FISCAL YEAR 2015 STATE SYSTEM OF THE R E P O R T PROGRAMMING AND SYSTEM ANALYSIS www.mcdot.maricopa.gov 2014 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Overview ................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose of the State of the System Report .............................................................................................. 1 Components of the State of the System Report ....................................................................................... 1 Timeframe of the State of the System Report .......................................................................................... 1 County Goals and Objectives for Transportation...................................................................................... 1 Traffic Management System.................................................................................................... 4 Overview and Background ........................................................................................................................ 4 Purpose of the Traffic Management System ............................................................................................ 4 Transportation System Plan Guidance ...................................................................................................... 4 Traffic Growth and Congestion ................................................................................................................. 4 Improving Traffic Systems Management and Operations ...................................................................... 16 Incident Management............................................................................................................................. 18 Traveler Information ............................................................................................................................... 20 Traffic Management Serving Regional Travel ......................................................................................... 21 Innovation ............................................................................................................................................... 26 Safety Management System ...................................................................................................28 Purpose of the Safety Management System .......................................................................................... 28 MCDOT Safety Management Procedures ............................................................................................... 28 Evaluation of Safety ................................................................................................................................ 28 Spot Safety Improvement Project Accomplishments ............................................................................. 28 County Crash Statistics ............................................................................................................................ 30 Safety Focus Areas .................................................................................................................................. 30 Low Volume Road Management System ...............................................................................41 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 41 Background ............................................................................................................................................. 41 Unpaved County Road System ................................................................................................................ 41 Bridge Management System ..................................................................................................46 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 46 Data Gathering and Analysis ................................................................................................................... 46 Evaluation Criteria................................................................................................................................... 47 Recommendations for TIP Programming Procedures ............................................................................ 47 Current Status of the MCDOT Bridge Management System................................................................... 47 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Asset Management for Structures .......................................................................................................... 47 Federal Funding Eligibility Comparisons ................................................................................................. 48 Notable FY 2015 Bridge Events ............................................................................................................... 53 Synopsis of MCDOT’s Bridge Projects ..................................................................................................... 53 Road Management System.....................................................................................................58 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 58 Summary of MCDOT Paved Facilities ...................................................................................................... 58 Road and Pavement Evaluation Ratings ................................................................................................. 59 Preventive Maintenance Procedures...................................................................................................... 72 FY 2015 Pavement Preservation Results................................................................................................. 72 5-Year Pavement Preservation Plan ....................................................................................................... 79 FY 2016 Pavement Preservation Plan ..................................................................................................... 79 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Figures Figure 1: Overview of General Areas of the County as Presented in the TSP........................................... 3 Figure 2: 2014 Two-way Daily Traffic Counts............................................................................................ 5 Figure 3: 2010-2014 Daily Traffic Volume Growth Rates .......................................................................... 8 Figure 4: 2014 Road Segment V/S Ratios ................................................................................................ 13 Figure 5: Original MCDOT TMC (left) and Current TMC (right) ............................................................... 16 Figure 6: MCDOT FY 2015 Traffic Signal Maintenance Activities Compared to Goal ............................. 17 Figure 7: Jurisdictional Distribution of REACT Calls (FY 2015) ................................................................ 19 Figure 8: Categories of Incidents Responded to by REACT (FY 2015) ..................................................... 19 Figure 9: Regional Rental Car Center at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport ............................... 20 Figure 10: AZTech Regional Archived Data Center (RADS) ..................................................................... 22 Figure 11: Example of Loop 101 Detour Maps........................................................................................ 24 Figure 12: Dashboard of the 2013 AZTech Performance Indicator Book ............................................... 25 Figure 13: National Connected Vehicle Test Beds .................................................................................. 26 Figure 14: FY 2015 Safety Improvements on County Roads ................................................................... 29 Figure 15: Fatal Crashes on County Roads 2010-2014............................................................................ 34 Figure 16: Bicycle and Pedestrian Fatal Crashes on County Roads 2010-2014 ...................................... 37 Figure 17: Work Zone Fatal Crashes on County Roads 2010-2014 ......................................................... 40 Figure 18: Road Surface Types as of 2015 .............................................................................................. 43 Figure 19: 2015 Bridge Sufficiency Ratings ............................................................................................. 50 Figure 20: Miles of Paved Roads owned by MCDOT (FY 2011 - FY 2015) ............................................... 59 Figure 21: FY 2011 - FY 2015 PCR for County Arterial Roads .................................................................. 60 Figure 22: FY 2015 PCR for County Arterial Roads .................................................................................. 61 Figure 23: FY 2011 - FY 2015 IRI for County Arterial Roads .................................................................... 64 Figure 24: FY 2015 IRI for County Arterial Roads .................................................................................... 65 Figure 25: FY 2011 - FY 2015 Sufficiency Ratings for County Arterial Roads .......................................... 68 Figure 26: FY 2015 Sufficiency Ratings for County Arterial Roads .......................................................... 69 Figure 27: FY 2015 Completed Maintenance Mileage ............................................................................ 74 Figure 28: FY 2015 Maintenance Costs ................................................................................................... 74 Figure 29: FY 2015 Pavement Maintenance Activities............................................................................ 76 Figure 30: FY 2016 Pavement Preservation 5-Year Summary Report .................................................... 79 Figure 31: FY 2016 Pavement Preservation Plan Summary .................................................................... 81 Figure 32: FY 2016 Estimated Maintenance Costs .................................................................................. 81 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Tables Table 1: Highest 50 2014 Road Segment V/S Ratios ............................................................................... 12 Table 2: Growth of ITS Features for FY 2006 and FY 2015 ...................................................................... 16 Table 3: Bell Road Travel Time Performance for 2007-2014 .................................................................. 18 Table 4: Traveler Information Message Posts (FY 2011 - FY 2015) ......................................................... 20 Table 5: County Crash Rates 2010 - 2014 ............................................................................................... 31 Table 6: Intersection and Non-Intersection Fatal and Incapacitating Injury Crashes ............................. 32 Table 7: Low Volume Roads Paved in 2015 ............................................................................................ 42 Table 8: Structures with Sufficiency Ratings between 50 and 80 ........................................................... 49 Table 9: Bridge Projects in the MCDOT FY 2016 - FY 2020 TIP ............................................................... 53 Table 10: New Bridges and Bridge Improvements Completed in FY 2015 ............................................. 54 Table 11: Bridges Anticipated to Be Under Construction by MCDOT in FY 2016 ................................... 54 Table 12: Projects Currently in the Design Phase by MCDOT ................................................................. 54 Table 13: Summary of FY 2015 Inspection Results ................................................................................. 55 Table 14: Listing of Span Bridges Over 600’ in Overall Length ............................................................... 55 Table 15: Listing of Span Bridges between 300’ and 600’ in Overall Length .......................................... 55 Table 16: Listing of Span Bridges between 100’ and 300’ in Overall Length .......................................... 56 Table 17: Listing of Span Bridges Under 100’ in Overall Length ............................................................. 56 Table 18: Miles of MCDOT Paved Roads FY 2011 - FY 2015 ................................................................... 58 Table 19: Preventive Maintenance Treatment Longevity....................................................................... 72 Table 20: FY 2015 Completed Maintenance Plans.................................................................................. 73 Table 21: FY 2011 - FY 2015 Annual Network Rating Summary ............................................................. 75 Table 22: FY 2016 Pavement Preservation Plan ..................................................................................... 80 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Acronyms ADOT – Arizona Department of Transportation ALERT – Arizona Local Emergency Response Team AR – Asphalt Rubber ARHM – Asphalt Rubber Hot Mix ATIS – Advanced Traveler Information System BIS – Bridge Investment Study BSR – Bridge Sufficiency Rating CAD – Computer Aided Dispatch Chip Seal HV – Chip Seal High Volume Chip Seal LV – Chip Seal Low Volume CCTV – Closed Circuit Television Cameras DCR – Design Concept Report MMITSS – Multi Modal Intelligent Traffic Signal System MUTCD – Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices MVMT – Million Vehicle Miles of Travel NUG – National Unified Goal O&D – Open and Declared PCR – Pavement Condition Rating RADS – Regional Archived Data Server RDM – Roadway Design Manual REACT – Regional Emergency Action Coordinating Team RMS – Road Management System DMS – Dynamic Message Sign SRPMIC – Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community DPS – Department of Public Safety SHSP – Strategic Highway Safety Plan DSRC – Dedicated Short-Range Communications SMS – Safety Management System FHWA – Federal Highways Administration FMS – Freeway Management System FY – Fiscal Year GAAP – Generally Accepted Accounting Principles GASB – Governmental Accounting Standards Board ICM – Integrated Corridor Management IGA – Intergovernmental Agreement IRI – International Roughness Index ITS – Intelligent Transportation Systems SOS Report – State of the System Report STSP – Strategic Transportation Safety Plan TAB – Transportation Advisory Board TIM Coalition – Traffic Incident Management Coalition TIP – Transportation Improvement Program TMC – Traffic Management Center TOC – Traffic Operations Center TSMO – Traffic Systems Management and Operations TSP – Transportation System Plan LRP – Laser Road Profiler USDOT – United States Department of Transportation LVR – Low Volume Roads V/C Ratio – Volume-to-Capacity Ratio M&R – Mill and Replace V/S Ratio – Volume-to-Service Ratio MAG – Maricopa Association of Governments VMT – Vehicle Miles of Travel MAP-21 – Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century MCDOT – Maricopa County Department of Transportation MDI – Model Deployment Initiative STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 v OVERVIEW Overview Purpose of the State of the System Report The State of the System (SOS) Report (hereafter referred to as “Report”) is a compilation of the physical inventory and status of the Maricopa County Department of Transportation’s (MCDOT’s) transportation system infrastructure. The transportation system includes roads, bridges, bicycle facilities, traffic signals, and other facilities. The Report documents the performance and condition of the various components of MCDOT’s transportation system. Components of the State of the System Report The Report includes the following system components:  Traffic Management;  Safety Management;  Low Volume Road Management;  Bridge Management; and  Road Management. Timeframe of the State of the System Report The Report focuses on FY 2015 (July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2015) but also includes limited information for other fiscal years in sections that discuss trends over the last several years. It is anticipated that the Report will be prepared annually moving forward. Most of the data analyzed in the Report is aggregated by fiscal year. Notable exceptions are traffic volume count data and traffic crash data, both of which are aggregated by calendar year per industry standards. For timeframe references throughout the Report, unless the year is noted as a fiscal year (e.g., FY 2015), the year referenced is a calendar year. County Goals and Objectives for Transportation Comprehensive Plan Guidance The Maricopa County Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1997 and revised in 2002. It directs the management of MCDOT. The Comprehensive Plan helps set direction for the County's transportation system investment, and the following objectives related to the transportation system are set forth in the Comprehensive Plan:  Employ technology to improve the use of transportation facilities;  Identify and accommodate transportation corridors;  Optimize public investments;  Minimize travel times;  Reduce crashes; and  Minimize and mitigate impacts of construction and operation. Transportation System Plan Guidance The Maricopa County Transportation System Plan (TSP) was adopted in 2007 and is currently being updated. The TSP sets the overall policies, goals, and fundamental considerations for MCDOT decisions concerning current and future transportation needs and investments. The TSP recommends investment STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 1 OVERVIEW priorities based on three types of routes: primary, secondary, and local. Much of the content of the TSP reflects the County’s Comprehensive Plan guidelines for transportation. Figure 1 provides an overview of the three General Areas that are delineated in the TSP. Throughout this Report, all maps that are presented are done so in sets of three, with one map for each area depicted in Figure 1. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 2 OVERVIEW Figure 1: Overview of General Areas of the County as Presented in the TSP STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 3 TRAFFIC Management System Traffic Management System Overview and Background MCDOT’s Traffic Management System – also known as Traffic System Management and Operations (TSM&O) – includes the operations and management of traffic on Maricopa County (County) roads. For purposes of this Report, County roads are roads that are fully or partially owned and operated by MCDOT or maintained by MCDOT through an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) or through courtesy grading pursuant to Arizona Revised Statute 28-6705. MCDOT’s traffic management system includes the infrastructure, policies, and procedures in place to manage existing and future traffic congestion on County roads as well as information about traffic congestion shared with other agencies and the traveling public. This section incorporates and expands upon information provided in previous Reports in the Congestion Management System section. Purpose of the Traffic Management System The purpose of the traffic management system is to:  Identify and measure traffic growth and congestion on County roads; and  Identify and measure MCDOT improvements to traffic operations through innovation, intelligent transportation system (ITS) devices, incident management, and traveler information. Transportation System Plan Guidance The TSP includes several objectives related to traffic management to ease traffic congestion, which include:  Intersection improvements;  Alternate route enhancement;  Identify and plan for both current and future traffic volume needs;  Monitor and measure congestion;  Identify alternative actions;  Recommend cost-effective mitigation measures; and  Evaluate actions related to congestion management. Traffic Growth and Congestion Existing Traffic Volumes and Historical Growth Traffic growth and congestion are evaluated on all County roads for which traffic volume information is available from MCDOT’s traffic count program. Traffic counts from 2014 are considered “existing” traffic volumes for the purpose of this Report. Maps labeled Figure 2 show the two-way daily traffic volume counts conducted by MCDOT on County roads in 2014. At locations where no count was taken in 2014, the most recent prior year’s count is used. In locations where only one directional count was taken, the count was doubled to represent a two-way count. In rural areas, traffic volumes on County roads are generally less than 12,000 vehicles per day. In urban areas, traffic volumes on County roads are generally less than 30,000 vehicles per day. Bell Road is a notable exception at nearly 60,000 vehicles per day. Maps labeled Figure 3 show the average annual growth rate of the two-way daily traffic volume counts on County roads between 2010 and 2014. At locations where no traffic counts were taken in 2010 or 2014, the most recent prior year’s count was used. Traffic volume growth rates vary widely across the County but are generally highest in the areas currently experiencing rapid land development. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 4 TRAFFIC Management System Figure 2: 2014 Two-way Daily Traffic Counts Area 1 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 5 TRAFFIC Management System Figure 2: 2014 Two-way Daily Traffic Counts Area 2 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 6 TRAFFIC Management System Figure 2: 2014 Two-way Daily Traffic Counts Area 3 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 7 TRAFFIC Management System Figure 3: 2010-2014 Daily Traffic Volume Growth Rates Area 1 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 8 TRAFFIC Management System Figure 3: 2010-2014 Daily Traffic Volume Growth Rates Area 2 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 9 TRAFFIC Management System Figure 3: 2010-2014 Daily Traffic Volume Growth Rates Area 3 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 10 TRAFFIC Management System Traffic Congestion Performance Measures MCDOT has recently developed a traffic congestion performance measure known as the volume-toservice-standard-threshold (V/S) ratio. In contrast to the standard volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio, which compares traffic volumes to road capacity, the V/S ratio compares the volume on a given road segment to the maximum volume considered acceptable by MCDOT for the characteristics of that road segment. A road segment with a V/S ratio value over 1.0 is considered to have unacceptable levels of congestion. Table 1 lists the 50 County road segments with the highest V/S ratios. Maps labeled Figure 4 show the V/S ratio for the road segments where 2014 traffic volume counts were available. It should be noted that the table and the figures exclude local roads. Most of the County’s roads have V/S ratios well below 1.0 but there are some road segments with a V/S ratio that approaches or exceeds 1.0. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 11 TRAFFIC Management System Table 1: Highest 50 2014 Road Segment V/S Ratios Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 On Road Rittenhouse Rd Lower Buckeye Rd Baseline Rd 67th Ave Ocotillo Rd 51st Ave Litchfield Rd Elliot Rd 51st Ave 51st Ave Rittenhouse Rd Chaparral Rd Southern Ave 51st Ave Granite Valley Dr Southern Ave Broadway Rd Val Vista Dr Hunt Hwy 67th Ave Beltline Rd Litchfield Rd Rio Verde Dr Val Vista Dr Broadway Rd Broadway Rd Peoria Ave Rio Verde Dr Riggs Rd Carefree Hwy 135th Ave Union Hills Dr Baseline Rd Carefree Hwy Carefree Hwy Peoria Ave 151st Ave Carefree Hwy Indian School Rd Riggs Rd Baseline Rd Bell Rd 91st Ave Alma School Rd Bell Rd Meeker Blvd Broadway Rd Indian School Rd Bell Rd Camino Del Sol Reference Road S. of Combs Rd W. of 67th Ave E. of 64th Ave S. of Broadway Rd W. of Meridian Rd N. of Pecos Rd N. of Olive Ave E. of Ellsworth Rd S. of Pecos Rd S. of Estrella Dr S. of Via de Palmas E. of SR 101 W. of 47th Ave N. of Olney Ave N. of Meeker Blvd W. of 39th Ave W. of 71st Ave S. of Thomas Rd W. of Sossaman Rd N. of Broadway Rd S. of Santa Cruz Rd N. of Northern Pkwy E. of 148th St S. of Ocotillo Rd E. of 35th Ave E. of 59th Ave E. of 99th Ave E. of 150th St W. of SR-347 W. of 52nd St S. of Deer Valley Dr E. of 99th Ave W. of 87th Ave W. of 7th St W. of 3rd St E. of 99th Dr N. of R H Johnson Blvd E. of 7th Ave W. of 99th Ave W. of 187th Ave W. of 87th Ave E. & W. of Del Webb Blvd N. of Baseline Rd S. of Riggs Rd W. of Lindgren Ave N. of Grand Ave E. of 83rd Ave W. of 100th Ave E. of 99th Ave S. of Beardsley Rd Number of Lanes 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 2 2 6 2 2 6 5 2 4 6 2 Daily Volume (2010) 25,720 N/A 20,488 13,425 17,963 6,911 18,369 7,268 6,940 N/A 20,376 N/A 12,929 N/A 17,256 12,929 8,763 6,617 9,171 10,827 5,924 18,369 6,353 10,642 11,526* 6,199 23,560 6,353 5,952 18,364 10,607 17,937 3,787 N/A N/A 23,560 9,779 19,486 N/A 4,907 3,717 58,385 3,503 9,063^ 64,011 23,308 6,411 N/A 61,127 9,734 Daily Volume (2014) 24,342 18,901 18,198 17,679 22,067 9,568 15,465 14,460 8,786 15,938 19,801 17,183 19,033 15,004 12,901 17,471 13,298 7,263 7,077 12,674 6,897 15,465 6,867 15,324 12,816 12,013 14,937 6,867 6,456 18,050 10,345 15,246 6,248 17,574 17,574 14,937 10,082 17,203 31,204 5,326 5,945 57,428 5,814 10,494 52,833 25,769 10,398 31,204 55,177 9,238 2010-2014 Daily Volume Annual Growth Rate -1.37% N/A -2.92% 7.12% 5.28% 8.47% -4.21% 8.99% 6.07% N/A -0.71% N/A 10.15% N/A -7.01% 6.35% 10.99% 2.36% -6.27% 4.02% 3.88% -4.21% 1.96% 9.54% 3.60% 8.64% -10.77% 1.96% 2.05% -0.43% -0.62% -3.98% 13.33% N/A N/A -10.77% 0.77% -3.07% N/A 2.07% 12.46% -0.41% 13.50% 15.79% -4.69% 2.54% 12.85% N/A -2.53% -1.30% 2014 Daily V/S Ratio 1.902 1.853 1.784 1.733 1.724 1.709 1.681 1.572 1.569 1.563 1.547 1.494 1.487 1.471 1.402 1.365 1.304 1.297 1.264 1.243 1.232 1.227 1.226 1.197 1.187 1.178 1.167 1.164 1.153 1.135 1.124 1.121 1.116 1.105 1.105 1.098 1.096 1.082 1.076 1.065 1.062 1.048 1.038 1.029 1.026 1.023 1.019 1.010 1.007 1.004 * 2011 count used due to no 2010 count ^ 2013 count used due to no prior counts N/A indicates data is not available or applicable STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 12 TRAFFIC Management System Figure 4: 2014 Road Segment V/S Ratios Area 1 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 13 TRAFFIC Management System Figure 4: 2014 Road Segment V/S Ratios Area 2 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 14 TRAFFIC Management System Figure 4: 2014 Road Segment V/S Ratios Area 3 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 15 TRAFFIC Management System Improving Traffic Systems Management and Operations Data Gathering and Analysis Graphs, tables, and figures provided in this section are derived from established MCDOT reporting programs and are summarized herein. Some data sets have established goals associated with the annual collection of information while some data sets are simply reporting activity showing trending of data rather than performance compared to a specified goal. Data applies to FY 2015 unless otherwise noted. Intelligent Transportation Systems A network of ITS devices such as traffic signals, closed-circuit television cameras (CCTV) mounted on traffic signals, dynamic message signs (DMS), traffic detection, and communications infrastructure allows the MCDOT Traffic Management Center (TMC) to manage traffic on County roads. The operators at the MCDOT TMC use the ITS devices to monitor traffic conditions and develop signal timing plans to help relieve congestion, post messages on DMS to alert motorists to road conditions, and dispatch the County incident response team. The real-time services enabled through ITS help in reducing delays and enhancing safety. The MCDOT TMC was initially built in 1998 and moved in 2012 to a larger facility that allowed for more operational capabilities. Figure 5 shows the original TMC and the current TMC. Figure 5: Original MCDOT TMC (left) and Current TMC (right) In 2015, the MAG ITS Committee approved FY 2018 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) funds to further upgrade the MCDOT TMC. The MCDOT TMC has access to other jurisdictions’ ITS devices based on joint agreements to manage traffic and support incident and event management. MCDOT actively manages the signal system operations, provides regional monitoring of CCTV and DMS on freeways and arterials, and collects and processes data feeds for arterial and freeway traffic movement. The TMC also develops signal timing plans for MCDOT-owned traffic signals and changes/implements traffic signal timing using pre-set timing plans in response to real-time conditions. Table 2 compares the FY 2006 and FY 2015 levels of deployment for ITS infrastructure to measure growth in ITS devices. Table 2: Growth of ITS Features for FY 2006 and FY 2015 ITS Feature CCTV Cameras DMS with Travel Time Posting Capabilities Traffic Signals with Communication to TMC FY 2006 Amount 32 0 36 FY 2015 Amount 561 5 120 % Growth 2006-2015 75% 233% The MCDOT TMC operates ITS devices to manage congestion, incidents, and events on County roads. The amount of uptime of ITS devices and communications to support those activities is an important measure as it reflects the availability of the ITS infrastructure to support the management of traffic. The 1 In FY 2015, four (4) Flood Control District crossing cameras that were previously maintained by MCDOT were no longer maintained. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 16 TRAFFIC Management System MCDOT 2006 ITS Business Plan established a goal of having TMC-device communications to 95% of ITS field devices within 10 years. In 2006, 30% of field devices had communications connections. As of the end of FY 2015, 93% of field devices are connected to the TMC. Performance of systems is critical to effective traffic management. TMC staff routinely performs system health checks and logs the status of devices and systems in the MCDOT TMC Performance Activity Log. The operators notify technical staff for troubleshooting support, if needed. MCDOT collects data to support performance metrics established for the TMC as well as the analysis of incidents and other as-needed requests for performance reporting. MCDOT tracks scheduled and unscheduled maintenance of MCDOT-owned traffic signals with the following goals:  Complete preventative maintenance for 90% of all traffic signals within the monthly preset schedules; and  Respond to 90% of unscheduled repair work within two hours of notification. Both include a level of maintenance to traffic signals that meets all federal, state, and local standards. Figure 6 highlights the FY 2015 performance of MCDOT signal maintenance staff in meeting the aforementioned 90% goal. MCDOT Traffic Signals Maintained to Meet All Federal, State & Local Standards As of June 2015 Percent that Meet Standards 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Fiscal Year 2015 % Scheduled Maintenance Work Orders Completed Within MFR Measurement % Unscheduled Maintenance Completed within 2 Hours of Notification Goal - 90% Figure 6: MCDOT FY 2015 Traffic Signal Maintenance Activities Compared to Goal Bell Road Bell Road has been a priority corridor for MCDOT since 2000 when a Traffic Management Study was completed between Loop 303 and Loop 101. In 2004, a Concept of Operations and ITS Operations Plan were completed that defined the roles and responsibilities of traffic, incident, and traveler information management along the corridor across the multiple jurisdictions of Surprise, the County, and Peoria. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 17 TRAFFIC Management System Since 2004, ITS devices including CCTV, DMS, and fiber communications have been designed and installed in a series of three phases. In 2013, the ITS Operations Plan was updated to reflect current operating conditions as well as the formation of the Bell Road Coordination Committee for the crossregion 25-mile corridor to incorporate the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT), City of Glendale, City of Phoenix, and City of Scottsdale roles and responsibilities for the corridor. Although the corridor has experienced increased average daily traffic volumes, travel times have been reduced, as shown in Table 3 over multiple years since 2007. Table 3: Bell Road Travel Time Performance for 2007-2014 % Change in Travel Time Direction AM – Eastbound (EB)* 2007 - 2008 -7.3% 2009 0.0% 2010 -6.2% 2011 0.0% 2012 0.0% 2013 0.0% 2014 1.4% PM – Westbound (WB)* - -3.5% 0.0% -24.8% 0.0% 0.0% -9.7% -2.7% Combined EB & WB - -5.0% 0.0% -17.4% 0.0% 0.0% -5.3% -.07% Cumulative Change - -5.0% -5.0% -22.5% -22.5% -22.5% -27.8% -28.5% * Peak Hour - Direction The Bell Road Coordination Committee partner agencies have been planning for multiple years for an adaptive system(s) to be implemented along strategic sections of the road. A Concept of Operations and System Requirements for four different segments along Bell Road have been developed to outline the deployment of signal control technology to the existing signal system. In 2013, arterial travel times began to be provided along the Bell Road corridor. Third party and probe data as well as freeway detection information was used to collect and post eastbound travel times as a pilot program in the County’s jurisdiction. Incident Management The MCDOT Regional Emergency Action Coordinating Team (REACT) is a team of personnel that dispatch to an incident scene on arterials throughout the County. REACT provides first-responder emergency services (e.g., police, fire, medical) with traffic management and control assistance so the responders can focus on their responsibilities and clear incidents quickly, thereby reducing the likelihood of secondary crashes. REACT has six IGAs with agencies throughout the Phoenix metropolitan region that cover 1,054 miles of road. These agencies include:  ADOT;  Glendale;  Peoria;  Avondale;  Scottsdale; and  Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community (SRPMIC). The MCDOT TMC has access to incident data on freeways from the Arizona Department of Public Safety (DPS) and the Computer-Aided Dispatch (CAD) system of the Phoenix Fire Department for arterial incidents. Incident management is one of the primary functions of the MCDOT TMC. For incidents occurring on County-owned roads and local agency-owned roads, the TMC supports the County Sheriff’s Office, DPS, and local public safety