The purpose of tonight's meeting is to present information and receive public comments on:

Welcome! The Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT), in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), is conducting a Corridor Improvement Study of US 93 between State Route 74 and the Santa Maria River (Figure 1). The study will determine the optimum location and design concept for a proposed bypass around Wickenburg and the widening of 35 miles of US 93 north of town. In addition, a separate Interim Improvement Design Concept Study is underway to investigate alternatives to alleviate traffic congestion in downtown Wickenburg until the ultimate bypass is completed.

This is the third in a series of public information meetings designed to update the public on the progress of the studies and to gather your input. Tonight’s meeting will focus on the status of the proposed US 93 bypass around the Wickenburg area and the proposed interim improvement project within the town of Wickenburg.

Need for the Project

US 93 is the primary highway route linking the metropolitan Phoenix area to northwest Arizona and beyond. It is also part of the National Highway System and has been designated as a North American Free Trade Agreement route. ADOT’s long-range plan is ultimately to provide a four-lane highway from Phoenix to the Nevada state line. Improvements to the route are being made as traffic conditions warrant and as funding becomes available.

The portion of US 93 between Wickenburg and the Santa Maria River is currently operating near capacity and it is expected that traffic volumes will increase markedly over the next 20 years. Given these conditions, together with the congestion on US 93 within Wickenburg, ADOT has determined that there is an immediate need to initiate route improvements.

At the last public information meeting, held on August 22, 2000, ADOT presented the findings of the initial analysis of several Wickenburg bypass alignments suggested by the public and ADOT. The Southwest and Far West bypass corridors were presented as the most appropriate for a bypass (Figure 2), with the Far West being the preferred option. It was also stated that additional development and evaluation of specific highway alignments within each corridor is needed.

Subsequent to the public meeting, the BLM found that the Far West Corridor would pass through a protected area that surrounds the cliff areas of Vulture Peak and Caballeros Peaks. The area was established by BLM’s Lower Gila North Management Framework Plan (MFP), which was approved in March 1983, to protect the nesting habitat of the prairie falcon, golden eagle, barn owl, and great horned owl. This area, labeled on Figure 2 as a Raptor Protection Area (RPA), is designated as a “significant special habitat feature” in the MFP.

Without a change to the BLM’s plan, the Far West alternative cannot be considered a feasible alternative. If ADOT were to proceed with the corridor selection process at this time, the Far West Corridor would have to be dropped from further consideration, resulting in the selection of the Southwest Corridor by default. However, the Study Team feels that the Far West Corridor should be fully analyzed, due to the public support for that route and the advantages that the Far West offers in comparison to the Southwest Corridor. Another consideration is that the ultimate location of the proposed CANAMEX Corridor, which has not yet been resolved, could influence the alignment and selection of the bypass route.

In order to consider ADOT’s request for a transportation corridor across the RPA, the BLM would need to initiate a proposal to amend the current MFP. The amendment process involves full public participation and an environmental analysis. The analysis would determine whether the existing RPA designation is appropriate and whether it should be modified to allow the proposed transportation corridor. It is important to note that carrying out the BLM’s amendment process would not ensure approval of the Far West bypass corridor. In order to change the MFP, the BLM must demonstrate that the RPA designation is no longer valid or that the change in the plan is warranted by the need for the bypass to be located within the protected area.

Before the BLM will agree to begin the amendment process, the agency must have a compelling reason to justify the change to its current land use management plan. Therefore, ADOT has agreed to prepare a detailed Feasibility Report regarding the various bypass routes, including a new Southern Loop (Figure 2), as a basis for the BLM to consider revisiting the RPA designation status.

Regardless of whether or not the BLM amends the MFP to allow road construction through the RPA, continued consideration of a bypass route will take several years to complete. With the CANAMEX Corridor Study lagging well behind the bypass study, and with the uncertainty regarding a transportation corridor through the RPA, not enough information is available at this time to clearly define the ultimate bypass route. ADOT is committed to developing the Wickenburg bypass; however, a final decision on the route selection will now be several years in the future.

