![~C:/D(ID Llijootiduilwmjffif1 Mrnrnmv®Rn [Pffi(]J~~A~ ~Urnrn](http://data.docslib.org/img/518faae91e633c9b88480487e19b0ced-1.webp)
~c:/D(ID lliJOOTIDuilWmJffif1 mrnrnmv®rn [Pffi(]J~~a~ ~urnrn .....
Prepared by
Lima & Associates and TransCore
In Association With
ADOT-Transportation Planning Division
December 1999 TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1-1 BACKGROUND ...... 1-1 REPORT ORGANIZATION ...... 1-1
2. KINGMAN BUSINESS ROUTE ...... 2-1 INVENTORY ...... , ...... 2-1 B-40 ISSUES AND CONCERNS ...... 2- 10 B-40 ISSUES ...... 2-10 I-40 ISSUES ...... 2-11 CONSULTANT STATEMENT: B-40 ...... 2-12 CITY OF KINGMAN STATEMENT ...... 2-12 ADOT DISTRICT STATEMENT ...... 2-13 I-40 FRONTAGE ROAD ISSUES AND CONCERNS ...... 2-13 CONSULTANT STATEMENT: I-40 FRONTAGE ROAD ...... 2-14 ADOT DISTRICT STATEMENT ...... 2-14
3. SELIGMAN BUSINESS ROUTE ...... 3-1 INVENTORY ...... 3-1 ISSUES AND CONCERNS ...... 3-6 CONSULTANT STATEMENT ...... 3-7 YA V APAI COUNTY STATEMENT ...... 3-8 ADOT DISTRICT STATEMENT ...... 3-8
4. ASH FORK BUSINESS ROUTE ...... 4-1 INVENTORY ...... 4-1 ISSUES AND CONCERNS ...... 4-4 CONSULTANT STATEMENT ...... 4-6 YA V APAI COUNTY STATEMENT ...... 4-6 ADOT DISTRICT STATEMENT ...... 4-7
5. FLAGSTAFF BUSINESS ROUTE ...... 5-1 INVENTORY ...... 5-1 ISSUES AND CONCERNS ...... 5-15 CONSULTANT STATEMENT ...... 5-18 CITY OF FLAGSTAFF AND ADOT DISTRICT STATEMENTS ...... 5-19
6. WINSLOW BUSINESS ROUTE ...... 6-1 INVENTORY ...... 6-1 CONSULTANT STATEMENT ...... 6-7
7. JOSEPH CITY BUSINESS ROUTE ...... 7-1 INVENTORY ...... 7-1 ISSUES AND CONCERNS ...... 7-5 CONSULTANT STATEMENT ...... 7-6 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
8. HOLBROOK BUSINESS ROUTE ...... 8-1 INVENTORY ...... 8-1 CONSULTANT STATEMENT ...... 8-5
9. SUMMARY ...... 9-1 BUSINESS ROUTE ISSUES ...... 9-1 ROUTE TRANSFER INVESTMENT STRATEGIES ...... 9-3 ROUTE TRANSFER PROCESS ...... 9-5 BUSINESS ROUTE SUMMARY ...... 9-6
ii LIST OF TABLES
KINGMAN TABLE 2-1. SUMMARY OF ACCIDENTS ON B-40 ...... 2-5 TABLE 2-2. KINGMAN HISTORICAL SITES ...... 2-8 TABLE 2-3. LUST SITES ...... 2-9 TABLE 2-4. HAZMAT INCIDENTS ...... 2-10
SELIGMAN TABLE 3-1. HISTORIC AND FORECAST TRAFFIC VOLUMES ON B-40 ...... 3-3 TABLE 3-2. BRIDGE SUFFICIENCY RATING ...... 3-4
FLAGSTAFF TABLE 5-1. SUMMARY OF ACCIDENTS ON B-40 ...... 5-8 TABLE 5-2. FLAGSTAFF HISTORIC SITES ...... 5-13 TABLE 5-3. LUST SITES ...... 5-14
WINSLOW TABLE 6-1. B-40 TRAFFIC VOLUMES ...... 6-3 TABLE 6-2. SUMMARY OF ACCIDENTS ON B-40 ...... 6-4 TABLE 6-3 . B-40 MP 253 ACCIDENTS ...... 6-4 TABLE 6-4. BRIDGE SUFFICIENCY RATING ...... 6-5 TABLE 6-5. LUST SITES ...... 6-8
HOLBROOK TABLE 8-1. SUMMARY OF ACCIDENTS ON B-40 ...... 8-3 TABLE 8-2. B-40 MP 286 ACCIDENTS ...... 8-3 TABLE 8-3. LUST SITES ...... 8-6
SUMMARY TABLE 9-1. EXISTING CONDITIONS ON B-40 BUSINESS ROUTES ...... 9-6 TABLE 9-2. TRAFFIC FORECASTS ...... 9-8
iii LIST OF FIGURES
KINGMAN FIGURE 2-la. B-40 LOCATION, KINGMAN ...... 2-2 FIGURE 2-lb. 1-40 FRONTAGE ROAD LOCATION, KINGMAN ...... 2-3
SELIGMAN FIGURE 3-1. B-40 LOCATION, SELIGMAN ...... 3-2
ASH FORK FIGURE 4-1. B-40 LOCATION, ASH FORK ...... 4-2
FLAGSTAFF FIGURE 5-la. B-40 LOCATION, FLAGSTAFF ...... 5-2 FIGURE 5-lb. 1-40 FRONTAGE ROAD LOCATION, FLAGSTAFF ...... 5-3 FIGURE 5-2a. TRAFFIC VOLUMES - FLAGSTAFF WEST ...... 5-5 FIGURE 5-2b. TRAFFIC VOLUMES - FLAGSTAFF EAST ...... 5-6 FIGURE 5-3. DAILY VARIATION OF TRAFFIC VOLUME ...... 5-7
WINSLOW FIGURE 6-1. B-40 LOCATION, WINSLOW ...... 6-2
JOSEPH CITY FIGURE 7-1. B-40 LOCATION, JOSEPH CITY ...... 7-2
HOLBROOK FIGURE 8-1. B-40 LOCATION, HOLBROOK ...... 8-2
iv 1-40 MUTIMODIL ORBIDOR PROFILE STUD
BUSINESS ROUTE INVENTORY
Prepared by
Lima & Associates and TransCore
In Association With ADOT -Transportation Planning Division
December 1999 1. INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
The California-Flagstaff-New Mexico transportation corridor was served by US 66 prior to the development of the Interstate system. In fact, an 88-mile segment of US 66 still exists between Kingman and Seligman. Other "leftovers" of US 66 are seven business routes and a number of frontage roads associated with 1-40. The business routes are located in Kingman, Seligman, Ash Fork, Flagstaff, Winslow, Joseph City, and Holbrook.
In consideration of the changing role of business routes, an inventory of these routes was included in the 1-40 Corridor Profile Study. In conducting this study, meetings were held with each affected jurisdiction: Mohave County and the City of Kingman for B-40 in Kingman, Yavapai County for B-40 in Seligman and in Ash Fork, the City of Flagstaff for B-40 in Flagstaff, and Navajo County for B-40 in Joseph City. Since the Holbrook District of ADOT has begun negotiations with Winslow and Holbrook regarding the possibility of turning back B-40 in those two communities to the cities, the 1-40 Corridor Profile Study team did not meet with them to discuss business route issues.
The purpose of this report is to provide an inventory of the B-40 routes in each of the seven communities in the 1-40 corridor and to summarize the issues regarding how to manage the business routes from the perspective of the cities, counties, and State. This report is intended to serve as a baseline document from which ADOT and the local jurisdictions can continue discussions so that the most efficient methods of maintaining and improving the local transportation systems can be determined.
REPORT ORGANIZATION
Following this introductory chapter, each of the seven business routes is dealt with in a separate chapter. Both the inventory data and a summary of key issues identified through discussions with ADOT and the local jurisdictions are included.
The business route chapters are organized from west to east across Arizona beginning with Kingman in Chapter 2 and ending with Holbrook in Chapter 8. Chapter 9 includes a summary of some of the technical data documented through the research and a presentation of issues raised in the discussions that have taken place.
Each of the next seven chapters includes a section on inventory data, a discussion of issues and concerns raised during the meetings with ADOT and the local jurisdictions, and a summary of the findings. Sections are also made available for the local jurisdictions and the appropriate ADOT District to provide a statement.
The inventory sections of each chapter include a community specific business route description, and an inventory of roadway, land use, and environmental factors. The contents, source, and purpose of each section are discussed below:
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 1- Page 1 The Route Description was developed from the ADOT State Highway System Log and field review. The purpose of this section is to describe the limits of the business route, or in some cases the frontage road, so all parties know the limits of the roadway being discussed.
The Roadway Geometry section describes current geometric conditions. It was developed through field review.
The Traffic Control section is also intended to provide baseline data. It was developed through field review and provides information on speed limits and the location of traffic signals.
Accident Data was obtained from ADOT's Accident Records System. It covers the time period from September 1, 1992 through June 30, 1996. The purpose of the data is to provide accident data that may be useful in identifying locations where a safety study may be needed.
Pavement and Structure Conditions reported for each business route are taken from ADOT's Pavement Management System and Bridge Sufficiency Rating, respectively. Pavement conditions are reported in three categories: good, fair, and fair to poor. The fair to poor rating, which is the lowest rating given, includes the notation that the pavement may require rehabilitation. Structure conditions are also rated in three categories: good condition, eligible for rehabilitation, and eligible for replacement. The intent of the data is to indicate the possible need for pavement or structures improvements.
The Maintenance Costs section provides the most recent data available from the ADOT districts on how much is being spent to maintain the business routes. This data would prove useful to both ADOT and the local jurisdictions to estimate future roadway expenditures.
Railroad Crossing information was developed through field review. It is included because the railroad is a major issue in Flagstaff and is becoming a significant issue in Kingman. Both business route rail crossings and crossings of intersecting streets close to the business routes are included. The latter information is included because in some cases traffic stopped for trains backs up on to the business route.
A Railroad Survey was undertaken by the Western Governor's Association Task Force in 1997. Three of the communities with B-40 routes, Kingman, Flagstaff, and Winslow, responded to the survey. A report on the survey is yet to be published, and, according to the author, all responses will be consolidated into summary information rather than presented by jurisdiction in the report. Therefore, responses for each of the three jurisdictions in the B-40 corridor have been included in the discussions for the business routes. The intent is to provide an indication of rail issues that exist in the B-40 corridors.
Intermodal Facilities along the B-40 routes are identified through field review to help identify how important the business routes are to providing for intermodal transfers. In the case of rail facilities, freight loading information was obtained from ADOT. Amtrak
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 1- Page 2 passenger loading information was obtained from ADOT. Intercity bus loadings were obtained from Greyhound.
Programmed Projects were identified for the business routes from ADOT's 5-Year Highway Construction Program, FY 2000-04. The project descriptions are included to notify all interested parties of the improvements being planned for each business route.
The section on Potential 4(0 Sites provides information on parks, schools, and historic sites that would have to be dealt with as a 4(f) site should roadway improvements requiring additional right-of-way or impacting the site in other ways, be considered. Historic site locations were obtained from the State Historic Preservation Office. School and park sites were located via field review.
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) were identified from data provided by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). The intent is to provide information on where cleanup may be necessary if a business route project requires additional right-of-way.
Solid Waste Facility data was also obtained from ADEQ. The intent is to alert all parties that acquiring right-of-way in identified locations might lead to additional project cost.
The inclusion of Hazardous Material Incidents also provides information warning of possible additional costs if construction is undertaken in an area that may require cleanup resulting from hazardous material incidents. This data was also obtained from ADEQ.
Elements that are important but are not included in the inventory are air quality, noise, and Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS).
According to ADOT's Environmental Planning Section, there are no non-attainment areas within the 1-40 corridor and that noise has not been raised as an issue on any business routes in the corridor. Therefore, no noise data is available. If a project is undertaken on a business route, project level air and noise studies will need to be conducted.
With regards to ITS, the February 1997 ADOT Statewide Plan, Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure does not include any ITS elements in any B-40 routes. There are however some elements that relate to business routes. The Plan calls for a study of cellular phone coverage in Arizona to ensure complete coverage of the State; recommends that Kiosks be installed at tourist information centers and chambers of commerce; and recommends the synchronization of traffic signals in cities with 4 or 5 signals controlled by ADOT or the local government. Kingman and Flagstaff fit into this category.
The following seven chapters present inventory data for each of the seven business routes on 1-40.
Chapter 2. Kingman Business Route Chapter 6. Winslow Business Route Chapter 3. Seligman Business Route Chapter 7. Joseph City Business Route Chapter 4. Ash Fork Business Route Chapter 8. Holbrook Business Route Chapter 5. Flagstaff Business Route
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 1- Page 3 2. KINGMAN BUSINESS ROUTE
In addition to the business route through the City of Kingman, this chapter also includes consideration of the 1-40 Frontage Road which runs parallel to 1-40 between the Mcconnico and West Kingman traffic interchanges. If the business route were to be abandoned by ADOT, it would be turned back to the City of Kingman. If the frontage road were to be abandoned, it would be turned back to Mohave County.
INVENTORY
Route Description
Kingman is located in Mohave County at the junction of I-40, US 93, and SR 68. The Arizona Department of Economic Security (DES) estimated the 1995 population of the Kingman area was 32,480 persons, with about half residing in the City of Kingman. DES projects an area population of 55,000 persons in the year 2020.
As shown in Figure 2-la, B-40 in Kingman is located between Exit 48, the West Kingman TI, and Exit 53, the East Kingman TI. The total length of B-40 is 4.1 miles, all within the city limits of Kingman. Currently, the roadway is maintained by ADOT. If the roadway is abandoned by ADOT, the City of Kingman will be the receiving jurisdiction.
Starting at the West Kingman TI, B-40 follows Beale Street for about a quarter-mile to its intersection with Andy Devine Avenue. Business 40 follows Andy Devine Avenue to the East Kingman TI and runs parallel to the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad tracks.
The I-40 Frontage Road, shown in Figure 2-lb, begins at the intersection of B-40 one block south of the Beale Street/ Andy Devine A venue intersection. It proceeds south to the Mcconnico TI (Exit 44). The Kingman City Limits are approximately one-half mile south of the Andy Devine A venue intersection. The rest of the five-mile road is in Mohave County. Therefore, if abandoned, most of the I-40 Frontage Road would be turned back to the County.
Roadway Data
Roadway Geometry
/ Business 40 follows slightly rolling terrain. Except for about a one block stretch south from Beale Street, B-40 is 62 feet wide with four 12-foot travel lanes, has a 12-foot center two-way left-tum lane, curb, and gutter. Between Beale Street and at about !51 Street, the roadway is generally 44-feet wide with curb, gutter, and sidewalk and has three 14-foot lanes: one eastbound lane, one westbound lane, and one center left-tum/median lane.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 2 - Page 1 FIGURE 2-la B-40 LOCATION, KINGMAN
N
i I I A I I I I I I I I I I ■------'
) f
N,_ B-40 Routes N I-40 "', I Frontage Road ------,\ 1 /\/ Other Streets iI \ t_ ___ l. N Burlington Northern ------· Santa Fe Railroad 1\ I
I / \ \I/ Urban Boundary • Traffic Signal
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 2 - Page 2 FIGURE 2-lb 1-40 FRONTAGE ROAD LOCATION, KINGMAN
I I I I I I I I I N I I I I ·~·/ {1fft I ·I ------, II A _j_ A I I :i ~ C______( - I I\ ' L---\------~ j / , ..-- .,.,,_ ' 'I-/, ' ~ ~~,~ ' ..-- o\o
"'\
N B-40 Routes N 1-40 1 '\" I Frontage Road l'v; Other Streets /\/ Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad / ,/\"/ Urban Boundary / Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 2 - Page 3 Traffic Control
The ramps at both traffic interchanges on B-40 are signalized. In addition, there are five other traffic signals along B-40: Beale Street, 4th Street, 8th Street, Hualapai Mountain Road, and Tucker Street. All other intersecting streets are controlled by stop signs. Other than at the traffic signals, travel on B-40 is unimpeded as there are no other stop conditions. The speed limit along most of B-40 is 35 mph. North Of Tucker Street, the speed limit is 45 mph. Between the East Kingman TI and Harrison Street, the speed limit is 40 mph.
The only stop sign on the I-40 Frontage Road is at the end of the roadway at the Mcconnico TI. There are no traffic signals. The few intersecting driveways are stop sign controlled.
Traffic Volumes
Traffic volumes on B-40 reached 21,000 vpd in 1979 while I-40 was under construction. With the completion of I-40 construction, volumes dropped to 10,000 vpd. Since 1980, with an increase in both urban and Interstate traffic, volumes on B-40 have climbed back up to over 17,000 vpd in 1996. Signalized intersection capacity analyses from the 1997 Kingman Area Transportation Study indicate that B-40 intersections · operate at Level of Service A or B.
Year 2020 traffic forecasts show B-40 reaching 35,700 vpd north of Hualapai Mountain Road and 26,600 south of Hualapai Mountain Road. The Transportation Study predicts Level of Service F with these volumes.
Traffic volume data is not available for the I-40 Frontage Road.