agencies via alerts, closure reporting, scene monitoring through camera images (where available), and media relations (if needed). For all incidents that have requested REACT Team response, the TMC serves as the contact in actively supporting REACT personnel as well as supporting the local agency that requested REACT support. For STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 18 TRAFFIC Management System larger freeway incidents, REACT may be called upon to coordinate with ALERT. Figure 7 and Figure 8 show data tracking completed by MCDOT for REACT team activity. To date, there have been no secondary crashes while REACT is present and established at the incident site. Jurisdictional Distribution of REACT Calls (FY 2015) 100 93 90 Number of Calls 80 70 60 50 40 33 26 30 20 10 3 3 2 3 5 Avondale Tolleson ADOT SRPMIC Scottsdale 0 Maricopa County Glendale Peoria Figure 7: Jurisdictional Distribution of REACT Calls (FY 2015) Number of Incidents Categories of Incidents Responded to by REACT (FY 2015) 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 85 57 0 1 1 3 3 9 9 Figure 8: Categories of Incidents Responded to by REACT (FY 2015) STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 19 TRAFFIC Management System Traveler Information The activities that MCDOT performs have a regional impact as the County has jurisdiction in unincorporated areas within and surrounding the Phoenix metropolitan area. The MCDOT TMC provides various traveler information functions for the County as well as regionally. This includes e-mail traffic alerts, tweets, text alerts, data entry into MCDOT’s Advanced Traveler Information System (ATIS) program for arterial incidents and events for automated posting to the statewide 511 traveler information system, and travel time messages to DMS. As part of the Regional Rental Car Center implementation for the Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (shown in Figure 9), MCDOT developed a travel time and congestion information display system for travelers that need information to key locations in the metropolitan area. There are currently eight travel displays as part of this system located at the Rental Car Center and some key downtown public facilities. Figure 9: Regional Rental Car Center at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport MCDOT also operates and maintains nine DMS along Bell Road, MC-85, and McDowell Road that provide traveler information. Table 4 shows the number of traveler information messages posted from the MCDOT TMC between FY 2011 and FY 2015. Table 4: Traveler Information Message Posts (FY 2011 - FY 2015) Year FY 2011 Traveler Information Messages Posted 5,170 Year-to-Year % Growth - FY 2012 5,865 14% FY 2013 6,204 6% FY 2014 6,763 9% FY 2015 6,879 2% In an effort to broaden the scope and timeliness of MCDOT’s overall public outreach efforts, it was formally announced on May 14, 2013 that the MCDOT TMC and REACT traffic incident management team have joined the MCDOT Public Affairs Office News Twitter feed. In addition to important news about MCDOT projects, @MCDOTNEWS Twitter followers now receive major TMC Traffic Alerts and are notified in “real time” of major incidents on Valley roads. As of November 2, 2015, the Twitter account @MCDOTNEWS has 2,027 followers, follows 118 other agencies and media Twitter feeds for retweets, and tweets 5-25 times each day depending on the amount of incidents or news reports happening that day. Information is regularly retweeted from @ArizonaDOT and @PhxTrafficAlert. In addition to Twitter, MCDOT also has a Facebook page on which it can provide additional traveler information. The MCDOT Facebook page, as of November 2, 2015, had 280 likes/followers and experiences around 600 visitors in any typical week. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 20 TRAFFIC Management System Traffic Management Serving Regional Travel AZTech MCDOT serves as a program leader for the AZTech Regional Transportation Partnership. Through regional collaboration, this partnership aims to integrate and improve regional traffic management. Individual cities and towns deploy, operate, and maintain their ITS systems and equipment, and MCDOT helps to integrate these efforts to facilitate better regional traffic management and coordination. The regional AZTech activities that are coordinated through MCDOT Traffic Management Division include:  Institutional collaboration and public-private partnerships;  Center-Center communications infrastructure development;  Inter-agency operations;  Regional traveler information support; and  Incident management. AZTech was established in 1996 as one of four metropolitan areas selected by USDOT for the ITS Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative (MDI). The AZTech partnership was formed as a result of this MDI to integrate the region’s transportation system and give travelers up-to-the-minute traffic information through innovative partnerships among public sector and private sector technology companies. AZTech successfully completed the MDI in 2000 and has transitioned into a permanent partnership that continues to serve as a forum for innovation in transportation systems operations and management in the County. AZTech brings together decision makers and practitioners with a consensus-based approach to traffic management. ADOT and MCDOT provide joint leadership for the AZTech program. Members include ADOT, Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG), Valley Metro, DPS, the County, cities, towns, and private partners. Members represent state and county traffic management and operations, regional transit operations, regional planning, municipal traffic and transportation agencies, state and regional law enforcement and public safety and emergency services. MCDOT and ADOT continue their leadership roles chairing the AZTech Executive Committee, which sets strategic direction for the AZTech partnership. The AZTech Strategy Task Force is a subgroup of the Executive Committee, and is comprised of senior staff from member agencies across the region. AZTech also includes the following committees and working groups, which meet regularly and include representation from multiple partner agencies. These committees include:  Operations Committee;  Traffic Incident Management Coalition;  Strategic Steering Committee;  Advanced Traveler Information Systems Working Group; and  TMC Operators Working Group. RADS In 2003, MCDOT, ADOT, and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) developed and implemented an innovative archive and retrieval system for ITS data. The Regional Archived Data Server (RADS) was designed to provide and maintain valid, classified ITS-derived data for use in transportation system planning and modeling. MCDOT is responsible for management and oversight of RADS, and local jurisdictions provide data as appropriate to the RADS server as shown in Figure 10. The RADS server is housed in the ADOT traffic operations center (TOC) and ADOT provides technical support for maintenance activities to the server. RADS has become a critical part of the region’s data-sharing strategy. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 21 TRAFFIC Management System Figure 10: AZTech Regional Archived Data Center (RADS) The system is linked with ADOT’s Highway Condition Reporting System (HCRS) to provide real-time traffic data to support speed maps on the AZ511 website as well as supplemental road condition information collected from public safety agencies and local agencies not already provided through the HCRS system. RADS takes ITS data from systems throughout the Phoenix metropolitan area, stores the data in a centralized archived data server, and then makes the data available for a variety of users through a common Internet interface. Processes incorporated into the RADS system include:  ADOT freeway management system (FMS) detector station data;  Travel times from FMS detector station data that are displayed on freeway DMS, at the Sky Harbor International Airport Rental Car Center, and at County buildings in downtown Phoenix;  ADOT HCRS events;  Phoenix Fire incident data; and  Traffic signal timing and traffic characteristic data from local jurisdictions. A summary of RADS implementation for recent years is provided below. Integration of third-party travel time data  2013: integrated third-party travel time data (Nokia/HERE) in RADS. The third-party travel time data is provided on the Traffic Message Channel, which contains pre-defined segments of roads in the County. The travel time data is updated every minute and archived in RADS. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 22 TRAFFIC Management System Expansion of travel time display on DMS using RADS travel time module  2013: freeway DMS travel time expansion processed by RADS.  2013-2014: implemented DMS travel time in several jurisdictions along the Bell Road corridor. The third-party travel time data was used to compute the travel time of the corridor and post that information on the respective DMS. The jurisdictions include Surprise, Peoria, Glendale, and Sun City (managed by the County). Assessment of RADS IT architecture  2013: a study was conducted to assess the IT architecture of RADS in anticipation of future growth. The study assessed the needs of RADS in terms of communications, data storage, security, and processing. Implementation of AZTech Regional Information System (ARIS)  2014: MCDOT developed an advanced tool for notification and monitoring during incidents in the metropolitan area. The ARIS system uses information from RADS to display current speeds on freeways and arterials (where instrumented with detection), traffic volumes, freeway and arterial cameras, and incident status updates based on the Phoenix Fire CAD system. This helps operators receive timely notifications and understand the breadth of impact surrounding the incident location and provides a tool to manage in a cross-jurisdictional manner. Enhancements and expanded functions  2015: the MAG ITS Committee approved a project for FY 2018 funding that will upgrade and enhance the RADS system to support current and future Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) needs. This includes considerations for displaying expanded arterial information, such as alternate routing, as well as additional agency connectivity to RADS. Integrated Corridor Management In 2014, ADOT, DPS, MCDOT, Scottsdale, ALERT, REACT, SRPMIC and MAG jointly completed an ICM Program for the Loop 101 corridor in Scottsdale. The plan includes traffic management protocols between operating and responding agencies involved in freeway re-routing of traffic and specific alternate routing options through the arterial network of Scottsdale. This Program uses a strategic combination of Scottsdale arterial signal and infrastructure control, ADOT freeway DMS messaging, ALERT freeway traffic control support, REACT arterial traffic control support, and other responding services. This ICM Program also produced a Detour Guidebook that provided specific detour planning for segments of Loop 101 through Scottsdale as well as the roles and responsibilities for each partner agency for the specific detour. An example of the Detour Guidebook is shown in Figure 11. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 23 TRAFFIC Management System Figure 11: Example of Loop 101 Detour Maps Since its inception, there have been a few events that required closing the Loop 101 freeway for a period of four hours for major incidents that involved extensive investigation. The partners have successfully implemented the ICM plan and traffic was diverted to an efficiently managed arterial. In 2015, MAG received federal funding to complete the planning process for an ICM concept for the I-10 corridor between Loop 101 (Aqua Fria Freeway) in the West Valley and Loop 202 (San Tan Freeway) in the Southeast Valley that looks largely at strategies for non-recurring congestion (i.e., incidents) but will also consider strategies for recurring congestion. This project is a 24-month study that will result in a Concept of Operations, list of System Requirements and a plan for Analysis, Modeling and Simulation (AMS) to help verify and analyze the resulting concept. MCDOT will play a significant role in the development of the concept and will likely play a major role in the future implementation of the ICM concept across Maricopa County. Traffic Incident Management The AZTech Traffic Incident Management (TIM) Coalition was established in 2011 following TIM workshops in 2010 that addressed the need for a TIM Coalition in Arizona. Arizona DPS is the lead agency for the TIM Coalition and its members include FHWA, ADOT, MCDOT, MAG, first responders, medical examiners, towing and recovery entities, and Public Information Officers. The focus is to achieve the TIM National Unified Goal (NUG). NUG priorities include:  Responder safety;  Safe, quick clearance; and  Prompt, reliable, interoperable communications. The TIM Coalition has helped to improve cross-discipline communications, increase exposure to TIM training courses in Arizona, debrief secondary incidents, and conduct joint training and planning. As of July 2014, the TIM Coalition had conducted 108 TIM 4-hour classes with 2,815 first responders and produced two training videos to educate how traffic reporters play a critical role in reducing congestion and improve safety. AZTech TM&O Performance Indicator Book Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21), the current highway authorization, emphasizes performance management and monitoring across multiple transportation modes. MCDOT completed its first AZTech Traffic Management and Operations Performance Indicators Book (Book) in 2011. The Book combines key regional traffic management, traffic operations, and transit performance measures that are tracked and reported throughout the Phoenix metropolitan region. The Book has been completed for years 2011 and 2013 and an update for 2015 is planned. The goal is to publish the Book every two years. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 24 TRAFFIC Management System The 2013 Book identified data collection corridors in the region for measuring travel time data year-toyear. An example of the Book is shown in Figure 12. The Book is available electronically to a statewide and nationwide group of individuals with influence in national committees and activities. The 2015 Book is under development and is anticipated to be completed by April 2016 and published on the AZTech website. Figure 12: Dashboard of the 2013 AZTech Performance Indicator Book STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 25 TRAFFIC Management System Innovation MCDOT has strived to be at the leading edge of innovation in transportation both locally and nationally. This section provides a brief status update of MCDOT’s lead or involvement with innovative projects and programs. SMARTDrive Through a federal initiative called “Connected Vehicles”, the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) is working to leverage ITS technology to improve traffic operations to support public safety and surface transportation mobility. MCDOT and its partners, ADOT, FHWA, and the University of Arizona, are moving this initiative forward to develop and demonstrate advanced ITS applications that integrate vehicles together with road systems in the County. MCDOT’s SMARTDrive ProgramSM, which originated in 2007, represents an evolution of connected vehicle research, testing and implementation in Anthem, a community in unincorporated Maricopa County. Initiated as a research project through the Arizona Transportation Research Center, SMARTDrive has successfully demonstrated live operations and connectivity in a test bed environment, and has been established as a formal test bed for other connected vehicle technology and application developers to use. A map of the existing national test beds is shown in Figure 13. Figure 13: National Connected Vehicle Test Beds The MCDOT SMARTDrive Test bed will continue to focus on traffic signal operations safety and mobility applications. MCDOT has deployed applications under the USDOT and Connected Vehicle Pooled Fund Program Multi Modal Intelligent Traffic Signal System (MMITSS) initiative. The test bed in Anthem will continue to be expanded on in the upcoming years and demonstrated to local, state, and national stakeholders. Key components of the SMARTDrive demonstrations include:  Six signalized intersections equipped with Dedicated Short-Range Communications (DSRC) Radios, WiFi and Bluetooth readers;  Traffic signal priority application installed;  Representative emergency vehicle and transit vehicle used to test application priority logic; STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 26 TRAFFIC Management System  Field test for emergency and transit applications;  Pedestrian crosswalk application using smartphones to display crossing status; and  Collection of detailed vehicle and traffic operations data for post-operational analysis. As a result of these achievements and the County’s commitment to ongoing innovative research, testing and implementation, the County is recognized by USDOT as one of six Connected Vehicle test beds in the nation. In 2015, the FHWA released a federal grant funding opportunity to advance Connected Vehicle implementation and MCDOT, together with ADOT and University of Arizona, submitted an application for the grant. The partners are awaiting to hear the outcome of the grant program, and in the meantime, continue to proactively develop concept and applications related to connected vehicles. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 27 SAFETY Management System Safety Management System Purpose of the Safety Management System The County Safety Management System (SMS) is a systematic process that has three goals. These include:  Document the road safety improvements made by the County during the previous fiscal year;  Identify the location, type, and severity of traffic crashes in the unincorporated portions of the County; and  Report trends in traffic crashes and recommend improvements to reduce the number and rate of crashes. MCDOT Safety Management Procedures MCDOT makes every effort to respond quickly to identified safety problems. These problems are frequently identified through public complaints about unsafe road conditions, first-hand observation by County staff members, and reviews of recent crash records for County roads. When an actual or potential problem is encountered, a detailed engineering analysis may be conducted and recommendations are made to correct the situation. These recommendations are handled in one of three ways based on the recommendation: 1. Relatively simple and inexpensive solutions are handled through the MCDOT maintenance process. 2. More complex problems are handled by the MCDOT Traffic Engineering Division. 3. Complex problems involving significant changes that require substantial funding are handled through the MCDOT TIP. Evaluation of Safety MCDOT Traffic Engineering is continuing its program to identify and evaluate locations with potential safety concerns and prioritize and schedule improvements for upcoming years. The initial step each year is to examine the location and number of crashes, crash rates, injury severity, and the types of crashes occurring on County roads to identify locations with potential safety concerns. At these locations, crash history is used to evaluate the road and determine if improvements are required. Crash locations are plotted as indicated on ADOT crash reports. If five or more correctable crashes are detected within a road segment or intersection within a 12-month period, an engineering evaluation is conducted to determine if an action should be taken. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) provides guidance to determine if an identified safety problem meets the criteria for (‘warrants’) the installation of multi-way stop control or traffic signals. There are additional warrant factors that may also be used to determine if an intersection needs improvements such as additional turn lanes or other safety items. Projects that meet the ‘warrant’ criteria are typically implemented in the order in which they are identified. The average daily traffic, road function, posted speed, and scheduled transportation improvement projects are also used to help determine if and when improvements are required. Spot Safety Improvement Project Accomplishments In FY 2015, eight safety improvement projects were implemented by the MCDOT Traffic Engineering Division. The safety improvement projects that were completed in FY 2015 can be found in Figure 14. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 28 SAFETY Management System Figure 14: FY 2015 Safety Improvements on County Roads STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 29 SAFETY Management System County Crash Statistics The County crash rate summarizes the historical safety performance of the entire County-owned or maintained road system. The County crash rate measures the annual number of crashes per million vehicle miles of travel (MVMT) on the County road system. Table 5 shows that the County crash rate in 2015 was the same as it was in 2014, and both are below the 2010-2014 five-year average. MCDOT also tracks crash rates for crashes involving fatalities, single vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles, injuries, and work zones. Most of these crash rates decreased in 2014 compared to 2013, with the exception of the bicycle crash rate which increased in 2014 as compared to 2013. Further, all of the crash rates, except for that of bicycle crashes, are below the five-year average rate. Table 5 also compares the number of crashes to the population in unincorporated portions of the County. The total number of crashes in the unincorporated County increased in 2014 compared to 2013. Although the unincorporated County population also increased in 2014, there was a net increase in the number of crashes per 100,000 population in 2014. Other types of crashes generally declined in 2014 compared to 2013 on a per 100,000 population basis, with crashes involving bicycles being the exception. Safety Focus Areas The state of Arizona has established twelve Emphasis Areas within the Arizona Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). These Emphasis areas indicate what ADOT and other state agencies are focused on in order to improve safety in the state. The twelve Arizona SHSP Emphasis Areas are:  Speeding and Aggressive Driving;  Impaired Driving;  Occupant Protection;  Motorcycles;  Distracted Driving;  Roadway Infrastructure and Operations Improvement;  Age-related;  Heavy Vehicles/Buses/Transit;  Non-Motorized Users;  Natural Risks;  Traffic Incident Management;  Inter-jurisdictional Coordination;  Data Analysis Improvements; and  Policy Initiatives. Based on the Arizona SHSP initiatives, MAG developed its own set of Action Areas for the MAG Strategic Transportation Safety Plan (STSP). These Action Areas were developed to accompany and supplement the statewide Emphasis Areas, recognizing that the MAG planning area is largely urbanized while most of the State highway system traverses areas that are more rural. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 30 SAFETY Management System Table 5: County Crash Rates 2010 - 2014 County Crash Rate* 1.30 1.01 1.12 1.11 1.11 2010-2014 5-Year Average 1.13 County Fatality Rate** 1.13 1.49 1.26 1.61 1.55 1.41 10% Arizona Fatality Rate** 1.27 1.39 1.37 1.39 1.24 1.33 -7% U.S. Fatality Rate** 1.11 1.10 1.14 1.10 1.07 1.10 -3% Single Vehicle Crash Rate* Pedestrian Crash Rate* 0.255 0.214 0.238 0.229 0.208 0.229 -9% 0.014 0.010 0.008 0.011 0.009 0.011 -16% Bicycle Crash Rate* 0.018 0.015 0.015 0.014 0.017 0.016 10% Injury Crash Rate* 0.204 0.160 0.200 0.191 0.184 0.188 -2% Work Zone Related Rate* 0.036 0.022 0.025 0.017 0.000 0.020 -98% Total County Crashes 2,865 2,641 2,841 2,901 3,014 2,852 6% Miles of County Owned Roads That Have Traffic Counts Total County Road Miles 1,616 1,259 1,249 1,259 1,381 1,353 2% 2,353 2,393 2,392 2,462 2,464 2,413 2% Million Vehicle Miles/Day 6.0543 7.1479 6.9488 7.1570 7.4437 6.9503 7% 2,573 2,987 2,905 2,907 3,021 2,879 5% Factors VMT/Mile 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2014 vs. 5-Year Average -2% % Network with Traffic Counts County Population 68.68% 52.61% 52.22% 51.14% 56.05% 56.14% 0% 245,801 274,673 276,634 288,366 291,033 275,301 6% Crashes Per 100K Pop 1,165.6 961.5 1,027.0 1,006.0 1,035.6 1,039.1 0% Fatal Crashes Fatal/100K Pop County Fatalities County Fatalities/100K Pop Single Vehicle Crashes Single Vehicle/100K Pop Pedestrian Crashes Pedestrian/100K Pop Bicycle Crashes Bicycle/100K Pop Injury Crashes Injury/100K Pop Work Zone Related Work Zone/100K Pop 24 34 27 40 36 32 12% 9.76 12.38 9.76 13.87 12.37 11.63 6% 25 39 32 42 42 36 17% 10.17 14.20 11.57 14.56 14.43 12.99 11% 563 558 604 597 564 577 -2% 229.05 203.15 218.34 207.03 193.79 210.27 -8% 30 27 21 30 24 26 -9% 12.20 9.83 7.59 10.40 8.25 9.66 -15% 39 38 38 37 47 40 18% 15.87 13.83 13.74 12.83 16.15 14.48 12% 451 417 506 499 501 475 6% 183.48 151.82 182.91 173.04 172.15 172.68 0% 79 57 64 45 1 49 -98% 32.14 20.75 23.14 15.61 0.34 18.40 -98% Source: Crash data is from ADOT, modified by MCDOT. Only crashes on County-owned or maintained roads are included. All data sources reflect calendar year except for mileage information which is by fiscal year. *Crashes per MVMT **Fatalities per 100 MVMT STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 31 SAFETY Management System MAG established the following Action Areas:  Eliminate Death and Injury from Speeding and Aggressive Driving Behavior;  Eliminate Impaired Driving;  Eliminate Death and Injury Related to Intersections;  Eliminate Death and Injury Involving Young Roadway Users;  Eliminate Death and Injury Involving Vulnerable Road Users – Bicyclists, Pedestrians, Persons with Disabilities; and  Improve Data Collection, Quality, Availability, Integration, and Analysis for Decision-Making. Based on these two sets of emphasis/action areas, MCDOT has identified four main Focus Areas for its safety program. These Focus Areas were identified as those that MCDOT, as a transportation agency, could most directly influence and take actions to improve. The MCDOT Focus Areas are:  Intersection Crashes;  Fatal and Incapacitating Injury Crashes;  Non-motorized (Bicycle and Pedestrian) Crashes; and  Work Zone Crashes. Intersection Crashes Table 6 provides a summary of fatal and incapacitating injury crashes that have occurred on County roads between 2010 and 2014. Crashes include those that occurred within intersections as well as those that were not related to intersections. In total, there were 407 reported intersection crashes and 98 nonintersection crashes that were fatal or resulted in incapacitating injury over the five-year period. The most prevalent type of fatal and incapacitating injury intersection crash was single vehicle crashes, with 33% of fatal crashes and 25% of incapacitating injury crashes being single vehicle crashes. The most prevalent type of fatal and incapacitating injury non-intersection crash was also single vehicle crashes, with 71% of fatal crashes and 46% of incapacitating injury crashes being non-intersection single vehicle crashes. With intersection crashes being such a large percentage of total crashes, MCDOT will continue to take actions such as the current process for performing safety analyses on intersections that experience five or more reported crashes over a 12-month period. Table 6: Intersection and Non-Intersection Fatal and Incapacitating Injury Crashes Type of Crash Angle Head On Left Turn Rear End Sideswipe Single Vehicle Other Total Intersection Crashes Fatal Incapacitating Injury (% of Total) (% of Total) 24% 27% 4% 4% 10% 20% 9% 15% 1% 3% 33% 25% 19% 6% 100% 100% Non-Intersection Crashes Fatal Incapacitating Injury (% of Total) (% of Total) 0% 9% 0% 2% 0% 9% 6% 17% 0% 9% 71% 46% 24% 9% 100% 100% STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 32 SAFETY Management System Fatal Crashes Maps labeled Figure 15 show the number and location of fatal crashes reported between 2010 and 2014. While fatal crashes represent a small percentage of total crashes, they represent a large percentage of the societal cost in terms of medical expense and lost wages. Reducing the frequency of these highseverity crashes has become a priority at the federal, state, and local level. The County fatality rate (found in Table 5) decreased in 2014 to 1.55 fatalities per 100 MVMT compared to 1.61 in 2013, but this value is still above the historical average fatality rate of 1.41. Bicycle and Pedestrian Crashes Maps labeled Figure 16 show the number and location of fatal bicycle and pedestrian crashes on County roads. While bicycle and pedestrian crashes represent a small percentage of total crashes, the likelihood of severe injury or death is high when a vehicle hits a bicyclist or pedestrian. In 2014, the bicycle crash rate for the County was 0.017 crashes per MVMT as compared to 0.014 in 2013; the pedestrian crash rate was 0.009 in 2014 as compared to 0.011 in 2013. The 2014 bicycle crash rate is higher than the fiveyear average while the 2014 pedestrian crash rate is lower the five-year average crash rate. Work Zone Crashes Figure 17 depicts fatal work zone crashes between 2010 and 2014. MCDOT places a high priority on safety in and around work zones. There was one reported work zone-related crash on MCDOT facilities in 2014. This is significantly fewer crashes than in 2013, when 45 work zone-related crashes were reported. Between 2013 and 2014, the work zone-related crash rate was reduced from 0.017 to 0.000, which is much lower than the historical average of 0.020. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 33 SAFETY Management System Figure 15: Fatal Crashes on County Roads 2010-2014 Area 1 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 34 SAFETY Management System Figure 15: Fatal Crashes on County Roads 2010-2014 Area 2 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 35 SAFETY Management System Figure 15: Fatal Crashes on County Roads 2010-2014 Area 3 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 36 SAFETY Management System Figure 16: Bicycle and Pedestrian Fatal Crashes on County Roads 2010-2014 Area 1 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 37 SAFETY Management System Figure 16: Bicycle and Pedestrian Fatal Crashes on County Roads 2010-2014 Area 2 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 38 SAFETY Management System Figure 16: Bicycle and Pedestrian Fatal Crashes on County Roads 2010-2014 Area 3 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 39 SAFETY Management System Figure 17: Work Zone Fatal Crashes on County Roads 2010-2014 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 40 LOW VOLUME ROAD Management System Low Volume Road Management System Introduction In FY 2000, MCDOT initiated a formal program for paving low volume roads (LVR) in the County. A multiyear capital improvement program for paving low traffic volume unpaved roads was then created and implemented. This section documents the number and miles of unpaved LVRs that were paved by MCDOT in FY 2015. Background Prior to 2004, MCDOT paved LVRs primarily based on citizen complaints and field observations by MCDOT staff. However, beginning in 2004, MCDOT initiated a program to systematically identify low volume unpaved roads for paving. Unpaved roads with high or increasing traffic volumes, safety issues, or other significant concerns were considered for paving. This program was developed to specifically address unpaved roads that do not meet federal criteria for paving under the PM-10 (federal dust abatement) program. The County Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) recommended to the Board of Supervisors that an annual allocation be set aside in the MCDOT budget to pave selected LVRs. Unpaved County Road System In FY 2015, the County owned or maintained 2,454 centerline miles of roads of which approximately 398 miles are unpaved. These roads are located in the unincorporated parts of the County, which include urban or near-urban conditions as well as rural locations. MCDOT categorizes unpaved roads into one of five categories:  Roads that are owned by the County and identified as open and declared (O&D) – This means the County owns right-of-way for these segments of road and has accepted the road into the County System;  Roads that are partially opened and declared – These are roads where part of the right-of-way is owned by the County;  Primitive roads – Roads that are usually located in remote parts of the County, provide access to wilderness areas and are typically less developed than other areas;  Courtesy grade roads – Existing, unpaved roads that have little or no County owned right-of-way but are maintained by MCDOT through historical precedent and allowed by state statute; and  Unpaved roads not owned or maintained by the County. Table 7 lists the details of each of the LVRs that was paved in FY 2015. Maps labeled Figure 18 show the surface type (paved or unpaved) of County roads as of FY 2015 as well as the PM-10 air quality dust abatement program boundary. Most of the unpaved County roads are outside of the PM-10 area. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 41 LOW VOLUME ROAD Management System Table 7: Low Volume Roads Paved in 2015 Road Name 90th Place From Adobe Road To End of Maintenance Length (feet) 995 91st Way Adobe Road End of Maintenance 980 93rd Street McLellan Road End of Maintenance 1,175 75th Drive Northern Avenue End of Maintenance 425 193rd Avenue Thomas Road Catalina Drive 630 193rd Drive Thomas Road Catalina Drive 630 Loma Lane End of Maintenance 330 Southern Avenue Buckeye Canal 75th Drive 1256' west of Dysart Road PROJECT MILES = 1,505 2,640 PROJECT MILES = 11th Avenue Joy Ranch Road Irvine Road Honda Bow Road New River Road End of Maintenance Project TT410 - Paved March 2015 0.60 Project TT410 - Paved May/June 2015 0.67 560 PROJECT MILES = 0.61 TOTAL MILES = 1.87 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov Notes Project TT410 - Paved June 2015 FISCAL YEAR 2015 42 LOW VOLUME ROAD Management System Figure 18: Road Surface Types as of 2015 Area 1 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 43 LOW VOLUME ROAD Management System Figure 18: Road Surface Types as of 2015 Area 2 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 44 LOW VOLUME ROAD Management System Figure 18: Road Surface Types as of 2015 Area 3 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 45 BRIDGE Management System Bridge Management System Introduction As of June 2015, the County maintains and inspects a total of 424 structures on public roads. By the Federal Highway Administration definition, 284 of these structures are qualified to be called “bridges”, meaning the structure has a length greater than 20 feet and is qualified to receive federal aid for its maintenance. The remaining 140 are called “minor” structures with lengths of 20 feet or less. Data Gathering and Analysis “Bridges” and “Minor” Structures Every structure (bridge and minor) within MCDOT’s jurisdiction is inspected in accordance with the FHWA’s National Bridge Inspection Standards Recording and Coding Guide. This procedure allows MCDOT to maintain thorough, consistent records on each bridge and structure in the County system. The decision to maintain and inspect all of MCDOT’s structures enables MCDOT to include minor structures when considering how best to appropriate funds and prioritize in-house projects. Due to the comprehensive data MCDOT maintains on all structures, MCDOT is readily able to evaluate its inventory as a whole for both bridges and minor structures. Summary of FY 2015 Structures Total number of structures in inventory: Number of Federal Structures: Number of Non-Federal Structures: Number of bridges: Number of culverts: 424 284 140 78 346 Total number of new structures added to the inventory this year: 9 Total number of federal structures added to the inventory this year: 7 11338 – Meridian Rd RCB at unnamed wash (N. of Southern Ave) 11425 – MC-85 RCB at FCD2011C015 (Loop303 Outfall Drainage) +11361 – Williams Dr RCB at unnamed wash (no plans available) +11362 – Parada Dr RCB at unnamed wash (no plans available) +11363 – Tom Ryan Dr RCB at unnamed wash (no plans available) +11364 – Via Tercero RCB at unnamed wash (no plans available) +11365 – Dusty Trail Blvd RCB at unnamed wash (no plans available) MCDOT TT315 MCDOT TC201300773 Total number of non-federal structures added to the inventory this year: 2 990286 – Riggs Rd RCB at unnamed wash (Intersection at Sossaman) MCDOT TC20080348 & TC20090467 +990287 – 151st Ave RCB at unnamed wash (no plans available) Total number of structure replacements made this year: 0 The structure 990271 had its structure number changed to a Federal structure number – 11439 – due to incorrect bridge length data entered into the bridge management software. Therefore, the structure was not replaced but received a new structure number. Total number of structures removed/annexed from the inventory this year: 11008 – Reems Road RCB at Reems Rd Channel 9138 – Ellsworth Rd RCB at Sonoqui Wash 6 Annexed by Glendale, June 2015 Annexed by Queen Creek, May 2015 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 46 BRIDGE Management System 10517 – Osborn Rd RCB at unnamed wash 11107 – Ellsworth Rd RCB at Sonoqui Wash 990222 – Southern Ave RCB at unnamed wash 990257 – 107th Ave RCB at unnamed wash Annexed by Buckeye, Aug. 2014 Annexed by Queen Creek, Aug/Sep 2014 Annexed by Mesa, 2014 Annexed by Peoria, Aug/Sep 2014 Number of scour critical bridges in the MCDOT Structure Inventory: 1 Gilbert Road Bridge over the Salt River - Structure Number 7780 Number of fracture critical bridges in the MCDOT Structure Inventory: 1 Old US 80 Bridge over the Gila River - Structure Number 8021 Evaluation Criteria In 1997, the County Bridge Investment Study (BIS) recognized the need to evaluate bridges separately from road projects. The following information describes MCDOT’s method of scoring and prioritizing bridge projects. The following categories of bridge projects were chosen for evaluation and prioritization:  Replacement Projects;  Replacement of Dip Sections with New Structures;  Scour Protection Projects; and  New Bridge Projects (not included in major road projects). A bridge should be considered for replacement if all of the following conditions are met:  The cost of rehabilitation is 50% or more than the cost of a new bridge; and  The Bridge Engineer agrees replacement is justifiable. Recommendations for TIP Programming Procedures Each year, MCDOT reviews the highest ranking bridge projects from the following subcategories:  TIP Projects;  Replacement of Existing Bridges;  Replace Dip Sections with New Structures; and  New Bridge Projects (not included in major road projects). In any given year, the budget allocation may not support inclusion of all top rated bridge projects in the TIP Program. When this occurs, decisions are made based on the rating criteria and professional engineering judgment. Current Status of the MCDOT Bridge Management System The MCDOT Bridge Management System is up-to-date, complete, and meets or exceeds all current Federal National Bridge Inspection Standards. The MCDOT Bridge Management System is included in the ADOT AASHTOWare BrM electronic database. Asset Management for Structures In 2002, MCDOT began an Asset Management program for its structure inventory. Through FY 2015, MCDOT’s structure inventory consists of 284 bridges and 140 minor structures. In FY 2015, there were seven new/existing bridges and two new/existing minor structures added to the bridge Asset Management. There were also four bridges and two minor structures removed from the MCDOT structure inventory. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 47 BRIDGE Management System Federal Funding Eligibility Comparisons Structures Eligible for Federal Replacement Funds (Sufficiency Rating (SR) < 50) The Bridge Sufficiency Rating (BSR) is a rating based on multiple technical factors that measure how well a bridge performs its intended duty. Ratings range from 0 to 100, with 100 being the highest. The FHWA guidelines stipulate that when a bridge’s sufficiency rating falls below a score of 50, the bridge becomes eligible for Federal replacement funds. As of July 2015, the County had no structures with a rating below 50. Maps labeled Figure 19 provide the BSR for all bridges in the MCDOT inventory. Structures Eligible for Federal Rehabilitation Funds (SR between 50 and 80) As a general rule of thumb, if a BSR falls between a score of 50 and 80, the bridge/structure is a good candidate for federal rehabilitation funds. Currently, there are 23 federal structures in MCDOT’s inventory that have sufficiency ratings between 50 and 80. After each inspection cycle, the Bridge Engineer pays specific attention to all structures that showed a significant change in the sufficiency rating (ten points or more) from the previous year in order to determine what caused the change. Remedial action is taken as necessary. Table 8 lists the bridges in MCDOT’s inventory that have sufficiency ratings between 50 and 80. It also indicates if a structure has a deficiency, meaning that it is considered either functionally obsolete (not built to current standards) or structurally deficient (has a defect that requires attention). STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 48 BRIDGE Management System Table 8: Structures with Sufficiency Ratings between 50 and 80 Structure No Structure Name Feature Carried by Structure Deficiency Sufficiency Rating 10552 144th St-Rio Verde 144th St. RCB / Wash - 79.81 10554 144th St-Rio Verde 144th St. RCB / Wash - 79.81 10555 144th St-Rio Verde 144th St. RCB / Wash - 79.81 10556 144th St-Rio Verde 144th St. RCB / Wash - 79.81 10781 Northern Avenue FRS#3 Diversion Channel - 79.78 7780 Gilbert Road-FAS 229 Salt River Bridge - 79.70 11071 Deer Valley Drive Deer Valley Channel - 79.60 10108 Meridian Road Meridian Rd RCB / Wash - 79.21 10779 Olive Avenue Olive Avenue RCB / Wash - 78.64 11009 Olive Avenue / BNSFRR Reams Road Channel - 78.36 10516 Olive Avenue Olive Avenue RCB / Wash - 78.00 9825 Carefree Hwy Highway WB Cave Creek Bridge - 77.92 10514 Wigwam Creek Blvd Wigwam Creek Blvd RCB / Wash - 77.37 10515 Wigwam Creek Blvd Wigwam Creek Blvd RCB / Wash - 77.37 9859 Camelback Road Agua Fria River Bridge - 77.12 9588 Olive Avenue New River - 76.92 10229 Citrus Road Citrus Road RCB / Wash - 76.75 9375 Broadway Rd Road EB Tempe Canal Bridge EB Functional 75.26 9384 Broadway Rd Road WB Tempe Canal Bridge WB Functional 75.26 8553 Alma School Road Salt River Bridge NB - 74.92 8554 Alma School Road Salt River Bridge SB - 74.92 8570 RH Johnson Boulevard Drainage Ditch RCB - 67.64 8021 Old US 80 Gila River Bridge Functional 61.50 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 49 BRIDGE Management System Figure 19: 2015 Bridge Sufficiency Ratings Area 1 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 50 BRIDGE Management System Figure 19: 2015 Bridge Sufficiency Ratings Area 2 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 51 BRIDGE Management System Figure 19: 2015 Bridge Sufficiency Ratings Area 3 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 52 BRIDGE Management System Notable FY 2015 Bridge Events Bridge Inspector Certification MCDOT bridge engineering staff completed required certification training in compliance with the National Bridge Inspection Standards as published in the Code of Federal Regulations, 23 CRF 650, Subpart C and the ADOT Bridge Inspection Guidelines, 2011. Currently, MCDOT has four staff members who are certified Bridge Inspectors. The four staff members attended a four-day National Highway Institute training course for “Fracture Critical Inspection Techniques for Steel Bridges” to further expand the staff members’ inspection credentials. Tuthill Road Bridge The completion of the Tuthill Road Bridge diaphragm reconstruction project was one of the most notable projects during FY 2015. The structural improvements made to the bridge’s diaphragms at certain locations were needed to ensure the bridge would function as designed and be safe. The diaphragms were becoming noticeably distressed and detaching from the bridge. This was evident from spalled chunks of concrete that fell into the river bed. Northern Parkway Program – Phase I MCDOT managed the design and construction of three new overpass bridges and one reinforced box culvert (RBC) that were completed in FY 2014 as Phase I of a 20-year multi-phase Northern Parkway Program in partnership with MAG, El Mirage, Glendale, and Peoria. In the next phase of this project, two additional overpass bridges were completed in FY 2015. In accordance with the IGA terms, Glendale has taken over ownership and maintenance responsibilities of all of the structures constructed along Northern Parkway (from Sarival Road to Dysart Road) upon the final acceptance and conveyance of rights-of-way. Union Hills Drive Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert Extension at 99th Avenue The intersection improvement project at Union Hills Drive and 99th Avenue requires the concrete-lined channel along the median of 99th Avenue to be closed up between the northbound and southbound lanes. In order to close up the median and support new traffic turn lanes on 99th Avenue, the existing reinforced concrete box needs to be extended on both the north and south ends of the intersection. The MCDOT Bridge Group designed the required reinforced concrete box modification in FY 2015, while construction is scheduled for FY 2016. Synopsis of MCDOT’s Bridge Projects Bridge Projects in the MCDOT FY 2016 - FY 2020 TIP Table 9 provides a list of these projects currently in the TIP. These projects include bridge project scoping and new bridge designs. Table 9: Bridge Projects in the MCDOT FY 2016 - FY 2020 TIP Feature 99th Avenue Channel Facility/Facilities Location Current Improvement Stage Union Hills Drive 99th Avenue RCB extension Construction Salt River Gilbert Road Bridge At Salt River Bridge Replacement Final Design Salt River Dobson Road, McKellips Road, At Salt River and Gilbert Road Bridges Design Concept Report (DCR) Salt River 75th Avenue Bridge Initial Scoping Loop 101 Northern Avenue Parkway Over Loop 101 south of current Phase II Overpass at Loop 101 Northern Ave Loop 101 interchange At Salt River STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov Construction FISCAL YEAR 2015 53 BRIDGE Management System Feature Facility/Facilities Current Improvement Stage Location Agua Fria River Northern Avenue Parkway Bridge Northern Parkway between Dysart Rd and 111th Avenue Construction Dysart Road Dysart Road Overpass at Northern Ave Dysart Road at Northern Avenue Design The status of the Bridge/Structure work completed in FY 2015 is shown in Table 10. The bridges anticipated to be under construction in FY 2016 are shown in Table 11 below. Table 10: New Bridges and Bridge Improvements Completed in FY 2015 Structure No. Project Location Description of Work Completed 8584 Tuthill Bridge Diaphragm Reconstruction Bridge rehabilitation project completed N/A Northern Parkway at Reems Road Bridge completed N/A Northern Parkway at Litchfield Road Bridge completed Table 11: Bridges Anticipated to Be Under Construction by MCDOT in FY 2016 Project Location Facility Description of Work Northern Parkway/Loop 101 Parkway Overpass Design finalized (Est. Const. FY 2016) Northern Parkway Bridge Agua Fria River Design finalized (Est. Const. FY 2016) Union Hills Drive 99th Avenue (RCB extension) Design finalized (Est. Const. FY 2016) Status of Bridge and Structure Projects Currently Being Designed There are numerous bridge projects in various stages of design by MCDOT as well as numerous structure projects within private developments in the design phase. Table 12 lists the bridge projects currently under design or in the Design Concept Report (DCR) or scoping process. Table 12: Projects Currently in the Design Phase by MCDOT Name Facility Status Deer Valley Road Bridges Agua Fria River Construction plans in progress for 2 bridges (Est. Const. FY 2017) Dobson Road Bridge Salt River DCR completed Camelback Road Bridge Beardsley Canal Initial Scoping in progress McKellips Road Bridge Salt River DCR completed Gilbert Road Bridge Salt River Identified for replacement (Est. Const. FY 2018) Northern Parkway Overpass Overpass at Dysart Road Design finalized (Est. Const. FY 2017) Rittenhouse Road Bridge Queen Creek Wash Initial Design phase (Est. Const. FY 2019) Summary of Inspection Activity for FY 2015 Each year MCDOT must submit a report to the County Board of Supervisors concerning the physical condition of its bridges and minor structures as compared to the adopted criteria as required by the STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 54 BRIDGE Management System Governments Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement 34. The latest ratings of the County’s bridges and structures along with the BSR are shown below in Table 13: Table 13: Summary of FY 2015 Inspection Results Criteria Target Value Actual Value % of Bridges and Structures with BSR > 70 min. 90% 99.2% % of Bridges and Structures with BSR < 50 max. 3% 0.0% Table 14 through Table 17 provide a list of County bridges based on their overall length. The tables include information on each structure’s sufficiency rating. An alphabetical list of all structures within the MCDOT Bridge inventory can be found in Appendix A. Table 14: Listing of Span Bridges Over 600’ in Overall Length Structure No. Road Location Feature Intersected 8584 Tuthill Rd 0.5 mi S/ Beloat Rd 9859 8021 Camelback Rd Old US 80 1.0 mi E/ El Mirage Rd Agua Fria River S/ Gillespie Dam Gila River 9145 8981 7819 Indian School Rd 0.5 mi E/ El Mirage Olive Ave 0.8 mi E/ El Mirage Rd Gilbert Rd-FAS 0.5 mi N/ Thomas Rd 229 Happy Valley 1.5 mi W/Lake Pkwy Pleasant Rd MC-85 Hwy 0.5 mi W/ El Mirage 8553 Alma School Rd 300' S/ McKellips 7780 10396 Sufficiency Length Rating (ft.) Gila River Structure Name 91.87 1,770 Gila River Bridge 77.12 61.50 1,725 Agua Fria River Bridge 1,662 Gila River Bridge Agua Fria River Agua Fria River 95.52 94.27 1,623 Agua Fria River Bridge 1,504 Agua Fria River Bridge Salt River 79.70 1,302 Salt River Bridge Agua Fria River 87.13 1,256 Agua Fria River Bridge Agua Fria River Salt River (N. Channel) 94.12 1,203 Agua Fria River Bridge 74.92 936 Salt River Bridge NB Table 15: Listing of Span Bridges between 300’ and 600’ in Overall Length Structure No. Road Location Feature Intersected 9999 Old US 80 500' E/ Salome Hwy Hassayampa River 9849 Bush Hwy at Blue Point-Salt River Salt River 8554 Alma School Rd 0.25 mi N/ McLellan 10106 10085 10021 9825 10162 9588 Sufficiency Length Rating (ft.) Salt River (S. Channel) New River Road 0.25 mi E/ I 17 New River I-17 Frontage Rd 1000' S/ New River Rd New River New River Rd Carefree Hwy WB 0.25 mi W/ 7th Ave 1 mi W/ Cave Creek Rd 1 mi W/ Cave Creek Carefree Hwy EB Rd Olive Avenue E/ of 99th Ave Skunk Creek Cave Creek Wash Cave Creek Wash New River STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov Structure Name 99.13 483 Hassayampa River Bridge 92.59 480 Blue Point Bridge 74.92 410 Salt River Bridge SB 96.59 99.58 407 401 New River Bridge New River Bridge 98.66 367 Skunk Creek Bridge 77.92 354 Cave Creek Bridge 82.92 354 76.92 300 Cave Creek Wash Bridge New River Bridge FISCAL YEAR 2015 55 BRIDGE Management System Table 16: Listing of Span Bridges between 100’ and 300’ in Overall Length Structure No. 10582 Road Gavilan Peak Pkwy 7548 571st Ave 9928 Power Rd 10083 10390 11108 8038 8862 Location Feature Intersected Sufficiency