In the meantime, ADOT will continue the development of a separate Location/Design Concept Report and an Environmental Assessment (EA) for US 93 north of Wickenburg to the Santa Maria River, so that improvements to that segment of the highway are not delayed by the bypass study. A public information meeting will be held early next year to present details on this portion of the US 93 corridor improvement study.

At the last public information meeting, numerous alternatives were described and illustrated as candidates for an interim improvement project to relieve existing congestion in Wickenburg prior to construction of the US 93 bypass. Of the alignments considered, Alternatives 7 and 13 were presented as the two options with the most potential. Alternative 10, which would remove parking from Tegner Street and Wickenburg Way to provide room for two left-turn lanes, was described as the simplest and least costly solution. Input from the public indicated virtually no support for Alternative 10, little support for Alternative 7, and a fair amount of support for Alternative 13. There were also many who opposed all of the interim improvement alternatives. This input indicated that additional work was necessary to arrive at an alternative that could be recommended.

Since the last meeting, three additional alternatives, numbers 14, 15, and 16, have been investigated. Illustrations of these alternatives, as well as Alternatives 7 and 13, are attached at the back of this handout. All alternatives were evaluated based on 27 factors with the result that Alternative 16 is being presented this evening as the preferred alternative. The primary reasons for preferring Alternative 16 are:

· Its terminus north of the APS substation would remove regional traffic farther from downtown Wickenburg than the other alternatives, thereby having the greatest beneficial effect upon local air quality, safety, and traffic operations.

· It would be located farther away from residential communities between Coffinger Park and the Super 8 Motel, reducing potential noise impacts on these neighborhoods. In addition, Alternative 16 would minimize potential impacts on community cohesion, neighborhood character, and visual quality of the area by avoiding direct intrusions into these residential areas.

· It would avoid separating the existing commercial development on Tegner Street at the northern town limit from existing and potential commercial development immediately to the south. As a result, it would maintain the continuity of the commercial district and accommodate future development.

Interim Improvement Evaluation Factors

Access Control, Access to Public Lands and Existing Local Streets
Air Quality
Neighborhoods
Consistency with Wickenburg Traffic Circulation System
Consistency with Land Use
Riparian Habitat Displacement
Historic/Archaeological Sites
Noise
Parks/Schools/Hospital
Right-of-Way from Private Land
Regional Transportation System
Rehabilitation Centers
Water Quality
Federal Emergency Management Agency Implications

Number of Businesses and Residences Displaced
Cost
Constructability and Traffic Control
Roadway Geometrics (Horizontal/Vertical Alignment)
Safety/Traffic Operations
Flood Protection
Drainage
Superfund Liability
Community Cohesion
Impact to Future Development
Threatened/Endangered Species
Visual Impacts
Corps of Engineers Implications

Your input this evening is very important to the outcome of the study. Before and after tonight’s presentation, Study Team representatives will be available for you to discuss the study project and ask questions. Following the presentation, the meeting will be opened for comments and questions from the audience. A court reporter will be on duty to ensure that the open session is recorded accurately for our use as we continue with the study.

Your input should be noted on the attached Comment Sheet. Please hand it to a Study Team representative tonight or send it to Bert Bertleson by December 19, 2001.

Following tonight’s meeting, the Study Team will review the input received from the public. The information will be used in completing the design concept for the interim improvement project. An Initial Design Concept Report and a Draft EA will be prepared and made available to the public early next year, followed by a public hearing where we will present our final recommendations. As mentioned earlier, the design concept for improving US 93 north of Wickenburg is continuing, with a public information meeting also planned for early next year.

No final decision or endorsement of any of the study alternatives has been made at this time by ADOT, the FHWA, or the BLM. An official decision will not be made regarding either the bypass or the interim improvement until: (1) the alternatives evaluation process has been documented in an EA; (2) a public hearing has been held to present recommendations; and (3) the agencies and the public have had an opportunity to comment. These steps are required for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act.