B B
N27 190 1999 2,854 3,620 3,918 4,326 5,273 B C C
N27 193 1999 2,854 3,620 3,918 4,326 5,273 B C C
N27 196 1999 2,854 3,620 3,918 4,326 5,273 B C C
N27 200 1999 2,854 3,620 3,918 4,326 5,273 B C C
N59 230 2000 1,580 1,965 2,126 2,348 2,862 B B B
N59 240 2000 1,580 1,965 2,126 2,348 2,862 B B B
N59 245 1995 3,751 5,149 5,574 6,154 7,502 C C C
N64 10 1997 3,437 4,535 4,909 5,420 6,607 C C C
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 66 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 24 - Future Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service – BIA Roads (continued)
Road
Name
Section
Number
ADT
Year
ADT
Count
2011
ADT
2015
ADT
2020
ADT
2030
ADT
2015
LOS
2020
LOS
2030
LOS
N102 10 1998 4,142 5,358 5,800 6,403 7,806 C C C
N8082 10 2004 60 69 75 82 100 B B B
N8084 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 B B B
N8084 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 B B B
N8084 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 B B B
N8084 40 2001 101 123 133 147 179 B B B
N8084 60 2001 101 123 133 147 179 B B B
N8084 66 2001 101 123 133 147 179 B B B
N8084 80 2001 101 123 133 147 179 B B B
N8086 10 2001 76 93 100 111 135 B B B
N8086 30 2001 76 93 100 111 135 B B B
N8086 35 2001 185 226 244 270 329 B B B
N8086 50 2001 185 226 244 270 329 B B B
N8086 70 1999 455 577 625 690 841 B B B
N8087 10 2005 263 296 321 354 431 B B B
N8087 30 2001 213 260 281 310 378 B B B
N8087 34 2001 213 260 281 310 378 B B B
N8087 36 2001 213 260 281 310 378 B B B
N8090 62 1998 89 115 125 138 168 B B B
N8090 66 1999 527 668 723 799 974 B B B
N8090 80 1999 527 668 723 799 974 B B B
N8091 10 2001 243 296 321 354 432 B B B
N8091 15 2001 243 296 321 354 432 B B B
N8094 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 B B B
N8094 26 1997 332 438 474 524 638 B B B
N8095 10 2000 445 553 599 661 806 B B B
N8095 30 2000 445 553 599 661 806 B B B
N8095 33 2000 445 553 599 661 806 B B B
N8095 36 2000 445 553 599 661 806 B B B
Source: BIA IRR Inventory 2010, analysis by Kimley-Horn
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 67 Chinle and Many Farms
Table 25 - Future Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service - US 191
Road
Name Section ADT
Year
ADT
Count
2011
ADT
2015
ADT
2020
ADT
2030
ADT
2015
LOS
2020
LOS
2030
LOS
US 191 MP 444 to N102 2008 4,225 4,484 4,853 5,358 6,532 B B B
US 191 N102 to N7 2008 8,781 9,318 10,087 11,136 13,575 B B B
US 191
N7 to 4/2 Lane
Transition 2008 4,451 4,723 5,113 5,645 6,881 A A B
US 191
4/2 Lane Transition to
N59 2008 4,451 4,723 5,113 5,645 6,881 B B C
US 191 N59 to MP 465 2008 1,479 1,570 1,699 1,876 2,287 A A A
Source: ADOT, analysis by Kimley-Horn
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 68 Chinle and Many Farms
Source: Kimley-Horn and Associates
Figure 18 – 2030 Congested Road Segment
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 69 Chinle and Many Farms
3.12 Transit
The Navajo Transit System operates service throughout the Nation. The system is set
up to operate much like an inter-city bus service on fixed routes that link Navajo Nation
growth centers. There are 13 transit routes, of which two routes serve the Chinle and
Many Farms areas.
