DOCSLIB.ORG

City of Benson, Arizona Smallareatransportationstudy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
City of Benson, Arizona Smallareatransportationstudy City of Benson, Arizona SmallSmall Area Area Transportation Transportation Study Study Final Report UCG September 2007 United Civil Group City of Benson Small Area Transportation Study CITY OF BENSON Small Area Transportation Study Final Report Prepared for: City of Benson 120 W. 6th Street Benson, Arizona 85602 and Arizona Department of Transportation Transportation Planning Division 206 South 17th Avenue Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Prepared by: United Civil Group Corporation 2803 North 7th Avenue, Suite 16 Phoenix, AZ 85007 602.265.6155 Fax 602.265.6171 September 2007 UCG Project Number: TR5102 September 2007 FINAL REPORT City of Benson Small Area Transportation Study Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Study Context .............................................................................................................................................. 6 1.2 History of Benson ....................................................................................................................................... 7 1.3 Purpose ....................................................................................................................................................... 7 1.4 Report Organization ................................................................................................................................. 11 1.5 Previous Plans and Studies ....................................................................................................................... 11 1.6 Community Involvement ........................................................................................................................... 11 1.6.1 Technical Advisory Committee Meetings ......................................................................................... 11 1.6.2 Community Interviews ...................................................................................................................... 12 1.6.3 Community Meetings/Public Forums .............................................................................................. 12 2.0 TRANSPORTATION VISION, ISSUES, GOALS AND POLICIES ..................................................... 14 2.1 The Transportation Vision ........................................................................................................................ 14 2.2 Transportation Issues and Concerns ........................................................................................................ 14 2.3 Opportunities and Constraints .................................................................................................................. 18 2.4 Study Objectives ........................................................................................................................................ 18 2.5 Transportation Goals, Objectives, and Strategies ..................................................................................... 19 2.5.1 Traffic Safety .................................................................................................................................... 19 2.5.2 Mobility Improvement ...................................................................................................................... 20 2.5.3 Right of Way ..................................................................................................................................... 20 2.5.4 Project Funding ................................................................................................................................. 20 2.5.5 Land Use Integration ......................................................................................................................... 21 2.5.6 Economic Development .................................................................................................................... 21 3.0 METHODOLOGIES AND STANDARDS ................................................................................................ 23 3.1 Functional Classification .......................................................................................................................... 23 3.2 Level of Service ......................................................................................................................................... 24 3.3 Roadway Segment Level of Service Standards and Thresholds ................................................................ 25 3.4 Pedestrian Standards and Guidelines ....................................................................................................... 26 3.5 Bicycle Standards and Guidelines ............................................................................................................ 26 3.6 Transit Service Planning Guidelines ........................................................................................................ 26 4.0 CURRENT SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS .................................................................................... 28 4.1 General Characteristics ............................................................................................................................ 28 4.1.1 Total Population ................................................................................................................................ 28 4.1.2 Ethnicity and Race ............................................................................................................................ 28 4.1.3 Age and Sex ...................................................................................................................................... 28 4.1.4 Persons per Household ...................................................................................................................... 28 4.2 Social Characteristics ............................................................................................................................... 29 4.2.1 Schooling .......................................................................................................................................... 29 4.2.2 Veteran Status ................................................................................................................................... 29 4.3 Economic Characteristics ......................................................................................................................... 29 4.4 Work Travel .............................................................................................................................................. 30 5.0 TITLE VI AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ...................................................................................... 32 5.1 Minority Population .................................................................................................................................. 33 5.2 Aged 65 and Older .................................................................................................................................... 34 5.3 Mobility Limited........................................................................................................................................ 35 5.4 Below Poverty Level ................................................................................................................................. 36 September 2007 FINAL REPORT 1 City of Benson Small Area Transportation Study 6.0 NETWORK INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS ................................................................ 37 6.1 Interstate ................................................................................................................................................... 