sr 77/oracle road multimodal corridor profile study final report - Pima ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Page 5. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES, SERVICES AND CONDITIONS 5-1 (Continued) 5.3 INTERMODAL FACILITIES 5-27 5.4 BICYCLE FACILITIES 5-27 5.5 PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 5-27 5.6. ITS FACILITIES 5-31 5.6.1 Traffic Signal System 5-31 5.6.2 Other Existing ITS Facilities 5-31 5.7 PLANNED AND PROGRAMMED IMPROVEMENTS 5-32 5.7.1 Corridor Roadway Projects 5-32 5.7.2 Alternate Mode and Other Non-Capacity Projects 5-39 6. EXISTING AND PROJECTED NEEDS AND DEFICIENCIES 6-1 6.1 ROADWAY SYSTEM 6-1 6.1.1 Congestion 6-1 6.1.2 Evaluation of Concept Design of Realigned Segment of Fort Lowell Road/Miracle Mile 6-5 6.1.3 Safety 6-8 6.1.4 Access 6-11 6.1.5 Public Comments on Safety and Access Needs 6-13 6.2 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION 6-13 6.2.1 Transit Workshops 6-13 6.2.2 Technical Advisory Committee Field Review 6-13 6.2.3 Transit Deficiencies Identified in Plans and Studies 6-14 6.3 BICYCLE FACILITIES 6-14 6.3.1 Public Open House Comments on Bicycle Related Improvement Needs 6-16 6.4 PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 6-16 6.4.1 Open House Comments on Pedestrian Improvements 6-18 6.5 BRIDGES AND DRAINAGE STRUCTURES 6-18 6.6 PAVEMENT 6-19 6.7 AASHTO DESIGN STANDARDS 6-19 6.8 ITS 6-20 6.9 SUMMARY OF CORRIDOR DEFICIENCIES 6-20 SR 77/Oracle Road Multimodal Corridor Profile Study May 2007 Final Report Page vi
7. INVESTMENT OPTIONS 7-1 7.1 SUMMARY OF INVESTMENT OPTIONS TO ADDRESS CAPACITY DEFICIENCIES 7-1 7.1.1 Development of an Alternative High-Capacity Corridor 7-1 7.1.2 Summary of Capacity Improvement Options Along SR 77 7-2 7.1.3 Micro-Simulation Analysis of GSI Alternatives 7-5 7.1.4 Right-of-Way Implications and Costs for Widening SR 77 to Eight Lanes 7-8 7.2 SUMMARY OF INVESTMENT OPTIONS TO ADDRESS NON-CAPACITY DEFICIENCIES 7-11 7.2.1 Roadway Lighting Investment Options 7-11 7.2.2 Pedestrian Investment Options 7-15 7.2.3 Bicycle Facility Investment Options 7-15 7.2.4 Transit Investment Options 7-18 7.2.5 Bridge and Drainage Structures Investment Options 7-19 7.2.6 ITS Investment Options 7-19 7.2.7 Investment Options to Address AASHTO Design Deficiencies 7-23 7.2.8 Access Control Investment Options 7-23 7.2.9 Other Improvements 7-27 8. OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS 8-1 8.1 FINANCIAL OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS 8-1 8.2 RIGHT-OF-WAY OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS 8-1 8.3 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AND CONSTRAINTS 8-6 8.3.1 Terrain 8-6 8.3.2 Sensitive Species and Habitats 8-6 8.3.3 Cultural Resources 8-8 8.3.4 Air and Noise Quality 8-9 8.3.5 Title VI Issues 8-9 8.3.6 Pima County Environmentally Sensitive Roadway Guidelines 8-10 8.3.7 Pusch Ridge Wilderness Area 8-11 8.3.8 Drainage Considerations 8-11 8.3.9 Summary of Environmental Resources Issues 8-13 SR 77/Oracle Road Multimodal Corridor Profile Study May 2007 Final Report Page vii
Page 1: & InAsociationwith: Lima&Asociates
Page 5 and 6: TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. INTRODUCT
Page 7 and 8: TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Page
Page 9: TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Page
Page 13 and 14: LIST OF EXHIBITS Page Exhibit 1-1 S
Page 15 and 16: LIST OF EXHIBITS (Continued) Page E
