~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