3.12.1 Current Routes and Stops
The following routes serve the Chinle and Many Farms areas:
Route 3 – Kayenta / Tsaile / Fort Defiance
Route 3 provides transit service to Shonto, Kayenta, Many Farms Chinle, Fort Defiance,
and Window Rock. There is one morning run which begins in Shonto at approximately 5
am, and ends at Fort Defiance at 10 am. In the afternoon, there is another bus run that
begins in Window Rock at 3:15 pm and ends at Shonto at 8 pm. Transit stops in the
Chinle and Many Farms area are:
Many Farms - Mustang Store
Chinle - Tseyi Shopping Center
Chinle - Elementary School
Chinle - IHS
Chinle 7-2-11 Baldwin Mini-Mart
Chinle - Chevron Store
Route 8 – Chinle / Ganado
Route 8 provides transit service to the Chinle and Ganado area. There is one run in the
morning and one run in the late afternoon. Stops in the Chinle area are:
Chinle - Fleet Management
Chinle - Bashas Parking Lot
Chinle - Motor Vehicle Division
Chinle - IHS Hospital
Chinle - Mustang Store (when
requested)
Chinle - NTUA
Chinle - Bashas Parking Lot
Chinle - Cellular One Complex
Chinle - Chapter House
Chinle - BIA
Chinle - School Admin Bldg.
Chinle - Chevron Station
Chinle - Police Dept.
Chinle - LDS Church (when
requested)
3.12.2 Ridership
Ridership data was obtained from the Arizona Rural Transit Needs Study and from the
Navajo Transit System website. In 2006, ridership on the system was 35,700
passengers. In 2010, ridership grew to over 88,000 passenger trips.
3.12.3 Future Plans
A new Navajo Transit Bus Maintenance and Administration Center opened in March
2012 in Fort Defiance. This facility will serve as a central hub for the Nation's growing
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 70 Chinle and Many Farms
Rendering of Navajo Transit Bus Maintenance and Administration Center
bus fleet and includes areas for administration, office and clerical, vehicle repair,
storage, and a fueling island.
Source: http://grnbrg.com/nts/info.html
3.12.4 Transit Needs
Transit Dependent Populations
For many trips in the study area corridor, there are few alternatives to the automobile.
Segregation of land uses and nearly universal automobile availability has resulted in
dispersed land uses that are difficult to reach without an automobile, as well as little or
no alternate modes of travel. Not only is there little public transportation service
available, the distances between origin and destination and lack of facilities for
pedestrians and bicyclists makes walking or riding a bicycle impractical and/or unsafe.
In most cases, about the only viable alternative to driving somewhere is riding there with
someone else.
Transit Demand for Transit Dependent Population
A transit demand forecast based on projected population growth within the study area is
shown in Table 26. The 2010 census data were used to calculate the 2010 population
of elderly, disabled, and living below the poverty level within the study area corridor. The
Arkansas Public Transportation Needs Assessment (APTNA) model was used to
estimate the 2010 transit demand based on the 2010 population. The APTNA method,
which is used in both the RTP and ADOT’s Rural Transit Needs Study (May 2008) to
project transit demand, uses the following trip rates:
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 71 Chinle and Many Farms
An elderly person age 60 and over would make about 6.79 one-way passenger trips
annually;
A person with disabilities under age 60 would make about 4.49 one-way passenger
trips annually (census data reported this for under age 64); and
A person living in poverty under age 60 would make about 20.50 one-way
passenger trips annually (census data reported this for under age 64).