37 6.2 State Routes .............................................................................................................................................. 37 6.2.1 SR 90 ................................................................................................................................................. 37 6.2.2 SR 80 ................................................................................................................................................. 37 6.3 Arterials .................................................................................................................................................... 38 6.4 Collectors .................................................................................................................................................. 38 6.5 Jurisdictional Responsibility ..................................................................................................................... 40 6.6 Number of Lanes ....................................................................................................................................... 40 6.7 Speed Limits .............................................................................................................................................. 40 6.8 Intersection Traffic Control ...................................................................................................................... 43 6.9 Pavement Conditions ................................................................................................................................ 43 6.10 Traffic Data ............................................................................................................................................ 46
Load more

Recommended publications
  • San Antonio San Antonio, Texas
    What’s ® The Cultural Landscape Foundation ™ Out There connecting people to places tclf.org San Antonio San Antonio, Texas Welcome to What’s Out There San Antonio, San Pedro Springs Park, among the oldest public parks in organized by The Cultural Landscape Foundation the country, and the works of Dionicio Rodriguez, prolificfaux (TCLF) in collaboration with the City of San Antonio bois sculptor, further illuminate the city’s unique landscape legacy. Historic districts such as La Villita and King William Parks & Recreation and a committee of local speak to San Antonio’s immigrant past, while the East Side experts, with generous support from national and Cemeteries and Ellis Alley Enclave highlight its significant local partners. African American heritage. This guidebook provides photographs and details of 36 This guidebook is a complement to TCLF’s digital What’s Out examples of the city's incredible landscape legacy. Its There San Antonio Guide (tclf.org/san-antonio), an interactive publication is timed to coincide with the celebration of San online platform that includes the enclosed essays plus many Antonio's Tricentennial and with What’s Out There Weekend others, as well as overarching narratives, maps, historic San Antonio, November 10-11, 2018, a weekend of free, photographs, and biographical profiles. The guide is one of expert-led tours. several online compendia of urban landscapes, dovetailing with TCLF’s web-based What’s Out There, the nation’s most From the establishment of the San Antonio missions in the comprehensive searchable database of historic designed st eighteenth century, to the 21 -century Mission and Museum landscapes.
    [Show full text]
  • Controlling Expansive Soil Destructiveness by Neep Vertical
    4R ~ransportation Research Record 1032 Controlling Expansive Soil Destructiveness by Fol_Jr His:rhw~v~ neep Vertical Geomembn~nP-~ on - - - '"-'- - --.,1 - '\IALCOLM L. STEINBERG ABSTRACT Expansive soils are a worldwide problem. In the United States damages caused by expansive soils probably exceeded $10 billion in 19B4. One-half of these damages involved highways, streets, and roads. Studies and research have been conducted by international, national, state, and educational institutions. The Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation has used rela­ tively impervious fabrics (geomembranes) placed vertically along the pavement edges through the zone of moisture activity to minimize the destructiveness of expansive soils. These vertical geomembranes have been placed in sections of four highways in Sctn Anlonlo, Texas, varying from 1/4 to 2 mi. Te!'!ting proce­ dures involved measuring the smoothness of the riding surface and the cracking of the pavement surface, installing moisture sensors, and determining mainte­ nance requirements. Two of the earlier projects had records of 4 and 5 years without significant surface cracking, which is an indication that the use of the geomemhrane barrier contributed to a better riding surface and less mainte­ nance. All four tests indicate that the fabric can be placed in a variety of ways. Conclusions to date offer guarded optimism that the deep vertical geo­ membrane barrier can reduce the destructiveness of expansive soils on pavement. Expansive soils are a worldwide problem and the sub­ INTERSTATE 410 ject of international conferences and studies. In the United States these soils extend from coast to coast The first test section of a deep vertical geomem­ and from border to border.
    [Show full text]
  • GHG Permit Draft Final Cultural Report for Lon C Hill Power Station
    18 June 2014 Alfred Dumaual US Environmental Protection Agency Region 6 Air Permits Section (6PD-R) 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200 Dallas, TX 75202-2733 RE: Request for Concurrence – Finding of No Effect to Archaeological and Historic Resources Lon C. Hill Power Station Project Nueces County, Texas Mr. Dumaual: Lon C. Hill, LP (Lon C. Hill) is requesting a review of the enclosed project information for the Lon C. Hill Power Station Project in Nueces County, Texas. Lon C. Hill is seeking concurrence from the Texas Historical Commission (THC)/State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the United States (US) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that the construction and operation of the power station will not affect historic properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or that meet the criteria for the NRHP in accordance with Section 106 guidance. The proposed project is subject to Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) review for greenhouse gases by the EPA; and, therefore, is subject to regulation under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The proposed project is expected to be subject to New Source Review (NSR) and PSD review for nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, and particulate matter, but not for sulfur dioxide. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality is responsible for issuance of the NSR permit and PSD review of National Ambient Air Quality Standards criteria pollutants. Lon C. Hill proposes to construct a 2x2x1 combined cycle power plant. It will consist of 2 natural gas-fired combustion turbines, 2 heat recovery steam generators, and 1 steam turbine.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Meeting Summary
    Documentation of Public Meeting Project Location Bexar County Loop 1604 CSJ.1479-01-024 and 2255-01-083 Project Limits From US 281 to FM 1303 Meeting Location Southside High School, 19190 US 281, San Antonio, TX 78221 Meeting Date and Time April 27, 2017 at 5:30 p.m. Translation Services Spanish Interpreter Available Presenters N/A Elected Officials in Attendance N/A Total Number of Attendees (approx.) 92 Total Number of Commenters 32 Contents A. Comment/response matrix B. Notices C. Sign-in sheets D. Comments received E. Figures F. Description of project modifications resulting from public meeting A.