Accident Data
According to ADOT accident data, 172 accidents were reported on B-40 between September 1, 1992 and June 30, 1996. These accidents resulted in 121 injuries, but no fatalities. Accident data is summarized in Table 2-1. For reference purposes, the West Kingman TI is at B-40 milepost 52.61, Hualapai Mountain Road is at B-40 milepost 54.59, and the East Kingman TI is at B-40 milepost 56.67. The average accident rate for B-40 in Kingman is 1. 95 accidents per million vehicle-miles of travel.
Pavement and Structures Condition
According to data in the ADOT Pavement Management System, the pavement on B-40 in Kingman is rated in fair to poor condition, except for the mile near the East Kingman TI which is in fair condition
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 2 - Page 4 TABLE 2-1. SUMMARY OF ACCIDENTS ON B-40 (September 1, 1992 - June 30, 1996)
Number of Accidents* Total Number of Million Accidents per Milepost PDO Injury Fatal Total Injuries Fatalities VMT** Million VMT 52 17 9 0 26 11 0 13 .2 2.0 53 34 18 0 52 29 0 17.7 2.9 54 28 25 0 53 41 0 17.7 3.0 55 11 10 0 21 19 0 19.8 1.1 56 10 10 0 20 21 0 19.8 1.0 Total 100 72 0 172 121 0
Source: ADOT Traffic Engineering Group *PDO = Property Damage Only **VMT = Vehicle Miles of Travel
Records in ADOT's Bridge Management System show two structures on B-40 in Kingman, excluding the two Tls. One is the Johnson Wash Bridge on Beale Street. The Johnson Wash Bridge has a sufficiency rating of 89.3. The second structure is a culvert just west of the bridge. It has a sufficiency rating of 98.9. Both of these structures are in good condition. Culverts, such as the one at Harrison Street, are not included in the Bridge Management System.
Data for pavement and structures is not available for the 1-40 Frontage Road.
Maintenance Costs
ADOT spent a total of $35,253 in fiscal years 1994, 1995, and 1996 on maintenance of B- 40 through Kingman. This is an average of $11,750 per year or nearly $2,900 per mile per year. In the same time period, $18,783, or an average of $6,260 per year, was spent on the 1-40 Frontage Road. This is an average of $1,250 per mile per year on the five mile frontage road.
Railroad Crossings
Business 40 parallels the railroad tracks through Kingman. Although B-40 never crosses the tracks, five streets that intersect with B-40 do cross the tracks: 2nd Street, 4th Street, 8th Street, Hualapai Mountain Road, and Louise Avenue. Two of these crossings are grade separated. There is a two-lane underpass on 8th Street and a five-lane overpass of the tracks on Hualapai Mountain Road; both roadways are adequate to handle existing and projected traffic volumes.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 2 - Page 5 At-grade crossings are on 2nd Street, 4th Street and Louise Avenue. The at-grade, gated crossings of the railroad tracks on both 2nd Street and 4th Street are about 100 feet south of B-40. With storage room for five or six vehicles, traffic congestion does not seem to be an issue at these crossings.
Louise Avenue tees into an unsignalized intersection with B-40. The 1997 Kingman Area Transportation Study recommends a realignment of Louise Avenue between B-40 and Eastern Street and a reconstruction of the B-40/Louise Avenue intersection to solve congestion problems. Because it is one of only two roadways that provides access to the "east bench" of Kingman, the other being Hualapai Mountain Road, improving the Louise Avenue crossing is essential to the City.
A railroad spur crosses the 1-40 Frontage Road.
Railroad Issues Survey
In 1997, the Western Governor's Association Task Force on Transportation Futures sponsored a survey concerning rail issues in communities along the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad in Arizona and other states. The City of Kingman participated in this survey. A summary of the City's response follows:
• Rail service provides some local employment and tax revenue. It is a vital element in the recruitment of industrial and warehousing businesses.
• The City indicates that non-rail related congestion, new road construction, roadway maintenance, and improved traffic signalization are all greater transportation concerns in the community than any caused by the railroad. However, with the continued increase in rail traffic, the impact to the at-grade crossings and the overall transportation system in Kingman is going to increase.
• The City rates a number of railroad problems as "very important": train speed too fast, derailments, hazardous leaks and spills, emergency vehicle and resident delay, and not enough grade separated crossings. "Important" railroad problems include noise, safety, poorly maintained railroad property, and access to local businesses.
• The most important action in addressing Kingman railroad-related problems is to reduce train speed. Other important actions include the construction of new grade separations; additional signalized grade crossings, and training emergency response teams for railroad accidents.
• The major barrier to dealing with the rail issues has been inadequate public and private sector funding. Financing grade-separated crossings is extremely difficult because construction funding sources and bonding capacity are limited. Other barriers have been too much red tape, lack of consensus on an action plan, and lack of support by the railroads.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 2 - Page 6 • Assistance in eliminating these barriers would best be in the form of more public and private sector funding; a pooling of information from the railroads, communities, and states which have dealt with similar problems; more support from the railroads; and a reduction in red tape.
• The City has attempted to maintain an open line of communication with the railroad to resolve the crossing issues. They have found that the railroad 1s very cooperative when a particular solution is in the railroad's best interest.
Intermodal Facilities
An Amtrak station is located on B-40 at 4th Street and a Greyhound Bus Depot is located at the McDonald's restaurant on B-40 near the East Kingman TI. The Kingman Municipal Airport is located on US 66, five miles north of I-40.
Annual Amtrak passenger loading has stayed fairly constant in Kingman since 1990, ranging from 2,415 in 1996 to 3, 144 in 1992. In 1997, 3, 140 passengers boarded in Kingman. Also in 1997, 106,000 passengers boarded Greyhound busses in Kingman. The average departure loading was 24.5 persons per bus.
The Getz Team Yard, a rail freight loading yard, is located adjacent to B-40 near Louise Avenue. Sidings are located on both sides of the railroad tracks. Twenty freight cars were loaded in the year 1995. Activity is increasing with building materials being brought in by rail and unloaded at this site.
No intermodal facilities are on the I-40 Frontage Road.
Programmed Projects
One project on B-40 in Kingman is in ADOT's 5-Year Highway Construction Program, PY 2000-04. This project has been allocated $380,000 for the construction of a multi-use path on Andy Devine Avenue and programmed for PY 2000.
No projects are programmed for the I-40 Frontage Road.
Land Use
The land on both sides of B-40 is predominantly occupied by commercial and light industrial land uses. Traveler services account for much of the commercial land use. In addition, there are also scattered residential and community service uses, as well as several vacant lots.
Land along the I-40 Frontage Road is mostly vacant with some scattered residential, industrial, and commercial activity. The City's sewage treatment plant is located adjacent to this road.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 2 - Page 7 Potential (41) Sites
Three parks are located along B-40. These include Lewis Kingman Park located near the Louise A venue intersection; Metcalf Park, located at the northeast comer of the Beale Street/ Andy Devine A venue intersection; and Locomotive Park, located on the southeast comer of the same intersection. There are no parks or schools located along the I-40 Frontage Road.
The ten-acre Lewis Kingman Park was originally constructed as a rest stop for US 66 and US 93 travelers. The property was deeded to the City of Kingman years ago and currently functions as a local park. Amenities include a restroom facility, picnic area, small ball field, and open turf area.
The four-acre Kingman Locomotive Park houses an historic railroad_ steam engine and caboose. The majority of the area is under turf, with the westerly portion having a flagstone courtyard area. The park is frequently used for various special events. This park is located immediately across from the Historic Power House, which is the current home of the Visitor Information Center.
The one-acre Metcalf Park includes a picnic area, playground, and restroom facility. The park is located across the street from the Mohave Museum of History and Art. This facility is also frequently used for special events.
No parks or schools are located on the I-40 Frontage Road.
The listing of Historic sites in the I-40 corridor was obtained from the State Historic Preservation Office. The three B-40 sites in Kingman that are on the National Register of Historic Places are listed in Table 2-2. There are no historic sites on the I-40 Frontage Road.
TABLE 2-2. KINGMAN HISTORICAL SITES
Name of Site Location AT & SF Locomotive City Park Kingman Kingman Commercial Historic District 300 and 400 blks. of Andy Devine Ave. Desert Power & Water Co. (Electric) Bounded by AT & SF RR tracks, Spillway
Environmental Issues
Information on LUST sites, solid waste facilities, and HAZMAT incidents were obtained from ADEQ.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 2 - Page 8 Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
There are 44 LUST sites adjacent to or near B-40, none were listed on the 1-40 Frontage Road. The B-40 sites are listed in Table 2-3.
TABLE 2-3. LUST SITES
LUST No. Facility Name Facility Address City 3458.01 AMERICAN 3458CAR CARE . 2870 Andy Devine Ave Kingman 1478.01 ATCHISON TOPEKA & SANTA FE RY 4th St & Andy Devine Kingman 0678.01 BENJAMIN BROCK 105 Andy Devine · Kingman 4474.01 CANADA MART 210 W Andy Devine Kingman 2558.01 - CHEVRON 93944 . _ 3 !_07 E Andy -Devine Kingman 2558.02 CHEVRON 93944 3107 E Andy Devine Kingman 2558.03 .CHEVRON 93944 3107 E An~y Devine Kingman 2558.04 CHEVRON 93944 3107 E Andy Devine Kingman 2558.05 CHEVRON 93944 3107, E Andy Devine Kingman . 2558.06 CHEVRON 93944 3107 E Andy Devine Kingman 2558.07 CHEVRON 93944 310_7 E Andy Devine __ - --• Kingman 3030.01 COBB'S EXXON 3137 E Andy Devine Kingman 1308.01 ,DUNTON & DUNTON 119 EAndy Devine Kingman 3017.01 EAST SIDE SHELL 2837 E Andy Devine_ Kingman J017.02 EAST SIDE SHELL 2837 E Andy Devin~ _Kingman 3017.03 EAST SIDE SHELL 2837 E Andy Devine Kingman 3017.04 EAST SIDE SHELL - 2837 E Andy pevine · Kingman 3017.05 EAST SIDE SHELL 2837 E Andy Devine Kingmru_i 0500.0i' EXXON RAS # 76369 _3Q91 E Andy Devine Kingman .. 1009.01 KJS MINI MART 1945 Andy Devine Kingman - - - 0344.01 MCCUMBERS SUPER SERVICE _1 423 _E An_dy D~vine_ Kingman 3527.01 OLD TRAILS LIQUOR 229 E Andy Devine Kingman 4197.01 . .UNION 76 . _3030 _E Andy Devine' -. Kingman 4197.02 UNION 76 3030 E Andy Devine . Kingman 4197.03 -. UNION 76 _ 3030 E---Andy Devine- Ki_ngtp.an 4197.04 UNION 76 3030 ~ Andy Devine Kingman 4197.05 UNION 76 -~030 _E ~ dy Devin~ · Kingman 4197 .06 UNION 76 3030 E Andy Devine Kingman 4506.01 W. HILL/CRYSE~/66 AUTO'SAL~S ~ - , · 2610 E Andy Devine Kingman 4506.02 W. HILL/CRYSEN/66 AUTO SALES 2610 E Andy Devine Kingman 4506.03 W: HILL/CRYSEN/66 AUTO SALES - . 2610 E Andy Devine Kingman 4506.04 W. HILL/CRYSEN/66 AUTO SALES 2610 E Andy Devine Kingman 4506.05 HILL/CRYSEN/66 AUTO SALES 2610 E Andy Devine Kingmlll! _ -·- -- . W. - . - - 4506.06 W. HILL/CRYSEN/66 AUTO SALES 2610 E Andy Devine Kingman A506.07 __ ~~ _HILL/CRYSEN/66 AUTO SJ\LES 2610 E ~dy _Devi _ne . KingmllJ?: 4506.08 W. HILL/CRYSEN/66 AUTO SALES 2610 E Andy Devine _Kingman :2736.01-- - \YALKER'SS CHEVRON-950i9 - - 1420 E Andy Devine_ _ Kingman '._ 2736.02 WALKER'SS CHEVRON 95019 1420 E Andy Devine Kingman 2736.03 WALKER'SS CHEVRON 95019 .1420 E Andy Devine · Kingman . · 2736.04 WALKER'SS CHEVRON 95019 1420 E Andy Devine Kingman 2736~05__ :WALKER'SS CHEVRON 95019 . 1429 E Ap.dy Devine . Kingman 2736.06 WALKER'SS CHEVRON 95019 1420 E Andy Devine Kingman 273~.07 · W,'\_LKER'SS ·cHEVRON 95019 1420 E Andy Devine Kingman -- - - . 2736.08 WALKER'SS CHEVRON 95019 1420 E Andy Devine Kingman
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 2 - Page 9 Solid Waste Facilities
There are no reported solid waste facilities near B-40 nor the I-40 Frontage Road in Kingman.
Hazardous Material Incidents
There were four reported HAZMAT incidents that occurred near B-40. All of these occurred at truckstops. They are listed in Table 2-4. No HAZMAT incidents were reported on the I-40 Frontage Road.
TABLE 2-4. HAZMAT INCIDENTS
Date Responsible Party Location Description
2/22/1996 North American Transport Flying J Truckstop Release of Diesel Fuel
6/04/1992 Westinghouse Flying J Truckstop Release of Uranium 235
3/10/1991 Burlington Motor Carrier Petro Pit Stop Release of Cobalt Nitrate
9/18/1984 JB Hunt Transport Union 76 Truckstop Rele·ase of Diesel
B-40 ISSUES AND CONCERNS
On April 27, 1998, ADOT and consultant staff met with the City of Kingman staff to inform the City of the I-40 study, the study schedule, and to identify issues and concerns related to the business route in Kingman. In attendance were:
Louis Sorensen City of Kingman - City Manager Jack Kramer City of Kingman - Public Works Director Dennis Roberts City of Kingman - Community Development Director Blake Chapman City of Kingman Debra Brisk ADOT-Kingman District Engineer Jack Shambaugh ADOT - Transportation Planning Mike Connors Lima & Associates
Both I-40 and B-40 issues were raised at the meeting. Summaries of the issues follow:
B-40 ISSUES
• The Kingman City Council has taken a strong stance against accepting any tumbacks from ADOT because of the maintenance costs. The City has an annual
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 2 - Page 10 one million dollar shortfall per year for maintenance and cannot afford to take new roads into the system.
• HURF funds are not keeping pace with transportation demands in the City.
• ADOT and Kingman do share responsibilities on B-40 through town. The City takes care of lighting, street sweeping, and sidewalks. ADOT is responsible for pavement and signals.
• There are pavement and drainage problems on B-40 in Kingman. The Beale Street to Michael Street project programmed in FY 1999 will address these problems.
• Drainage in the historic area of Kingman will be improved with the pavement preservation project. However, a master drainage study of the historic area is needed.
• Grade differentials and meeting ADA requirements are a concern.
• Business 40 provides a detour for Interstate 40 traffic during emergency situations.
1-40 ISSUES
• ADOT is addressing problems at all three existing Kingman Tls: two-lane WB to NB and SB to EB ramps will be constructed at the 1-40/US 93 TI; a signal interconnect will be installed between the WalMart entrance and Detroit Avenue on Stockton Hill Road; and minor improvements are being planned for the East Kingman TI.
• A reduction of the current 7 5 mph speed limit through Kingman from the McConnico TI to the East Kingman TI should be considered.
• Interstate generated noise is also becoming an issue in Kingman.
• Eastbound climbing lanes are needed at both the McConnico and West Kingman Tls and east of town near the Silver Springs TI.
• A new connection between 1-40 and US 93 is needed to solve congestion and safety issues at the West Kingman TI.
• A new "Parkway" TI east of the East Kingman TI has been discussed for many years.
• Four to five windshields are cracked per year from golf balls hit onto 1-40 from the Cerbat Cliffs Golf Course.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 2 - Page 11 CONSULTANT STATEMENT: B-40
On July 18, 1995, ADOT sent a letter to the City of Kingman proposing that, upon the completion of the four projects specified in the letter, B-40 would be turned back to the City. The City indicated concurrence by signing the letter on August 2, 1995. With the completion of the pavement preservation and drainage projects programmed for Fiscal Year 1999, ADOT will have completed the four projects and is expecting to turn B-40 over to the City.
In 1996, ADOT drafted an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) spelling out the terms of B-40 abandonment in Kingman. With a change in elected leadership, the new City Council refused to sign the IGA. For financial reasons, the Council was and remains adamantly opposed to accepting any new roadways into the City's jurisdiction. To date ADOT has made the decision not to force the turnback issue. Thus, the abandonment of B-40 through Kingman has been on hold.
Since there seems to be agreement that if financing were not an issue, Andy Devine Avenue should belong to the City. A possible solution to the Kingman situation might be for the legislature to establish designated funding to assist in the maintenance of turned back highways. This approach has been used by the State of Minnesota. The approach is discussed in the last chapter of this report.
CITY OF KINGMAN STATEMENT
This chapter discusses ADOT's desire to turn back B-40 to the local jurisdictions, and highlights the fact that the local jurisdictions are disinclined to accept these segments of the State System. The local jurisdictions are probably more strapped for financial resources than the State. This report appears to reflect a pre-judgment about the turnover issue for B-40 routes, but there is no data on out-of-state versus local traffic usage of B-40 and the significance B-40 maintains as an alternative route to the interstate system.
