|
Home
SR 89 to
Wickenburg Interim Bypass
Wickenburg (SR 89) to Santa Maria
River
Interim Improvement Project
Wickenburg
Bypass
Related Studies
Study Team
Feedback
What's New
| |
COMMENTS FROM JUNE 3, 1999 PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING
HELD AT WICKENBURG COMMUNITY CENTER
61 people returned comments or letters
(Of these, 5 people sent in 2, so 66 comment sheets or letters received. If one person
made the same comment more than once, it was counted as only one comment.)
Some comment sheets/letters expressed more than one of the listed opinions (e.g. oppose
both corridors and support interim solution). These comments are counted once in each
appropriate category.
GENERAL CORRIDOR PREFERENCES
Southwest Corridor |
Generally support |
11 |
| Generally oppose |
4 |
Northeast
Corridor |
Generally support |
3 |
| Generally oppose |
6 |
Both Corridors |
Oppose both corridors |
6 |
Other Corridors |
Support Far West route |
14 |
| Support bypass route other than Northeast,
Southwest, or Far West |
3 |
Interim Solution |
Generally support |
6 |
| Generally oppose |
8 |
| |
None of the above/no preferences stated |
18 |
QUESTION 1 – IDENTIFY CRITICAL ISSUES FOR BYPASS CORRIDOR
COMPARISON
CRITICAL BYPASS ISSUES:
Natural Environment
37 comments
Air
Quality
(14) |
Minimize air pollution/impacts in Wickenburg area |
6 |
| Southwest bypass would bring air pollution into
Wickenburg due to southwesterly winds blowing into basin |
6 |
| Far West route minimizes air pollution |
2 |
Noise
Impacts
(8) |
Minimize noise pollution/impacts in Wickenburg
area |
6 |
| Far West route minimizes noise impacts |
1 |
| Southwest corridor causes noise impact on Section
15 area (residential area southwest of town) |
1 |
Visual
Impacts
(7) |
Minimize visual impacts on Vulture Peak area |
3 |
| Southwest bypass would cause negative impact on
desert scenery |
2 |
| Area northeast of Wickenburg is more scenic than
southwest area |
1 |
| Light pollution from vehicles on bypass |
1 |
Wildlife/
Habitat
(6) |
Minimize wildlife and habitat impacts /
destruction of desert |
3 |
| Northeast bypass would have big impact on
wildlands |
1 |
| Minimize impact on Hassayampa for both interim
and the long-term bypasses |
1 |
| Both corridors result in too much destruction of
desert habitat |
1 |
Water Quality
(2) |
Bridges should not cross river upstream from town
to protect local water supply. Southwest corridor avoids this. |
1 |
| Minimize water quality impacts |
1 |
CRITICAL BYPASS ISSUES:
Socio-Economic Impacts
67 comments
Private Property
(13) |
Protect / minimize impacts on private property |
7 |
| Northeast bypass has too much / more impact on
private property than Southwest |
3 |
| Favor Southwest corridor because it’s less
built-up / more compatible with surroundings |
2 |
| Far West route minimizes negative impacts on
private property |
1 |
Recreational
Areas
(11) |
Protect existing recreational areas |
5 |
| Both corridors create impacts on horse trails |
3 |
| Northeast route would have a larger impact on
community activities |
1 |
| Vulture Peak area should not be disturbed |
1 |
| Both corridors impact recreational areas |
1 |
Residential Areas/
Neighborhoods
(11) |
Minimize impacts on residential areas /
neighborhoods |
3 |
| Bypass should not infringe on life in Wickenburg
– prefer out of town away from developed areas |
2 |
| A Southwest corridor is best for community but Far
West would have least impact |
2 |
| No disruption of neighborhoods is acceptable for
the interim solution |
1 |
| Northeast bypass would have big impact on
residential areas |
1 |
| Prefer southwest route because it would have less
impact on residential areas |
1 |
| Southwest corridor comes close to nice developing
area NW of town |
1 |
Business Impacts
(10) |
Both bypass corridors would negatively affect
guest ranches/tourism due to proximity of roadway to facilities |
2 |
| Northeast bypass would have negative impact on
major businesses, e.g. Remuda Ranch, Rosewood Women’s Center, The Meadows |
2 |
| Travelers will stop in Wickenburg regardless of
which bypass is built |
2 |
| Avoid negative impacts on Wickenburg’s major
employers/business community |
2 |
| Good signage on bypass would help businesses |
1 |
| Keep bypass near center of town to help businesses |
1 |
Cost
(9) |
Consider cost of building bridges and/or roadway
on rough terrain |
2 |
| Far West route would be easier / less expensive
to build due to flat terrain |
2 |
| Prefer southwest route because it’s mostly
public land, would therefore cost less |
1 |
| Need to do cost comparison of Far West vs.