Table 26 - Transit Demand Forecast
Transit Demand
Variables Area 2010
2010 Transit
Demand,
One-way
Passenger
Trips Annually
Persons over Age
60*
Chinle 483 3,280
Many Farms 158 1,073
Total 641 4,353
Persons with a
disability under
age 64 **
Chinle 915 4108
Many Farms 184 826
Total 1,099 4,934
Persons Living
below the poverty
level under age
64**
Chinle 1922 39,401
Many Farms 423 8672
Total 2,345 48,073
*Source: 2010 Census, analysis by Kimley-Horn
**Source: 2000 Census, analysis by Kimley-Horn
Using these trip rates, it was determined that the 2010 transit demand estimate for the
study area corridor is 48,073 passenger trips annually. Discussion with the Manager of
the Navajo Transit System indicated that transit service from Chinle to Ganado was
tried about three years ago; however, it did not attract sufficient ridership. He
suggested trying a local transit service again, and provided a summary of potential bus
stop locations. Figure 19 shows location of existing and planned bus stops in the study
area corridor, based on input from the Navajo Transit System. The planned bus stops
would include bus shelters, where feasible. The transit system has bus shelters in
storage that can be placed at the bus stops. They are designed with mesh wires that
should help to reduce the incidence of graffiti. In remote areas, the stops are marked
with bus stop signs only. Figure 19 also shows the location of a proposed transit center
in Chinle. The goal of the transit center, according to the Navajo Transit System Five-
Year Plan (2009), is to serve as a meeting place for riders as well as an office/operating
location for drivers to begin and end the route. The facility would consist of a modest
modular office. In addition to a meeting point for riders, the office would also be
equipped with some maintenance parts/materials that would allow the driver to do minor
maintenance and paperwork.
091374043 Final Report
April 2012 72 Chinle and Many Farms
Source: Navajo Transit System
Figure 19 – Existing and Proposed Bus Stops
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 73 Chinle and Many Farms
3.12.5 School Bus Transportation Needs
Discussions with stakeholders indicated the following needs to support school bus
travel:
Need for bus pullouts and advance signing on US 191.
Need for paving of bus routes. School bus routes are located on the following roads:
o N8086
o N8084
o CR505
o CR519
o N8085
o CR566
o CR506
o N8095
o N8090
o N27
o N8094
o CR463
o CR552
o N8082
3.13 Bicycle Facilities
There are no signed bike routes in the Chinle and Many Farms area.
The project team reviewed the BIA IRR data to determine roads that might be suitable
to be signed as bike routes. The American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities
(1999) gives the following guidelines for bike lane widths:
For roadways with no curb and gutter – minimum width should be four feet.
The recommended width of a bike lane is five feet from the face of the curb or
guardrail to the bike lane stripe.
Shoulder types and widths are shown in Figure 7 (earlier in the report). Paved
shoulders are provided on US 191, N59, and segments of N64, and N102.
3.13.1 Shoulder Conditions on US 191
All ADOT highways not designated as “bicycles prohibited” are open to bicycle use.
Figure 20 shows that US 191 has an effective shoulder width of less than four feet. Text
on the map indicates that facilities conditions as shown on this map often vary from one
side of the road to the other. Bicyclists should use extreme caution while riding on
Arizona highways. Discussion with the ADOT State Bicycle Coordinator indicated that
although typically the ADOT policy is not to install bicycle route signs, there are
locations where a jurisdiction has entered into an agreement with ADOT and paid for
bicycle route sign installation and maintenance. Bicycle route signs can also include
destination information.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 74 Chinle and Many Farms
Source: Bicycle User Map, referenced on
7/26/2011 from
http://www.azbikeped.org/maps.htm
Figure 20 – Summary of Shoulder
Conditions on US 191 within the Study
Area Corridor
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 75 Chinle and Many Farms
3.14 Pedestrian Sidewalks, Crossings, and Paths
A connected sidewalk and pathway system will encourage walking and provide links to
destinations in Chinle and Many Farms area. Sidewalks on BIA and ADOT routes are
shown in Figure 21. Sidewalks are located on sections of N7 and US 191.
A sidewalk project was completed in July 2011 by the National Park Service (NPS)
which included paving improvements and a short sidewalk extension near the Visitor
Center. Originally the NPS concept was to extend sidewalks from the Canyon De Chelly
Visitor Center to N7, where the current sidewalk terminates near the Holiday Inn (see
the photo below). However, because of funding constraints, the new sidewalks extend a
short distance from the Visitor Center. A project need will be to complete the sidewalk
system from the Canyon De Chelly Visitor Center to N7, which end just east of the
Holiday Inn in Chinle. This would also support economic development plans for future
commercial development along N7.
View east of N7 near the Holiday
Inn showing the end of the
sidewalks on both sides of the
street.