    [Show full text]
  • General-Brochure-Web.Pdf
    PAPALOTE ST. PAUL GENERAL INFORMATION Port Corpus Christi is the fifth largest port in the United States in total tonnage. The Port provides a straight, 45’ deep channel (approved and authorized for 52 ft.) and quick access to the Gulf of Mexico and the entire United States inland waterway system. The Port delivers outstanding access to overland transportation, with on-site and direct connections to three Class-I railroads, BNSF, KCS and UP, and direct, vessel-to-rail discharge capabilities. InnerInner HarborHarbor LA QUINTA TRADE GATEWAY The La Quinta Trade Gateway Terminal is an 1,100 acre greenfield project by Port Corpus Christi. When fully developed, this facility will provide a state-of-the-art multipurpose dock and container facility. The project consists of the Federal extension of the 45’ deep La Quinta Ship Channel, a 3800’, three berth ship dock with nine ship-to-shore cranes, 180 acres of container/cargo storage, an intermodal rail yard, and over 400 acres for on-site distribution & warehouse centers. The facility will be served by on-site Class I railroads. REFUGIO LaLa QuintaQuinta ChannelChannel COUNTY A ran sas R iver NORTHSIDE TERMINAL Project Cargo, RO/RO, Breakbulk and General Transfer Capabilities • Dockside rail or truck transfer capability Cargo can be loaded, unloaded and transferred • 122,000 square feet of shipside covered storage directly between trucks, rail and vessels at Dock • RO/RO ramp handles bow or stern ramp vessels 9. Shipside tracks on Dock 9 allow direct transfers between vessels and railcars and a 48-foot wide Rail and Highway Access canopy over double rail tracks allows loading of The Northside docks have uncongested, direct weather-sensitive cargoes.
    [Show full text]
  • The Value of Texas Ports 6
    Technical Report Documentation Plllte 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. TX -96/2994-1 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Apri11997 THE VALUE OF TEXAS PORTS 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Perfonning Organization Report No. Zane A. Goff, William F. McFarland, Billy Edge, John Basilotto, and Sara Graalum Research Report 2994-1 9. Perfonning Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (fRAIS) Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System 11. Contract or Grant No. College Station, Texas 77843-3135 Study No. 7-2994 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Final Office of Research and Technology Transfer July 1996 - December 1996 P. O. Box 5080 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Austin, Texas 78763-5080 15. Supplementary Notes Research performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Texas Port Association. Research Study Title: Identify and Assess the Collective Contribution (Value) of Texas Ports to Texas and the Nation 16. Abstract The foremost objective of this project is to demonstrate the importance of the ports in the State of Texas to the economy of the State and the Nation. Traditionally, the economic value of the state's ports has focused upon the economic impact to the region or a small sector of the state. Seldom has the full interior regions of the state been considered in the economic value of the ports. Moreover, the assessment will provide information including data, analyses and findings that may be used by TxDOT in developing a statewide port planning assistance program.