Southwest |
1 |
| Southwest route less expensive because don’t
have to build connector road to US 60 |
1 |
| Cost of building road |
1 |
| Bypass on east side of town would cost less |
1 |
Town
Planning /Growth
(7) |
Allow Wickenburg room to expand to the west, put
bypass further out west |
2 |
| Preserve character of Wickenburg |
2 |
| Consider impacts to Town tax base and utility
revenues |
1 |
| Consider regional growth and traffic patterns |
1 |
| Close-in bypass would turn Wickenburg into gas
stop/highway town like on I-40 |
1 |
School Zones
(4) |
Protect school zones from traffic, noise of
Southwest corridor |
3 |
| Oppose an interchange at S. Vulture Mine Road
because unsafe for schools |
1 |
Mining Claims
(2) |
Concerned that mines near Vulture Peak will be
obstacle / more important than impacts on people |
2 |
CRITICAL BYPASS ISSUES:
Other
39 comments
Comments on Study
(17) |
Expand study to include "Far West"
bypass route on far side of Vulture Peak, Twin Peaks |
5 |
| Listen to the community’s wishes to make
decision / get consensus |
3 |
| Forget the interim bypass and spend the money on
the Far West bypass |
2 |
| Third corridor alternative needed because
community doesn’t like these 2 and ADOT doesn’t like Far West |
1 |
| Need to consider interim solution to solve
existing congestion and safety issues |
1 |
| Need a close-in town bypass and a distant corridor
to Phoenix and Mexico |
1 |
| Build interim solution now, then Northeast bypass
in 15 years |
1 |
| Methodology of study is sound and well planned |
1 |
| Has bypass location been pinned down yet |
1 |
| Current conditions unsafe – put in bypass
soon |
1 |
Design
(9) |
Concerned about how US 60 will connect to bypass |
2 |
| Concerned about improvements to Constellation
Road, who pays for this and what type of road would it be |
1 |
| Prefer Southwest route because it avoids connector
road required to tie US 60 into northeast corridor. A connector road would not help
downtown traffic conditions. |
1 |
| Suggests bypass location past McDonald’s, up
the river several miles then return to 93, like in Globe |
1 |
| Suggests bypass starting at Hwy. 303, passing by
White Tank Mts., staying west until past Wickenburg and joining 93 north of town |
1 |
| For northeast route, follow existing unpaved road
(Gates Rd.) – avoids rodeo grounds, trails, Remuda Ranch |
1 |
| Bypass should be far to west or east, and possibly
join 93 to I-10 |
1 |
| Does Southwest route begin at SR 74? |
1 |
Other
(13) |
No comment on these issues |
4 |
| Neither corridor is acceptable |
3 |
| Prefer Far West corridor |
2 |
| Prefer Southwest corridor |
2 |
| Prefer In-town bypass |
1 |
| Want close-in bypass within sight of town or else
Far West |
1 |
QUESTION 2 – IDENTIFY ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED ON US 93 NORTH OF WICKENBURG
ISSUES NORTH OF WICKENBURG:
Natural Environment
7 comments
Wildlife/
Habitat
(3) |
Minimize impact on desert / wildlife habitat |
2 |
| Transplant Joshua trees |
1 |
Air Quality
(1) |
Minimize air quality impacts |
1 |
Visual Impacts
(1) |
Make as scenic as possible |
1 |
Floodplain
(1) |
Do not consider a route in the floodplain because
flooding would be very destructive |
1 |
Noise Impacts
(1) |
Minimize noise |
1 |
ISSUES NORTH OF WICKENBURG:
Socio-Economic Impacts
5 comments
Residential
Areas/
Neighborhoods
(2) |
Avoid impacts on Vista Royale, Nine-Iron Ranch
Rd., and Quail Run Rd., off 93 just west of 89 split |
1 |
| Takeoff point for bypass should be well north of
present development, more than ½ mile away |