3.14.1 Pedestrian Access to Schools
Providing safe access to schools is a key pedestrian consideration for all the
communities in this study area corridor. Both Chinle and Many Farms have schools
located near major roads. Discussion with stakeholders in both the Chinle and Many
Farms area indicated a number of needs regarding school crossings and pedestrian
needs:
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 76 Chinle and Many Farms
Source: BIA IRR 2010 Inventory
Figure 21 – Sidewalk Locations
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 77 Chinle and Many Farms
Pedestrian crosswalk in Chinle (N7) with
striping that has been worn away.
Providing sidewalks along Lake View Drive will
provide better access to the Many Farms High School
and Chinle Boarding School
Improved school crossings are
needed. These could potentially
include higher visibility
crosswalks with advance
warning and flashers, (High-
Intensity Activated crossWalK
(HAWK) beacon crossings,
pedestrian overpasses, or high
visibility crosswalks. Improved
crossings are needed on US 191
in Chinle, N7, and US 191 in
Many Farms. A HAWK beacon
is a traffic signal used to stop
road traffic and allow
pedestrians to cross safely.
The purpose of a HAWK beacon
is to allow protected pedestrian
crossings, stopping road traffic
only as needed. Unlike an
ordinary traffic signal, the HAWK beacon only lights when activated by a
pedestrian who wishes to cross. The HAWK beacon first flashes yellow, then
displays steady yellow, and finally steady red over a period of several seconds,
allowing pedestrians to cross.
Sidewalks are needed for students to reach the schools. Specific needs are:
Sidewalks along Lake View Road – Lake View Road connects residential
areas to schools and to US 191. A sidewalk would provide better pedestrian
access in this area.
Sidewalks to connect
residential areas north of US
191 with schools and school
crossings in Chinle.
New sidewalk connections
on N27, in coordination with
paving improvements.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 78 Chinle and Many Farms
3.14.2 Pedestrian Safety Needs from ADOT Pedestrian Safety Plan, 2009
The ADOT Pedestrian Safety Action Plan analyzed segments of state highways with
relatively high levels of pedestrian crashes. Within the study area corridor, one road
segment was identified as having a high level of pedestrian crashes—US 191 between
Milepost 446.6 and MP 448.2. This is the area where US 191 transitions from a four-lane
to a five-lane section. The study recommended evaluation of the following potential
countermeasures:
Evaluate Crossing Opportunities - determine if signalized crossings should be
installed.
Remove Vegetation Overgrowth
Evaluate Need for Sidewalk / Walkway Improvements along US 191
Evaluate Need for a Raised Median
Reduced speeds through the areas may also increase safety.
3.15 Trails and Equestrian Paths
This section discusses conceptual plans for equestrian trails that were discussed in
stakeholder interviews and with Navajo Division of Transportation staff. Suggestions for
trails were made by the Chapter House representatives, the National Park Service, and
the Navajo Division of Transportation Planners.
Chinle Area: The Chinle area is the gateway to the Canyon De Chelly National
Monument, and attracts thousands of visitors each year. Many of these visitors stay at
local hotels near the Monument and walk or drive to the Canyon De Chelly Visitor
Center. In addition, the Canyon De Chelly Monument provides recreational
opportunities for residents of the area. Interviews with stakeholders have indicated that
it may be beneficial to provide a walking / interpretive trail from the Canyon De Chelly
Visitor Center to the Thunderbird Lodge and Holiday Inn on N7.
The residential area north of N7 and east of US 191 has a number of equestrians who
ride regularly and could benefit from equestrian paths that link residential areas to
commercial areas and Canyon De Chelly.
Many Farms Area: Discussion with the Chapter House representatives indicated that
they would like to see more trails to serve Many Farms Lake, a major recreational site in
the area, as well as trail connections to the high school area.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 79 Chinle and Many Farms
View of Many Farms Lake,
looking north. Trails are
needed to better serve this
area.
Another need was a trail along N8418 at the foot of the hill west of the Many Farms
High School.