Length Rating (ft.) Just S of Daisy Mtn Dr Deadman Wash 96.86 270 9.75 mi N/ I-8 via AC Rd 99.14 257 Gila River Bridge 92.38 226 E Maricopa Fldwy Bridge 99.66 221 Cline Creek Bridge 96.68 193 Queen Creek Bridge 97.22 191 85.52 180 Gila River East Maricopa Fldwy Cline Creek New River Road 350' N/ Circle Mtn Rd Wash 0.2 mi S/ Queen Power Road Queen Creek Creek Rd Riggs Rd 0.2 mi E of Hawes Rd Sonoqui Wash Queen Creek Rittenhouse Rd 0.25 mi N/ Cloud Wash University Drive 0.5 mi E/ Ellsworth Rd CAP Canal S/ Guadalupe Rd 8884 Southern Ave 9832 Salome Rd 8569 8856 Patton Rd Crismon Rd 9895 Ellsworth Rd 9824 Bush Hwy 10230 MC-85 Hwy Structure Name Gavilan Peak Pkwy Bridge 0.6 mi E/ Signal Butte Rd 8 mi W/ Harquahala Valley Rd 1 mi W/ Grand Ave 500' N/ Apache Rd 98.57 146 Riggs Rd Bridge Queen Creek Wash Bridge CAP Canal Bridge CAP Canal (Mesa) 97.41 145 CAP Canal Bridge CAP Canal 94.46 124 CAP Canal Bridge CAP Canal CAP Canal 94.07 94.70 119 109 CAP Canal Bridge CAP Canal Bridge 98.24 106 CAP Canal Bridge 97.08 105 CAP Canal Bridge 91.24 103 MC-85 Bridge 0.25 mi N/ University CAP Canal Rd FanninMcFar 1.7 mi N/ Thomas CAP Aqueduct 0.3 mi E/ Estrella Bullard Wash Pkwy Table 17: Listing of Span Bridges Under 100’ in Overall Length Structure No. Road 8560 8881 Dysart Rd-FAS 547 Eagle Eye Rd Van Buren St Location 7 mi N/ Indian School Rd 5 mi N/ US 60_Grand Ave 0.25 mi N/ Camelback Rd 2 mi S/ Salome Hwy 0.5 mi W/ Citrus Rd 10061 Old US 80 0.3 mi S/ 331th Ave 9834 Old US 80 Cave Creek Pkwy Dysart Road El Mirage Rd 8576 355th Avenue 8571 163rd Avenue 7883 7898 10787 9949 9927 10786 7901 8000 Feature Intersected Sufficiency Length Rating (ft.) Structure Name CAP Canal 90.60 90 CAP Canal Bridge HaydenRhode CAP Aqueduct 93.80 88 CAP Canal Bridge Colter Channel 94.65 86 Colter Channel Bridge CAP Canal RID Canal Arlington Valley Wash Buckeye Drain 96.88 97.62 86 87 CAP Canal Bridge RID Canal Bridge 90.05 84 Arlington Valley Bridge 97.99 82 Buckeye Drain Bridge 93.76 80 Wash Bridge 99.99 96.82 76 75 92.38 69 99.99 65 97.25 95.14 56 55 Dysart Road Bridge El Mirage Drain Bridge RWCD Canal (N) Bridge El Granada Blvd Bridge Buckeye Canal Bridge Buckeye Canal Bridge 1 mi W/ Jct SR-85 1.5 mi N/32nd St/Cloud Wash Rd 0.25 mi. S/ Jomax Rd Beardsley Canal 0.5 mi N/ Glendale Ave Dysart Drain RWCD Canal N. Power Rd S/ Guadalupe Rd Crossing) 0.4 mi. N/ Happy El Granada Blvd Beardsley Canal Valley Rd MC 85 Hwy 0.5 mi W/ Perryville Buckeye Canal Baseline Rd 200' NW MC-85 Buckeye Canal STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 56 BRIDGE Management System Structure No. Road Location 7557 Meridian Rd 9375 Broadway Rd EB 0.2 mi E/ Price Rd 9384 Broadway Rd WB 10776 Rainbow Road 9503 Higley Rd 0.5 mi S/ Southern Avenue 0.5 mi S/ Germann 9919 Woods Rd E/ Old US-80 10126 Airport Rd 8001 9593 8044 7582 8638 10847 8043 7551 7782 9672 9831 9374 10088 8583 8681 8629 10239 10240 8578 11111 9426 8680 8855 990181 0.5 mi N/ Brown Rd Feature Intersected Bulldog Floodway Sufficiency Length Rating (ft.) Structure Name 97.37 54 Tempe Canal 75.26 50 Tempe Canal 75.26 50 Buckeye Canal 97.59 48 Rainbow Road Bridge RWCD Canal 89.84 44 Gila Bend Canal 97.42 44 1 mi N/ MC85 Buckeye Canal 0.5 mi N/ Lower Airport Rd RID Canal Buckeye Miller Rd 0.25 mi N/ SR-85 Buckeye Canal Perryville Rd 0.5 mi N/ Southern Buckeye Canal 309th Avenue S of Lower River Rd Buckeye Canal Dean Rd 0.75 mi N/ MC-85 Buckeye Canal Meridian Rd 0.5 mi S of Warner Power Line (Mesa) Road Fldwy Chnl Perryville Rd 1/3 mi S/ Van Buren RID Canal 600' N/ Lower Buckeye Dean Rd RID Canal Rd 0.75 mi N/ Old US80 Palo Verde Rd Buckeye Canal Hwy 99th Ave 0.5 mi N/ McDowell Rd RID Canal Jackrabbit Trail 1000' N/ Southern Ave Buckeye Canal University Dr 900' W/ Dobson Tempe Canal Jackrabbit Trail 0.25 mi N/ Yuma RID Canal 59th Ave 0.5 mi S/ Buckeye Rd RID Canal Rainbow Rd 1 mi N/ Broadway RID Canal Turner Rd 0.5 mi S/ Baseline Rd Buckeye Canal Buckeye Feeder Roeser Rd 0.5 mi S/ Broadway Rd Ditch Buckeye Feeder Chambers Street 0.6 mi S/ Broadway Rd Ditch Wilson (283rd) 1 mi S/ Baseline Buckeye Canal Ave 5.7 mi W/ Harqua. Val. Centennial Rd CAP Aux Canal Rd Palo Verde Rd 0.25 mi N/ Broadway RID Canal Johnson Rd 0.25 mi N/ Broadway RID Canal Bruner Rd 0.75 mi N/ Old US-80 Buckeye Canal 0.25 mi S/ Cactus Arlington Valley Old US 80 Rose Wash 97.77 43 RWCD Canal Bridge Gila Bend Canal Bridge Buckeye Canal Bridge 97.53 41 RID Canal Bridge 98.62 97.90 97.95 97.86 40 39 39 39 Buckeye Canal Bridge Buckeye Canal Bridge Buckeye Canal Bridge Buckeye Canal Bridge 93.10 39 Meridian Rd Bridge 97.82 38 RID Canal Bridge 97.56 37 RID Canal Bridge 97.84 37 Buckeye Canal Bridge 96.23 97.52 95.39 96.62 98.14 97.46 99.97 37 37 36 36 34 34 33 RID Canal Bridge Buckeye Canal Bridge Tempe Canal Bridge RID Canal Bridge RID Canal Bridge RID Canal Bridge Buckeye Canal Bridge 93.08 32 Roeser Rd Bridge 93.08 32 Chambers St Bridge 97.99 32 Buckeye Canal Bridge 95.15 32 Centennial Rd Bridge 97.37 99.86 97.99 31 28 28 84.96 18 RID Canal Bridge RID Canal Bridge Buckeye Canal Bridge Arlington V Wash Bridge 0.2 mi E/ Price Rd STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov Bulldog Fldwy Bridge Tempe Canal Bridge EB Tempe Canal Bridge WB FISCAL YEAR 2015 57 ROAD Management System Road Management System Introduction Pavement maintenance is broadly identified as work accomplished to preserve or extend the functional life of a pavement surface until major rehabilitation or complete reconstruction is performed. Maintenance is classified by function as either routine or preventive. Preventive maintenance preserves rather than improves the capacity or strength of the pavement. In order for preventive maintenance to be effective, it should be applied to structurally sound pavement before the pavement displays significant environmental distress such as raveling, oxidation and block cracking. Timely treatments prove to be the most cost effective. Routine maintenance typically consists of pothole repair, patching, sweeping and/or striping of pavement. All roads deteriorate over time due to environmental conditions and the volume and type of traffic using the road. However, the roads within the jurisdiction of MCDOT are maintained at a high level of service because of a County program that includes the following procedures:  Continuously monitor and evaluate road conditions – road evaluation ratings are stored in the Road Management System (RMS) database;  Report road conditions to decision makers via annual reports;  Model pavement conditions and maintenance strategies; and  Develop annual and long-term maintenance plans and implement the plans as funding permits. Summary of MCDOT Paved Facilities In 2015, MCDOT had jurisdiction of 922 miles (1,895 lane miles) of local roads and 1,078 miles (2,586 lane miles) of major roads (arterial and collector). This breakdown can be seen in Table 18 and Figure 20, which compare the MCDOT road composition between FY 2011 and FY 2015. In total, MCDOT owned and maintained 1,999 centerline miles of local and major roads in FY 2015, which equates to 4,481.15 lane miles. For comparison, in FY 2014, MCDOT maintained 4,471.50 lane miles of road. Table 18: Miles of MCDOT Paved Roads FY 2011 - FY 2015 Road Classification FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Difference 2011-2015 Local 898 910 912 915 922 24 Minor Collector 389 390 315 314 310 -79 Major Collector 274 272 266 266 265 -9 Minor Arterial 359 358 342 342 338 -21 Principal Arterial 158 164 164 164 164 6 2,070 2,094 1,999 2,001 1,999 -71 TOTAL STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 58 ROAD Management System Miles of Paved Roads (FY 2011 - FY 2015) 1000 900 800 M i l e s 700 600 Local 500 Minor Collector 400 Major Collector 300 Minor Arterial 200 Principal Arterial 100 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year Figure 20: Miles of Paved Roads owned by MCDOT (FY 2011 - FY 2015) Road and Pavement Evaluation Ratings The following section describes the type of pavement evaluations and ratings that are conducted as part of MCDOT’s routine pavement maintenance. Pavement Condition Ratings (PCR) The Road Management Section evaluates pavement conditions for surface distress every 12-18 months for arterial and collector roads and every other year for local roads, with half of the local roads evaluated each year. The resulting Pavement Condition Ratings (PCR) range from 0 to 100, with 100 being new pavement or pavement with no distress. The results help to quantify the overall pavement condition of the road network. The consist positive results from preventive maintenance on MCDOT roads is evident in Figure 21, which shows the FY 2011-2015 PCR quality by percentage ranking of all arterial roads in the County. Maps labeled Figure 22 show the PCR for every County-owned arterial road. The PCR data is also presented as part of the Annual Network Rating Summary, which is found later in this section. MCDOT utilizes the PCR ratings to forecast preventive maintenance programs and for TIP planning. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 59 ROAD Management System FY 2011 - FY 2015 Arterial Pavement Condition Ratings (PCR) P e r c e n t o f S y s t e m 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 57% 41% 39% 35% 25% 17% 50% 48% 48% 38% 32% 19% 19% 16% 11% 1% 1% 1% 2% FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 0% FY2015 Fiscal Year Excellent (100-85) Very Good (84-70) Good (69-55) Fair (54-40) Poor (<40) Figure 21: FY 2011 - FY 2015 PCR for County Arterial Roads STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 60 ROAD Management System Figure 22: FY 2015 PCR for County Arterial Roads Area 1 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 61 ROAD Management System Figure 22: FY 2015 PCR for County Arterial Roads Area 2 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 62 ROAD Management System Figure 22: FY 2015 PCR for County Arterial Roads Area 3 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 63 ROAD Management System International Roughness Index (IRI) To collect International Roughness Index (IRI) data, MCDOT uses a Laser Road Profiler (LRP) equipped with three lasers, one in each wheel track and one in the mid-lane. Annually, the MCDOT Road Management Section collects the IRI for each arterial road segment with a length greater than a quarter mile. The IRI values are determined for each road segment on a scale from 1 to 500 with 500 representing an extremely rough road. IRI values are categorized by performance subgroups, and the percentage of each group for the years between FY 2011 and FY 2015 can be seen in Figure 23. Maps labeled Figure 24 show the IRI for every County arterial road. MCDOT utilizes the IRI ratings to forecast preventive maintenance programs and TIP planning. FY 2011 - FY 2015 International Roughness Index (IRI) P e r c e n t o f S y s t e m 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 43% 41% 26% 17% 18% 15% 23% 13% 3% 1% FY 2011 19% 22% 14% 3% FY 2012 51% 47% 42% 14% 15% 5% 2% FY 2013 24% 22% 15% FY 2014 5% FY 2015 Fiscal Year Very Smooth (0-59) Smooth (60-94) Average (95-169) Rough (170-220) Very Rough (>220) Figure 23: FY 2011 - FY 2015 IRI for County Arterial Roads STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 64 ROAD Management System Figure 24: FY 2015 IRI for County Arterial Roads Area 1 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 65 ROAD Management System Figure 24: FY 2015 IRI for County Arterial Roads Area 2 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 66 ROAD Management System Figure 24: FY 2015 IRI for County Arterial Roads Area 3 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 67 ROAD Management System Sufficiency Ratings The Road Management Section identifies a sufficiency rating for each arterial road segment when it is initially constructed. The rating identifies how well each road segment compares to the MCDOT Roadway Design Manual (RDM) standards. Ratings for each category are combined per road segment and scored on a scale from 0 to 100, with 100 representing a road in compliance with the RDM standards. The sufficiency ratings of arterial roads are updated only after major improvements are made to the road or the road is reconstructed. New construction, widening, or significant improvements to roads to address safety issues such as bottlenecks, drainage, and vertical and horizontal sight distance will all impact the road’s sufficiency rating. The Sufficiency Ratings of the MCDOT road network between FY 2011 and FY 2015 are provided in Figure 25. Maps labeled Figure 26 below show the sufficiency ratings of every County arterial road. FY 2011 - FY 2015 Sufficiency Ratings 100% P e r c e n t o f 80% S y s t e m 60% 40% 20% 32% 60% 57% 57% 55% 31% 31% 57% 29% 30% 12% 1% 11% 1% 11% 1% 10% 1% 11% 1% FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 0% Fiscal Year Excellent (100-85) Very Good (84-70) Good (69-55) Fair (54-40) Poor (<40) Figure 25: FY 2011 - FY 2015 Sufficiency Ratings for County Arterial Roads STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 68 ROAD Management System Figure 26: FY 2015 Sufficiency Ratings for County Arterial Roads Area 1 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 69 ROAD Management System Figure 26: FY 2015 Sufficiency Ratings for County Arterial Roads Area 2 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 70 ROAD Management System Figure 26: FY 2015 Sufficiency Ratings for County Arterial Roads Area 3 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 71 ROAD Management System Preventive Maintenance Procedures Preventive maintenance extends the life of the pavement and provides for better road performance. The majority of treatments for pavement involves sealing the existing surface and providing a new wearing surface for traffic. MCDOT has used preventive maintenance practices for decades with excellent results. Table 19 shows the breakdown of each treatment that is typically used, the frequency of application, and the observed increase in pavement life per application. Table 19: Preventive Maintenance Treatment Longevity Pavement Age at Time of First Application (year) 3 to 4 Frequency of Application (year) 3 to 4 Observed Increase in Pavement Life (year) 3 to 4 Crack Filling/Sealing 8 to 10 4 to 5 4 to 5 Single Chip Seal 10 to 12 5 to 6 5 to 6 Double Chip Seal 10 to 12 5 to 6 5 to 6 Micro Surfacing 10 to 12 5 to 6 5 to 6 Slurry Seal Arterial—Thin Overlay— 1.5”- 2” Asphalt Rubber Hot Mix (ARHM) Local—Mill & Resurface 1.5” ARHM 10 to 12 5 to 6 5 to 6 12 to 15 12 to 15 12 35+ To be determined To be determined Treatment Fog Seal/ Rejuvenate FY 2015 Pavement Preservation Results A maintenance plan was established that identified the major projects that were needed to maintain the integrity of the MCDOT owned roads in 2015. A summary of the completed maintenance projects in FY 2015 can be found in Table 20. The cost to complete the FY 2015 maintenance plan was approximately $17.16 million. As a comparison, MCDOT spent $12.68 million to complete the FY 2014 maintenance plan. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 72 ROAD Management System Table 20: FY 2015 Completed Maintenance Plans WO# MPC01 MPC02 MPH01 Cost per Square Yard (SY) $ 0.32 $ 0.32 $ 2.00 MPH02 MPH02 $ $ MPM15 MPP15 MPS15 MPS15 T468 T471 T472 T475 T494 TT434 TT469 TT470 Square Yards (SY) 1,956,780 334,231 320,519 Lane Miles 238.25 40.69 39.03 $ $ $ Total Cost 626,169.63 106,953.92 641,038.44 2.50 2.50 226,095 799,649 27.53 97.36 $ $ 565,236.98 1,999,122.50 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 2.92 0.35 1.75 2.92 12.87 16.60 10.50 230,524 1,358,855 326,208 2,050 44,595 30,672 273,129 28.07 165.44 39.72 0.25 5.43 3.74 33.25 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 673,129.15 475,599.15 570,864.74 5,986.64 573,939.07 509,158.85 2,867,853.24 $ $ $ $ $ 13.00 52.00 18.50 12.50 12.50 29,307 16,931 264,121 32,864 51,366 3.57 2.06 32.16 4.00 6.26 $ $ $ $ $ 380,991.00 880,394.84 4,886,229.62 410,800.00 642,069.50 2015 - Mesa Locals #1 - Rehab TT434 - Coralbell TT485 $ 73.50 Ave - 93rd to 95st Project Maintenance Totals 4,748 0.58 $ 348,978.00 6,302,644 767.39 $ 17,164,515.25 TIP Funding: $ 11,500,414.12 Operations Funding: $ 5,664,101.14 Project Name 2015 - Crack Seal - MPC15 2015 - Crack Seal - MPC15 2015 - Chip Seal LV - Beltline, Riggs, 51st Ave, Meridian 2015 - Chip Seal HV - Locals - Cape Seal 2015 - Chip Seal HV - Eagle Eye - Vulture Mine Patton 2015 - Micro Seal - Cape Seal 2015 - Preservative Seal - Locals TRMSS 2015 - Slurry Seal 2015 - Micro Seal - Cape Seal 2015 - AR M&R - Meridian Rd - T468 2015 - 2" AC Ovl Superpave - Germann Rd 2015 - AR Overlay - SR 303/Northern Pkwy Area T472 2015 - AR M&R - McDowell Rd 2015 - Rehab - Old US 80 - T494 2015 - Mesa Locals #1 - Rehab TT434 2015 - AR M&R - Arterials 2015 - AR M&R - Arterials In FY 2015, MCDOT’s pavement preservation group and the Operations Division completed 18 programs with an expenditure of $17,164,515.25. Figure 27 and Figure 28 break down the FY 2015 completed projects and costs by the type of surface treatment that was performed. As can be seen in Figure 27, the most prevalent road improvement undertaken in 2015 was the crack seal, with 279 miles of road undergoing a crack seal treatment. However, the type of surface treatment that resulted in the largest cost in FY 2015 was the pavement rehabilitation projects, which cost MCDOT more than $6 million. This is despite the fact that there were only 35 miles of road that underwent rehabilitation. Table 21 shows the overall Network Rating Summary for FY 2015, which shows the results of the preventive maintenance efforts by evaluating the road system’s PCR and comparing it to previous years. The results of the FY 2015 pavement preservation program show that the network is being successfully maintained. It can be seen that the effort in FY 2015 resulted in improvement of the network, as the 2015 average PCR value was higher than in FY 2014 for arterial roads (82.78 versus 79.40), the PCR of park roads remained the same (89.63) and the average PCR of local roads showed minimal decline (92.07 versus 93.27). If additional funding becomes available, MCDOT can consider accelerating the preventative maintenance plans for more crack seal, slurry seal, chip seal and mill and overlay projects to improve the quality of MCDOT roads and reduce more costly maintenance in the future. Maps labeled Figure 29 show the pavement maintenance activities that have been undertaken on County roads in FY 2015. These maps also show the MCDOT-delineated maintenance areas. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 73 ROAD Management System FY 2015 Completed Maintenance Mileage 300 279 L 250 a n 200 e 165 150 125 M i 100 l e s 50 56 40 39 35 28 0 Crack Seal Preservative Chip Seal HV Seal AR Overlay Slurry Seal Chip Seal LV Rehabilitation Micro Slurry Surface Treatments Figure 27: FY 2015 Completed Maintenance Mileage FY 2015 Maintenance Costs $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $6,115,603 $5,384,812 $5,000,000 C o $4,000,000 s $3,000,000 t $2,564,359 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $733,122 $679,000 $641,039 $570,865 $475,600 $0 Surface Treatments Figure 28: FY 2015 Maintenance Costs STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 74 ROAD Management System Table 21: FY 2011 - FY 2015 Annual Network Rating Summary Fiscal Year Average PCR Average IRI Mileage PCR 100-85 PCR 84-70 PCR < 55 Miles above 70 % above 70 % below 55 2011 81.96 157.08 1,119.18 631.09 273.28 8.03 904.37 82.00% 1.00% Fiscal Year Average PCR Mileage PCR 100-85 PCR 84-70 PCR < 55 Miles above 70 % above 70 % below 55 2011 92.53 897.68 751.23 103.18 5.03 854.41 98.70% 0.60% Fiscal Year Average PCR Mileage PCR 100-85 PCR 84-70 PCR < 55 Miles above 70 % above 70 % below 55 2011 89.61 54.97 45.22 5.46 1.3 50.68 97.00% 3.00% Fiscal Year Network Average PCR Network % above 70 Network % below 55 2011 86.74 87.34% 0.69% Arterial 2012 81.84 149.9 1,123.14 517.28 387.14 12.28 904.42 83.00% 1.10% Local 2012 93.62 910.02 815.22 61.99 1.26 877.21 98.40% 0.10% Park 2012 89.63 56.54 44.97 5.46 1.3 50.43 97.50% 2.50% 2013 80.67 150.52 1,087.43 519.82 349.61 12.36 869.43 79.90% 1.10% 2014 2013 93.26 912.27 834.21 51.98 1.24 886.19 99.00% 0.10% 2014 2013 89.63 56.36 44.97 5.46 1.3 50.43 97.50% 2.50% 2014 Network Totals 2012 2013 87.18 86.5 87.67% 87.84% 0.71% 0.72% 79.40 154.44 1,084.28 438.75 423.64 17.02 862.39 79.50% 1.60% 93.27 920.97 852.88 42.22 0 895.1 99.40% 0.00% 89.63 58.18 44.97 5.46 1.3 50.43 97.50% 2.50% 2014 85.88 87.62% 0.89% 2015 82.78 128.01 1,077.14 535.43 412.70 4.53 948.13 88.20% 0.4% 2015 92.07 922.17 846.47 55.40 0.00 901.87 99.40% 0.00% 2015 89.63 58.18 44.97 5.46 1.30 50.43 97.50% 2.50% 2015 87.14 92.37% 0.28% Note: FY data is typically selected from June 30th or the last work day of the FY. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 75 ROAD Management System Figure 29: FY 2015 Pavement Maintenance Activities Area 1 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 76 ROAD Management System Figure 29: FY 2015 Pavement Maintenance Activities Area 2 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 77 ROAD Management System Figure 29: FY 2015 Pavement Maintenance Activities Area 3 STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 78 ROAD Management System 5-Year Pavement Preservation Plan Pavement preservation plans are generated by applying of the preservation strategy flow charts to the current pavement ratings in the database. Per Figure 30, in 2015 it was projected that the pavement preservation and preventative maintenance needs for the five-year period (FY 2015 - FY 2019) would be $91.7 million to keep the County road system at the then existing serviceability level. In FY 2015, MCDOT completed pavement preservation and preventative maintenance projects for a total amount of approximately $17.2 million, or about 19 percent of the projected five-year expenditures. The projected needs for pavement preservation and preventative maintenance were identified to be $85.5 million for the next cycle of five fiscal years, FY 2016 to FY 2020. FY 2016 – FY 2020 FY 2016 5 Yr. Projection 2016 Preservation Type Lane Miles Only Cost Lane Miles Cost % Arterial AR Overlay Local M&R/Rehab HIPR Chip Seal HV Chip Seal LV Micro Seal Slurry Seal Preservative Seal Crack Seal 226.96 163.54 8.77 398.36 231.55 95.60 231.00 1,663.21 1,126.06 $30,071,553 $24,429,810 $936,273 $9,290,309 $4,627,097 $2,322,655 $3,908,796 $5,929,877 $4,036,923 42.55 59.75 8.77 141.90 59.34 18.41 41.66 336.36 248.72 $6,485,163 21.5% $8,691,431 35.5% $936,273 100% $3,711,987 40% $978,760 21% $420,610 18% $598,796 15% $966,895 16% $714,967 18% Pavement Preservation Totals: 4,145.04 $85,553,292 957.47 $23,504,880 27.5% Figure 30: FY 2016 Pavement Preservation 5-Year Summary Report FY 2016 Pavement Preservation Plan Table 22 shows the FY 2016 Pavement Preservation Plan that was developed in FY 2015. Implementation of the projected maintenance plan will cost $19.3 million to apply all the recommended surface treatments and existing pavement rehabilitation. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 79 ROAD Management System Table 22: FY 2016 Pavement Preservation Plan Project Name Arterial - AR Overlay - Bush Hwy - Phase I AR M&R - Arterials - T474nw AR M&R - Arterials - T475se AR M&R - Arterials - T476sw Rehabilitation - Locals - Area 2 AR M&R - Locals - Area 2 HIP - AR Ovl - Patton Rd & Alma School Rd Chip Seal - HV - Hot Precoated Chip Seal - HV Chip Seal - LV Chip Seal - HV - Town of Gilbert IGA Chip Seal - LV - Town of Gilbert IGA Crack Seal - Town of Gilbert IGA Micro Seal - Town of Gilbert IGA Micro Seal - Anthem Arterials Rehabilitation - SCW Unit 39 Slurry Seal - Sun Lakes Units 1-10 Preservative Seal - Arterials MC Preservative Seal - Local - TRMSS Plan 1 Crack Seal Pavement Preservation Totals: WO # T348 T474 T475 T476 T473 T473 T--T473 Lane Miles 10.11 10.75 16.59 5.11 45.20 7.85 8.77 51.87 85.11 54.42 4.92 4.92 5.21 5.21 13.20 6.70 41.66 141.19 195.17 243.52 957.47 TIP Funding: Operations Funding: Additional Funding Required: Cost/SY $38.00 $12.50 $12.50 $12.50 $18.50 $12.50 $13.00 $3.80 $2.85 $2.00 $2.50 $2.10 $0.35 $2.23 $3.00 $18.50 $1.75 $0.35 $0.35 $0.35 SY 83,000 88,317 136,215 41,961 371,231 64,500 72,021 426,006 699,025 446,984 40,377 40,377 42,762 42,762 108,417 54,995 342,169 1,159,625 1,602,931 2,000,000 7,863,675 Needs Cost $3,154,000 $1,103,963 $1,702,688 $524,513 $6,867,774 $806,250 $936,273 $1,618,823 $1,992,221 $893,968 $100,943 $84,792 $14,967 $95,359 $325,251 $1,017,408 $598,796 $405,869 $561,026 $700,000 $23,504,880 $14,159,186 $9,345,694 $0 Figure 31 and Figure 32 break down the planned FY 2016 projected maintenance projects and project costs by the type of surface treatment that will be performed. Similar to FY 2015, the 20 projects in the FY 2016 plan will have the highest number of lane miles being treated by crack seal. For costs, in FY 2015, the treatment that was generating the highest cost was rehabilitation. In FY 2016, the treatment with the highest projected cost is also rehabilitation, which is estimated to cost approximately $8.7 million. AR M&R are the next highest costs, with projections at approximately $6.5 million. STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 80 ROAD Management System FY 2016 Pavement Preservation Plan 400 L 350 a 300 n 250 e 336 244 200 M 150 i 100 l 50 e 0 s 60 59 52 43 42 18 9 Surface Treatments Figure 31: FY 2016 Pavement Preservation Plan Summary FY 2016 Estimated Maintenance Costs $10,000,000 $9,000,000 $8,691,431 $8,000,000 C o s t $7,000,000 $6,485,163 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,711,987 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $978,760 $966,895 $936,273 $714,967 $598,796 $420,610 $0 Surface Treatments Figure 32: FY 2016 Estimated Maintenance Costs STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 81 Appendix Appendix A – Alphabetical Listing of All Structures in the MCDOT Bridge Inventory Structure No. 10050 10051 8583 9289 10444 9666 9672 990151 990153 990154 9677 990234 9678 9679 990280 10783 990265 10368 10553 7561 990202 10552 10554 10555 10556 990203 990204 10849 10850 990287*** 8571 11109 11327 7582 8576 7548 990156 8001 10126 7549 8553 8554 990117 990187 10405 10551 990227 990228 990229 990230 990231 990232 990250 990258 990259 990184 Road 7th St 7th St 59th Ave 91st Ave 96th Street 99th Ave 99th Ave 99th Ave 99th Ave 103th Ave NB 105th Ave 105th Place 106th Ave 107th Ave 116th Street 117th Avenue 119th Avenue 129th Avenue 12th Street 138th Ave 141st Ave 144th St-Rio Verde 144th St-Rio Verde 144th St-Rio Verde 144th St-Rio Verde 145th Drive 147th Drive 150th Street 150th Street 151st Ave 163rd Avenue 203rd Place 231st Ave 309th Avenue 355th Avenue 571st Ave_AguaCal 571st Ave_AguaCalR Airport Rd Airport Rd Aleppo Drive Alma School Rd Alma School Rd Alma School Rd Amigo Dr (SCW) Anthem Way Anthem Way Anthem Way Anthem Way Anthem Way Anthem Way Anthem Way Anthem Way Anthem Way Anthem Way Anthem Way Aurora Dr Location 0.2 mi N/ 7th St/Carefree 450' N/ Carefree Hwy 0.5 mi S/ Buckeye Rd at McDowell Rd 1/8 mi N/ Broadway Road 250' N Grand Ave 0.25 mi N/ McDowell Rd 200' N/ Grand at Concho Circle 325' N/ Olive at Del Webb Blvd Median Quarterline Rd to Contess at Del Webb Blvd Median at Del Webb Blvd Median 600' S of Riggs Rd 620' S/ Agua Fria Blvd 0.5 mi s/ Williams Drive N/ Camelback Rd N of Circle Mtn Rd 200' W/ Camino del Sol 200' W/ Yosemite Dr 120' S of Dixileta Dr 350' S of Peakview Rd 1250' S of Dixileta Dr at Windstone Trail 200' W/ Yosemite Dr 200' N/ Antelope 765' N of Rio Verde Drive 1610' N of Rio Verde Dr 0.33 mi S of Deer Valley 5 mi N/ US 60_Grand Ave just N of Riggs Rd (QC) 0.25 mi. N/Patton Rd S of Lower River Rd 7 mi N/ Indian School Rd 9.75 mi N/ I-8 via AC Rd 8.5 mi N/ I-8 via AguaCal 0.5 mi N/ Lower Buckeye 1 mi N/ MC85 200' N/136th Dr_W/SpnGrdn 300' S/ McKellips 0.25 mi N/ McLellan 0.25 mi S/ Riggs Rd at Stardust Blvd Median East of I-17 0.89 mi SE/ Daisy Mtn Dr 530 ft SE/ Navigation Way 475 ft SE/ Venture Court NW of Anthem Club Dr 350 ft SE/Anthem Club Dr E/ Freedom Way .25 mi W/ Daisy Mtn Dr 370 ft NW of LibertyBell 0.53 mi SE/ Daisy Mtn Dr 0.4 mi SE/ Daisy Mtn Dr at Stardust Blvd Median STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov Feature Intersected Desert Lake Wash Desert Lk Wash S Branch RID Canal RID Canal Wash Drainage Ditch RID Canal Drainage Ditch Drainage Ditch Drainage Ditch Drainage Ditch Drain Ditch Drainage Ditch Drainage Ditch Consolidated Canal Wash Drainage Ditch Drainage Channel Wash Drainage Ditch Drainage Ditch Wash Wash Wash Wash Drainage Ditch Drainage Ditch Wash Wash Wash RCB HaydenRhodes CAP Aqueduct Sonoqui Wash Drainage Wash Buckeye Canal CAP Canal Gila River Wash RID Canal Buckeye Canal Drainage Ditch Salt River(N.Channel) Salt River(S.Channel) golf cart underpass Drainage Ditch Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Ped X Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Drainage Ditch Sufficiency Rating 98.33 98.33 98.14 94.83 98.70 95.74 96.23 95.74 96.04 92.75 96.94 96.94 96.94 96.50 91.92 80.27 79.68 96.91 99.98 97.95 96.95 79.81 79.81 79.81 79.81 96.95 96.95 85.83 85.83 95.12 93.80 96.89 99.99 97.95 90.60 99.14 95.87 97.53 97.77 96.78 74.92 74.92 97.66 94.42 92.57 98.94 98.51 98.51 99.12 99.12 98.79 99.48 99.47 99.47 99.47 97.87 FISCAL YEAR 2015 82 SST ATE OF Appendix Structure No. 990185 8000 8555 990272 9126 9686 990157 10512 990243 990244 9676 9687 8975 990101 990102 9375 9384 8855 9688 9763 9824 9849 990113 7779 9859 990158 990282 9689 10158 10159 10160 10161 9891 9892 9893 10162 9825 990269 990256 7550 7898 11111 10240 990116 990218 10084 10229 10520 990261 990235 990236 10443 990283 990162 990163 990107 990164 Road Ballad Dr Baseline Rd Beardsley Rd Belfair Way Bell Rd Bell Rec Center Dr Beloat Rd Bethany Home Rd Bethany Home Rd Bethany Home Rd Boswell Blvd Boswell Blvd Broadway Rd Broadway Rd Broadway Rd Broadway Rd EB Broadway Rd WB Bruner Rd Burns Drive Bush Hwy Bush Hwy Bush Hwy Bush Hwy Bush Hwy-FAS 388 Camelback Rd Camelback Rd Camelback Road Cameo Dr Carefree Highway Carefree Highway Carefree Highway Carefree Highway Carefree Hwy Carefree Hwy Carefree Hwy Carefree Hwy EB Carefree Hwy WB Carlota Lane Castano Drive Cavalcade Drive Cave Creek PKWY Centennial Rd Chambers Street Chandler Hts Rd Cicero Street Circle Mtn Road Citrus Road Clarendon Avenue Clearview Trail Cloud Rd Cloud Rd Cloud Road Colter Road Conquistador Dr Conquistador Dr Coralbell Ave Cotton Lane Location at Stardust Blvd Median 300 ft NW MC-85 100' E/ 125th Ave N of Meridian Drive at 99th Ave at 99th Ave Median E/ Rainbow Rd 200' E of 125th Ave 350' E of 137th Ave 418' W of 135th Ave at Del Webb Blvd Median at 99th Avenue Median 400' W/ FanninMcFar CAP at Meridian Rd. 1000' E/ Crismon Rd 0.2 mi E/ Price Rd 0.2 mi E/ Price Rd 0.75 mi N/ Old US-80 at 99th Avenue Median 3.2 mi N/ McDowell Rd 1.7 mi N/ Thomas at Blue Point-Salt River 3.25 mi N/ McDowell Rd 3.5 mi N/ McDowell Rd 1.0 mi E/ El Mirage Rd 0.5 mi E/ El Mirage Rd E of Jackrabbit Trail at 99th Avenue Median W/ 16th Street 0.5 mi W/ 24th Street 0.25 mi E/ 24th Street 0.5 mi E/ 24th Street at 10th St 200' W/ 12th St 200' W/ 24th St 2 mi W/ Cave Creek Rd 2 miles W/ Cave Creek Rd 313' W of 119th Avenue just N. of Bethany Home R 200' E/ 141th Ave 1.5 mi N/32nd St/Cloud Rd 5.7 mi W/ Harqua. Val. Rd 0.6 mi S/ Broadway Rd 0.5 mi E/ SR-87 (AZ Ave) E/ 105 St & N/ Univ Dr 3437' E/ New River Rd just N/ Northern Ave just W/ 195th Ave N/ Meridian Dr just E/ Via Puzzola 1000' W/ 32nd Dr 500' W of 32nd Drive just E of Jackrabbit Trl 200 ft E/ Regal 200 ft S/ Beechwood E/ Ellsworth & S/Broadway N/ Camelback Rd STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov Feature Intersected Drainage Ditch Buckeye Canal Drainage Ditch Wash Drainage Ditch Drainage Ditch Buckeye Canal S. Branch Wash wash Wash Drainage Ditch Drainage Ditch Drainage Ditch Drainage Ditch Drainage Ditch Tempe Canal Tempe Canal Buckeye Canal Drainage Ditch Spook Hill Fldwy FanninMcFar CAP Aqueduct Salt River Wash Wash Agua Fria River Drainage Ditch White Tanks FRS#3 Drainage Ditch Wash Wash Wash Apache Wash Wash Wash Wash Cave Creek Wash Cave Creek Wash Drainage Ditch Wash Drainage Ditch Wash CAP Aux Canal Buckeye Feeder Ditch Consolidated Canal Drain Ditch Wash Wash Drain Ditch Wash Wash Wash Wash White Tanks FRS#3 Drainage Ditch Drainage Ditch Drainage Ditch (Wash) Drainage Ditch Sufficiency Rating 97.87 95.14 97.61 99.96 91.74 96.55 99.67 95.83 83.55 83.55 96.69 99.83 93.21 95.10 92.07 75.26 75.26 97.99 99.78 86.32 97.08 92.59 94.92 95.97 77.12 95.30 85.41 95.83 98.93 96.93 96.93 96.93 98.93 98.93 98.93 82.92 77.92 97.89 94.82 95.77 93.76 95.15 93.08 96.81 96.95 88.70 76.75 91.33 99.92 82.81 80.80 91.47 96.99 96.83 86.91 96.85 68.08 FISCAL YEAR 2015 83 SST ATE OF Appendix Structure No. 10062 9736 8761 8856 990247 10519 10557 10558 10559 10627 10628 990266 7551 8638 10044 990165 990166 990167 11071 990168 11365*** 888 990224 7883 10787 8560 10784 10785 10786 8561 9949 11105 11106 990169 990279 9586 9842 9895 7899 990284 10366 10367 990223 10104 8019 10384 10397 10582 10855 11005 11070 990233 7554 10276 7780 990170 8562 10396 Road Cottonwood Rd Courthouse Rd Crismon Rd Crismon Rd Daisy Mtn Dr RCB Daisy Mtn Drive Daisy Mtn Drive Daisy Mtn Drive Daisy Mtn Drive Daisy Mtn Drive Daisy Mtn Drive Daley Lane Dean Rd Dean Rd Deer Valley Dr Deer Valley Dr Deer Valley Dr Deer Valley Dr Deer Valley Drive Desert Glen Dr Dusty Trail Blv Dysart Rd Dysart Rd-FAS 547 Dysart Road Eagle Eye Rd El Granada Blvd El Granada Blvd El Granada Blvd El Mirage Rd El Mirage Rd El Mirage Rd El Mirage Rd El Mirage Rd El Mirage Rd Elliot Rd Ellsworth Ellsworth Rd Ellsworth-FAU 7077 Encanto Blvd Forest Rd Forest Rd Forest Road Fort McDowell Road Ft McDowell Rd Gavilan Peak Pkwy Gavilan Peak Pkwy Gavilan Peak Pkwy Gavilan Peak Pkwy Gavilan Peak Pkwy Gavilan Peak Pkwy Gavilan Peak Pkwy Gemstone Drive Germann Road Gilbert Rd-FAS 229 Granite Valley Dr Greenway Rd Happy Valley Pkwy Location N Entrance Lk Plsnt Pk 3 mi W/ Salome Rd 0.25 mi N/ Brown Rd 500' N/ Apache Rd 0.52 mi S of Anthem Way 0.6 mi S of Anthem Way E of Dedication Trail 750 ft E/Dedication Trail 0.36 mi NE/ Dedication Tr 0.4mi W/GavilanPkPkwy 0.1 mi W/GavilanPk Pkwy just e/ 123rd Avenue 600 ft N of Lower Buckeye 0.75 mi N/ MC-85 W/ 135th Ave W/ Dustytrail Blvd (SCW) E/ Veterans W/ Acapulco Drive Just N/ exist DeerValleyD 160 ft W/ 132nd Ave N of Parada N/ Camelback Rd 0.25 mi N/ Camelback Rd 0.25 mi. S/ Jomax Rd 2 mi S/ Salome Hwy 0.18 mi. S/ Jomax Rd 0.42 mi. N/Happy Valley Rd 0.4 