Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES 90-39RESOLUTION NO.90-39 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION, ARIZONA APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GPA-90-02,A CITY -INITIATED PROPOSAL TO INCLUDE THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS OF THE 1988 PARSONS- BRINCKERHOFF STUDY IN THE GENERAL PLAN. WHEREAS,the Apache Junction City Council did on June 16,1987 adopt the 1987 Apache Junction General Plan;and WHEREAS,the Apache Junction Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing regarding GPA-90-02 on August 28,1990;and WHEREAS,the Apache Junction Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of GPA-90-02 subject to stipulations;and WHEREAS,this Council finds that the action taken on this General Plan Amendment is necessary for sound and orderly community development,for preservation of community values,and for the promotion of the general health, safety,convenience,and welfare of the citizens of the Apache Junction community;and WHEREAS,this Council has considered the findings of fact given in Section D.1.6 of the Apache Junction General Plan and finds: 1.That the amendment constitutes an overall improvement to the General Plan and is not solely for the good or benefit of a particular landowner or owners at a particular point in time. 2.That the amendment is consistent with the overall intent of this General Plan. 3.That the amendment is in the best long-range interest of Apache Junction. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Apache Junction,Arizona,that: GPA-90-02,a City -initiated proposal to include the Regional Transportation Corridors of the 1988 Parsons-Brinckerhoff Study in the General Plan,be approved and adopted subject to the following stipulations: 1.That the Low Density designation be retained. 2.That buffering techniques be employed to mitigate visual impacts. RESOLUTION NO.90-39 PAGE ONE OF TWO 3.That the McKellips Corridor east of the Red Mountain Freeway and the Goldfield Corridor north of Superstition Boulevard and State Route 360 be deleted from the Transportation Corridors. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APACHE JUNCTION,ARIZONA,THIS 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER ,19 90 . SIGNED AND ATTESTED TO THIS 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER ATTEST: Kathleen Connelly City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Davfd F.Alexander City \Attorney RESOLUTION NO.90-39 PAGE TWO OF TWO 19 90 Ketmeth Bluntschly Mayor GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GPA-90-02 CHANDLER as •0 P1•a- •-• e P O. MESA MI II IN NNW MU 11 • •• • siam•ewee, 100 \Red 'we A0. ••McKellios Rd.9..%1 j Brown Rd. University Ave. Main St Elliot Rd. GILBERT Pecos Rd.1, I I alk*wilitrmann Rd. - -l a In IN NI IIII Queen Creek Rd. Ocotillo Rd. rr dl .5 1 pantan ma a lei Cr di a. .c rri Mc APACHE JUNCTION TRANSPORTATION /TRANSIT STUDY (81110S Corridor REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION .CORRIDORS 1,41) c..t/ u.s.6n New- I sleds—, ay i ;.°Grounds , .I 1 i r --GM. Pr vino I .---.1-i dill itair Force Base NI I- -1 Williams Mr i lia * *hi. - N Ill 111 111 1111 kg a ii, Queen Creek ....•••••••--• • •• .r. 0 N 96tp awl WIEN CONN 11•11 IIII • 131111 0 m p 411II0.110 ;• • APACHE JUNCTION FIUME) 15 PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF • I LEGEND Six Lane Controlled Access Afiefial MgI u Existing or Planned Freeway NINE Potential New Highway Corridor INA ••::I iniatiermamininam. • •• • • Ranters Connection -N. to Globe_ • •••Allornallvas Junction• ....—...- Otle cis C 1)0 c iag IL -0 O C••• 41 .— (.7 V.FUTURE ROADWAY NEEDS Future roadway needs can be placed in two categories.One category is the regional transportation corridors consisting of the connection to the Red Mountain Freeway, the connection on the east side of Apache Junction between S.R.88 and S.R. 360 and the connection to the Santan Freeway.These corridors are significant to state, county, and local governments because they go beyond Apache Junction and cross county and local government lines.The other category is the arterial street system of Apache Junction and its environs.Plans for both categories were developed,and financing of the arterial street category was reviewed. REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS One of the primary elements of this study was to examine the future regional transportation needs in the study area.Three corridors were identified in the Request for Proposal: (1) an east -west connection to the Red Mountain Freeway north of Apache Junction, (2) an east -west