Numerous scenarios are discussed attempting to find a win-win solution to the continued maintenance and operation of B-40. Currently the win-win solution may already exist, that being that B-40 remain in the State Highway System, and that local IGA's be maintained (or entered into) whereby the State maintains responsibility of pavement preservation and traffic signals, and the local jurisdictions accept the responsibility for boulevard lighting, signage, street sweeping, sidewalk and right-of-way maintenance (behind the curb/sidewalk), pavement striping, and that permits to work in the right-of-way and approval of curb cuts and access issues be coordinated with the local jurisdictions. This type of arrangement reduces the annual maintenance costs and issues for ADOT, and saves the local jurisdiction from expending large percentages of their HURF funds on a five to six year cycle on pavement preservation.
The State of Minnesota's annual funding option may have some merit.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 2 - Page 12 ADOT DISTRICT STATEMENT
The ADOT Kingman District and the City of Kingman are working jointly to fix up Business Route 40. The Pavement Preservation Project will be done in mid-1999. Sidewalk will be added in areas where there is no sidewalk. Enhancements will be done in the historic areas and between Hualapai Mountain Road and the eastern limit interchange. The City is progressively planning sidewalk and multi-use pathways in the community.
1-40 FRONTAGE ROAD ISSUES AND CONCERNS
On April 27, 1998, ADOT and consultant staff met with Mohave County staff to inform the County of the 1-40 study, the study schedule, and to identify issues and concerns related to the 1-40 frontage road segment located near Kingman. In attendance were:
Richard Skalicky Mohave County - Public Works Director Sam Elters Mohave County - Assistant County Engineer Debra Brisk ADOT - Kingman District - District Engineer Jack Shambaugh ADOT - Transportation Planning Mike Connors Lima & Associates
Points raised at the meeting were:
• Mohave County feels that it has recently taken back more State highways than it can afford. The County also understands there are a number of roadways on the State Highway System that logically should belong to the County.
• The County has been sued for accidents that have occurred on the turned back portion of SR 95. The law suits have centered on two issues: design, which the County inherited from ADOT, and maintenance, which the opposing attorneys feel should have a higher priority in the County because of the higher traffic volumes on what used to be a State highway. The County suggested that shared liability for a specified number of years, between the State and the jurisdiction receiving the turnback, would be a method to relieve the County's concerns in this area.
• The State of Minnesota has designated State program maintenance funding for County use during the first ten years after receiving an abandoned highway.
• Old US 66 through Oatman has been abandoned to Mohave County and has been designated Historic 66. Because of this designation, any improvements require an expanded environmental process. The County would like assistance from ADOT to process these expanded environmental requirements.
• ADOT is interested in abandoning scattered frontage roads located along 1-40.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 2 - Page 13 • The Colorado River Regional Transportation Study Update has recommended that a new roadway be constructed in the Vanderslice corridor south of Bullhead City. The County mentioned this as a possible SR 95 exchange route.
• ARS 28-6701 dealing with establishing a local (County) highway states, "A highway .... may be established ... . by presentation of a petition that is signed by ten or more resident taxpayers." Without this petition, the County does not feel they are authorized to spend maintenance money on the roadway.
CONSULTANT STATEMENT: 1-40 FRONTAGE ROAD
The situation on the 1-40 Frontage Road in Mohave County is similar to that of B-40 in the City of Kingman. Both ADOT and the County seem to agree that the frontage road logically belongs under County jurisdiction. In fact, there are a number of other frontage roads associated with 1-40 that ADOT and the County also feel should logically belong of the County. However, the funding of future maintenance is a major concern to the County. The establishment of designated funding to assist in maintenance might help expedite a turnback in Mohave County.
The County has been the recipient of State Highway turnbacks in recent years and has been sued over accidents on these highways that have occurred after the turnback. Roadway design can be a factor in these lawsuits. In discussions with the County, the concept of shared liability for a specified number of years came up as an idea to make accepting abandoned roadways more palatable. In considering the turnback issue, ADOT might want to balance the cost of establishing both designated maintenance funding and dealing with the liability issue against the cost of keeping urban and other unneeded roadways on the State system.
ADOT DISTRICT STATEMENT
The frontage road from Beale Street to McConnico TI is known as Perfume Canyon. It is Old Route 66. This roadway provides no function to the State system except as a detour of Interstate 40 traffic if an emergency occurs on 1-40 between the McConnico TI and the East Kingman TI. The district is willing to create a win-win relation with Mohave County in review of a possible tumback to Mohave County of Perfume Canyon (Route 66) between Beale Street and McConnico TI. Suggestions are to negotiate in reference to other routes proposed in the area, which will be access controlled.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 2 - Page 14 3. SELIGMAN BUSINESS ROUTE
INVENTORY
Route Description
The community of Seligman is located on I-40 between Kingman and Ash Fork at about I- 40 milepost (MP) 121. Seligman had an estimated 1990 Census population of 680 persons. The latest population projections from the Arizona Department of Economic Security predict a year 2020 population of 565 persons.
The largest continuous stretch of Route 66 in Arizona is an 88-mile segment between Seligman and Kingman. As shown in Figure 3-1, Route 66 starts at the East Seligman TI, overlaps B-40 on Chino Street through town, and then continues west to Peach Springs and Kingman. Business 40 turns off Route 66 at 7th Street and goes over the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad tracks and ends at the West Seligman TI. The Seligman segment of B-40 is 4.1 miles long. If the roadway were abandoned by ADOT, Yavapai County would be the receiving jurisdiction. Yavapai County has already accepted jurisdiction of Route 66 from the Yavapai-Mohave County Line to 7th Street in Seligman.
Roadway Data
Roadway Geometry
Business 40 generally follows flat terrain. Between I-40 and Route 66, B-40 is a two-lane highway with 12-foot travel lanes and 8-foot paved shoulders on both sides. A single overpass concrete structure provides a grade-separated crossing with the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad. The structure also crosses Route 66. Twelve-foot travel lanes and 10-foot shoulders are provided across the structure. Business 40 is a four-lane undivided highway between 7th Street and just east of Main Street (MP 140.6). The roadway is 60 feet wide with four 12-foot travel lanes, 6-feet of pavement for parking on each side, curb, and gutter. East of Main Street the roadway narrows to two 12-foot travel lanes and 8-foot shoulders to the East Seligman TI. Tum lanes are present at only a few of the intersections.
Paved sidewalks are along B-40 in both directions between Second A venue and Main Street. Unpaved sidewalks exist along the remainder of the four-lane roadway section. An ADOT sidewalk improvement project is programmed for July 1998.
Traffic Control
Westbound travel on B-40 is unimpeded. With the exception of a stop sign on B-40 at the intersection with Route 66, eastbound travel on B-40 is also unimpeded, as there are no
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 3 - Page I FIGURE 3-1 B-40 LOCATION, SELIGMAN
N A
Seligman Mu_nicipal ....J. A1rpon -('
West Seligman TI
East Seligman TI
N B-40Route 1-40 % Other Streets N Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 3 - Page 2 other stop conditions. With the exception of Route 66, all streets intersecting B-40 are stop controlled. There are no traffic signals along B-40 in Seligman. The speed limit between the West Seligman TI and Route 66 is 45 mph, and the speed limit along the four lane section is 35 mph. The speed limit east of Seligman along the two-lane section is 50 mph until it drops to 35 mph near the East Seligman TI. Off-ramp terminals with B-40 at both interchanges are stop sign controlled.
Traffic Volumes
According to ADOT, traffic data average daily traffic (ADT) on B-40 reached a high of 6,200 vpd in 1978 while I-40 was under construction. With the completion of the construction on I-40, traffic volumes dropped to 700 vpd in 1980. Since 1980, traffic volumes on B-40 have increased to between 1,300 and 1,700 vpd. The 1995 count was 1,500 vpd. Historic ADTs for B-40 are summarized in Table 3-1.
TABLE 3-1. HISTORIC AND FORECAST TRAFFIC VOLUMES ON B-40
1-40 Exit #121 West Route 66 to Main Main Street to 1-40 Exit Year Seligman to Route 66 Street #123 East Seligman 1975 Not Available 5,500 5,500 1980 Not Available 700 700 1985 1,200 1,200 700 1990 900 1,700 1,000 1995 800 1,500 900
Traffic forecast data on B-40 is not available from ADOT. With the population of Seligman remaining relatively constant, any traffic growth would come from Interstate travel. In 1995, there were 10,000 vpd on I-40 and 900 vpd (9 percent of I-40 traffic) between the East Seligman TI and Seligman. The year 2020 forecast on I-40 is 23,600 vpd. Assuming the 9 percent figure holds, the 900 vpd would increase to 2,100 vpd in the year 2020. With 1,200 additional vehicles going through town, traffic on Main Street would increase to 2,700 in the year 2020. With four lanes, the level of service will remain at A.
Accident Data
Only two accidents were reported on B-40 in Seligman during the nearly four-year period between September 1, 1992, and June 30, 1996, both occurring near the Main Street intersection. The accident rate during this period was 1.62 accidents per million vehicle miles of travel.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 3 - Page 3 Pavement and Structures Condition
Based on data in the Arizona Pavement Management System, the pavement from the West Seligman TI to Chino Street is in good condition. The pavement through town to the East Seligman TI is rated in fair condition.
Excluding bridges associated with the 1-40 traffic interchanges, there are seven structures listed in the January 1997 Arizona Highway System Bridge Record for B-40 in Seligman (Table 3-2) . All of the structures were built in the late 60's or late 70's and all have excellent sufficiency ratings.
TABLE 3-2. BRIDGE SUFFICIENCY RATING
MP Structure Name Year Built SR 142.35 RCB 1968 0998 142.21 E Seligman SFRR UP 1969 Not Rated 142.20 E Seligman UP 1969 0992 141.04 RCB 1970 0986 139.73 W Seligman OP 1978 0998 139.40 W Seligman RR OP 1978 0999 139.05 RCB 1978 0999
Maintenance Costs
ADOT spent $40,100 on maintenance of B-40 through Seligman over the three year period between July 1994 and June 1997, an average of $13,375 per year.
Railroad Crossings
The only two railroad crossings on B-40 in Seligman are grade separated. The first is just north of the West Seligman TI B-40 passing over the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad tracks. The second is located just north of the East Seligman TI with B-40 passing under the tracks. The only at-grade crossing of the tracks in the Seligman area is on Simmons Highway. Because of the low traffic volumes, train related traffic congestion is not an issue. lntermodal Facilities
The Seligman Municipal Airport lies just north of B-40, however, no direct access is available from B-40. Yavapai County is planning to spend 1.2 million dollars on improvements at the airport. This will include paving the access road.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 3 - Page 4 Programmed Projects
There are no projects on B-40 in Seligman included in ADOT' s 5-Year Highway Construction Program, FY 2000-04.
Land Use
Business 40 provides access to a variety of land uses. Between 1-40 and Route 66, the land is vacant with no access points. Commercial and retail uses line B-40 on both sides of the road between the intersection with Route 66 and Indian School Road. Between Indian School Road and 1st Avenue, single family homes line both sides of the road. East of Main Street to Lamport Street, commercial land uses resume. East of Lamport Street the land is primarily vacant with scattered residential and commercial land uses along B-40. Interstate traveler services are located near both TI's.
Potential 4(/) Sites
There are no parks or schools located on B-40 through Seligman.
There are no Seligman sites listed in the National Register of Historic Places Information System.
Environmental Issues
The listing of Historic sites in the 1-40 corridor was obtained from the State Historic Preservation Office. Information on LUST, Solid Waste Facilities, and HAZMAT incidents were obtained from ADEQ.
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
A total of 7 LUST sites are located along B-40 in Seligman.
• Four sites owned by the Mobil station at 1-40 Exit 123 (East Seligman TI) • The Cauthen/B&R Car Care on Chino Street • The Olson's Seligman Mini Mart at 1-40 Exit 123 • An old gas station on Chino Street
Solid Waste Facilities
One municipal solid waste facility is located approximately one mile north of Seligman on Seligman Landfill Road.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 3 - Page 5 Hazardous Material Incidents
No hazardous materials incidents were reported on B-40 in Seligman during the last ten years.
ISSUES AND CONCERNS
On April 8, 1998·, ADOT and consultant staff met with Yavapai County staff to inform the County of the I-40 study, the study schedule, and to identify issues and concerns related to the business routes in Seligman and Ash Fork. The business routes in both of these communities would transfer to Yavapai County if ADOT abandoned them. In attendance were:
Jim Holst Y avapai County Administrator Richard Straub Y avapai County Public Works Director Debra Brisk ADOT- Kingman District Engineer Bill Wang ADOT- Kingman District Bruce Mejia ADOT- Kingman District Jack Shambaugh ADOT - Transportation Planning Mike Connors Lima & Associates
Seligman and Ash Fork were discussed at the same meeting with Yavapai County, therefore, the issues and concerns raised were the same for both communities.
• The County has been partnering with ADOT for the construction of new highways and the abandonment of existing highways in the Prescott area of central Yavapai County and wants very much to continue with mutually beneficial partnering activities.
• ADOT has more routes in Y avapai County they would like to tumback to the County, SR 96 and SR 97 were mentioned. The County would like ADOT to put all such routes on the table for discussion. Such roadways in the Kingman, Prescott, and Flagstaff District located in Y avapai County should all be included in the discussions.
• The County has an aggressive plan, funded by its new impact fee, for constructing new controlled-access highways in central Y avapai County and the Verde Valley. ADOT participation in the design, construction, and take-over of these routes is being done through partnering efforts with the Prescott District.
• The County has worked with ADOT in the past to trade mile for mile and would prefer this approach with the business routes. However, they would consider a cash settlement for the business routes.
• The County currently has jurisdiction of old US 66 from Ash Fork to Seligman and Seligman to the County Line and would like to have these considered in roadway trade discussions with ADOT.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 3 - Page 6 • As is the case with ADOT, the counties do not have sufficient revenues to take care of all construction and maintenance needs.
• The County is not interested in adding miles to its system - the $7 million they now have for maintenance is stretched to cover the 1,400 miles of primarily dirt roadways they now have.
• The County has only one maintenance person in the Seligman/ Ash Fork area. Responsibility for additional miles would require additional staff. (ADOT has 13 maintenance personnel in the Seligman Maintenance Office).
• The condition of the pavement of any abandoned roadway is a concern to the County.
CONSULTANT STATEMENT
Yavapai County, like all other transportation agencies, operates on a tight maintenance budget. Although, they are willing to discuss trades, they are not interested in a straight turnback.
During the ADOT/Yavapai County meeting, it was agreed that open discussions should continue regarding:
1. Identifying changes of existing roadway maintenance responsibility that would be of mutual benefit.
2. Identifying future roadways within Yavapai County, which could be traded for existing State highways.
To continue this process, ADOT should compile a list of all roadways, highways, business routes, and frontage roads they would like to have considered for possible transfer to County jurisdiction. Mileage and pavement conditions would need to be included in such a list. All three ADOT Districts, Prescott, Kingman, and Flagstaff, need to be involved. The County is going to update its transportation plan to identify new controlled access routes, which could be offered to ADOT in exchange for existing ADOT roadways.
Since Yavapai County, has only one maintenance person in its Seligman office, as compared to 13 in ADOT's Seligman maintenance district, it might make sense for ADOT to retain control of Route 66 for use as an alternative route for 1-40 traffic when an incident forces closure. Turnbacks in other areas of Yavapai County where County maintenance forces are larger than State maintenance forces could be negotiated.
Even if B-40 is turned back to the County, the roadway will still function as a State highway since it will remain signed as Route 66 and travelers will still take signed Route 66 through town toward Peach Springs.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 3 - Page 7 YAVAPAICOUNTYSTATEMENT
Yavapai County promotes and engages in partnerships with ADOT to develop a true, meaningfully transportation relationship.
Our HURF funding for road maintenance is not adequate for maintenance of our existing system of roads. Y avapai County is interested in discussing solutions that would be a win win situation for ADOT and the county based on a county-wide basis concerning transportation planning, construction, maintenance, solid waste, and other mutual items of interest.
ADOT DISTRICT STATEMENT
Business Route 40 through Seligman is a good candidate for turnback to Y avapai County. The District wants a win-win with Y avapai County in reference to the turnback. A possible negotiating project would be to create an access controlled route from Seligman to Prescott.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 3 - Page 8 4. ASH FORK BUSINESS ROUTE
INVENTORY
Route Description
The community of Ash Fork, located between Seligman and Williams at about I-40 MP 145, had a 1990 Census population of approximately 480 persons. The Arizona Department of Economic Security projects minimal population growth with a population estimate of 525 in the year 2020.
Business Route 40 in Ash Fork is 1.5 miles long. As shown in Figure 4-1, it starts at the West Ash Fork TI at I-40 MP 144.9 and ends at the East Ash Fork TI at I-40 MP 146.4. Business 40 starts at the West Ash Fork TI (Exit 144) and proceeds in a northeast direction. Business 40 splits into a one-way pair for approximately three-fourths of a mile beginning at 8th Street and continues through the developed area of Ash Fork. Eastbound B-40 travels along Park A venue, while westbound B-40 travels along Lewis Avenue. The one-way pair merges east of !51 Street and turns south to connect with I-40 at the East Ash Fork TI (Exit 146).