mi. N/ Happy Valley Rd N/ Bell Rd 0.5 mi N/ Glendale Ave 1.7 mi N. of Bell Road 3.4 mi. N. of Bell Road 0.25 mi S/ Beardsley 600' S. of Loop 303 at Sossaman 200' S/ Apache Trail 0.25 mi N/ University Rd 400' N/ Broadway W. of Jackrabbit Trail 1.3 mi N/ McDowell Mtn Rd 1.4 mi N/ McDowell Mtn Rd 1.3 mi N/McDowell Mtn Rd just N/ Yavapai Rd 2.25 mi N/ SR 87 300 ft N/ King Drive 0.2 mi W/ Navigation Way S of DaisyMtnDr 840 ft N of Daisy Mtn Dr 0.5 mi N of Pioneer Rd NE of Jordan Lane 0.3 mi SE/ Navigation Way 200' W/ 136th Dr_SCW .25 mi E/ Sossaman Rd 0.5 mi N/ Thomas Rd 200' N/ Antelope Dr (SCW) at 99th Ave 1.5 mi W/LkPleasant Pkwy STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov Feature Intersected Cottonwood Creek RCB Saddleback Diversn Chn Signal Butte Fldwy CAP Canal Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Drainage Channel RID Canal Buckeye Canal Golf Cart Path (SCW) Golf Cart Path Golf Cart Path Golf Cart Path Deer Valley Channel Drainage Ditch Wash Drain Chnl Colter Channel Beardsley Canal CAP Canal Drainage Channel Drainage Channel Beardsley Canal Drainage Ditch Dysart Drain McMicken Dam Outlet Wash McMicken Dam Outlet Wash Drainage Ditch Pinnacle Pk Drain Chnl Sossaman Ditch Drainage Ditch CAP Canal Wash White Tanks FRS#3 Large Wash Small Wash golf cart crossing Wash Wash Wash Wash Deadman Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Drainage Ditch Drainage channel Salt River Drainage Ditch Drainage Ditch Agua Fria River Sufficiency Rating 84.18 98.54 90.29 94.70 99.10 99.55 97.45 97.45 97.45 95.75 95.75 95.89 97.56 97.86 99.39 96.36 99.67 96.67 79.60 97.88 99.97 94.38 94.65 99.99 96.88 96.92 99.96 99.99 98.99 96.82 93.98 93.98 85.58 96.61 94.06 98.14 98.24 97.70 96.99 94.95 92.44 82.64 99.62 87.24 99.18 99.73 96.68 99.18 98.36 98.26 99.75 87.29 87.40 79.70 94.58 88.56 87.13 FISCAL YEAR 2015 84 SST ATE OF Appendix Structure No. 10457 10458 11006 990249 990254 990255 10518 10581 9503 9668 8640 10085 990213 9145 990281 990285 990260 9831 10088 11204 990175 8680 10274 990268 10511 990248 990177 10052 10053 7556 11110 7901 11425 990127 990128 990214 990215 990219 990220 7819 10230 7583 990262 10105 10242 8797 990179 10385 10386 10388 990226 990275 10560 10561 7557 10108 11338*** Road Happy Valley Pkwy Happy Valley Pkwy Happy Valley Road Hastings Way Hastings Way Hastings Way Hemingway Lane High Noon Way Higley Rd Hutton Drive I-17 Frontage Rd I-17 Frontage Rd I-17 Frontage Rd Indian School Rd Indian School Rd Indian School Road Iron Horse Way Jackrabbit Trail Jackrabbit Trail Jackrabbit Trail Jackrabbit Trail Johnson Rd Jomax Road Jomax Road King Drive Laurel Valley Way Lk Pleasant Ent Rd Lone Mountain Rd Lone Mountain Rd Lower Buckeye Rd Marsh Rd MC 85 Hwy MC-85 MC-85 MC-85 MC-85 MC-85 MC-85 MC-85 MC-85 Hwy MC-85 Hwy McDowell Rd McDowell Road McKellips Road Meadowbrook Ave Meeker Blvd Meeker Blvd Memorial Drive Memorial Drive Memorial Drive Memorial Drive Memorial Drive Meridian Drive Meridian Drive Meridian Rd Meridian Rd Meridian Rd Location 2.06 mi w/ LakePleasantRd 1.65 mi W/LakePleasantRd 0.7 mi E of Dysart Rd 250 ft SE/ Hickcock Trail 250 ft SE of Blaze Court 280 ft NW of Blaze Court E of DedicationTrail NW of Kuralt Drive 0.5 mi S/ Germann at 99th Ave Median_SCW 0.7 mi S/ New River 1000' S/ New River Rd S/ Meander Rd 0.5 mi E/ El Mirage W of Jackrabbit Trail at 191st Avenue N/ Meridian Dr 0.25 mi N/ Southern Ave 0.25 mi N/ Yuma just N of Minnezona Ave 0.25 mi S/ MC-85 0.25 mi N/ Broadway .25 mi W/ Grand Ave 0.25 mi. W of Dysart Rd 0.1 mi E/ Gavilan PkPkwy N of Keller Drive 0.2 mi E/ Castle HSpr Rd 0.75 mi E/ 227th Ave 0.65 mi E/ 227th Ave 1 mi W/ El Mirage Rd just N of Riggs Rd (QC) 0.5 mi N/Southern 0.75 mi W/ Cotton Lane 0.5 mi W/ Sarival 0.25 mi E/ Cotton Lane 0.25 mi E/ Perryville Rd E/ Perryville Rd 335' W/ Estrella Pkwy 0.3 mi W/Estrella Pkwy 0.5 mi W/ El Mirage 0.3 mi E/ Estrella Pkwy W/ Jackrabbit Tr_195th Av 0.5 mi E of Hawes Rd_Mesa 0.5 mi W/ SR 101 W/ Jackrabbit Tr (195Ave) 0.5 mi S/ RH Johnson Rd 0.75 mi S/ RH Johnson 0.1 mi E/Gavilan Pk Pkwy 0.3 mi E/Gavilan Pk Pkwy 350 ft E of Republic Way 160 ft E of Republic Way 250 ft NW/ Daisy Mtn Dr 480 ft SE/ Daisy Mtn Dr 0.3 mi SE/ Daisy Mtn Dr 0.5 mi N/ Brown Rd 0.25 mi N/ McKellips Rd 425' N of Southern STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov Feature Intersected Wash Wash Trilby Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash RWCD Canal Drainage Ditch Wash New River Wash Agua Fria River White Tanks FRS#3 Beardsley Canal Wash Buckeye Canal RID Canal White Tanks FRS#3 Buckeye Canal S. Branch RID Canal Wash Drainage Channel Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash AFR Diversion Channel Drainage Ditch Buckeye Canal 303L drainage sys Drainage Ditch Drainage Ditch Buckeye Canal S Branch Buckeye Canal S Branch Dirt Irr Ditch Dirt Irr Ditch Agua Fria River Bullard Wash Wash Drainage Ditch Granite Reef Wash Wash Drainage Ditch Golf Cart Underpass Wash Wash Split Flow Wash Split Flow Wash Wash Wash Wash Bulldog Floodway Wash Wash Sufficiency Rating 86.67 86.67 96.55 99.36 99.36 99.36 88.25 99.96 89.84 99.73 96.59 99.58 99.59 95.52 85.96 96.89 99.96 97.52 96.62 93.46 78.00 99.86 98.93 95.47 99.89 99.96 93.83 98.94 98.94 98.47 97.92 97.25 97.20 93.77 80.46 99.43 99.43 90.19 90.19 94.12 91.24 91.88 96.70 98.54 90.91 96.21 96.21 99.68 99.68 99.57 99.57 99.36 99.49 98.99 97.37 79.21 97.26 FISCAL YEAR 2015 85 SST ATE OF Appendix Structure No. 990217 10846 10847 10442 9593 10778 10241 10510 990245 990246 7642 7643 8011 10021 10086 10083 10106 10780 10781 8565 10507 10521 990114 8021 8023 8025 9834 9999 10061 11007 990155 990180 990181 990205 990206 990207 990208 990209 8981 11009 9588 10516 10779 990276 990251 7782 9426 11362*** 10580 8569 8043 8044 990264 11439 9927 9928 10390 Road Meridian Rd Meridian Rd (Mesa) Meridian Rd (Mesa) Meridian Road Miller Rd Mingus Road Minnezona Ave Missouri Ave Missouri Ave Missouri Ave New River Rd New River Rd New River Rd New River Rd New River Rd New River Road New River Road Northern Avenue Northern Avenue Old Lk Plsnt AccRd Old SR 87 Old SR 87 Old Stage Road Old US 80 Old US 80 Old US 80 Old US 80 Old US 80 Old US 80 Old US 80 Old US 80 Old US 80 Old US 80 Old US 80 Old US 80 Old US 80 Old US 80 Old US 80 Olive Ave Olive Ave & BNSFRR Olive Avenue Olive Avenue Olive Avenue Olive Avenue Owens Drive Palo Verde Rd Palo Verde Rd Parada Dr Patagonia Way Patton Rd Perryville Rd Perryville Rd Pinnacle Peak Rd Plymouth Drive Power Rd Power Rd Power Road Location 1/8 mi N/ University 0.5 mi S of Warner Rd 0.25 mi S/Riggs Rd 0.45 mi N/ Warner Rd 0.25 mi N/ MC-85 just E/ 25th Avenue W/ Jackrabbit Trl N/ Marshall Ave_135thAve S/ Marshall Ave near 135 just W of Dysart at 29th Ave 0.25 mi E/ 27th Ave 0.25 mi E/ I 17 0.75 mi N/Venado Dr 100' E/ I 17 Frontage 350' N/ Circle Mtn Rd 0.25 mi E/ I 17 1 mi. W/ Perryville Rd 1 mi W/ Perryville Rd 0.6 mi N/ SR-74 0.8 mi NW of New SR87Junc 1.0 mi NW of New SR87Junc 0.6 mi N/ New River Rd S/ Gillespie Dam 0.8 mi SW Arlgton Sch Rd 600 ft NE 331st Ave 1 mi W/ Jct SR-85 E/ Salome Hwy 450 ft SW of 331th Ave 3.5 mi S of Patterson Rd 0.5 mi W/ Palo Verde Rd 50' S/ Cactus Rose 0.4 mi S/ Cactus Rose 0.75 mi S/ Cactus Rose 0.8 mi S/ Cactus Rose 1 mi S/ Cactus Rose 1.25 mi S/ Cactus Rose 1.5 mi S/ Cactus Rose 0.5 mi E/ El Mirage Rd just W of Reems Road E/ of 99th Ave .5 mi W/ Perryville Rd 0.49 mi. W/ Perryville Rd 800' E of Perryville Rd E of Capra Way 0.9 mi N/ Old US80 Hwy 0.25 mi N/ Broadway 0.25 mi W/Tom Ryan N of Honor Court (Anthem) 1 mi W/ Grand Ave 0.25 mi S/ Van Buren 0.4 mi N/ Southern 70' w/ 121st Avenue E of GavilanPkPkwy S/ Guadalupe Rd S/ Guadalupe Rd 0.2 mi S/ Queen Creek Rd STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov Feature Intersected Drainage Ditch Drainage Channel Power Line Fldwy Chnl Wash Buckeye Canal White Spar Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Skunk Creek Wash Cline Creek Wash New River Beardsley Wash FRS#3 Dvrsn Chnl Wash Wash Wash Wash Gila River Arlington Valley Wash Luke Wash E Tributary Buckeye Drain Hassayampa River Luke Wash Layton Wash Buckeye Lateral Arlington Valley Wash Arlington Valley Wash Arlington Valley Wash Arlington Valley Wash Arlington Valley Wash Arlington Valley Wash Arlington Valley Wash Agua Fria River Reems Road Channel New River Wash W/ Beardsley Canal Waterfall Wash Wash Wash Buckeye Canal RID Canal Wash Wash CAP Canal RID Canal Buckeye Canal Drainage Ditch Drainage Channel RWCD Canal East Maricopa Fldwy Queen Creek Sufficiency Rating 96.65 95.10 93.10 99.86 98.62 99.99 96.96 80.36 80.35 80.26 99.79 99.79 97.96 98.66 97.96 99.66 96.59 80.35 79.78 99.91 94.25 94.25 86.54 61.50 96.12 95.99 97.99 99.13 90.05 98.50 98.87 96.87 84.96 96.87 99.96 85.85 99.87 94.87 94.27 78.36 76.92 78.00 78.64 77.71 99.77 97.84 97.37 96.95 99.96 94.07 97.82 97.90 77.70 99.96 92.38 92.38 96.68 FISCAL YEAR 2015 86 SST ATE OF Appendix Structure No. 8681 10776 990277 990278 8570 990182 11108 990286*** 990270 8038 10239 9669 9670 9832 8982 990112 990186 990252 990253 7716 8884 990108 990211 8573 990183 7644 7645 7646 7647 7648 7649 7650 7651 7652 7653 990134 7654 7655 7656 990135 990136 7657 7658 7659 990137 990138 7660 7661 990139 7662 7663 990140 990141 990142 990143 990144 990145 Road Rainbow Rd Rainbow Road Ray Rd Ray Rd RH Johnson Blvd RH Johnson Blvd Riggs Rd Riggs Rd Riggs Rd Rittenhouse Rd Roeser Rd Royal Oak Rd Royal Ridge Rd Salome Rd Signal Butte Rd Signal Butte Rd Skylark Dr Sossaman Rd Sossaman Rd Southern Ave Southern Ave Southern Ave Southern Ave Spanish Garden Dr Stardust Blvd Sun Valley Pkwy Sun Valley Pkwy-01 Sun Valley Pkwy-02 Sun Valley Pkwy-03 Sun Valley Pkwy-04 Sun Valley Pkwy-05 Sun Valley Pkwy-06 Sun Valley Pkwy-07 Sun Valley Pkwy-08 Sun Valley Pkwy-09 Sun Valley Pkwy-10 Sun Valley Pkwy-11 Sun Valley Pkwy-12 Sun Valley Pkwy-13 Sun Valley Pkwy-14 Sun Valley Pkwy-15 Sun Valley Pkwy-16 Sun Valley Pkwy-17 Sun Valley Pkwy-18 Sun Valley Pkwy-19 Sun Valley Pkwy-20 Sun Valley Pkwy-21 Sun Valley Pkwy-22 Sun Valley Pkwy-23 Sun Valley Pkwy-24 Sun Valley Pkwy-25 Sun Valley Pkwy-26 Sun Valley Pkwy-27 Sun Valley Pkwy-28 Sun Valley Pkwy-29 Sun Valley Pkwy-30 Sun Valley Pkwy-31 Location 0.85 mi N/ Broadway 0.5 mi S/ Southern Avenue 1200' E of Mountain Rd 900' E of Mountain Rd N/ Bell Rd 175 ft E/ 132nd Ave 0.2 mi E of Hawes Rd (QC) E/ of Sossaman 160' W of Robson Blvd 0.25 mi N/ Cloud 0.5 mi S/ Broadway Rd at 99th Avenue Median at 99th Avenue Median 8 mi W/ Harquahala Val Rd N/ Broadway Rd 0.5 mi N/ Brown Rd at Stardust Blvd Median 980' N of McDowell Rd 0.3 mi N of McDowell Rd .6mi E of Signal Butte Rd .6mi E/ Signal Butte Rd E/ Ellsworth (Mesa) 0.3 mi E/ MC-85 200' E/ 132nd Ave 165' S/ Yosemite Rd 300 ft W/ McMicken Dam 0.7 mi N/ McDowell Rd 0.8 mi N/ McDowell Rd 1.3 mi N/ McDowell Rd 1.5 mi N/ McDowell Rd 1.9 mi N/ McDowell Rd 2.0 mi N/ McDowell Rd 2.5 mi N/ McDowell Rd 2.6 mi N/ McDowell Rd 2.6 mi N/ McDowell Rd 2.9 mi N/ McDowell Rd 3.3 mi N/ McDowell Rd 3.4 mi N/ McDowell Rd 3.6 mi N/ McDowell Rd 3.7 mi N/ McDowell Rd 4.2 mi N/ McDowell Rd 4.4 mi N/ McDowell Rd 4.5 mi N/ McDowell Rd 4.6 mi N/ McDowell Rd 4.6 mi N/ McDowell Rd 5.0 mi N/ McDowell Rd 5.1 mi N/ McDowell Rd 5.3 mi N/ McDowell Rd 5.6 mi N/ McDowell Rd 6.1 mi N/ McDowell Rd 6.1 mi N/ McDowell Rd 6.4 mi N/ McDowell Rd 6.6 mi N/ McDowell Rd 6.7 mi N/ McDowell Rd 6.9 mi N/ McDowell Rd 7.0 mi N/ McDowell Rd 7.2 mi N/ McDowell Rd STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov Feature Intersected RID Canal Buckeye Canal Wash Wash Drainage Ditch Drainage Ditch Sonoqui Wash Wash Golfcart Underpass Queen Creek Wash Buckeye Feeder Ditch Drainage Ditch Drainage Ditch CAP Canal Drainage Ditch Signal Butte Floodway Drainage Ditch Wash Drain Ditch CAP Drainage Channel CAP Canal (Mesa) Drainage Ditch Buckeye Canal S Branch Drainage Ditch Drainage Ditch McMicken Dam Channel Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Sufficiency Rating 97.46 97.59 96.98 96.98 67.64 77.40 97.22 100.00 94.84 85.52 93.08 96.81 85.78 94.46 98.86 97.91 97.81 88.37 88.37 97.41 97.41 94.89 97.99 97.77 96.78 99.11 85.62 85.62 85.62 85.62 85.62 85.62 85.62 85.62 85.62 85.62 85.62 85.62 95.98 85.62 85.62 95.98 95.98 95.98 85.62 85.62 95.98 95.98 82.62 96.50 96.50 95.46 96.50 96.50 96.50 96.50 96.50 FISCAL YEAR 2015 87 SST ATE OF Appendix Structure No. 990146 7664 7665 7666 990147 7667 7668 990148 990149 990150 7669 7670 7671 7672 7673 990189 990190 7674 7675 7676 7677 7678 7679 7680 7681 7682 990191 7683 7684 7685 990192 990193 7687 7688 990194 7689 7690 7691 990195 7692 990196 7693 7694 7695 990197 7696 7697 7698 7699 7700 7701 7702 7703 990198 7704 7705 990110 Road Sun Valley Pkwy-32 Sun Valley Pkwy-33 Sun Valley Pkwy-34 Sun Valley Pkwy-35 Sun Valley Pkwy-36 Sun Valley Pkwy-37 Sun Valley Pkwy-38 Sun Valley Pkwy-39 Sun Valley Pkwy-40 Sun Valley Pkwy-41 Sun Valley Pkwy-42 Sun Valley Pkwy-43 Sun Valley Pkwy-44 Sun Valley Pkwy-45 Sun Valley Pkwy-46 Sun Valley Pkwy-47 Sun Valley Pkwy-48 Sun Valley Pkwy-49 Sun Valley Pkwy-50 Sun Valley Pkwy-51 Sun Valley Pkwy-52 Sun Valley Pkwy-53 Sun Valley Pkwy-54 Sun Valley Pkwy-55 Sun Valley Pkwy-56 Sun Valley Pkwy-57 Sun Valley Pkwy-58 Sun Valley Pkwy-59 Sun Valley Pkwy-60 Sun Valley Pkwy-61 Sun Valley Pkwy-63 Sun Valley Pkwy-64 Sun Valley Pkwy-65 Sun Valley Pkwy-66 Sun Valley Pkwy-67 Sun Valley Pkwy-68 Sun Valley Pkwy-69 Sun Valley Pkwy-70 Sun Valley Pkwy-71 Sun Valley Pkwy-72 Sun Valley Pkwy-73 Sun Valley Pkwy-74 Sun Valley Pkwy-75 Sun Valley Pkwy-76 Sun Valley Pkwy-77 Sun Valley Pkwy-78 Sun Valley Pkwy-79 Sun Valley Pkwy-80 Sun Valley Pkwy-81 Sun Valley Pkwy-82 Sun Valley Pkwy-83 Sun Valley Pkwy-84 Sun Valley Pkwy-85 Sun Valley Pkwy-86 Sun Valley Pkwy-87 Sun Valley Pkwy-88 Sunland Ave Location 7.3 mi N/ McDowell Rd 7.3 mi N/ McDowell Rd 7.4 mi N/ McDowell Rd. 7.4 mi N/ McDowell Rd 7.6 mi N/ McDowell Rd 8.0 mi N/ McDowell Rd 8.1 mi N/ McDowell Rd 8.5 mi N/ McDowell Rd 8.7 mi N/ McDowell Rd 8.9 mi N/ McDowell Rd 9.2 mi N/ McDowell Rd 9.2 mi N/ McDowell Rd 10.0 mi N/ McDowell Rd 10.2 mi N/ McDowell Rd 10.2 mi N/ McDowell Rd 10.5 mi N/ McDowell Rd 10.8 mi N/ McDowell Rd 11.1 mi N/ McDowell Rd 11.2 mi N/ McDowell Rd 11.8 mi N/ McDowell Rd 11.8 mi N/ McDowell Rd 11.9 mi N/ McDowell Rd 11.9 mi N/ McDowell Rd 11.9 mi N/ McDowell Rd 11.9 mi N/ McDowell Rd 12.0 mi N/ McDowell Rd 13.1 mi N/ McDowell Rd 13.9 mi N/ McDowell Rd 14.1 mi N/ McDowell Rd 14.3 mi N/ McDowell Rd 17.7 mi N/ McDowell Rd 18.2 mi N/ McDowell Rd 18.3 mi N/ McDowell Rd 18.4 mi N/ McDowell Rd 18.5 mi N/ McDowell Rd 18.9 mi N/ McDowell Rd 18.9 mi N/ McDowell Rd 19.1 mi N/ McDowell Rd 19.2 mi N/ McDowell Rd 19.3 mi N/ McDowell Rd 19.5 mi N/ McDowell Rd 19.6 mi N/ McDowell Rd 19.7 mi N/ McDowell Rd 19.8 mi N McDowell Rd 19.9 mi N/ McDowell Rd 20.4 mi N/ McDowell Rd 21.4 mi N/ McDowell Rd 21.6 mi N/ McDowell Rd 22.1 mi N/ McDowell Rd 22.5 mi N/ McDowell Rd 22.6 mi N/ McDowell Rd 22.9 mi N/ McDowell Rd 23.4 mi N/ McDowell Rd 23.6 mi N/ McDowell Rd 24.1 mi N/ McDowell Rd 24.2 mi N/ McDowell Rd E/ Ellsworth STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov Feature Intersected Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Wash Drainage Ditch Sufficiency Rating 96.50 96.50 96.50 96.50 96.50 96.50 96.50 96.16 96.16 96.16 96.16 96.16 96.16 92.98 92.98 82.62 82.62 96.16 92.98 92.98 92.98 92.98 92.98 92.98 92.98 96.16 82.62 92.98 92.98 96.16 87.24 87.24 87.24 87.24 87.24 87.24 87.24 87.24 87.24 87.24 87.24 87.24 87.24 87.24 87.24 86.40 86.40 86.40 86.40 86.40 86.40 86.40 86.40 86.40 86.40 86.40 96.88 FISCAL YEAR 2015 88 SST ATE OF Appendix Structure No. 9683 11363*** 990200 8629 8584 990152 9374 8862 7706 8881 8882 990273 8983 11364*** 990274 10369 10513 10514 10515 8577 11361*** 10782 990263 8578 9919 990267 Road Thunderbird Rd Tom Ryan Dr Trail Ridge Dr Turner Rd Tuthill Rd Union Hills Dr University Dr University Dr Van Buren St Van Buren St Van Buren St Venture Drive Via Hermosa Via Tercero WhiteTanksMnt Blvd Whitman Drive Wigwam Creek Blvd Wigwam Creek Blvd Wigwam Creek Blvd Wildwood Drive Williams Dr Williams Dr Williams Dr Wilson (283rd) Ave Woods Rd Yearling Rd Location at 99th Ave Median 0.34 mi S of Deer Valley 200' W/ Yosemite Dr 0.65 mi S/ Baseline Rd 0.5 mi S/ Beloat Rd at 99th Ave 900' W/ Dobson 0.5 mi E/ Ellsworth Rd E/ SVP-Palo Verde Rd 0.5 mi W/ Citrus Rd 1 mi W/ 339th Ave 0.3 mi SW of Anthem Way W/ Forest Rd (Rio Verde) 0.31 mi N of Williams Dr 460' W of 183rd Ave 0.2 Mi E/GavilanPeakPkwy 200' SW of 124th Lane 550' NW of Orange Drive just N of Camelback Rd 200' W/ 125th Ave 0.35 mi E of Deer Valley 0.3 mi. E/ El Mirage Rd at 123rd Avenue 0.8 mi S/ Baseline E/ Old US-80 0.2 mi. e/ Litchfield Rd Feature Intersected Drainage Ditch Wash Drainage Ditch Buckeye Canal Gila River Drainage Ditch Tempe Canal CAP Canal Drainage Ditch RID Canal Dickey Wash Wash Wash Wash Drainage Channel Wash Drain Channel Drain Ditch Drain Ditch Drainage Ditch Wash McMicken Outfall Wash Drainage Ditch Buckeye Canal Gila Bend Canal Drainage Channel Sufficiency Rating 98.22 99.93 96.87 99.97 91.87 95.83 95.39 98.57 99.78 97.62 90.14 99.81 99.70 99.95 96.56 99.89 95.50 77.37 77.37 97.89 99.95 89.57 87.29 97.99 97.42 83.62 *** indicates that MCDOT has bridge inspection responsibilities for the structure but does not have ownership STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT | www.mcdot.maricopa.gov FISCAL YEAR 2015 89 SST ATE OF