connection to the Santan Freeway south of Apache Junction, and (3) a north -south connection on the east side of Apache Junction between S.R. 88 (Apache Trail) and the Superstition Freeway (S.R. 360). During the alternatives analysis portion of this study,year 2010 traffic forecasts were developed based on a street network with a connection to the Red Mountain Freeway near McKellips Road,and a connection between S.R. 88 and S.R. 360 in the vicinity of Goldfield Road.A connection to the Santan Freeway was not included in the network because the probable locations appear to be far south of the Apache Junction study area. This point will be discussed later in more detail.The traffic assignments indicated that the connection to the Red Mountain Freeway, and the connection between S.R. 88 and S.R.360, would be beneficial for the Apache Junction street system, and the year 2010 traffic volumes in these corridors could be accommodated by arterial streets.However, a much longer planning horizon is desirable for regional transportation corridors to ensure that adequate right-of-way is preserved before development occurs.As an example, the Phoenix area freeway system was outlined in a report in the early 1960's, yet some portions will not be completed until after the year 2000, which is a time span of over 40 years. -41- As land in the East Valley continues to change to urban uses, it is reasonable to assume that the urbanization will extend to the Superstition Mountains east of Apache Junction, to the mountains north of Apache Junction,and on the State Land between Apache Junction and Queen Creek.When this occurs,the transportation needs of the area will be similar to the fully urbanized areas of the Valley.Arterials and local streets will be constructed in conjunction with development of the land,but regional highways generally are not constructed until the need exists.However,if adequate right-of-way can be preserved for these regional highways,they can be built with a minimum amount of social disruption, and with a lower cost for the necessary right-of-way. Early planning of the regional transportation system also can help local governments create municipal plans that are complementary t o the transportation system.A heirarchy of roadways can be developed and a land use plan can be adopted that will maximize the public investment in transportation systems,utilities, schools, and parks. Red Mountain Freeway and S.R. 88/S.R. 360 Connections The year 2010 traffic forecasts with a connection to the Red Mountain Freeway and a connection between S.R. 88 and S.R. 360 indicated these corridors would alleviate some potential overloads on portions of the Superstition .Freeway and some arterial streets in Apache Junction and eastern Mesa.Based on the 2010 traffic forecasts presented in the previous chapter,six -lane arterial streets could accommodate the expected traffic demand in the two corridors for the next twenty years.However,beyond the twenty- year period,if growth continues in the Apache Junction area, higher capacity roadways may be desirable. In the public meetings held during the course of the study,the idea was presented that the city adopt these .two corridors for study purposes.Additional studies would be conducted in the future that would define the type of roadway and the location of the roadway within each corridor.There was some adverse reaction to this concept for fear that freeways might be recommended in the future studies.As a result,an arterial street concept was developed to be more in line with the public comments. McKellips Road and Goldfield Road exist as two-lane roadways in each of the two corridors.Both roadways provide driveway access to residential properties and have numerous intersections with local streets.Both roadways could be widened and upgraded to full urban arterial streets similiar to those found throughout the metropolitan area. -42- These typical arterial streets have high traffic accident rates, speed limits are limited to 45 mph and traffic service is relatively poor because of the extensive side friction caused by the driveways and local streets. It is recommended that McKellips and Goldfield roads be developed into higher type roadways than the typical arterials.Such high -type roadways would serve longer trips made within Apache Junction and through traffic to S.R. 88 and other points not served by S.K. 360. The minimum recommended roadway would be access controlled with cross streets no closer than half -mile intervals.Intersections with cross streets would be signalized, when warranted by traffic volumes.The minimum right-of-way