Roadway Data
Roadway Geometry
Business 40 is a 40-foot wide roadway with two 12-foot travel lanes and 8-foot paved shoulders between the West Ash Fork TI and the one-way pair section. Eastbound B-40 (Park Avenue) is 40-four feet wide with two 12-foot travel lanes and 10 feet of pavement on both sides for parallel parking. Westbound B-40, Lewis Avenue, is 40 feet wide with two 12-foot travel lanes and 6-feet of pavement on each side for parking. Following the merge, B-40 is 48 feet wide with two 12-foot travel lanes and 12-foot paved shoulders. Paved sidewalks, curb, gutter, and street lighting exist within the one-way pair. Eastbound, there are sidewalks between 7th Street and 5th Street on the north side of the street and between 8th Street and 3rd Street on the south side of the street. Westbound, there are sidewalks between 3rd Street and 5th Street on the south side of the street and between 2nd Street and 5th Street on the north side of the street. An ADOT project to fill in gaps in the sidewalks is scheduled to begin in July 1998.
Traffic Control
Travel along B-40 is uninterrupted, as there are no stop conditions along the route. All streets intersecting B-40 are stop sign controlled. All off-ramp terminals connecting with B-40 at both I-40 traffic interchanges are stop sign controlled. No traffic signals are in Ash Fork. The speed limit on the one-way pair is 30 mph and 35 mph on either side of the one way pair to the TI's.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 4 - Page 1 FIGURE 4-1 B-40 LOCATION, ASH FORK
N A
- - • I
East Ash Fork TI West Ash Fork TI
N B-40 Route I-40 « Other Streets Burlington Northern N Santa Fe Railroad
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 4 - Page 2 Traffic Volumes
In 1995, the traffic volume on B-40 in Ash Fork was 1,700 vpd. Based upon the minimal growth expected in population, volumes are not expected to go over 2,000 vpd in the next 20 years. Business 40 will continue to operate at Level of Service A.
Accident Data
Six accidents were reported between September 1, 1992, and June 30, 1996, on B-40 in Ash Fork. One resulted in an injury and one resulted in a fatality. Five of the six accidents were intersection related. The accident rate on B-40 in Ash Fork is 0.13 accidents per million vehicle-miles of travel.
Pavement and Structures Condition
The only structure along B-40, other than the structures associated with the 1-40 traffic interchanges, is a culvert east of the one-way pair at milepost 146.25. According to the 1997 Arizona State Highway System Bridge Record, this structure was constructed in 1934 and has a good sufficiency rating of 97. 7 percent.
Data from the Arizona Pavement Management System indicates that the pavement condition on eastbound B-40 is fair from MP 145 to MP 146 and fair to poor from MP 146 to 147. The pavement condition on westbound B-40 is fair to poor from MP 145 to MP 146 and fair from MP 146 to 147.
Maintenance Costs
ADOT spent $14,600 on the maintenance of B-40 through Ash Fork over the three year period between July 1994 and June 1997.
Railroad Crossings
The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad tracks are located north of B-40 in Ash Fork. Double A Ranch Road crosses the tracks about two blocks from Lewis Avenue, the westbound leg of B-40. Train traffic does not cause traffic problems in Ash Fork.
Intermodal Facilities
No intermodal facilities are located in Ash Fork.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 4 - Page 3 Programmed Projects
ADOT's 5-Year Highway Construction Program, PY 2000-04 has two projects on B-40 in Ash Fork, programmed for PY 2000. The sum of $5,000 is allocated for roadway acquisition and $60,000 is allocated for landscaping islands at the entrance to B-40.
Land Use
The land around the West Ash Fork TI and along B-40, to what would be 9th Street, is vacant. Following a block of commercial use, there is a mix of commercial and residential use from 8th Street to past 1st Street. The land is then vacant to the East Ash Fork TI.
Potential 4(1) Sites
Ash Fork Centennial Park is located on the northwest corner of 6th Street and Lewis Avenue.
The National Register of Historic Places does not list any sites along B-40 in Ash Fork.
Environmental Issues
The listing of Historic sites in the 1-40 corridor was obtained from the State Historic Preservation Office. Information on LUST, Solid Waste Facilities, and HAZMAT incidents were obtained from ADEQ.
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
The only LUST site on B-40 is the ADOT maintenance yard at MP 145.22.
Solid Waste Facilities
No solid waste facilities are located near Ash Fork.
Hazardous Material Incidents
One HAZMAT incident was reported in Ash Fork. This incident occurred on January 25, 1988, and involved the release of Orm-E at Ted's Truckstop.
ISSUES AND CONCERNS
On April 8, 1998, ADOT and consultant staff met with Yavapai County staff to inform the County of the 1-40 study, the study schedule, and to identify issues and concerns related to
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 4 - Page 4 the business routes in Seligman and Ash Fork. The business routes in both of these communities would transfer to Yavapai County if ADOT abandoned them. In attendance were:
Jim Holst Y avapai County Administrator Richard Straub Yavapai County Public Works Director Debra Brisk ADOT- Kingman District Engineer Bill Wang ADOT- Kingman District Bruce Mejia ADOT- Kingman District Jack Shambaugh ADOT - Transportation Planning Mike Connors Lima & Associates
Ash Fork and Seligman were discussed at the same meeting with Yavapai County, therefore, the issues and concerns raised were the same for both communities.
• The County has been partnering with ADOT for the construction of new highways and the abandonment of existing highways in the Prescott area of central Y avapai County and wants very much to continue with mutually beneficial partnering activities.
• ADOT has more routes in Y avapai County they would like to turnback to the County, SR 96 and SR 97 were mentioned. The County would like ADOT to put all such routes on the table for discussion. All such roadways in the Kingman, Prescott, and Flagstaff District located in Y avapai County should be included in the discussions.
• The County has an aggressive plan, funded by its half-cent sales tax and new impact fee, for constructing new controlled-access highways in central Yavapai County and in the Verde Valley. ADOT participation in the design, construction, and take-over of these routes is being done through partnering efforts with the Prescott District.
• The County has worked with ADOT in the past to trade mile for mile and would also prefer this approach regarding the business routes. However, they would consider a cash settlement for the business routes.
• The County currently has jurisdiction of old US 66 from Ash Fork to Seligman and Seligman to the County Line and would like to have these considered in roadway trade discussions with ADOT.
• As is the case with ADOT, the counties do not have sufficient revenues to take care of all construction and maintenance needs.
• The County is not interested in adding miles to its system - the $7 million they now have for maintenance is stretched to cover the 1,400 miles of primarily dirt roadways they now have.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 4 - Page 5 • The County has only one maintenance person in the Seligman/ Ash Fork area. Responsibility for additional miles would require additional staff. (ADOT presently has 13 maintenance personnel in the Seligman Maintenance Office) .
• The condition of the pavement of any abandoned roadway is a concern of the County.
CONSULTANT STATEMENT
Yavapai County, like all other transportation agencies, operates on a tight maintenance budget. Therefore, they are willing to discuss trades, but are not interested in a straight tumback.
During the ADOT/Yavapai County meeting, it was agreed that open discussions should continue regarding:
1. Identifying changes of existing roadway maintenance responsibility that would be of mutual benefit.
2. Identifying future roadways within Yavapai County, which could be traded for existing State highways.
To continue this process, ADOT should compile a list of all roadways, highways, business routes, and frontage roads they would like to have considered for possible transfer to County jurisdiction. Mileage and pavement conditions would need to be included in such a list. All three ADOT Districts, Prescott, Kingman, and Flagstaff, need to be involved. The County should update its transportation plan to identify new controlled access routes, which could be offered to ADOT in exchange for existing ADOT roadways.
YAVAPAI COUNTY STATEMENT
Yavapai County promotes and engages in partnerships with ADOT to develop a true, meaningfully transportation relationship.
Our HURF funding for road maintenance is not adequate for maintenance of our existing system of roads. Yavapai County is interested in discussing solutions that would be a win win situation for ADOT and the county based on a county-wide basis concerning transportation planning, construction, maintenance, solid waste, and other mutual items of interest.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 4 - Page 6 ADOT DISTRICT STATEMENT
Ashfork Business Route 40 is a key link in the community of Ashfork. The District has the following concerns:
• If abandonment to Yavapai County occurs, concern is given to the attention the community will get from Y avapai County.
• Concern is given to the one-way street system in Ashfork as to why it is needed.
• Concern has been given to district reference signage for school crossings/children crossing on B-40.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 4 - Page 7 5. FLAGSTAFF BUSINESS ROUTE
In addition to the business route through the City of Flagstaff, this chapter also includes consideration of the 1-40 Frontage Road which runs parallel to 1-40 between the traffic interchanges. If either the business route or the frontage road were to be abandoned by ADOT, it would be turned back to the City of Flagstaff.
INVENTORY
Route Description
Business Route 40 goes through Flagstaff on Route 66. As shown in Figure 5-la, B-40 begins approximately 1.3 miles east of Exit 191, the West Flagstaff TI, at the west City Limits of Flagstaff and ends east of Fanning Drive near the East Flagstaff TI, Exit 201. At the east end of B-40, the roadway splits, continuing to the north as US 89 and to the east on the 1-40 Frontage Road (Figure 5-lb). The length of B-40 is approximately 6.7 miles, all within the City Limits of Flagstaff. The frontage road continues another 2.5 miles from the split to a cattle guard at the Walnut Canyon TI, Exit 204.
The segment of Route 66 between the West Flagstaff TI and the City Limits of Flagstaff was turned back to Coconino County in January 1991. ·
There are three other State highways in Flagstaff. US 180 overlaps 1-40 between Flagstaff and Holbrook. It exits 1-40 at the East Flagstaff TI and overlaps B-40 to Humphreys Street where it goes north. US 180 ends at SR 64. The US 180/SR 64 route is the most direct route between Flagstaff and the Grand Canyon. US 89 goes north to Page and into Utah from the East Flagstaff TI. SR 89A enters Flagstaff from the south on Milton Avenue and ends at the Route 66 intersection.
Roadway Data
Roadway Geometry
In west Flagstaff, B-40 is a 24-foot wide roadway with two 12-foot travel lanes and 7-foot graded shoulders between the Flagstaff City Limits and Woodlands Village Boulevard. There are left-tum lanes at some intersecting roads. The rest of B-40 is 64 feet wide with four 12-foot travel lanes, 2-foot shoulders, and a center two-way left-tum lane. For two blocks in downtown Flagstaff between Leroux Street and Agassiz Street, an additional 8- feet of pavement is available for parallel parking on the north side of B-40. Right-tum lanes are present at only a few streets. Paved sidewalks, street lighting, curb, and gqtter are present for most of the route from Woodlands Village Boulevard east. The 1-40 Frontage Road is 24 foot wide with two 12-foot travel lanes and graded shoulders.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 5 - Page 1 FIGURE 5-la B-40 LOCATION, FLAGSTAFF
N
A ------
i I I I I I I I I I I
'I I' I
' I 'I , ~ _:_- I I I 'I :..j~~~ -- 'I " . 'I -& .-, .-_, .·li .. ,- ,. _:, 'I
/' , {
/
: 1 I . I
\ \ Flagstaff Municipal \ \ Airport • 3 Miles South \ ------, of! 1-40
/\/ B-40 Route P------, /\/_ I-40 I I I I I I / 'v' Frontage Road ______, ~------· Other Streets N Burlington Northern ,, , Santa Fe Railroad / '_,' Urban Boundary • Traffic Signal
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 5 - Page 2 FIGURE 5-lb 1-40 FRONTAGE ROAD LOCATION, FLAGSTAFF
N A
I------1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ,------·I !
/\/ B-40 Route /\/_ l-40 / \,' Frontage Road /'-J Other Streets N Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad ,, I / 'v' Urban Boundary • Traffic Signal
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 5 - Page 3 Traffic Control
There are 14 traffic signals on B-40 through Flagstaff. The signals are located at Woodlands Village Boulevard, SR 89A (Milton Road), Butler Avenue, US 180 (Humphreys Street), Beaver Street, San Francisco Street, Verde Street, Switzer Canyon Drive, Enterprise Road, Arrowhead A venue, Fourth Street, Postal Boulevard, Steves Boulevard, and Fanning Drive. All other streets intersecting B-40 are stop sign controlled.
The posted speed limit between the West Flagstaff TI and the Flagstaff City Limits is 50 mph. Just west of Woodlands Village Boulevard, the speed limits drops to 40 mph and then to 30 mph just east of Woodlands Village Boulevard. The speed limit remains 30 mph to Verde Street where it increases to 40 mph. The speed limit remains 40 mph to the end of B-40.
Traffic Volumes
According to ADOT traffic data, traffic on B-40 has grown steadily since 1975. Traffic on Milton Road has increased from 10,000 vpd in 1975 to over 33,000 vpd in 1995 and from 10,000 vpd to over 25,000 vpd east of Switzer Canyon Drive during the same time frame. Volumes near the I-40 West Flagstaff TI have fluctuated between 2,000 and 4,000 vpd since 1975.
In July 1997, Traffic Research & Analysis collected traffic counts for the City of Flagstaff. Volumes at three B-40 locations are shown in Figure 5-2a. Near the railroad underpass, B-40 carries 44,240 vpd, the highest volume of any street in Flagstaff. The volume drops to 35,030 vpd east of Switzer Canyon Road and to 29,460 vpd east of 4th Street.
Figure 5-3 shows the daily distribution of traffic on B-40 near the underpass. Traffic gradually increases beginning at 6:00 a.m., reaches a plateau of around 3,100 vehicles per hour at 11 :00 a.m. which holds for four hours. Traffic peaks between 3:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. at around 3,300 vehicles per hour then gradually drops off to fewer than 1,000 vehicles per hour after 10:00 p.m.
Urban arterial level of service is controlled by signalized intersections. Therefore, it cannot be calculated without going into a detailed intersection analysis. However, using a general capacity guideline of 750 vehicles per hour per lane and assuming a 50-50 split of green time at intersections for a capacity of 3,000 vehicles per hour on a four-lane road, it can be estimated that B-40 operates near or over capacity between 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. The City keeps traffic flowing by providing more green time to Route 66 at signalized intersections, but drivers still experience congestion throughout the day. A new traffic forecast model has been developed for use in the City's Comprehensive Land Use and Traffic Study. Traffic forecasts are not yet available from this model, however, it is certain that the volumes on B-40 through Flagstaff will not decrease. Traffic volume and increasing congestion on B-40 and the lack of a good alternative route are the most serious traffic problems in Flagstaff
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 5 - Page 4 FIGURE 5-2a TRAFFIC VOLUMES - FLAGSTAFF WEST
N
A ------
i I I I I I I I I I I I FMPO I I Boundary I I I
'I 'I I I I I I
··;· / ,/.,'
=....: ' . /
FMPO Boundary
\ Flagstaff Municipal \ Airpon - 3 Miles South ' '"------.of 1-40
.A. Traffic Volume, 7 /97 /\I B-40 Route
r••••••• /\/_ l-40 I I I I I I / v ' Frontage Road ______, ~------, , , · Other Streets N Burlington Northern ,, , Santa Fe Railroad ,, ',,' Urban Boundary • Traffic Signal
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 5 - Page 5 FIGURE 5-2b TRAFFIC VOLUMES - FLAGSTAFF EAST
N
FMPO A '°~'"' 6,970
21,030 .A.
------·-~------
1 ~-- - .. ., \ . -. . ., ~------East Flagstaff TI
' '
· _>.. .'\ l / . /" ... ,-_
,( . ,· . ---~'-"
' /• . ··- · ,, ... _;...... : .. ,..
, _✓ ••• •
' ':.,·· ·' J
/ ,------!
• Traffic Volume, 7 /97 /\/ B-40 Route /\/_ I-40 / '\, ' Frontage Road , ' , Other Streets N Burlington Northern ,, , Santa Fe Railroad / '_,' Urban Boundary • Traffic Signal
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 5 - Page 6 FIGURE 5-3 DAILY VARIA TI ON OF TRAFFIC VOLUME
3500 ,----,-----,-,-----,---r-,-·,-T-1-,7-,-T-r-,7-,-T-,-r-1-1-17
3000 -+--t---t--t----+---+---t---+--,--t----t---;-t,
2500 - I I I I I I I -- I ~t-..'\l--tt-.."11-t-l
~ 2000 ·t-----+--r ~ ~ ~ 1500 +--+--+--+--t---i--,t
1000 I I I I I I I ~+t-..'\l--+~t
500 t--t---+--+-~--+-
o .-~--~J~--~l~---- ___ ,_I # # # # # # # # # # # ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ # ...:.c$> ,-,;c$' ,,,c$> ,..c$> 'jc$> 'o~ "~ ~~ °"~ {::,~ ...:.~ ~~ ..t ,-,;~ ,,,~ ...~ ,l 'o~ "c$> ~c$> °"~ I;)~ ...:.~ ,-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~y Hour Ending
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Assessment - Chapter 5 - Page 7 Traffic volumes at the FMPO boundary and in the urban area for US 89 and US 180 are also shown in Figures 5-2a and 5-2b. These volumes can be used to estimate the percentage of highway traffic on these arterial streets in Flagstaff. On US 89, it can be estimated that 33 percent of the traffic on US 89 north of Townsend-Winona Road is through highway traffic by dividing the volume at the urban boundary (6,970 vpd) by the volume north of Townsend-Winona Road (21,030 vpd) . Conversely, two-thirds of the traffic on US 89 in town is urban traffic. Using the same method, it can be estimated for US 180 that 15 percent of the traffic on Humphreys Street north of Dale Avenue is through highway traffic and 85 percent of the traffic is urban.