Dashed line shows a
planned trail
improvement along
N8418 at the foot of
the hill west of the
High School (Source:
Many Farms Chapter)
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 80 Chinle and Many Farms
3.16 Airports and Airport Access
Chinle Municipal Airport is a public airport located three miles southwest of the central
business district of Chinle. The airport has one asphalt paved runway. It is a general
aviation airport. According to ADOT the airport had 2,400 annual operations in 2010
(landings and takeoffs). There are 5 aircraft based at the airport (parked at the airport
by owners). This airport serves primarily medical air transport.
Access to the airport is via N8094. This road has been recently paved and is in good
condition; however the road needs striping near the airport. The good condition of the
road will enhance economic development plans for the area near N8094 and US 191.
N8094 which serves the Chinle Airport
Discussion with the Navajo Nation Aviation Planner indicated that key needs and
deficiencies with respect to the Chinle Airport and surrounding area are:
There is an old wagon trail that crosses the access road to the airport. It is used by
hikers and runners. There needs to be a pedestrian crossing sign where the trail
crosses.
There should be warning signs regarding animal crossings.
Snow removal can be a problem on the access road. This is particularly critical for
medical transport from the Chinle Hospital to the airport. Currently, a Memorandum
of Understanding is being reviewed for maintenance between the Navajo Nation,
Apache County, and the BIA.
Striping is needed on a segment of N8094
Destination and speed limit signage is needed. Graffiti is a problem.
Perimeter fencing is needed along the road and around the airport. Animal crossings
can be a problem.
The Navajo Nation has requested funding for an update of Airport Master Plans for
Window Rock and Chinle Airports. Both airports are part of the National Plan of
Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS).
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 81 Chinle and Many Farms
4 NEEDS AND DEFICIENCIES
The needs analysis was developed through a process which considered:
Stakeholder / public input
Traffic analysis
Crash data analysis
Project team observations
This chapter provides an overview of transportation needs including general
transportation needs and roadway, pedestrian, bicycle, equestrian, transit, and airport
access needs.
4.1 General Transportation Needs
General needs and deficiencies in the study area were:
1. Enhance the quality of life in the Chinle and Many Farms area by promoting a
safe, well designed transportation system that promotes a sense of community
through transportation that recognizes the safety needs of motorists, transit
users, bicyclists, and pedestrians of all ages and abilities. At the national level,
there is emphasis on providing more bicycle and pedestrian facilities along
roadways to create “complete streets”. Complete streets are designed to function
for all users to safely and effectively move along and across a complete street
(see www.completestreets.org ). An example of a complete street is shown in
Figure 22.
Elements of a complete street in an urban area can include sidewalks, bike lanes
(or wide paved shoulders), special bus lanes, comfortable and accessible transit
stops, frequent crossing opportunities, median islands, accessible pedestrian
signals, curb extensions, and more. A complete street in a rural area may have
different elements, but should achieve the same goal.
2. Provide transportation improvements that will enhance economic development
and tourism.
3. Destination signing to both public services and tourism destinations.
4. Rural addressing system – police and fire department representatives both
expressed needs for better street addresses and street names signs.
5. Extend the Tse’nikani Scenic Road limits south to Chinle. Consider providing a
continuous scenic route to link the Tse’nikani Scenic Road to the Dine Tah
Scenic Road to provide a more continuous scenic road system to encourage
visitor travel. Other considerations include linking the scenic road to the
Monument Valley Scenic Road in Kayenta and extending the scenic byway
further south to the Beautiful Valley area. A rest area was also a need requested
by the Technical Advisory Committee. There are very few respite areas for
truckers in this region, and tourist information can be provided at the rest stop.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 82 Chinle and Many Farms
6. Finding ways to make signs graffiti resistant or to discourage graffiti was
mentioned by a number of stakeholders.
7. Back fencing, or reinforcing the fencing behind the ADOT right-of-way fence, is
needed along the US 191 since the right-of-way fences frequently build up with
sand and tumbleweeds. A fencing and cattle guard replacement project on US
191 between Chinle and Many Farms began in 2011. This project should help to
reduce the incidence of animal crashes on US 191, but back fencing will make
this improvement more lasting.