width should be 130 feet with an additional 10 feet at major intersections to accommodate double left turn lanes and a right turn lane. As shown in Figure 14,this minimum right-of-way width will accommodate a six -lane urban arterial with a raised median, and landscaped area with sidewalks on each side of the roadway.If additional right-of-way is provided,noises walls or berms may be accommodated and -there will be more flexibility in the treatment of bike paths, equestrian paths and other amenities.Consideration should also be given to providing underpasses for trails, paths, and selected local streets that need to cross the corridor. From the discussions received at the public meetings, it appears that the public generally favors placing the new street as close as possible to the existing McKellips and Goldfield roads.-These existing streets would remain as two-lane,two-way frontage roads and provide access to the abutting land uses. At each cross street intersection the existing two-lane street (frontage road) and the new arterial need to be separated by at least 400 feet in order to avoid side -by -side intersections.This separation can probably be best obtained by removing the frontage road on each side of the cross street and use other local streets to maintain traffic circulation for the frontage road traffic. Initial construction of the new arterial roadways may be two-lane streets until traffic volumes warrant additional capacity.The two lanes should be constructed in a location that will allow them to become part of the ultimate roadway.The next phase would be to add two more lanes and create a four -lane divided roadway.The final phase would be -43- t‘ \ \ \ \ \\ \ Or t,,1721 I ...I ._.I I __.I I __.I ...I 1_.1eq.4 1 41 U 14't. Street 4E4 0-1 -i t S/W Land-Lane l g .At 1-2..Ji Lane Lane Median Lane -r Lane 4 Lane Land-4 Lal nird-litZWII12' scaped •scaped 30'Areas 130'Areas L .aøf i-ftearneantL.A10 to 16.1710W1111 111. P•••• ••••., ••••••• I • S 1..g.'izS—h maz-maim 'am Escsrrz1.1=11 VO=ff El I Liez% VIM PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF Ea QV 1111 ,1(1 p =9 [SCALE: 1"=201 11 APACHE JUNCTION TRANSPORTATION /TRANSIT STUDY Figure 14 STREET CONCEPT McKELLIPS AND GOLDFIELD ROADS to add a third lane in each direction if and when the traffic volumes warrant such action. Depending upon the rate of growth of Apache Junction,it may be more practical to go directly from the two-lane roadway to the ultimate six -lane divided arterial. Connection to Santan Freeway A connection from the planned Santan Freeway in Chandler or Gilbert to U.S. 60 near Florence Junction would provide substantial benefits to the traveling public.Such a route would direct some through traffic off of S.R. 360 and provide a more direct route for recreation and other through traffic from the Gilbert,Chandler,and south Tempe areas destined for Florence Junction, Superior, and points further east. There are several potential locations for a connection from the planned Santan Freeway to U.S. 60 as shown in Figure 15.If a major connection is made north of Williams A.F.B. and the G.M.Proving Grounds,it would have to be in the vicinity of Elliot Road.The topography in this area has many major washes and flood control structures which make a connection in this location quite expensive.Also,a roadway here would be close (2 - 3 miles) to the Superstition Freeway which would not provide good major roadway spacing. In this portion of the metropolitan area,freeway connections two to three miles apart are too close for the expected density of development. During the course of this study it was revealed that General Motors Corporation may move their proving grounds to another site and sell the existing site to land developers. If this happens,a regional transportation corridor could b e developed through the GM property as shown in Figure 15.Another option would b e to curve the alignment to go southward along Power Road and continue eastward, south of the GM property. Another alternative location shown in Figure 15 would connect to the Santan Freeway in the vicinity of Gilbert Road and Germann Road and extend more or less straight eastward to U.S. 60.The probable location falls between Pecos Road and Queen Creek Road.The location is approximately half -way between S. R.360 and Hunt Highway which is at the southern edge of Maricopa County. -45- In Pinal County,the roadway would cross State Lands which are currently undeveloped. Such a roadway would make these lands much more accessible and attractive for future urban development.In addition,the previously discussed Goldfield Road corridor