Accident Data
According to the ADOT Accident Records System, 356 accidents were reported on B-40 between September 1, 1992, and June 30, 1996. The highest concentration of accidents was in a two-mile segment from west of Milton Road to past Switzer Canyon Drive. Over two-thirds of the B-40 accidents, 244 of 356, occurred in this segment. No fatalities were reported, however there were 139 injuries as summarized in Table 5-1. The average accident rate for B-40 through Flagstaff is 1. 76 accidents per million vehicle-miles of travel.
TABLE 5-1. SUMMARY OF ACCIDENTS ON B-40 (September 1, 1992 - June 30, 1996)
Number of Accidents Total Number of Million Accidents Per Milepost PDO* Injury Fatal Total Injuries Fatalities VMT Million VMT 193 5 1 0 6 1 0 6.4 0.9 194 5 2 0 7 4 0 6.4 1.1 195 100 45 0 145 59 0 34.1 4.3 196 70 29 0 99 44 0 38.4 2.6 197 11 1 0 12 1 0 37.4 0.3 198 33 6 0 39 8 0 37.4 1.0 199 33 12 0 45 22 0 37.4 1.2 200 3 0 0 3 0 0 4.9 0.6 Total 260 96 0 356 139 0
Source: ADOT Traffic Engineering Group *PDQ = Property Damage Only
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Assessment - Chapter 5 - Page 8 Pavement and Structures Condition
Pavement condition data was obtained from ADOT's pavement management system. The pavement for B-40 in Flagstaff is rated as being in good condition for the two-mile segment from the western city limits of Flagstaff to west of Milton Road and is in fair to poor condition for the next two-miles to about Switzer Canyon Drive. The middle mile of the three-mile segment from Switzer Canyon Drive to the end of B-40 is rated in good condition, while the other two miles are rated in fair condition. In summary, three miles of B-40 are rated in good condition, two miles are in fair condition, and two miles are in fair to poor condition.
A rating is not available for the I-40 Frontage Road pavement.
Two structures are on B-40 other than those associated with the I-40 traffic interchanges. Sufficiency ratings for the structures were obtained from ADOT's Structure Inventory and Appraisal records. Business 40 goes under the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad tracks. The vertical clearance at this structure is 14'0". A sufficiency rating is not available. The bridge over the Rio de Flag, located 0.3 miles west of Humphreys Street, has a sufficiency rating of 78.2. A rating of 80 to 100 is considered good. The 78.2 rating of this structure puts in the "eligible for rehabilitation" category.
The I-40 frontage road goes over the railroad tracks near the Walnut Canyon TI. The sufficiency rating of this structure is S43. 3, a rating that identifies it as being structurally deficient and eligible for replacement. A bridge replacement project is programmed for FY 2002.
Maintenance Costs
ADOT spent a total of $629,486.85 in fiscal years 1996, 1997, and 1998 on maintenance of B-40 through Flagstaff. This is an average of $209,829.95 per year or $31,317.75 per mile per year.
Railroad Crossings
The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad tracks parallel B-40 and the I-40 Frontage Road through Flagstaff. Three grade-separated crossings of the tracks exist in Flagstaff: Milton Road, Country Club Drive, and on the I-40 Frontage Road near the Walnut Canyon TI. In addition, there are five at-grade track crossings: Beaver Street, San Francisco Street, Enterprise Road, Steves Boulevard, and Fanning Drive.
The tracks are approximately 60 feet from Route 66 at each of the at-grade crossings. Thus, there is storage room for two cars between the tracks and Route 66. Southbound vehicles waiting to cross the tracks queue on the north side of Route 66 or on the approaches to the intersections on Route 66 itself. Queued traffic frequently extends beyond the turn lanes spilling into and, thus, blocking a through lane. All at-grade
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Assessment - Chapter 5 - Page 9 crossings are gated and there is a traffic signal on Route 66 at each street that has an at grade crossing. Except for the Enterprise crossing where the tracks are slightly lower, the tracks are at a slightly higher elevation than Route 66.
Based with discussions with the City in 1998, an estimated 80 trains per day go through Flagstaff. Traffic congestion caused by train traffic through the City is one of the most serious concerns facing Flagstaff.
Rail Issues Survey
In 1997, the Western Governor's Association Task Force on Transportation Futures sponsored a survey concerning rail issues in communities along the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad in Arizona and in other states. The City of Flagstaff participated in this survey. A summary of the City's response follows:
• According to the City's 1997 survey response, over 70 freight trains plus Amtrak service go through Flagstaff daily. Rail operations have increased during the past few years with 90 to 100 freight trains per day, up to two miles in length, anticipated. The 1997 /98 Amtrak schedule includes two trains daily through Flagstaff.
• There are extensive switching and yard operations within the City.
• The railroad does provide service to local industry.
• Flagstaff feels that the railroad helps attract new business and generates tax revenue for the City.
• The railroad does employ local residents.
• Local businesses depend upon rail service.
• The City feels that the railroad causes serious problems within the community. Lack of grade-separated crossings was sited as the single largest contributor to traffic congestion and safety.
• The City rated a number of factors that contribute to railroad problems in the community as "very important." These include: noise, grade crossing safety, traffic delays, environmental problems, derailments and hazardous material spills, rough grade crossings, emergency vehicles, resident and business access hampered by railroad right-of-way and blocked crossings, and too few grade separated crossings.
• Factors rated "important" were unattractive railroad property, trains traveling too fast, vibration damage from trains, and not enough signalized crossings.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Assessment - Chapter 5 - Page 10 • Through the Flagstaff 2020 process, residents identified railroad related traffic congestion, safety, and noise problems as high priority items to be addressed.
• Very important actions to be taken in addressing rail-related problems are construction of new pedestrian and vehicle grade separations and eliminating the use of locomotive horns. In addition to more grade separations, the City suggests two other options for exploration: railroad relocation and depressing the tracks. (Carbondale, Illinois has depressed the railroad tracks through town.)
• The City has spent five million dollars during the past five years to landscape the railroad corridor and to restore historic train depots. Additional funds are planned for · landscaping to buffer the rail corridor and for feasibility studies to address pedestrian and storm drain underpasses.
• The City would like to develop a government and railroad partnership to address rail problems. Inadequate public and private sector funding, too much red tape, and lack of interest from State agencies are cited as barriers to effectively dealing with rail related issues.
• The most effective assistance in dealing with Flagstaff issues would be additional public and private funding, technical assistance for traffic studies, and additional support from the railroad, and State and federal agencies.
• The City has established a good working relationship with local railroad operations management.
The City concluded the survey by suggesting the formation of a City /railroad partnership for any demonstration projects that might arise to address the rail/traffic-related problems in Flagstaff.
lntermodal Facilities
In addition to the Amtrak station located near Beaver Street, there is a Greyhound terminal just north of the Milton Road/Route 66 intersection and a Nava-Hopi Tours (charter bus service) terminal on the south side of Route 66 between Beaver and San Francisco Streets.
The Flagstaff Municipal Airport is located three miles south of the I-40/I-17 TI on I-17. Over 47,000 enplanements occurred in both 1996 and 1997.
Two BNSF intermodal freight facilities are located in downtown Flagstaff. One consists of a set of tracks south of the Amtrak Depot that includes a loading dock. The other facility is east of San Francisco Street adjacent to the old freight depot. An estimated 20 to 30 fright cars per year are loaded at these facilities.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Assessment - Chapter 5 - Page 11 Since 1990, Amtrak passenger boardings in Flagstaff have ranged from 45,160 in 1996 to 54,239 in 1993 . In 1997, 53,230 riders boarded in Flagstaff. During the same year, 205,165 persons boarded Greyhound busses in Flagstaff with an average departure rate of 28 . 0 passengers per bus.
The Arizona Trail is a hiking, mountain bike, equestrian path being constructed across the State of Arizona in a north-south direction. The Flagstaff urban leg of the Arizona Trail is planned to cross B-40 at Enterprise Road and tie into the City's McMillan Mesa Trail near Arrowhead Avenue. An at-grade crossing at the signalized intersection is planned.
Programmed Projects
There are two projects on B-40 in Flagstaff included in ADOT's 5-Year Highway Construction Program, FY 2000-04. The first project is to extend the right turn lane at Butler Avenue ($380,000) programmed for FY 2000. The second project is to construct a right turn lane and drainage at Fanning Drive ($647,000) programmed for FY 2001.
Land Use
The land between the West Flagstaff TI and Woodlands Village Boulevard is predominately forested with scattered residential/commercial areas along both sides of the roadway. Between Woodlands Village Boulevard and the railroad underpass on Milton Road, strip commercial fills both sides of the roadway. Commercial use continues along the north side of B-40 all the way to the East Flagstaff TI. The approximate distance of 60 feet between the tracks and the roadway prevents development of the south side of B-40.
The land is predominately vacant with scattered residences along the I-40 Frontage Road.
The National Register of Historic Places list 20 sites on or near B-40 in Flagstaff. These sites are listed in Table 5-2.
Environmental Issues
Information on LUST, Solid Waste Facilities, and HAZMAT incidents were obtained from ADEQ.
Leaking Underground Storage Sites
The 60 LUST sites located along B-40 in Flagstaff are listed in Table 5-3.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Assessment - Chapter 5 - Page 12 TABLE 5-2. FLAGSTAFF HISTORIC SITES
Site Name Location Arizona Lumber and Timber Company Office 1 Riordan Rd. Bank Hotel Santa Fe and Leroux St. Brannen--Devine House 209 E. Cottage C & M Garage 204 S. Milton Rd. Campbell, H. E., House 215 Leroux Clark, J. M., House 503 N. Humphreys St. Eldredge, Dean, Museum 3404 E. US 6~ First Baptist Church 23 S. Beaver St. Flagstaff Armory 503 S. Milton Flagstaff Townsite Historic Residential District Roughly bounded by Cherry Humphreys and Sitgreaves Sts., Railroad Ave. and Toltec and Aztec Sts. House at 310 South Beaver 310 S. Beaver Koch, I. B., House 7 Riordan Rd. La Cuidad de Mexico Grocery , 217 S. San Francisco La Iglesia Metodista Mexicana, El Divino 319 S. San Francisco St. Redentor Railroad Addition Historic District . Roughly bounded by Santa Fe : .RR tracks, Agassiz and Beaver Sts., Birch and Aspen Aves. . Railroad Addition Historic District Roughly bounded by Santa Fe RR (Boundary Increase) tracks, San Francisco St., alley S of Phoenix Ave., and Beaver St. Railroad Addition Historic District . 122 BUS 66 . (Boundary Increase) Riordan Estate 2 Kinlichi Knoll _AZ, Coconino, Weatherford Hotel 123 N. Leroux St. Wilson, Charles, Jr., House 100 Wilson Dr.
Solid Waste Facilities
A solid waste facility was previously located just south of B-40 between Industrial Drive and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad tracks in Flagstaff, but is now closed. The facility was operated by B.B. Bonner Construction.
Hazardous Materials Incidents
Business 40 in Flagstaff has not had a reported HAZMAT incident during the past ten years.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Assessment - Chapter 5 - Page 13 TABLE 5-3. LUST SITES
Leaking Facility Name Facility Address LUST No. 1936.01 AAMCO TRANSMISSION SHOP 2710 E Santa Fe Ave 4665.01 ANTCO PROPERTY/FLAGSTAFF FUELS 4200 E Hwy 66 4665.02 ANTCO PROPERTY/FLAGSTAFF FUELS 4200 E Hwy .66 . 4665.03 ANTCO PROPERTY/FLAGSTAFF FUELS 4200 E Hwy 66 2046.01 APPOLO RAD IA TOR & SERVICE 2202 E Santa Fe Ave 2118.01 ARIZONA SUPPLY CO (NAPA) 122 E Santa Fe Ave 1153.01 ASPEN MOTORS 800 W Hwy 66 2232.01 BARBARA NICHOLSON 624 E Santa Fe Ave 0758.01 BIG DO.N'S SERVICE STATION · 102 W "Santa . Fe Ave @ Beaver St 1523.01 BILL LUKE, CHRYSLER, PLYMOUTH 350 N Switzer Canyon 3593.01 CHEVRON 96401 2502 E Santa Fe 4571.01 CITY OF FLAG/SANTA FE/SHELL OIL 521 E Rte 66/501 E Santa Fe 4463.01 DAVE CLARK CHEVRON 1600 E Santa Fe 4463.02 DAVE CLARK CHEVRON 1600 E Santa Fe 4463.03 DAVE CLARK CHEVRON 1600 E Santa Fe 4463.04 DAVE CLARK CHEVRON 1600 E Santa Fe 4463.05 DAVE CLARK CHEVRON 1600 E Santa Fe 4292.01 EASY MART EAST TECACO 3124 E Rte 66 4292.02 , EASY MART EAST TECACO 3124 E Rte 66 4292.03 EASY MART EAST TECACO 3124 E Rte 66 4292.04 EASY MART EAST TECACO 3124 E Rte 66- 4292.05 EASY MART EAST TECACO 31 24 E Rte 66 0202.0i ECONOMY GAS STATION 301 S'Milton 1913.01 EXXON Enterprise & Santa Fe 1294.01 FLAG CAR WASH 915 S Milton 2408.01 FOUR WINDS TRADERS INC 118 W Rte 66 2408.02 FOUR WINDS TRADERS INC 118 W Rte 66 0164.01 GASAMAT 804 1265 S Milton Rd 3098.01 GASAMAT804 1265 S. Milton Rd 0251.01 GIANT #606 1205 S Milton Rd .- 3780.01 · JPA CARPETEERS 202 E Rte 66- - 2608.01 LEON'S MOBIL 1050 S Milton Rd 2119.01 MACKEY PROPERTY/FORMER WEBER OIL. 24 W Santa Fe - .. 1955.01 PINE SPRINGS TRUCK STOP/WOODY MT 2600 W US Hwy 66 1955.02 PiNE SPRINGS.TRUCK STOP/WOODY Mt 2600 W US Hwy 66 1955.03 PINE SPRINGS TRUCK STOP/WOODY MT 2600 W US Hwy 66 __ J ?55.04 - PINE SPRl!'!GS TRUCK-STOP/WOODY MT .. - 26.00 W ~S Hwy 66. 1955.05 PINE SPRINGS TRUCK STOP/WOODY MT 2600 W US Hwy 66 - . 19?5.06 . . ~!NE SPRINGS TRUCK STOI?!WOODY MT_- -_2600 W US Hwy 66 1955.07 PINE SPRINGS TRUCK STOP/WOODY MT 2600 W US Hwy 66 · 1955.08 PINE SPRINGS TRUCK STOP/WOODY MT · . -2600 W {!S Hwy 66_ 0458.01 SANTA FE AUTOS INC 805 W Hwy 66 2601.01 · _TANG, ENDERS & COOA~/TOYS "R" US . 4308·E Hwy 66 2783.01 TOTAL RENTAL CENTER 1200 E Rte 66
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Assessment - Chapter 5 - Page 14 TABLE 5-3. LUST SITES (continued)
Leaking Facility Name Facility Address LUST No. 0252.01 TRAILWAYS INC 114 W Santa Fe 0418.01 TREJO BULK PLANT 619 E Santa Fe 1426.01 TREJO BULK PLANT 619 E Santa Fe 4421.01 UNIVERSITY EXXON (CAMPUS EXXON) 1020 S Milton 4421.02 UNIVERSITY EXXON (CAMPUS: EX~ON) 1020 S Milton 4421.03 UNIVERSITY EXXON (CAMPUS EXXON) 1020 S Milton 4421.04 UNIVERSITY __!<:XXON (CAMPUS EXXON) 1020 S Milton 4421.05 UNIVERSITY EXXON (CAMPUS EXXON) 1020 S Milton 4421.06 UNIVERSITY EXXON (CAMPUS EXXON) 1020 S Milton 4421.07 UNIVERSITY EXXON (CAMPUS EXXON) 1020 S Milton 4421.08 UNIVERSITY EXXON (CAMPUS mcxo_N) 1020 S Milton 3660.01 US NAVAL OBSERVATORY FLAGSTAFF Hwy 66 W
~ · 4347.01 WATSON CHEVRON 6 S Milton Rd 4347.02 WATSON CHEVRON 6 S Milton Rd 4347.03 WATSON CHEVRON 6 S Milton Rd 0865.01 WEST HWY 66 FACILITY 970 W Hwy 66
ISSUES AND CONCERNS
Currently three major studies are underway in the Flagstaff area. In addition to the 1-40 Corridor Profile Study, ADOT also has a Phoenix-Flagstaff-Page Corridor Profile Study and the FMPO is just beginning the Greater Flagstaff Area Regional Land Use and Transportation Planning Study. In addition, NAU is planning to update the campus Master Plan.