    [Show full text]
  • Country Village Plaza
    KUYRKENDALL & Company Country Village Plaza 15717 San Pedro, San Antonio, TX 78232 KUYRKENDALL & Company Available Lease Spaces Price: $1.15 / Sf / Month Retail store front, anchored tenant is Golds Gym, great tenant mix. Great Location, Hill Country Village, Next To Mc Donalds Massive Signage On 281 N 150,000 cars per day Easy Access Total Space Available 1,800 SF Rental Rate $1,15/SF/Month Property Type Retail Property Sub-type Strip Center Building Size 41,000 SF Gross Leasable Area 41,000 SF NNN Expenses 4 Anchor Tenant 1 Golds Gym Anchor Tenant 2 Rebath Lot Size 3.40 AC Traffic Count 150,000 Cross Streets BrookHollow www.kuyrkendall.com 02 KUYRKENDALL & Company Available Lease Spaces Space 1 Space Available 1,800 SF Rental Rate $1,15/SF/Month Space / Lot Type Strip Center Additional Space / Lot Types Neighborhood Center Lease Type NNN No. Parking Spaces 84 Pct. Procurement Fee 4.00% 1,800 sf, large open area with 15ft counter, 3 offices 2 rr, glass store front, www.kuyrkendall.com 03 KUYRKENDALL & Company THRIVING SAN ANTONIO ECONOMY San Antonio’s economy has flourished over the last several years, with robust population and job growth and a boom in commercial activity due to the Eagle Ford Shale oil and gas play. Moody’s Economy.com forecasts annual employment growth of 3.0% over the next three years, and Forbes recently named San Antonio one of the top cities in the country for job growth. The city was also among the top five metros in the country for population growth in 2013, with projections for strong growth through 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • Real Estate Market Overview Corpus Christi
    RealReal EstateEstate MarketMarket OverviewOverview CorpusCorpus ChristiChristi Jennifer S. Cowley Assistant Research Scientist Dana M. Pechacek Graduate Research Assistant Texas A&M University July 2001 © 2001, Real Estate Center. All rights reserved. RealReal EstateEstate MarketMarket OverviewOverview CorpusCorpus ChristiChristi Contents 2 Population 5 Employment 7 Job Market 8 Major Industries 9 Business Climate 11 Education 13 Transportation and Infrastructure Issues 14 Public Facilities 15 Urban Growth Patterns Map 1. Growth Areas 16 Housing 18 Multifamily 19 Manufactured Housing 20 Seniors Housing Retail Market 21 Map 2. Retail Building Permits 23 Office Market Map 3. Office Building Permits 24 Industrial Market 25 Map 4. Industrial Building Permits Conclusion RealReal EstateEstate MarketMarket OverviewOverview CorpusCorpus ChristiChristi Jennifer S. Cowley Assistant Research Scientist Dana M. Pechacek Graduate Research Assistant Portland Inglesi Interstate 37 US Hwy 181 Robstown State Hwy 44 Corpus Christi State Hwy 358 Petronila State Hwy 286 Area Cities and Towns Counties Land Area of Corpus Christi Agua Dulce Edroy Port Aransas Nueces MSA Aransas Pass Gregory Portland San Patricio 1,540 square miles Banquete Ingleside Robstown Bishop Mathis San Patricio Population Density (2000) Chapman Ranch Odem Sinton Corpus Christi Padre Island Taft 247 people per square mile Driscoll he Corpus Christi Metropolitan five million visitors per year. Spanish bay was discovered on a Catholic holi- Statistical Area (MSA) has a explorer Alonso Alvarez De Pineda day, the Feast Day of Corpus Christi. T strong industrial base as well as named the city’s bay “Corpus Christi,” Founded in 1838, the city has a tourism industry that attracts nearly Latin for “Body of Christ,” because the evolved from a small trading post.
    [Show full text]
  • Interstate Methodology and Data Everquote Analyzed Interstate
    Interstate Methodology and Data EverQuote analyzed interstate fatalities using raw data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Fatality Analysis Report System from the last six years (2010–2015) and found fatality rates based on the highway lengths. We also compared that to data from EverQuote’s safe-driving app, EverDrive. That data represents over 6 million trips and 80 million miles of driving. Phone use is measured by a driver’s phone motion while driving. While it’s difficult to say for sure what impacts these crashes, there are some commonalities between the most lethal interstates, including high traffic volume, risky driving habits and a lack of distracted driving legislation. Distracted driving fatalities increased 8.8% in 2015 and distraction is believed to be responsible for 10% of all fatal crashes. For the first six months of 2016, traffic fatalities were also up 10.4% compared to the first half of last year. EverDrive data shows that US drivers are distracted by their phones on 31% of all drives: ● 11% of drives have a distraction of one minute or longer while driving in a moving vehicle ● 29% of distractions occur at speeds over 56 mph The average number of times per trip that drivers use their phones nationwide is 1.1. Drivers are, on average, driving .4 miles distracted every 11 miles. You can find that information in our “Confused State of Distracted Driving Report” and Infographic Florida: Three of the most dangerous interstate highways run through the state of Florida (I-4, I-95, I-10). Our EverDrive data found that Florida drivers use their phone on average 1.4 phone uses per trip and the state ranks 2nd worst nationally for phone use while driving.