could be extended southward across these State Lands to the Santan Freeway connection to further serve this large tract of developable land. Implementation It is recommended that a regional highway plan be adopted that will include the corridors shown in Figure 15.The initial step would be for the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT),the State Land Department,the Bureau of Land Management, Maricopa County,Pinal County,the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG),the Central Arizona Association of Governments (CAAG),and the municipalities of Apache Junction,Mesa,Chandler,and Gilbert to formally approve the corridors for study purposes.Within the next five to ten year time period (1 9 93-1998), location and design studies should be implemented in these corridors.In these studies, traffic forecasts will be prepared and the type of roadway (arterial street, parkway, freeway) to accommodate the future traffic forecasts will be determined.Alternative alignments will be studied and a recommended alignment established.Right-of-way limits and access controls will be set so that land development can occur to complement the regional highway system. These studies will include a program of public input and review.At the conclusion of the studies,the governmental agencies will need to adopt the appropriate portions of the plan so right-of-way can be preserved.These studies should be initiated by ADOT but have local government participation. ARTERIAL STREET PLANS (5 TO 20 YEARS) Using the regional transportation corridors as a framework,a future roadway improvement plan was developed,and is shown in Figure 16.Many of the elements of this plan are existing or are in the adopted five-year construction program.The remaining segments have been placed in the ten-year and twenty-year programs. When discussing plans ten and twenty years in the future it is difficult to determine with a high degree of accuracy the order in which the roadway segments should be constructed.However, the segments can be placed in priority categories to help Apache -47- Me r i d i a n D r . McKellips Rd. Lost Dutchman Blvd. Superstition Blvd.- oo U.S. 60 / Apache Trail- co Broadway Ave.- -oiCIcc -cicc -a ti i -o cc Iiio°.c 4-3 o c co o (340,gig 19.2 13.3 11.1 10.7 s cv I 4"•C,cD•0 ("f ro 7.3 5.6 0 4.1 0 4 .9,3.4 0 0 Ø j r9 0AOcl* `91 „dr r,:g000r•Z 13.4 12.5 0 _f 2 5.8 5.0 ! • cr, II Arz,troV • 2 5.0 I 2S:3 Arz 1 20.5 18.0 cr'in 9 7 •7 I 7.5 r k cr I Southern Ave.1/4c;1 16.7 6.1 6.1 5.3 0 Lor, );•6 V )I I 65.2 41 49.5 S.R. 360 11.7 c4 6.2 c.,;cD4 co 0 t UI 5.1 `t" r 5.9 r 5.0 r!60 Daseitne Ave.\Millft.41L711111011ftWWIllft 41.1 0'1 7.7 • 37.3 co PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF 7-73. A APACHE JUNCTION TRANSPORTATION /TRANSIT STUDY LEGEND Figure 16 FU T UR E ROADWAY NEEDS Five Year Program Ten to Twenty Year Needs -48- Junction grow in an orderly fashion.The growth patterns in Apache Junction can be observed and, based on these patterns, roadway elements from these priority categories can be placed in future five-year plans for implementation. Three priority categories were established.The Priority 1 category contains the roadway elements that should be considered during the next five-year program (1993- 1998); those in Priority 2 category in the following five years (1998-2003); and Priority 3 during the 2003-2008 time period.The roadway plans in each category are outlined in the following sections. Priority 1 (1993-1998) The following roadway sections should be constructed to encourage development of the industrial/commercial land adjacent to S.R. 360.These roadway sections provide the basic access system for land development and should be four -lane roadways capable of handling truck traffic. A.Baseline Road from Meridian Drive to U.S.60. B.Idaho Road from S.R. 360 to Baseline Road. C.Tomahawk Road from Southern Avenue to Baseline Road. D.Goldfield Road from S.R. 360 to Baseline Road. E.Southern Avenue from Tomahawk Road to U.S. 60. Also included in the Priority 1 category is the initial planning for the connection to the Red Mountain Freeway. Priority 2 (1998-2003) The roadway segments in the Priority 2 category will be needed to carry the traffic volumes that will be generated by new land development in the northeast portion of Apache Junction. A.Initial construction of the connection to the Red Mountain Freeway.This roadway may begin as two lanes to provide a bypass for traffic headed to and from the Salt River recreation area, and also to provide access to the local street system as lands in the area develop. -49- B.Idaho Road and Tomahawk