On April 16, 1998, ADOT and consultant staff met with City of Flagstaff and FMPO staff to inform them of the 1-40 study, the study schedule, and to identify issues and concerns related to the business route and 1-40 Frontage Road in Flagstaff. In attendance were:
Dave Wilcox City Manager of Flagstaff Ron Spinar City Engineer of Flagstaff Gerry Craig City of Flagstaff Traffic Engineer Dave Wessel Flagstaff MPO Transportation Planner Don Dorman ADOT -Flagstaff District Engineer John Harper ADOT-Flagstaff District Regional Traffic Engineer Jim Confer ADOT-Flagstaff District Troy Suverkrup ADOT-Flagstaff District Jack Shambaugh ADOT - Transportation Planning Mike Connors Lima & Associates
Both 1-40 and B-40 issues were raised at the meeting. Summaries of the issues discussed (organized by Business Route, 1-40 Construction, 1-40 Operations and Maintenance, and City of Flagstaff Roadway Improvement issues) follow:
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Assessment - Chapter 5 - Page 15 Business Route Issues
• The City understands the logic of ADOT wanting to abandon the business route, but has neither the money to maintain additional streets nor the ability to raise additional funds.
• The City estimates that it would cost $25 million over the next 30 years to operate and maintain the business route.
• The business route issue boils down to a resource issue. All levels of government need to work together to increase the level of funding for transportation. ADOT and local governments along the I-40 corridor should partner to obtain additional revenues for all I-40 mainline and business route improvements. A statewide effort is preferable.
• ADOT would like to concentrate on rural highways and not deal with urban street issues such as access management, parking, and parade permits. They would like to tumback both B-40 and the I-40 Frontage Road to the City.
• A discussion of a partial exchange of responsibilities, e.g., the City takes over daily operations and maintenance and the State retains responsibility for major pavement rehabilitation every ten years, is acceptable to both the City and ADOT, if additional resources are made available through state-wide vehicle fees and taxes.
• The City does not have a traffic signal maintenance crew. With abandonment, staff would need to be increased to maintain the signals.
• The location of the railroad tracks adjacent to B-40 creates serious traffic problems within the city. Because of the random arrival pattern of the trains and the resultant disruption in traffic signal operations, maintaining signal progression is impossible. In addition, traffic wanting to cross the tracks interrupts other traffic by queuing into other traffic lanes. Both railroad relocation and the addition of grade separated crossings need to be assessed. It has been suggested that the railroad tracks could be relocated to interstate right-of-way. However, railroad geometric design criteria for vertical and horizontal curvature is stricter than highway design criteria and are not compatible with existing I-40 geometrics. Therefore, design criteria would not allow tracks to be constructed in the median. In addition, access into Interstate right-of-way for rail maintenance personnel would be a problem that would seem to preclude this option.
• ADOT is currently preparing a study of the Route 66/Enterprise road intersection.
• The most serious traffic congestion and safety problem in Flagstaff is in the Milton Road underpass and Route 66/Humphreys Street (US 180) intersection area. Grand Canyon destined traffic from 1-40 and 1-17 must tum left from Route 66 to Humphreys Street at the intersection.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Assessment - Chapter 5 - Page 16 • Beaver and San Francisco Streets are being converted to two-way travel south of Route 66 . The City wants to add right turn lanes on Route 66 to improve access to these streets.
• An access management policy for B-40 through Flagstaff would be desirable.
• Noise is becoming a problem on B-40 and noise attenuation measures should be considered in any future projects. The visual impacts of any noise attenuation efforts should also be considered.
• Improvements to capacity, sidewalks, curb, and gutter are needed between Woodlands Village Boulevard and Milton Road.
• Ponding issues include East Route 66, Milton Road, and US 89. A drainage evaluation is needed for this area.
1-40 Mainline Construction Issues
• Through Flagstaff, there is a need for 1-40 to be widened to a six-lane section.
• Truck traffic on 1-40 is particularly heavy on Sunday afternoons as trucks head for the Los Angeles market, driven by the "just-in-time" delivery strategy.
• On Friday, April 10, the City appeared before the State Transportation Board and requested that a new traffic interchange be constructed at Lone Tree Road. This interchange would provide alternative access to NAU and to a community college that has recently been approved in a bond election on the south side of 1-40 near Lone Tree Road. A concept pushing the road to the east in order to fit the interchange in was considered in the planning phase of the I-17 /1-40 reconstruction. NAU is about to undertake a study to update its Master Plan, a study that will include an assessment of this interchange.
• The East Flagstaff TI needs upgrading. SR 89 north traffic and access to the Ralston Purina plant and other truck traffic destinations provided on Motel Drive are the driving issues for this need. Motel Drive is too close to the ramp intersection to allow a signal; thus, traffic back-ups on Motel Drive are considerable. ADOT is currently preparing a Project Assessment for this interchange.
• With growth occurring on the west side of Flagstaff, either the West Flagstaff TI will need to be upgraded or an alternative route connection to 1-17 will be needed.
• Noise is becoming a problem on 1-40 and noise attenuation measures should be considered in any future projects. The visual impacts of any noise attenuation efforts should also be considered.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Assessment - Chapter 5 - Page 17 1-40 Mainline Maintenance and Operations Issues
• The City of Flagstaff is dependent upon daily deliveries of food, fuel , and other supplies into the City. Snow closures on both I-40 and I-17 stop truck traffic and, thus, the deliveries. Interstate closure also creates local traffic problems as trucks, unable to continue on the Interstate, come into Flagstaff and park along City streets.
• Snow closures also create southwest regional problems in the United States by causing truckers to reroute to alternate, more circuitous routes such as I-15 through Utah or I-10 through southern Arizona. The impact of these closures is felt from Oklahoma City to the West Coast due to "just-in-time" shipping requirements.
• The Flagstaff District of ADOT has 42 snowplows, nine of which are assigned to the 85-mile stretch of I-40 between mileposts 145 and 230. Thus, each snowplow has to clear nearly 63 lane-miles (including the shoulders) of I-40.
• The Arizona Trail will need a permit to cross I-40 right-of-way. Once the permit is issued, this trail will become a 4(f) issue that ADOT will have to deal with whenever federal funds are used for a project in the vicinity.
• There are problems of pedestrians jumping the right-of-way fence and crossing I-40 west of the I-17 /I-40 TI and west of the I-40/Country Club TI.
City of Flagstaff Roadway Improvement Issues
• The City is looking at extending JW Powell Road from near the airport south of I- 40 to 4th Street and building the 4th Street overpass with connections to east Route 66. At issue is the width of the 4th Street/I-40 overpass. Is it wide enough to accommodate the anticipated growth in traffic volumes on 4th Street?
• The Flagstaff District of ADOT has mentioned an I-40 to SR 89 connection on the eastside of town. The new road would connect to I-40 near the Walnut Canyon or Cosnino interchanges.
• An I-40 to US 180 north-south connection on the westside of Flagstaff may be needed to improve access to the Grand Canyon.
CONSULTANT STATEMENT
Business 40 through Flagstaff carries the highest traffic volumes of any business route in the I-40 corridor. To free staff and funding for maintenance and construction projects in the rural areas of the District, ADOT would like to abandon B-40 and the I-40 Frontage Road to the Walnut Canyon TI and turn both back to the City of Flagstaff. They would
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Assessment - Chapter 5 - Page 18 also like to turnback the urban portions of SR 89A (Milton Road) and US 180 (Humphreys Street) to the City.
The City fully understands ADOT's position, and in fact would benefit from ADOT having more funds to commit to Interstate snow removal in the District. However, as with all cities and counties, Flagstaff has a funding problem of its own and is not in a position to maintain additional streets. Nor is the City in a position to raise ·additional funds .
The City has serious traffic congestion problems caused by the growing number of trains that pass through the City and the need for State cooperation to help solve them. They support the widening of I-40 to six lanes through the City, to have an additional TI at Lone Tree Road, and to improve both the East and West Flagstaff Tis. The City has also suggested that a Coalition consisting of the cities and counties be formed to attempt to increase funding for transportation throughout the state.
Based on the above reasons it would appear that there is considerable ground for the City and the State to reach a mutually beneficial tumback agreement. Improvements that could be included in the agreement might include mutually beneficial improvements to I-40, e.g., widening and the TI improvements, and assistance in identifying and financing needed local improvements.
The City and the District have established a good working relationship from which to negotiate an agreement. However, funding will remain a problem. Therefore, a high priority should be the establishment of the city-suggested I-40 Financing Coalition.
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF AND ADOT DISTRICT STATEMENTS
City of Flagstaff and ADOT District comments have been incorporated into the document.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Assessment - Chapter 5 - Page 19 6. WINSLOW BUSINESS ROUTE
INVENTORY
Route Description
Interstate access to B-40 in Winslow is from Exit 252, the West TI, and Exit 255, the East Winslow TI. As shown in Figure 6-1, B-40 actually begins 1.4 miles west of the West Winslow TI just across the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad tracks. Proceeding east through Winslow, the roadway splits into a one-way pair with eastbound B-40 following 2nd Street and westbound B-40 following 3rd Street. Approximately 3 miles to the east, B-40 turns north at Transcon Lane and connects with 1-40 at the East Winslow TI, Exit 255 . The total length of B-40 is approximately 5.0 miles, all within the City Limits of Winslow.
Business 40 overlaps SR 87 from Williamson Avenue to Transcon Lane. SR 87 continues east from Transcon Lane.
Roadway Data
Roadway Geometry
Business 40 follows generally flat terrain. It starts just south of the railroad track overpass as a 40-foot roadway with two 12-foot travel lanes and 8-foot shoulders. About a quarter mile west of the West Winslow TI connection, B-40 becomes a four-lane divided highway with a raised median. The connection to the West Winslow TI is 40 feet wide with 12-foot travel lanes and 8-foot shoulders, curb, gutter, paved sidewalks, and street lighting. There are left-tum lanes at all cross-streets.
Eastbound B-40, 2nd Street, is a 40-foot wide roadway with two 12-foot travel lanes and 8- foot paved, parallel parking on both sides of the street to Williamson A venue. There is curb, gutter, street lighting, and paved sidewalks along 2nd Street. East of Williamson Avenue, 2nd Street widens to 60 feet with four travel lanes and parking for 0.2 mile. The roadway then narrows to three travel lanes for another 0.2 mile and then to two 12-foot travel lanes with 8 to 10 feet paved shoulders. A half-mile to the east of Williamson Avenue, the paved sidewalks, curb, gutter, and street lighting end.
The connection between B-40 and the East Winslow TI is a four-lane divided roadway with 8-foot outside shoulders and 4-foot inside shoulders.
Westbound B-40, 3rd Street, is 40-feet wide with two 12-foot travel lanes and parallel parking allowed on both sides of the street. The roadway section includes sidewalks, curb, gutter, and lighting.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 6 - Page I FIGURE 6-1 B-40 LOCATION, WINSLOW
N A
------~
I L------
North Rd
Winslow Municipal Airpon ,------' I ~~--,-----+-- I I I
I /\,/ B-40 Route I I I I A/' 1-40 I I I I /\/ Other Streets I I I N Burlington Northern I L-••••••••-••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••--•••••-••- Santa Fe Railroad ,, I / '"' Urban Boundary • Traffic Signal
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 6 - Page 2 Traffic Control
There are two traffic signals on B-40 in Winslow: one at the Williamson Avenue/2nd Street intersection and the second at the Williamson A venue/3rd Street intersection. Other than stop signs to halt traffic coming from both the West and East Winslow Tls at B-40, traffic is unimpeded for the rest of B-40. All intersecting side streets are stop sign controlled.
The speed limit on B-40 is 35 mph at both ends of the route with about a mile of 25 mph speed limits through town on 2nd and 3rd Streets. The eastbound speed limit is increased to 45 mph as traffic heads east on SR 87, near the tum-off to the East Winslow TI.
Traffic Volumes
According to ADOT traffic data, traffic on B-40 reached a high of 21,000 vpd in 1978 while 1-40 was under construction. With the completion of construction on 1-40, traffic volumes dropped to 12,600 vpd. Since 1980, traffic volumes have remained fairly constant at between 10,000 and 12,000 vpd (volumes are a sum of traffic on the one-way pair of 2nd and 3rd Streets). Between the West Winslow TI and SR 87 North, volumes have been between 2,000 and 3,000 vpd on the connection to the East Winslow TI. Business 40 through Winslow operates at Level of Service A. Historical traffic volumes are presented in Table 6-1.
TABLE 6-1. B-40 TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Year East of West of Connection to Williamson Ave Williamson Ave. East Winslow TI 1975 10,000 10,000 9,700 1980 10,500 8,400 900 1985 6,100 5,900 2,100 1990 5,700 6,100 2,200 1995 5,100 5,700 2,900
The 1992 Winslow Area Transportation Study includes a forecast of 20,400 for B-40 in the Year 2011. With continued growth traffic volumes could increase to as high as 25,000 in the Year 2020. At this volume, the level of service would decrease to the B/C range.
Accident Data
According to the ADOT Accident Records System, 136 accidents were reported on B-40 in Winslow between September 1, 1992, and June 30, 1996. These are summarized in Table 6-2. No fatalities and 32 injuries (in 27 injury accidents) were reported. The average
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 6 - Page 3 TABLE 6-2. SUMMARY OF ACCIDENTS ON B-40 (September 1, 1992 - June 30, 1996)
Milepost Number of Accidents Total Number of Million Accidents per PDO* Injury Fatal Total Injuries Fatalities VMT** Million VMT 252 10 4 0 14 6 0 8.6 1.6 253*** 99 23 0 122 26 0 21.5 5.7 Total 109 27 0 136 32 0
Source: ADOT Traffic Engineering Group *PDO = Property Damage Only **VMT = Vehicle Miles of Travel *** Accidents reported for milepost 253 is for a 2.5 mile section of B-40 that includes the one-way pair of 2nd and 3rd Streets
accident rate for B-40 through Winslow is 2.25 accidents per million vehicle-miles of travel.
The segment beginning at milepost 253, with 122 accidents and 5.7 accidents per million vehicle-miles of travel, ranks as the second highest segment on B-40 in terms of the accident rate. This segment includes both 2nd Street and 3rd Street, a one-way pair. Thirty four of the accidents occurred on 2nd Street, 69 on 3rd Street, and 19 were recorded as cross-street accidents with B-40 with no indication as to whether they occurred on 2nd or 3rd Streets. A matrix showing the numbers of accidents by type and street is provided in Table 6-3. The accident data should be studied in more detail before any improvements are made in this location.
TABLE 6-3. B-40 MP 253 ACCIDENTS
2nd Street Yd Street Cross-Street Multi-Vehicle Angle 7 25 3 Left Tum 1 2 4 Rear End 4 8 3 Sideswipe (Opposite) 2 Sideswipe (Same) 8 20 2 Backing 3 3 Other 1 Single Vehicle Parked Vehicle 10 4 Fixed Object 1 1 1 Curb 1 Pedalcyclist 1 2 1 Pedestrian 1 Total 34 69 19
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 6 - Page 4 Pavement and Structures Condition
Based on data in the Arizona Pavement Management System, a half-mile of B-40 pavement in Winslow is in fair condition and the rest is in fair to poor condition.
There are five structures listed in the January 1997 Arizona State Highway System Bridge Record for B-40 in Winslow. All are rated as being in good condition (Table 6-4). These do not include the bridges associated with the 1-40 traffic interchanges.
TABLE 6-4. BRIDGE SUFFICIENCY RATING
Structure Name Milepost Sufficiency Rating lcehouse Wash RCB WB 253.31 96.7 Icehouse Wash RCBC EB 253.31 96.7 Ruby Wash RCBC EB 254.28 96.7 Ruby Wash RCBC WB 254.28 96.7 RCB EB-WB 255.19 84.8
Maintenance Costs
According to records provided by the Holbrook District, there have been no maintenance expenses during the three-year period between July 1, 1995 and June 30, 1998 in Winslow
Railroad Crossings
The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad tracks are south of B-40 and run parallel to the B-40. Business 40 crosses the tracks with an overpass east of town. The only other crossing in Winslow is via a narrow underpass crossing on Williamson A venue (SR 87) one block south of the eastbound B-40 (2nd Street). The underpass is 20 to 22 feet wide with a 14'-9" clearance. The downgrade to the underpass starts at 2nd Street.
Rail Issues Survey
In 1997, the Western Governor's Association Task Force on Transportation Futures sponsored a survey concerning rail issues in communities along the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad in Arizona and other states. The City of Winslow participated in this survey. A summary of the City's response follows:
• The City feels that it has a good railroad yard facility with some switching activity. There is also an intermodal facility, the Amtrak depot, in Winslow.
• The railroad does provide some service to local industry.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 6 - Page 5 • Rail operations have diminished in the Winslow yards but have increased on the mainline.
• Rail service is rated very important to Winslow for the employment of local residents, the generation of tax revenue, the attraction of new business, as a customer of local businesses, and for the provision of freight service. Rail service is also important to the community as local businesses depend upon the service.
• The railroad does not cause any problems in Winslow; therefore the City does not consider any contributing factors as important and does not identify any actions that should be taken.
• The City states "Our community accepts the railroad activity as a part of our community" and does not identify any actions that need to be taken.
• They do suggest that educating the public on plans to deal with hazardous material spills would be beneficial.
Intermodal Facilities
An Amtrak station is located on 2nd Street at North Snider Drive in Winslow. The Winslow Municipal Airport is located south of the railroad tracks. Access is via Airport Access Road off SR 87.
Since 1990, Amtrak passenger boardings in Winslow have ranged from 2,325 in 1996 to 3,319 in 1995 with 2,550 boardings in 1997.
