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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Exhibit 5-7 BRIDGE SUFFICIENCY RATINGS Bridge Rating Description 0-49 percent Eligible for replacement 50-80 percent Eligible for Rehabilitation Over 80 percent Good condition “F” Indicates a Functionally Obsolete Bridge “S” Indicates a Structurally Deficient Bridge SR 77/Oracle Road Multimodal Corridor Profile Study May 2007 Final Report Page 5-8
Structure Number Structure Name 2362 Miracle Mile TI UP Mile Marker M255 (I-10) Exhibit 5-8 EXISTING SR 77 STRUCTURES Reconstruction Structure Material Offset Year 0.1 0000 Pre-stress concrete continuous Structure Design Box beams or girders – single (CIP mutlicell box) Structure Length (ft) Original Project No. SR 256 IR-10-4(109) 85.35 6830 RCB* M092 0.06 1973 Concrete continuous Culvert 42 AFE 7714 84.98 6574 Big Wash RCB M099 0.97 0000 Concrete continuous Culvert 32 F-031-1(9) 84.98 6575 Tucson Wash RCB M102 0.42 0000 Concrete continuous Culvert 32 F-031-1(9) 84.98 4728 RCB M69 0.73 1979 Concrete continuous Culvert 25 F-031-1(501) 82.00 4829 RCB M069 0.92 1979 Concrete continuous Culvert 38 F-031-1(501) 82.00 4734 RCB M088 0.59 1995 Concrete continuous Culvert 33 S-111(9) 81.51 4735 RCB M089 0.34 0000 Concrete continuous Culvert 3 STP-031-(1640) 81.51 4736 RCB M090 0.3 1994 Concrete continuous Culvert 76 S-111(9) 81.51 4737 RCB M090 0.85 0000 Concrete continuous Culvert 26 STP-031-(1640) 81.51 2006 Cañada Del Oro Br M080 0.78 0000 Pre-stress concrete Stringer/multi-beam or 455 BP-031-1-513 80.00 continuous girder 4733 Twenty-Seven M085 0.99 1989 Concrete continuous Culvert 90 S-111(8) 80.00 Wash RCB 1550 Rillito Creek M071 0.79 0000 Pre-stress concrete Stringer/multi-beam or 315 F-031-1(7) 78.22 Bridge girder 4730 Pima Wash RCB M072 0.46 1970 Concrete continuous Culvert 59 S-111(6) 70.00 6754 RCB M075 0.71 0000 Concrete continuous Culvert 26 F-031-1(11) 70.00 7115 CMP** M076 0.41 0000 Steel Culvert 21 F-031-1(11) 70.00 4731 RCB M076 0.68 1979 Concrete continuous Culvert 53 S-111(7) 70.00 6755 RCB M077 0.13 0000 Concrete continuous Culvert 26 F-031-1(11) 70.00 6756 RCB M078 0.37 0000 Concrete continuous Culvert 45 F-031-1(11) 70.00 6757 RCB M078 0.8 0000 Concrete continuous Culvert 62 F-031-1(11) 70.00 4732 RCB M078 0.9 1979 Concrete continuous Culvert 53 S-111(7) 70.00 6812 RCB M079 0.82 0000 Concrete continuous Culvert 98 BP-031-1-513 65.00 * RCB = Reinforced Concrete Box ** CMP = Corrugated Metal Pipe SR 77/Oracle Road Multimodal Corridor Profile Study May 2007 Final Report Page 5-9
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 and 10:
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Page
Page 11 and 12:
7. INVESTMENT OPTIONS 7-1 7.1 SUMMA
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: Exhibit 5-5 PAVEMENT TYPE ON SR 77
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 ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?