Page 17 and 18: LIST OF EXHIBITS (Continued) Page E
Page 19 and 20: 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 PROJECT BACKGRO
Page 21 and 22: 1.3.2 Objectives The primary object
Page 23 and 24: 2. STUDIES, CONTACTS AND ISSUES Thi
Page 25 and 26: Exhibit 2-1 LIST OF STUDY DOCUMENTS
Page 27 and 28: 2.1.6 Final Project Assessment, SR
Page 29 and 30: Intersection Spacing, Location, and
Page 31 and 32: lane and the northbound acceleratio
Page 33 and 34: amended Regional Transportation Pla
Page 35 and 36: • Park-and-Ride Lots with bike lo
Page 37 and 38: 2.5 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY PLANNING DOC
Page 39 and 40: • A Feasibility Study was complet
Page 41 and 42: Recommendations for the Calle Conco
Page 43 and 44: • A near term transit development
Page 45 and 46: • The Miracle Mile to Fort Lowell
Page 47 and 48: unmarked crosswalks. Quarter mile p
Page 49 and 50: 2.8.6 Pinal County Issues raised at
Page 51: enough shoulders, and feasibility f
Page 54 and 55: Exhibit 3-2 FUTURE POPULATION PROJE
Page 56 and 57: La Cholla Blvd La Canada Dr Exhibit
Page 58 and 59: La Cholla Blvd La Canada Dr Exhibit
Page 60 and 61:
Exhibit 3-8 AGE, DISABLED, AND LOW-
Page 63 and 64:
4. PHYSICAL AND NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
Page 65 and 66:
Biotic Community Arizona Upland Son
Page 67 and 68:
Exhibit 4-4 ARIZONA GAME AND FISH D
Page 69 and 70:
The statutory goal of the Tucson AM
Page 71 and 72:
Exhibit 4-6 DRAINAGES AND RIPARIAN
Page 73 and 74:
Exhibit 4-6 DRAINAGE AND RIPARIAN A
Page 75 and 76:
United States.” The phrase “wat
Page 77 and 78:
vehicle miles traveled (VMT). On Ap
Page 79 and 80:
An archaeological survey is recomme
Page 81 and 82:
Exhibit 4-9 PUBLIC SCHOOLS WITHIN T
Page 83 and 84:
5. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION FACILITI
Page 85 and 86:
Exhibit 5-2 CROSS SECTION GEOMETRY
Page 87 and 88:
Exhibit 5-4 TYPICAL RIGHT-OF-WAY WI
Page 89 and 90:
Exhibit 5-5 PAVEMENT TYPE ON SR 77
Page 91 and 92:
Structure Number Structure Name 236
Page 93 and 94:
(Watershed 1 - Watershed 5, excludi
Page 95 and 96:
FEMA Flood Insurance Study Exhibit
Page 97 and 98:
Thornydale Rd Shannon Dr La Canada
Page 99 and 100:
Exhibit 5-13 YEAR 1992, 2002 AND FO
Page 101 and 102:
Exhibit 5-15 YEAR 2002 LEVELS OF CO
Page 103 and 104:
except for the first segment listed
Page 105 and 106:
• In general, as the number of ac
Page 107 and 108:
Exhibit 5-20 SUN TRAN LEVEL OF SERV
Page 109 and 110:
5.3 INTERMODAL FACILITIES The exten
Page 111 and 112:
Exhibit 5-22 LOCATIONS OF SIDEWALKS
Page 113 and 114:
5.6 ITS FACILITIES 5.6.1 Traffic Si
Page 115 and 116:
Exhibit 5-25 SR 77/ORACLE ROAD ALRE
Page 117 and 118:
Exhibit 5-26 CORRIDOR NORTH/SOUTH A
Page 119 and 120:
Exhibit 5-27 CORRIDOR EAST/WEST ROA
Page 121 and 122:
East/West Capacity Projects Signifi
Page 123:
Exhibit 5-30 PLANNED AND PROGRAMMED
Page 126 and 127:
The existing and forecast levels of
Page 128 and 129:
Exhibit 6-3 CORRIDOR CONGESTION DEF
Page 130 and 131:
Thornydale Rd La Canada Dr Wells Rd
Page 132 and 133:
The realignment alternative selecte
Page 134 and 135:
Exhibit 6-7 SEGMENTS FOR POSSIBLE L
Page 136 and 137:
Exhibit 6-10 LOCATION OF LEVEL 1 AN
Page 138 and 139:
• A need exists for a grade-separ
Page 140 and 141:
In addition, key stakeholders ident
Page 142 and 143:
6.4.1 Open House Comments on Pedest
Page 144 and 145:
Project Assessment Begin MP End MP
Page 146 and 147:
Exhibit 6-16 ITS DEFICIENCIES SR 77
Page 148 and 149:
Exhibit 6-17 DEFICIENCIES BY SEGMEN
Page 150 and 151:
From MP 79.1 78.5 Pusch View Lane t
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
provide little congestion relief al
Page 158 and 159:
Exhibit 7-2 SUMMARY OF ROADWAY CAPA
Page 160 and 161:
Exhibit 7-3 PORTION OF THE SR 77 CO
Page 162 and 163:
7. The assumption of an eight-lane
Page 164 and 165:
The fringe urban section might incl
Page 166 and 167:
area of this segment, from Rancho V
Page 168 and 169:
Exhibit 7-6 SUMMARY OF POTENTIALLY
Page 170 and 171:
Exhibit 7-7 SEGMENTS FOR POSSIBLE L
Page 172 and 173:
The proposed recommendations for bi
Page 174 and 175:
Exhibit 7-9 CONSOLIDATION OF WORKSH
Page 176 and 177:
Exhibit 7-11 BRIDGES WITH SUFFICIEN
Page 178 and 179:
Exhibit 7-12 ITS IMPROVEMENTS SR 77
Page 180 and 181:
Segment I-10 to Oracle Road 1.4 Urb
Page 183 and 184:
8. OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS Th
Page 185 and 186:
Exhibit 8-2 GENERAL OPPORTUNITIES O
Page 187 and 188:
The impacts to existing businesses,
Page 189 and 190:
Exhibit 8-5 PYGMY OWL SURVEY ZONES
Page 191 and 192:
equire special consideration. In ad
Page 193 and 194:
8.3.7 Pusch Ridge Wilderness Area T
Page 195:
alternative would be a new bridge o
Page 198 and 199:
The capacity and level of service a
Page 200 and 201:
Exhibit 9-1 LIST OF PROPOSED PROJEC
Page 202 and 203:
Number Milepost Location SR 77 Defi
Page 204 and 205:
Exhibit 9-2 COST ESTIMATES FOR CONS
Page 207 and 208:
10. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The public i
Page 209 and 210:
Exhibit 10-2 OVERVIEW OF SURVEY RES
Page 211 and 212:
Exhibit 10-3 OVERVIEW OF SURVEY RES
Page 213 and 214:
Exhibit 10-4 ANALYSIS OF FIRST TRAN
Page 215 and 216:
Prior to the tour, the project team
Page 217 and 218:
There was a question about whether
Page 219 and 220:
Exhibit 10-5 PUBLIC COMMENTS SUBMIT
Page 221 and 222:
Exhibit 10-7 PUBLIC COMMENTS SUBMIT
Page 223 and 224:
Exhibit 10-8 (Continued) COMMENTS F
Page 225 and 226:
Exhibit 10-9 (continued) COMMENTS P
Page 227:
APPENDIX A Properties Listed on the
Page 230 and 231:
NRHP Properties within the Study Ar
Page 233 and 234:
Previous Archaeological Surveys wit
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Brew, Susan A. 1979 Letter Report t
Page 247 and 248:
2001d Cultural Resources Survey of
Page 249 and 250:
Goldstein, Beau J. 2001 A Cultural
Page 251 and 252:
1998e A Cultural Resource Inventory
Page 253 and 254:
2001c Cultural Resources Survey of
Page 255 and 256:
1986a Letter Report to the State La
Page 257 and 258:
Roth, Barbara J. 1993 Letter Report
Page 259 and 260:
1996a Coronado Ridge Right of Way (
Page 261 and 262:
1980b Clearinghouse Report No. 80-8
Page 263:
1996 Cultural Resource Survey of Mi
Page 269:
APPENDIX D Corridor Crash Character
Page 272 and 273:
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION NUMBER OF C
Page 274 and 275:
Mile Post SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION C
Page 276 and 277:
ROADWAY SEGMENT NUMBER OF CRASHES B
Page 278 and 279:
Beginning Mile Post Roadway Segment
Page 280 and 281:
ACCESS RELATED CRASH ANALYSIS SOUTH
Page 282 and 283:
180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 S
Page 284 and 285:
ACCESS RELATED CRASH ANALYSIS THREE
Page 286 and 287:
2.15 2.42 3.88 4.80 5.20 5.63 5.88
Page 289:
NIGHT/DAY CRASH AND ROADWAY LIGHTIN
show all

sr 77/oracle road multimodal corridor profile study final report - Pima ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?