8. Improvements on US 191 to address safety including widening, access
management improvements, turn lanes, wider shoulders, bus pullouts, and other
safety improvements.
9. Provision of emergency access routes as an alternative to US 191.
10. Provision of paved roads and trails to provide better access to Many Farms Lake.
Provide road connections to planned docks. Better access to Many Farms Lake
can enhance tourism and economic development.
11. Help in obtaining a grant writer to obtain funding for improvements.
Figure 22 – Example of a "Complete Street"
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 83 Chinle and Many Farms
Resurfacing this relatively small
segment of Lake View Road in
Many Farms will provide better
access to church, schools, and
residential areas.
4.2 Roadway, Street Lighting, and Traffic Control Needs
Roadway needs are summarized in Figure 23. A brief overview of those needs is
summarized as follows:
4.2.1 Street Improvements – Paving and Repaving Needs
Poor road conditions can lead to wear and tear on vehicles and can damage tires,
suspension systems, and wheel alignment. Braking to avoid potholes or to slow for
washboarded pavements conditions can also provide additional wear for the brake
system. In addition, pothole related accidents can
result in injuries.
Key needs included:
Providing gravel or paving on roads serving
as bus routes. On lower volume routes,
providing a gravel surface is recommended
as a first step towards paving. Figure 23
summarizes resurfacing needs.
Paving routes that can serve as emergency
access routes. These routes include N8091,
N8095, and N27. Providing better paved
road connections will also support
economic development plans.
Providing gravel surfaces on current unpaved roads serving Many Farms Lake will
support economic development plans for the Lake.
Repaving a segment of Lake View Road in Many Farms that intersects with US 191.
This road segment provides access to residences, church, and schools.
Resurfacing roads as indicated by a review of the BIA IRR Inventory data and
design standards, which included sections of BIA routes N7, N27, N64, N102,
N8082, N8084, N8086, N8087, N8090, N8094, and N8095. Shoulder upgrades were
also recommended on many of these routes, with the exception of N102.
091374043 Final Report
May 2012 84 Chinle and Many Farms
4.2.2 Street Improvements – Road Widening
There were a number of comments from stakeholders regarding the need to widen US
191 to four lanes between Chinle and Many Farms. Vehicles and school bus activity
causes delays and increases the potential for rear-end collisions. The traffic analysis did
not indicate a four-lane facility was warranted through 2030. However, in the interim,
improvements such as right- and left-turn lanes, wider shoulders, bus pullouts, provision
of raised medians, through Chinle and Many Farms, speed control, and other
improvements can reduce delays and improve safety, and should be considered by
ADOT for implementation.
Recommendations from previous planning studies that involve US 191 are:
The 2009 Navajo Nation Long Range Plan
Short-Term Plans:
Chinle: Street lights at the hospital access road (N102).
Long-Term Plans:
Chinle: Five-lane widening, access management design, roadway widening to the
flea market for safety improvement: raised medians, and limited access/turnoffs
between MP 446 – MP 449.
Street lights on US 191 from airport access to N8090.
Chinle: Amenities such as bicycle paths and sidewalks will support tourism and
create a livable community atmosphere.
Many Farms: Five-lane widening from junction N59/US 191 to High School turnoff.
The 2000 US 191 Corridor Profile Study recommended:
MP 444-446. 5 - Rebuild roadway including sub-base and improve drainage.
MP 446.5-448.5 - Widen to a five-lane cross section to accommodate local
growth.
MP 448.5-471.5 - Add paved shoulders to meet current AASHTO standards
and to accommodate bicycles. This includes the installation of edge line rumble
strips.
Entire Corridor - Install delineators along shoulder, install centerline rumble strips on
two-lane sections, and review passing distances based on existing speed limits.
Other recommendations were:
Chinle - Construct raised medians to control access, provide refuge for pedestrians,
and add to the aesthetic quality of the urban environment.
Entire C