A rail freight yard consisting of a 150-foot team track and loading dock is located east of the Amtrak depot. Loading data is not available, however, it is estimated that twenty freight cars are loaded at this yard per year.
Programmed Projects
Two projects on B-40 in Winslow are included in ADOT's 5-Year Highway Construction Program, FY 2000-04. Both deal with improvements to the rest area located at the east end of town. Twenty thousand dollars is programmed for the design of a sewer connection in FY 2000 and $75,000 is programmed for its construction in FY 2000.
Land Use
Food, gasoline, and lodging are provided along the roads connecting the West and East Winslow Tls to B-40. Through town, there is a mixture of commercial, residential, and light industrial land uses.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 6 - Page 6 Potential 4(1) Sites
No parks or schools are located along B-40 through Winslow.
The National Register of Historic Places lists three sites that are located on or near B-40 in Winslow.
• Winslow Commercial Historic District bounded by Third Street, Williamson Avenue, First Street and Warren Avenue
• Winslow Underpass on SR 87 under Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railroad
• La Posada Hotel
Environmental Issues
Information on LUST, Solid Waste Facilities, and HAZMAT incidents were obtained from ADEQ.
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Thirty-two LUST sites are along or near B-40 in Winslow. These are listed in Table 6-5.
Solid Waste Facilities
No solid waste facilities are located near B-40 in Winslow.
Hazardous Material Incidents
No reported HAZMAT incidents have been recorded on or near B-40 in Winslow.
CONSULTANT STATEMENT
The City of Winslow and the ADOT Holbrook District Engineer are currently negotiating a tumback of B-40 in Winslow to the City.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 6 - Page 7 TABLE 6-5. LUST SITES
Number of Facility Name Facility Location LUST Sites Burlington Northern & Santa Fe (formerly 301 East 2nd Street 1 Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe) Circle K 317 North Williamson 1 Circle K 524 West 3rd St 2 City of Winslow Right of Way/ ADOT West Old Highway 66 1 nd City of Winslow Police Department 115 East 2 . 3 Coca Cola of Northern Arizona 1941 West 2nd Street· 5 Hallum Inc 500 West 3rd Street 1 L & M Gas & Oil Company Hwy 66 & West 2nd Street 3 Mobil 18-NWG 2700 West Highway 66 1 . Navajo County Winslow Complex 621 East 3rd Street 1 Public Works Dept-Street Division · 317 Colorado 3. Route 66 Chevron 1979 West Hwy 66 2 Sunwest Express/Ice.House 1805 West 2nd Street 1· Texaco Certified Tire 1927 West Hwy 66 1 Whiting Bros } 402 East 2nd Street 1 Winslow Main Co 127551 300 Kinsley 1 Winslow Mini Mart 1900 ½ West Hwy 66 - 1 Winslow Service Center . 622 East 3rd Street 1 . - Winslow Shell . . . , 1-40 & Hipkoe Exit 252 2
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 6 - Page 8 7. JOSEPH CITY BUSINESS ROUTE
INVENTORY
Route Description
The community of Joseph City is located between Winslow and Holbrook at about milepost 275 on 1-40. According to a 1990 Census population there are 1,350 persons residing in the City. The latest population projections from the Arizona Department of Economic Security do not include the community; therefore, it is assumed that little, if any, growth will occur.
Business 40 in Joseph City is located between the West Joseph City TI at 1-40 milepost 274.6 and the East Joseph City TI at 1-40 milepost 277.3. As shown in Figure 7-1, B-40 follows Main Street through Joseph City. The total length of B-40 is 2. 8 miles. If the roadway is abandoned by ADOT, Navajo County will be the receiving jurisdiction.
Going west to east, B-40 starts at the West Joseph City TI, Exit 274, and travels north approximately 0.2 miles to a tee intersection with Main Street. Business 40 continues east along Main Street after a right turn and parallels 1-40 for approximately 2.4 miles. The roadway then turns south and connects to 1-40 at the East Joseph City TI, Exit 277. Business 40 follows generally flat terrain.
Roadway Data
Roadway Geometry
Between the West Joseph City TI and McLaws A venue, the roadway is 34 feet wide with two 12-foot travel lanes and 5-foot paved shoulders on both sides. The highway widens to a four-lane undivided highway at McLaws Avenue with 12-foot travel lanes, curb, and gutter. East of Robertson Avenue, the roadway narrows to two 12-foot lanes with 5-foot shoulders to the East Joseph City TI. Paved sidewalks, curb, gutter, and street lighting are present on both sides of B-40 through the four-lane section. Currently the facility is maintained by ADOT.
Traffic Control
With the exception of a stop sign on B-40 at Main Street north of the West Joseph City TI, travel on B-40 is unimpeded as there are no other stop conditions. All streets intersecting B-40 are stop sign controlled. There are no traffic signals along B-40. The speed limit between the West Joseph TI and the four-lane section is 45 mph. The speed limit drops to 35 mph along the four-lane section, increases to 45 mph at the resumption of the two-lane section, and is reduced to 35 mph through the curve west of the East Joseph City TI. All 1- 40 off-ramp terminals at both interchanges are stop sign controlled.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Assessment - Chapter 7 - Page 1 FIGURE 7-1 B-40 LOCATION, JOSEPH CITY
' to N ~ '::,; ~ ·' "'"::,; , g · :,;- ,I~ ... ·> 1::d (;; I< A : c. ::,0 ·" c?. > I .,"= 4th North St. ~1 a:: ~ i ...... I .3.rd North SL >< i I I i " ;.. 2ncl North St .. ~ i. . . 1" · i Main:St ! !
B-40 Route 1-40 % Other Streets Burlington Northern N Santa Fe Railroad
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 7 - Page 2 Traffic Volumes
ADOT traffic data shows 900 vpd in 1990. With little population growth anticipated, future volumes will probably remain in this 1,000 vpd range. The roadway now operates and will continue to operate at Level of Service A.
Accident Data
No accidents were reported on B-40 in Joseph City between September 1, 1992, and June 30, 1996.
Pavement and Structures Condition
Based on data in the Arizona Pavement Management System, the pavement near the East Joseph City TI is in good condition and the pavement near the West Joseph City TI is in fair condition. The pavement through the town is rated in fair to poor condition.
The only structure listed in the January 1997 Arizona State Highway System Bridge Record on B-40, other than the bridges associated with the 1-40 traffic interchange, is the St. Joseph Wash Bridge located just west of McLaws Avenue at milepost 275.42. The bridge, which was built in 1996, has a nearly perfect sufficiency rating of 99.9 percent.
Maintenance Costs
Maintenance costs for the Joseph City business route totaled $72,373 for the three-year period ending June 30, 1998. This is an average of $24,124 per year or $8,616 per mile per year for the 2.8-mile business route.
Railroad Crossings
The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad tracks are located south of 1-40. South Richards Avenue leads to a crossing of the tracks. There are no traffic issues associated with the railroad crossing.
Intermodal Facilities
No intermodal facilities are located on or near B-40 in Joseph City.
Programmed Projects
ADOT's 5-Year Highway Construction Program, FY 2000-04 does not include any projects programmed for B-40 in Joseph City.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 7 - Page 3 Land Use
The land between the West Joseph City traffic interchange and B-40 is vacant. South of B- 40 between the Main Street junction with B-40 and McLaws Avenue, the land use is agricultural. In this section of B-40 there are scattered residences north of the road. Through the four-lane section, the land on both sides of the road is primarily residential with some commercial uses. East of Robertson Avenue, there is some scattered residential, but the land is primarily vacant. The Old Fort Historic Monument is located on the north side of the roadway in this section of the road.
A restaurant and gas station near the East Joseph City TI are the only traveler services located on the Joseph City B-40 route.
Potential 4(1) Sites
No parks or schools are located on or near B-40 in Joseph City.
No sites along B-40 in Joseph City are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. There is an "Old Fort Historic Monument" located on the north side of B-40 near the east end of town.
Environmental Issues
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Three LUST facilities are listed by ADEQ for Joseph City:
• The Arizona Public Service Cholla Power Plant located on old US 66 • The Giant Four Comers/Thriftway 231 located at 4526 Main Street • The Jack Rabbit Trading Post located at 3386 Main Street
The latter two are located on B-40 in Joseph City.
Solid Waste Facilities
ADEQ lists the Navajo County - Joseph City facility , located 1.5 miles south and east of B-40 on Richard Avenue, as a closed solid waste facility.
Hazardous Material Incidents
ADEQ indicates no reported hazardous materials incidents on B-40 in Joseph City during the last ten years.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 7 - Page 4 ISSUES AND CONCERNS
On April 14, 1998, ADOT and consultant staff met Navajo County staff to inform the County of the I-40 study, the study schedule, and to identify issues and concerns related to the business route in Joseph City. The business routes in Joseph City would transfer to Navajo County if ADOT abandoned it. In attendance were:
Eddie Koury Navajo County Manager Ron Ayers Navajo County Contract Administration David Ashton Navajo County Assistant County Engineer Jeff Swan ADOT Holbrook District Engineer Jack Shambaugh ADOT - Transportation Planning Mike Connors Lima & Associates
The following I-40 and B-40 issues were raised at the meeting:
Business Route Issues
• Navajo County has a very tight maintenance budget and is willing to discuss trades or cash settlements, but is not interested in simply adding miles to its system. • Both maintenance costs and economic benefits to the community are important. • It is legal to sign routes as business routes, but through inter-governmental agreements have the County be responsible for maintenance. • ADOT needs to maintain control within interstate right-of-way of all roads crossing the Interstate. • Navajo County does not now have any traffic signals or street lighting. If they acquired either of these traffic engineering elements through a trade, staff expertise to maintain them would have to be added - at additional expense to the County. • Access across State land to maintain channels or drainage structures associated with business routes or other turned back State highways is of concern to the County. • dvantages of a turnback to the County: (1) if development is occurring and they can work with the developer to plan the roads and access, and (2) if miles are traded to establish more efficient maintenance areas.
1-40 Mainline Issues
• I-40 needs reconstruction between Holbrook and New Mexico, the sub-base is gone in many areas. Pavement rehab projects are designed for ten years. I-40 rehab projects are not lasting that long.
• Pavement is in bad condition in many areas between Flagstaff and Holbrook.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 7 - Page 5 • The volume of truck traffic, especially on Sunday afternoons heading toward Los Angeles, is a major concern.
• There is a truck accident problem on an "S" curve between Joseph City and Holbrook.
• Reconstruction of the Holbrook TI is starting this summer. I-40 traffic will be reduced to one lane in each direction.
• A northeast Arizona, 320-acre landfill is located north of Joseph City. Access is via the West Joseph City TI and Porter Avenue. The County is planning a new landfill access road west of Joseph City. The landfill is privately owned by USA Waste.
• There is an intermodal transfer site located south of the Adamana TI. Propane is brought in by rail, stored in old salt caverns, and trucked out. Access is via a State road.
CONSULTANT STATEMENT
Navajo County, like all other transportation agencies, operates on .a tight maintenance budget. Therefore, they are willing to discuss trades, but are not interested in a straight turnback.
During the ADOT/Navajo County meeting, other roadways that might make sense for trading were mentioned. As discussion on turnbacks continue, it would be beneficial to all parties involved for the State to put all highways in Navajo County on the table for discussion that they think are more appropriately County roads. The County, through the White Mountain Transportation Study, will identify a number of new and existing roadways that need construction and may meet criteria for inclusion in the State Highway System. State participation in the location, design and/or construction, and possible acceptance into the State Highway System of these roadways in exchange for the abandoned roadways could then be discussed.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 7 - Page 6 I 8. HOLBROOK BUSINESS ROUTE
INVENTORY
Route Description
Business 40 in Holbrook is located between the West Holbrook TI at Exit 285 and the East Holbrook TI at Exit 289. As shown in Figure 8-1 , B-40 follows Hopi Drive and Navajo Boulevard through Holbrook, passing through the Holbrook TI, Exit 286, on the way. The total length of B-40 is 4.9 miles. The entire route is within the City Limits of Holbrook.
Roadway Data
Roadway Geometry
Business 40 follows generally flat terrain. Beginning at the West Holbrook TI, the roadway is 34 feet wide with two 12-foot travel lanes and 5-foot paved shoulders. One half-mile east of the TI, the highway widens to four 12-foot travel lanes with curb, gutter, and a 12-foot two-way left-tum lane. This 64-foot cross-section continues through the Holbrook TI. East of the Holbrook TI, the roadway narrows to a two-lane roadway with a 12-foot two-way left-tum lane and 2-foot shoulders. There is not sidewalk, curb, or gutter in this section. This cross-section continues for the rest of B-40 to just west of the East Holbrook TI.
Traffic Control
Travel on B-40 is unimpeded except for two traffic signals, one at the intersection of Hopi Drive and Navajo Boulevard, and the other at the north ramp intersection of the Holbrook TI. All other streets and interchange ramps intersecting B-40 are stop sign controlled.
South of the Holbrook TI, the speed limit is 35 mph. North of the Holbrook TI, the speed limit increases to 45 mph and then decreases to 35 mph at the West Holbrook TI.
Traffic Volumes
According to ADOT traffic data, traffic on B-40 in Holbrook has remained fairly constant since 1975 at between 8,000 and 10,000 vehicles per day. The level of service on the route is controlled by the traffic signals at the Hopi Drive/Navajo Boulevard and I-40 Ramp/Navajo boulevard intersections. However, based upon the volumes, it should be in a LOS A/B range. Traffic forecasts are not available for Holbrook.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 8 - Page 1 FIGURE 8-1 B-40 LOCATION, HOLBROOK
N A
East Holbrook TI
Holbrook Municipal Airport
/
H~rm~a. Dr__
, , , I ' I
West o · Holbrook TI «:;,.: -s " - - -Florida ~t__ . .. : . 00· . 0 Er_lfc_St _Buffalo St · -. j __ > ___ ···- . . . :.· .-,· . .... -·r!i;- i
Montano St
/\/ B-40 Route rv 1-40 , , , , Other Streets N Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad • Traffic Signal
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 8 - Page 2 Accident Data
According to the ADOT Accident Records System, 145 accidents were reported on B-40 between September 1, 1992, and June 30, 1996. The accidents resulted in two fatalities and sixty-two injuries, as summarized in Table 8-1. The average accident rate for B-40 through Holbrook is 3.53 accidents per million vehicle-miles of travel.
TABLE 8-1. SUMMARY OF ACCIDENTS ON B-40 (September 1, 1992 - June 30, 1996)
Number of Accidents Total Number of Accidents Million Milepost per PDO* Injury Fatal Total Injuries Fatalities VMT Million VMT 285 4 0 0 4 0 0 5.0 0.8 286 64 21 2 87 38 2 5.0 17.4 287 30 14 0 44 21 0 11.1 4.0 288 6 3 0 9 3 0 10.0 0.9 289 1 0 0 1 0 0 10.0 0.1 Total 105 38 2 145 62 2
Source: ADOT Traffic Engineering Group *PDO = Property Damage Only
The 87 accidents and the accident rate of 17. 4 at milepost 286 are the highest on any mile segment of B-40 in the State. A matrix showing the numbers of accidents by type and street is provided in Table 8-2. The accident data should be studied in more detail before any improvements are made in this location.
TABLE 8-2. B-40 MP 286 ACCIDENTS
Multi-Vehicle Number of Single Vehicle Number of Accidents Accidents Angle 19 Parked Vehicle 5 Left Tum 15 Curb 2 Rear End 21 Pedalcyclist 2 Sideswipe (Opposite) 1 Pedestrian 5 Sideswipe (Same) 6 Backing 3 Head On 1 Other 7
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 8 - Page 3 Pavement and Structures Condition
The pavement condition on B-40 in Holbrook is rated in good condition on the multi-lane section and in fair condition on the two-lane section.
Other than the interchange-related bridges, there are no structures on B-40 in Holbrook.
Maintenance Costs
Based upon data provided by the Holbrook District, ADOT has spent $78,254 on maintenance of the business route in Holbrook during the three-year period ending June 30, 1998. This is an average of $26,085 per year or $5,323 per mile per year for the 4.9- mile route.
Railroad Crossings
One railroad track crossing is in Holbrook, an at-grade crossing one block south of the Hopi Drive/Navajo Boulevard intersection. Navajo Boulevard, SR 77, is four lanes wide across the tracks. Since switching operations were modified to avoid blocking the crossing, rail-related traffic congestion has not been an issue in Holbro~k.
Intermodal Facilities
The Holbrook Municipal Airport is located north of B-40 near the East Holbrook TI. Access to the airport from B-40 is via Airport Road.
Though not technically an intermodal facility, the Apache Railroad interconnects with the BNSF Railroad in Holbrook. There are no other intermodal facilities located on B-40 in Holbrook.
Programmed Projects
ADOT's 5-Year Highway Construction Program, FY 2000-04 includes a $461,000, 1.5- mile pavement improvement project beginning at MP 284.9 on B-40 in Holbrook for FY 2000. Design for roadway improvements ($200,000) from West Holbrook TI to Navajo Blvd is programmed for FY 2002. Roadway from West Holbrook TI to Navajo Blvd is programmed for reconstruction and widening($2,000,000) in FY 2004. This project also includes drainage improvements.