1 |
Mining Claims
(1) |
Concerned mining claims have too much weight in
decision |
1 |
Private Property
(1) |
Minimize impacts to private property |
1 |
Cost
(1) |
Cost of building road |
1 |
ISSUES NORTH OF WICKENBURG:
Other
55 comments
Design
(29) |
Supports following existing route with 4-lane
divided highway |
12 |
| Roadway / traffic safety |
4 |
| Install turn lanes at Rincon Road. Very dangerous
area |
2 |
| Improve traffic flow |
1 |
| Convenience |
1 |
| Improve traffic safety around The Meadows, where
there are many accidents |
1 |
| This area needs work ASAP due to heavy traffic /
unsafe conditions |
1 |
| Area is wide open & terrain is not a problem |
1 |
| Don’t want 93 north of Wickenburg |
1 |
| Provide access to 93 from feeder roads |
1 |
| Plan for 93 connection with I-8 or I-10 through
Aguila & Eagle Eye Rd. to Vulture Mine Rd. |
1 |
| Improve access to Vulture Mine Rd – present
SB right turn lane too short |
1 |
| Frontage roads will be required |
1 |
| Provide access to SR 89 |
1 |
Comments on Study
(2) |
Need to explain where traffic is coming from and
where it is headed – people do not understand the project |
1 |
| The people should pick bypass route |
1 |
Other
(24) |
No comment on these issues |
20 |
| Neutral / uninformed of issues |
3 |
| Does not support NAFTA corridor |
1 |
QUESTION 3 – COMMENTS
GENERAL COMMENTS:
Natural Environment
8 comments
Visual
Impacts
(4) |
Need an attractive way to exit bypass into
town/keep town from being dominated by freeway |
1 |
| Visual simulations / 3-D graphics are critical to
public understanding / support of project |
1 |
| Vulture Peak is important landmark for Wickenburg |
1 |
| Avoid visual impact of Southwest corridor on
Vulture Peak, Twin Peaks, and Black Mt. |
1 |
Wildlife/
Habitat
(2) |
Interim bypass should not include bridges due to
impact on Hassayampa |
1 |
| Both corridors destroy too much desert |
1 |
Air Quality
(1) |
Southwest corridor would cause negative impact
with air pollution – prefer Far West |
1 |
Noise
Impacts
(1) |
Noise near rehab center is not tolerable –
may need to relocate |
1 |
GENERAL COMMENTS:
Socio-Economic Impacts
20 comments
Private Property
(4) |
Interim solution would have too much impact on
property |
2 |
| Private property should be primary concern in
bypass location |
1 |
| Interim bypass should not go east of the river
– too much impact on landowners |
1 |
Cost
(3) |
Far West bypass route would be cheaper because it
wouldn’t require bridges |
1 |
| Interim bypass should not include bridges due to
expense |
1 |
| Costs / mileage should have been known for public
meeting |
1 |
Mining Claims
(3) |
Mining claims can easily be condemned by
evaluating mineral potential |
1 |
| What is procedure for condemning mining claims |
1 |
| Concerned about mines having too much weight in
decision |
1 |
Business Impacts
(2) |
Businesses have been affected by delay in
determining bypass location, e.g. real estate builders, investors |
1 |
| Do not disrupt downtown business district for
interim bypass |
1 |
Town
Planning / Growth
(2) |
Who controls development along the bypass? |
1 |
| Southwest corridor interferes with town expansion
of airport and industrial park – prefer Far West |
1 |
Residential Areas
/Neighborhoods
(2) |
Northeast bypass has too much impact on
homeowners |
1 |
| No residential areas should be taken for the
interim bypass |
1 |
Recreational
Areas
(2) |
Northeast bypass has too much impact on
recreational areas |
1 |
| Both corridors destroy too much recreational area |
1 |
Cultural
Resces.