Road between S.R. 88 and the connection to the Red Mountain Freeway. C.Broadway Avenue from Idaho Road to U.S. 60, and Superstition Boulevard from Idaho Road to S.R. 88. Priority 3 (2003 - 2008) The forecast traffic volumes indicate it may be necessary to have a minimum of four lanes on S.R. 83 from Idaho Road to the Red Mountain connection, and on Goldfield Road between U.S. 60 and the connection to the Red Mountain Freeway. FINANCING Financing for street improvements consists of estimating both the amount of money that will be available and the cost of design and construction.Only orders of magnitude estimates may be made due to the inability to accurately predict the sources of revenue, the effects inflation will have on construction costs during the next twenty years,and the absence of specific studies on individual road segments. Revenues While developing the five-year street construction program outlined in Chapter III, it was determined that the only funds available for street construction are 1/24 of the sales tax of Apache Junction,and the 1/2t sales tax of Final County.It was further estimated that these revenues will increase one percent per year.If the City continues its current policy,thirty percent of the city sales tax money will be devoted to residential street construction.Using these assumptions,the total estimated revenues for street construction from fiscal year 1993 - 94 to fiscal year 2007 — 08 are shown in Table 12. -50- TABLE 12 ESTIMATED STREET CONSTRUCTION REVENUES (FISCAL YEARS 1993 -94 THRU 2007 -08) REVENUE SOURCE MAJOR RESIDENTIAL STREETS STREETS TOTAL Pinal County Tax $6,000,000 -$6,000,000 Apache Junction Tax 10,500 ,000 $4 500 000 15,000,000 Total $16,500,000 $4,500,000 $21,000,000 Construction Costs Construction cost estimates were prepared for the roadway elements outlined in the ten- and twenty-year plans.Because no definite years have been established for constructing any of the roadways,costs for all of them were escalated three percent per year for fifteen years which is the average for the ten- and twenty-year programs.The unit costs resulting from this escalation are: •$100,000 per lane mile for paving and light grading •$125,000 per traffic signal installation •$50,000 per acre for right-of-way •$100,000 per mile for drainage The construction cost estimate for each roadway is shown in Table 13.Three of the roadway segments are on either the Pinal County or Arizona Department of Transportation systems, so it was assumed that Apache Junction will participate on these projects on a 50-50 basis.This scenario indicates that the total estimated costs of $16,400,000 for major street construction projects are about equal to the total estimated revenues of $16,500,000 for major street construction for the period between 1993 and 2008. -51- TABLE 13 FUTURE STREET CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE COST ($1,000's) DISTANCE NO. STREET FROM TO (MILES)LANES PAVING SIGNALS It/1V DRAINAGE TOTAL Baseline Road Meridian Drive U.S. 60 5.0 5 $2,500 $625 $4,500 $500 $8,125 (1) Idaho Road Baseline Road S.R. 360 0.5 5 250 --50 300 Tomahawk Road Baseline Road Southern Avenue 1.0 5 500 --100 600 Goldfield Road Baseline Road S.R. 360 0.5 5 250 --50 300 Southern Avenue Tomahawk Road U.S. 60 1.0 5 500 --100 600 Red Mountain Freeway Connection 5.0 2 1,000 750 4,500 500 6,750 (2)(3) Idaho Road S.R. 88 Red Mountain Connection 2.5 5 1,250 125 250 1625 Tomahawk Road S.R. 88 Red Mountain Connection 1.5 2 300 -1,400 200 1,900 Broadway Road Idaho Road U.S. 60 0.5 5 250 125 -100 475 Superstition Boulevard Idaho Road S.R. 88 0.25 5 125 --25 150 i Apache Trail Idaho Road Red Mountain Connection 3.5 5 1,750 375 350 2,475 (2) cri ts3 Goldfield Road U.S. 60 Red Mountain Connection 4.0 5 2,000 900 400 3,300 $16,400 (4) (1) (2) (3) (4) Joint Development with Pinal County Joint Development with ADOT Includes $500,000 for location and design study Assumes 50-50 share with Pinal County on items marked (1)and 1/3 - 1/3 - 1/3 share with ADOT and Pinal County on items marked (2). MUG ID IC) CO C 4 Ce) 1 w =II t ca -Urban Roads of Regional Significance Gateway Roads of Regional Significance Existing Freeways and lnterstates =mum Planned Freeways z 9 111 um u elk t I 1 AI I Potential Roads of t i \ x g I u I I a I ILJIgIIIIIUE111U t OMNI III DOME WWI IC MID* ID ODIITA CD CO r.r) OD kI1DI a it FV 104DILLIPI ID DWI OD MOGI ID .. Illy ID 0441€4111 11.40/4114111 FILO ID " 14 4 113344011 GAON MEI 110 I F 4 E :amII9a9 —ODIUM KR ID liaDS ID MAID g IUD - (1) NORM 0 1 2 3 4 5 101104/11 .0111/3 NAM DP ulin41911 Di semmi444 100.401141 10.10130 411 Figure 4 OD 4/03