Land Use
Between the West Holbrook TI and the Holbrook TI, the majority of the land is in commercial and light industrial use. Many of the commercial uses are food, gasoline, and
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 8 - Page 4 lodging services for travelers. North of the Holbrook TI, development is less concentrated but still mainly commercial in use.
Potential 4(/) Sites
No parks or schools are located on B-40 in Holbrook.
Five sites near B-40 in Holbrook are on the National Register of Historic Places. They are listed below.
• The Arizona Rancho at the junction of Tovar and Apache Streets in Holbrook • Holbrook Bridge on SR 77 over the Little Colorado River • County Courthouse in Holbrook • Sapp, Sidney House in Holbrook • South Central A venue Commercial Historic District in Holbrook
Environmental Issues
Information on LUST, Solid Waste Facilities, and HAZMAT incidents were obtained from ADEQ.
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Table 8-3 shows the 26 LUST sites on or near B-40 in Holbrook.
Solid Waste Facilities
Two municipal solid waste facilities are near the City of Holbrook. One is closed and is located one mile east of SR 77 on US 180. The other is open and is located approximately five miles south of I-40 on SR 77.
Hazardous Materials Incidents
ADEQ indicates no reported hazardous materials incidents on B-40 in Holbrook during the last ten years.
CONSULTANT STATEMENT
The City of Holbrook and the ADOT Holbrook District Engineer are currently negotiating a tumback of B-40 in Holbrook to the City.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 8 - Page 5 TABLE 8-3. LUST SITES
Number of Facility Name Location LUST Sites Capital Gas · 707 __West Hopi Drive , 1 Circle K 101 Mission Lane 3 Crabtree Auto Center/Earl's Tire 615 Navajo Blvd. 2 Farr's Downtown Shell 101 West Hopi Drive 1 Gas Mart . 2414 Navajo Blvd. 3 Hatch's Market 2310 Navajo Blvd '. 5 Hensley's Inc. 404 Navajo Blvd . 1 Holbrook Maintenance Camp 2407 E Navajo Blvd. 2 . Holbrook Pepsi-Cola 124 Apache Drive 1 Hopi Whiting Brothers 728 West Hopi Drive_ 1 Jack's Place · 614 South Apache Drive 1 Pacific Pride Fueling Terlllinal 108 North 12th Avenue 1 · Sun West Trading Post 909 West_Hopi 1 Sunwest Express 866 Navajo Blvd 1 Thompson's Muffler . ·· 404. West Hopi 1 Woody's Exxon 950 Navajo Blvd. 1
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 8 - Page 6 9. SUMMARY
The previous seven chapters of this report have presented information on the seven B-40 routes in the 1-40 corridor. The purpose of this chapter is first to present, on a general basis, possible courses of action that have been uncovered during discussions with ADOT and the local jurisdictions on how to deal with the business routes. This includes sections on business route issues, route transfer investment strategies, and the route transfer process. The final section of this chapter summarizes some of the technical data developed in the business route research in order to lay the groundwork for further discussions with ADOT and the local jurisdictions.
BUSINESS ROUTE ISSUES
A number of general issues which pertain to all business routes on 1-40, were discussed in the ADOT and jurisdictional meetings held during the preparation of this report. Since these are issues that are of concern to the State and local jurisdictions when discussing tumbacks, they are documented in this section. After further discussions with the State and local jurisdictions regarding the business routes on 1-40, the final chapter of this report will discuss these issues further.
Financial Concerns
In all of the study meetings that related to the business routes, financial concern was the major issue. ADOT would like to tumback the business routes to the appropriate local jurisdiction because of roadway function, tight budgets, and the need to program scarce resources on needed improvements on the State Highway System outside of urban areas. The cities and counties face equally tight budgets, and have no desire to absorb more roadways into their own systems.
From the discussions held with the local jurisdictions, it was generally agreed that:
• There is a shortage of funds for transportation improvements at all levels of government;
• Through partnering among all parties, efforts should be made to increase funding for all transportation agencies; and
• A fair and equitable resolution of business route jurisdiction should be sought.
Tourism
Tourism is an important element of the economic well being of all communities on 1-40. The designation of a business route to direct travelers into the communities is therefore considered very important. If any business routes are turned back to the communities,
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 9 - Page 1 consideration should be given to maintaining the business route signing so the tourism industry would not be affected.
Designated Turnback Funds
The State of Minnesota has established county and municipal turnback accounts within which a percentage of the highway user tax distribution is set aside to fund reconstruction of old highways that were replaced by interstates. Funds are available annually to cities and counties for such purposes.
In order to help alleviate financial concerns of local jurisdictions with regards to accepting abandoned State roadways, the State of Arizona could consider establishing such an account to fund construction and/or maintenance on business routes and other roadways that are abandoned. If such a designated fund were to be established, a specified time frame during which such funds are available should probably be defined.
One Arizona county has been sued for an accident that occurred on a roadway which had been turned back to them. The suit centered on design and maintenance. The State might consider establishing a liability policy as part of a designated turnback account.
Maintenance Capabilities
Two factors that are of concern to city and county engineers when discussing acceptance of business routes, or any other roadways, are manpower availability and manpower capability. In some cases, assuming maintenance for additional roadways could overload a small maintenance office and require the hiring of additional staff. In other cases, assuming responsibility for business routes that have traffic signals or lighting could create a situation where a city or county assumes responsibility for a traffic engineering function for which they have no expertise. Such an action could also require training existing staff or hiring new personnel. Transfer of equipment from the state to a local jurisdiction might also be considered. In order to create a win-win situation, the balancing of maintenance staff and equipment between State and local agencies could be a consideration during abandonment discussions. Local agency staff training provided by the State could be considered.
Route Management Issues
As discussions regarding business routes took place throughout this study, a number of factors emerged which could be used to determine how such routes should best be managed, i.e. should the State maintain responsibility or should they be turned back to the local jurisdictions. Some of the factors are quantifiable, although the data may not be readily available, and some are more subjective. As these might be useful in determining the future management of business routes, they are included below.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 9 - Page 2 Functional Use as a State Highway
• What is the proportion of highway traffic to local traffic on the business route? • Does the business route provide needed access to key multi-modal facilities? • Are there excessive curb cuts or is access controlled? • Are there an excessive number of traffic signals? • Can sufficient access control be achieved?
Location of Traveler Services
• Is it necessary for Interstate highway users to travel significant distances on the business route to obtain gasoline, food, or shelter? • Are traveler services conveniently located either at the traffic interchanges where the business routes interchange with 1-40 or at a nearby interchange?
Highway System Continuity
• Does the business route provide continuity through the community between State routes? • Is this continuity necessary for the traveler to reach his destination in a timely and safe manner? • Does the business route overlap another State highway?
Jurisdictional Control
• Are there land use or roadway usage issues (e.g. adjacent land use, access, or parking) which require State input? • Would land use and roadway usage issues be better handled at the local level?
ROUTE TRANSFER INVESTMENT STRATEGIES
Many issues need to be dealt with in developing an equitable and desirable solution to the business route concerns. As a basis to start negotiations, this section includes a number of investment strategies that have been identified during discussions on the business routes. In all probability, each business route in the 1-40 corridor will require a different combination of these and other strategies if, in fact, a tumback proves mutually beneficial and is negotiated.
Basic Improvements
As provided for in the statutes of the State of Arizona, unless waived by mutual agreement, the State shall provide the receiving jurisdiction four years notice and five
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 9 - Page 3 years pavement life on any roadway abandoned to a city or county. This is reinforced by the 1995 Transportation Board Policies and provides a basic improvement package with which to begin negotiations.
Mutually Beneficial Improvements to 1-40
In exchange for a local jurisdiction accepting the responsibility of a business route, the State could agree to fund and construct improvements (e.g. a new traffic interchange or freeway widening) on 1-40 to improve circulation within the community.
B-40 or Other Mode Improvements
The State could make improvements, other than the mandated pavement improvements, to B-40 in preparation for a local jurisdiction accepting the responsibility for a business route. Alternatively, the State and the receiving jurisdiction could determine the cost of the improvements and the State could give the receiving jurisdiction cash for that amount in exchange for the jurisdiction accepting the business route. This cash could be used for improvements to other modes of transportation.
Cash Payment
In exchange for a local jurisdiction accepting responsibility for a business route, the State could agree to simply pay the local agency an agreed upon cash amount that is not tied into business route improvements. The cash could either be a lump sum payment or multiple payments spread over a number of years. Legislative action would be required to provide for the establishment of programmed funds for this purpose.
Roadway Exchange
In exchange for a local jurisdiction accepting responsibility for a business route, the State could agree to assume control over an existing city or county roadway. This method might be used to balance workloads between State and local agency maintenance districts. Although not included in the 1997 policies, if a roadway exchange were discussed, consideration should be made for the ADOT Transportation Board Policies, 1995 Edition, to state that an addition to the State Highway System must meet one or more of the following criteria:
1. Serves a major number of trips entering, traveling through, or leaving the State; 2. Serves corridor movements generally characterized by long trip lengths and high traffic volumes indicative of Statewide, interstate, or international travel;
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 9 - Page 4 3. Connects an urban area of over 50,000 population or a County seat with the existing State Highway System; 4. Connects to a rural traffic generator which produces 500,000 or more annual trips with the existing State Highway System; or 5. Serves as part of a regionally adopted urban controlled access system.
As of May 1998, these policies were being updated. In the update, it may be judicious to consider adding other policies such as:
• Would provide for mutually beneficial maintenance responsibilities for State and local agencies. • Is access controlled or has a minimum number of access points.
Partial Turnback
In exchange for a local jurisdiction accepting responsibility for a business route, the State could retain responsibility for specified tasks, e.g., maintaining traffic signals or lighting, or being responsible for major pavement rehabilitation projects at a specified time period for a specified number of years. Although current statutes prohibit ADOT from expending State funds on non-State roads, it may be in the State's interest to seek a change in the law to allow for this type of abandonment agreement.
ROUTE TRANSFER PROCESS
This report is intended to present inventory data and issues concerned with the 1-40 business routes. If turnback to the local jurisdiction is pursued, negotiations between ADOT, led by the responsible District Engineer, and the local jurisdiction would continue. If a mutually satisfactory arrangement is reached, the negotiating parties should sign a Letter of Agreement stating the terms of the possible turnback. The next step would be to formalize the terms of the Letter of Agreement in an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA). The terms specified in the IGA would then be implemented and, finally, the official turnback would take place.
To provide complete background information on the business route issue, it is important to provide the legal framework for State highway abandonment. The issue of ADOT transferring State routes, including business routes, is dealt with in three statutes of the 1997-98 Edition of the Arizona Criminal and Traffic Law Manual:
• ARS 28-7046 allows the ADOT Director or the Board to abandon a State roadway to a county or city and provides for the review of the abandonment by the Superior Court;
• ARS 28-7207 States that the roadway shall be abandoned to either a city or county, depending upon the location of the road; and
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 9 - Page 5 • ARS 28-7209 provides that, in the case of abandonment, the local jurisdiction shall be provided "four years advance notice" and that the pavement "shall be in such a condition that additional surface treatment and major maintenance of the highway are not required for at least five years". Both of these provisions may be waived by mutual agreement between the parties involved.
Even though the statutes provide for ADOT to transfer a State highway at its discretion, internal ADOT policy has been to work closely with the potential receiving jurisdiction to work out a fair and equitable agreement that creates a win-win situation for both parties. This policy will probably continue.
BUSINESS ROUTE SUMMARY
The purpose of this section of the report is to provide a summary of key engineering data concerning the business routes on 1-40. By so doing, ADOT management will have a feel for what it will be dealing with if a decision is made to continue with turnback discussions.
Existing Conditions
There are approximately 33 miles of business routes associated with 1-40 through Arizona. A summary of existing characteristics of the 1-40 business routes is provided in Table 9-1.
In addition to the business routes, 5 miles of frontage road in Kingman and 2.5 miles in Flagstaff were discussed in this report. However, technical data was not available for the frontage roads and therefore they are not included in this chapter.
Pavement condition data is taken from the ADOT Pavement Management System (PMS) which ranks each mile of pavement in one of three condition ratings: good, fair, or fair to poor. A PMS rating of fair to poor, the lowest given, includes the notation that the pavement may require rehabilitation. Nearly half of the 33 miles of pavement on the business routes associated with 1-40 is in fair to poor condition. This 16 miles may require rehabilitation. Of the other 17 miles, 9. 5 miles are rated in fair condition and 7. 5 miles are rated in good condition.
TABLE 9-1. EXISTING CONDITIONS ON B-40 BUSINESS ROUTES
1996 Average Length Daily Traffic Pavement Accident Rate (miles) (LOS) Conditions Structure Conditions Accident/VMT Kingman 4.10 17,000 (A/B) Fair to poor (3) Good (2) 1.95 Fair (1)
Seligman 4.10 1,500 (A) Good (1) Good (7) 1.62 Fair (3)
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 9 - Page 6 TABLE 9-1. EXISTING CONDITIONS ON B-40 BUSINESS ROUTES (continued)
1996 Average Length Daily Traffic Pavement Accident Rate (miles) (LOS) Conditions Structure Conditions Accident/VMT Seligman 4.10 1,500 (A) Good (1) Good (7) 1.62 Fair (3)
Ash Fork 2.25* 1,700 (A) Fair (1) Good (1) 2.58 Fair to poor(l)
Flagstaff 6.70 44,200 (E) Good (3) Eligible for rehab. 1.76 Fair (2) (1) Fair to poor (2) Not rated (1)
Winslow 8.00** 10,400 (A/B) Fair to poor (8) Good (5) 2.25
Joseph 2.80 900 (A) Good (0.5) Good (1) 0.00 City Fair (0.5) Fair to poor (2)
Holbrook 4.90 10,000 (B/C) Good (3) None 3.53 Fair (2)
* The length of B-40 in Ash Fork includes 0.75 miles of a one-way pair. ** The length of B-40 in Winslow includes 3.0 miles of a one-way pair. (3) Number of one-mile segments
Structure condition is taken from the ADOT Bridge Sufficiency Rating, which rates structures in three categories: good condition, eligible for rehabilitation, and eligible for replacement. Of the 17 structures on the business routes that are rated, 16 are in good condition. The bridge over the Rio de Flag in Flagstaff has a sufficiency rating of 78.2, which puts it into the eligible for rehabilitation category. A rating over 80 is considered good condition. The railroad underpass in Flagstaff is not rated.
Accident rates cover the period between September 1, 1992, and June 30, 1996. Rates are given in accidents per million vehicle-miles of travel. The accident rates on the B-40 streets range from 0.00 in Joseph City to 3.53 in Holbrook.
Level of service on arterial streets is determined by the intersections. Intersection turning movement data was not available, therefore a level of service determination could not be made. Thus, the levels given in Table 9-1 are approximations based upon a generalized capacity of 3,000 vehicles per hour on a four lane street. In six of the seven communities, the level of service is good. Business 40 operates at Level of Service (LOS) A in Seligman, Ash Fork, and Joseph City and in the LOS A/B range in Kingman, Winslow, and Holbrook. In Flagstaff, B-40 operates at near capacity LOS E.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 9 - Page 7 Future Traffic Conditions
Existing and future traffic forecasts and estimated level of service for business routes in five of the seven communities are shown in Table 9-2. Traffic forecasts in Kingman and Winslow were available from transportation studies completed within the last six years. Traffic forecasts in Seligman, Ash Fork, and Joseph City were prepared by the consultant for the 1-40 Corridor Profile Study. Although not technically based, these forecasts are probably reasonable because of the low traffic volume and small size of the communities for which they were prepared. On the other hand, because of the size and growth potential of Flagstaff and Holbrook, an estimate by the consultant for the Corridor Profile Study is not appropriate. Flagstaff is currently developing a land use and transportation plan for the region and forecasts may become available before this B-40 report is finalized. This is not the case in Holbrook.
TABLE 9-2. TRAFFIC FORECASTS
Average Daily 1996 Level of Forecast Future Level Traffic - 1996 Service Traffic - 2020 of Service Kingman 17,000 AIB 35,700 DIE Seligman 1,500 A 2,700 A Ash Fork 1,700 A 2,000 A Flagstaff 44,240 E NIA Winslow 10,400 AIB 25,000 BIC Joseph City 900 A 1000 A Holbrook 10,000 BIC NIA
Traffic forecasts in the 1997 Kingman Area Transportation Study show volumes on B-40 reaching 35,700 vpd in the year 2020. With this doubling in volume, the level of service will be in the LOS DIE range as compared to LOS AIB in 1996.
The 1992 Winslow Area Transportation Study includes a year 2011 traffic forecast of 20,400 vpd on the 2nd Street and 3rd Street one-way pair that is B-40 in Winslow. Assuming continued growth, year 2020 volumes could be in the 25,000-vpd range, dropping service to the LOS BIC range.
Business 40 in Seligman, Ash Fork, and Joseph City will continue to operate at LOS A in the year 2020.
Although traffic forecasts are not available in Flagstaff and Holbrook, it is reasonable to assume that the volumes will increase. Assuming an approximate doubling of the volume in Holbrook as forecast in Winslow, B-40 will probably drop to LOS BIC. Increases in Flagstaff will worsen an already congested situation. The City is addressing this potential problem in its on-going transportation planning effort.
Lima & Associates 1-40 Business Route Inventory - Chapter 9 - Page 8