    [Show full text]
  • 1-37 Public Meeting
    ~ ® 1-37 PUBLIC MEETING lo•t°:!-ransportatione;~x;;,ent The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) is proposing improvements to Interstate 37 (1-37) from Redbird Lane to the US 77 Interchange in Nueces and San Patricio Counties. Major proposed improvements include: • Widening the 1-37 mainlanes to provide four lanes in each direction with widened shoulders. • Replacing the bridges over the Nueces River with wider and higher bridges. • Improving vertical clearances within the project limits. • Reconfiguring entrance and exit ramps between the mainlanes and frontage roads. No additional right-of-way is expected to be required. Proposed improvements would improve safety and mobility within the project area. Join us for an open house to learn more about proposed improvements, ask questions, and provide feedback to the project team. This is a come-and-go opportunity provided for your convenience. WHEN &WHERE ONLINE CONTACT April 25, 2019 Can't make it to the open For general questions regarding Open House: 4:30 - 6:30 p.m. house? Review project the proposed project or the Calallen High School information online at www. meeting, please contact Jason 4001 Wildcat Dr., Corpus Christi TxDOT.gov, search keywords Alvarez at (361) 808-2495 "1-37 from Redbird Lane". "'k Public Meeting Location - Project Limits The open house will be conducted in English with Spanish speaking staff on hand. Persons interested in attending who have special communication or accommodation needs are encouraged to contact Rickey Dailey at (361) 808-2544. Requests should be made at least five days prior to the meeting. Every reasonable effort will be made to accommodate these needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Message from the Attorney General
    Message from the Attorney General ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ ver the last several decades, our Nation’s fed- ing, storing, analyzing, and sharing information about eral criminal justice system has played an in- criminals and their activities. We are coordinating our re- O creasingly sophisticated role in the fight against sources to eliminate the duplication of efforts; improve crime in America. Problems that came to the forefront in the detection, investigation, and prosecution of crime; and the 1970’s and 1980’s, such as illegal drugs in our com- ensure the appropriate sanctioning of criminal offenders. munities and illegal weapons in the hand of criminals, continue to confront us today. More recently, advances At the federal level, various components of the Depart- in technology and computers, mass communication, and ment of Justice are working together and with other ex- international travel have created entirely new types of ecutive branch agencies that have law enforcement func- criminals and crimes. We are now fighting very sophisti- tions in a variety of new collaborative crime control ini- cated efforts to commit fraud or launder money, steal gov- tiatives. The Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) collabo- ernment or corporate secrets, or commit acts of interna- rates with the U.S. Marshals Service in the detention of tional or domestic terrorism. pretrial offenders and the transportation of federal inmates, and with the Immigration and Naturalization Service in Despite the profound challenges that we face, we have the detention of criminal aliens and the coordination of made great strides; crime rates have dropped for over their release. The BOP also partners with many state and 7 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Hazardous Materials Route Registry
    LEGEND Restrictions (Columns A to K) Designations (Columns L to P) 0 = All Hazmats A = All NRHM Hazmats 1 = Class 1 Explosives B = Class 1 Explosives 2 = Class 2 - Gas P = Class 7 HRCQ Radioactive 3 = Class 3 - Flammable I = Toxic Inhalation Hazard (TIH) 4 = Class 4 - Flammable Solid/Combustible M = Medical Waste 5 = Class 5 - Organic 6 = Class 6 - Poison 7 = Class 7 - Radioactive ID 8 = Class 8 - Corrosives REST = Restricted Route 9 = Class 9 - Dangerous (Other) PREF = Preferred Route i = Toxic Inhalation Hazard (TIH) PRES = Prescribed Route RECOM - Recommended Route YEAR DATE ID A B C D E F G HIJ K BLANK L NO P M STATE_ TEXT STATE CITY COUNTY ABBR ALABAMA YEAR DATE ID A B C D E F G HIJ K BLANK L NO P M STATE_ TEXT STATE CITY COUNTY ABBR 1996 08/26/96 PREF - ---------- ---P- ALBattleship Parkway [Mobile] froma By Bridge Rd. Alabama Mobile [Mobile] to Interstate 10 [exit 27] 1996 08/26/96 PREF - ---------- ---P- ALBay Bridge Rd. [Mobile] from Interstate 165 to Alabama Mobile Battleship Parkway [over Africa Town Cochran Bridge] [Westbound Traffic: Head south on I165; To by-pass the downtown area, head north on I165.] 1996 08/26/96 PREF - ---------- ---P- ALInterstate 10 from Mobile City Limits to Exit 26B Alabama Mobile [Water St] [Eastbound Traffic: To avoid the downtown area, exit on I-65 North] 1996 08/26/96 PREF - ---------- ---P- ALInterstate 10 from Mobile City Limits to Exit 27 Alabama Mobile 1996 08/26/96 PREF - ---------- ---P- ALInterstate 65 from Interstate 10 ton Iterstate 165 Alabama Mobile [A route for trucks wishing to by-pass the downtown area.] 1996 08/26/96 PREF - ---------- ---P- ALInterstate 65 from Mobile City Limits to Interstate Alabama Mobile 165 1996 08/26/96 PREF - ---------- ---P- ALInterstate 165 from Water St.
    [Show full text]