(1) |
Southwest corridor interferes with historic
ranches – prefer Far West |
1 |
Schools
(1) |
Southwest corridor has too much impact on schools
– prefer Far West |
1 |
GENERAL COMMENTS:
Interim Bypass
29 comments
Interim
Solution Design
(14) |
Build interim solution ASAP, currently unsafe
situation / too much traffic |
4 |
| Use existing facilities, eliminate downtown
parking, and use 2 lanes for traffic through town. |
4 |
| Interim bypass should be incorporated as part of
permanent bypass, not left to become frontage road |
1 |
| Short-term bypass should be permanent 4-lane
divided highway – solves downtown traffic and keeps people west of town happy |
1 |
| Suggests interim continue west on 60 to Vulture
Mine Rd., turn right. Alleviates congestion turning at Tegner |
1 |
| Suggests 3 lanes NB on Tegner, Circle K solution |
1 |
| Suggests interim going north on 60, go right at
Stolz gas station, across park, rejoin near Woodies on 93, go through trailer park |
1 |
| Don’t build new bridges for interim |
1 |
Interim Solution
Concerns
(6) |
Concerned interim solution will become permanent |
3 |
| Interim alternatives were not what the public
expected - are too expensive, major property impacts, eliminate parking, cause problems
for tourists and businesses, and/or increase speed in pedestrian area downtown |
1 |
| Concerned that interim bypass study skirts legal
process to do long-term solution |
1 |
| Concerned interim solution would compete for funds
for long-term solution, "sabotage" permanent bypass |
1 |
Other
(9) |
Don’t waste money and time on interim bypass
– only delays permanent solution |
6 |
| Forget interim bypass, it’s a waste of money
– build Southwest bypass instead |
1 |
| Study traffic control measures rather than interim
route |
1 |
| Truckers will use shortest route so they will
continue to go through town even if build out of town |
1 |
GENERAL COMMENTS:
Other
47 comments
Comments on Study
(25) |
Good meeting / presentation |
7 |
| Study process too long |
5 |
| Has EIS been done? |
1 |
| At next public meeting, ask people who want to
speak to fill out a card, then call them up to speak, limit 2-3 min. |
1 |
| The two proposed corridors were chosen based on
inaccurate or incomplete data |
1 |
| Web page is good idea |
1 |
| People weren’t pleased with the corridors
presented, instead favored Far West route. Use money for interim to offset extra cost of
this corridor |
1 |
| Impossible to please everyone – don’t
try to or will never get study done |
1 |
| Solutions are more convenient for ADOT and
federal govt. than for people and future of Wickenburg |
1 |
| Why is bypass study included with widening US 93
north of town – only slows process |
1 |
| Should appeal to US government to promote
"Tonopah" solution for the NAFTA corridor |
1 |
| Is bypass part of 93 improvements or I-8 / Tonopah
route? Where is the traffic coming from? |
1 |
| Plan for I-10 to eventually tie into Southwest
bypass |
1 |
| Forget interim and Northeast corridor – only
Chamber of Commerce wants those |
1 |
| Include Far West route in study |
1 |
Comments on Survey
Results
(6) |
Survey showed that majority in favor of Southwest
corridor |
1 |
| Chamber of Comm./local businesses outweigh
residents in decision according to Sun’s analysis of survey results |
1 |
| Should have contacted someone in Section 15
(residential area southwest of town) regarding the survey |
1 |
| Survey results showed support for southwest
corridor, but "close in" and "far out" weren’t defined so the
results are clouded |
1 |
| More people want Far West corridor than polls
showed |
1 |
| Did survey include residents who live outside town
limits |
1 |
Other
(16) |
No comment on these issues |
12 |
| In favor of Northeast corridor |
1 |
| Concerned about Sun aligning with
businesses – will not be a good forum for public discussion |
1 |
| Chamber of Commerce is not representative of the
people |
1 |
| 303 loop not suitable to connect 93 to I-10 |
1 |
|
