Germann Road Corridor Improvement Study
Power Road to Ironwood Road
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FINAL REPORT
Prepared for

MULTIMODAL
PLANNING
DIVISION
and the following Project Partners

Town of Queen Creek
City of Mesa
Town of Gilbert
Maricopa County Department of Transportation (MCDOT)
Flood Control District of Maricopa County (FCDMC)
Pinal County Department of Transportation (PCDOT)
Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG)
Central Arizona Governments (CAG)
Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR)
Prepared by

In association with

Wilson & Company

TRA, Inc.

410 N. 44th Street, Suite 460
Phoenix, AZ 85008

3844 East Indian School Road
Phoenix, AZ 85018

July 2013

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 1-1

1.1
1.2

PROJECT OVERVIEW ..................................................................................... 1-1
PURPOSE AND NEED ..................................................................................... 1-1

1.2.1. Sossaman Road Grade Separation at the Union Pacific Railroad ........................................... 1-3
1.2.2. Germann Road/Meridian Road Intersection......................................................................... 1-4

1.3
1.4

STUDY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ...................................................................... 1-5
STUDY PROCESS .......................................................................................... 1-6

1.4.1. Phase 1 – Develop Base Data ............................................................................................. 1-6
1.4.2. Phase 2 – Develop Candidate Transportation Improvement Alternatives and Identify a Preferred
Roadway Design................................................................................................................ 1-7
1.4.3. Public Involvement.............................................................................................................. 1-7

1.5
2.0

ORGANIZATION OF THIS REPORT ..................................................................... 1-8
CORRIDOR FEATURES AND CHARACTERISTICS ............................................... 2-1

2.1

PHYSICAL FEATURES ...................................................................................... 2-1

2.1.1. Location ............................................................................................................................ 2-1
2.1.2. Topography ...................................................................................................................... 2-2
2.1.3. Physiography .................................................................................................................... 2-2

2.2

SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS ................................................................ 2-4

2.2.1.
2.2.2.
2.2.3.
2.2.4.
2.2.5.

2.3

Land Ownership ................................................................................................................ 2-4
Population and Employment Data ....................................................................................... 2-4
Zoning and Development ................................................................................................... 2-6
Existing Land Use ............................................................................................................... 2-8
Future Land Use ............................................................................................................... 2-11

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ............................................................................ 2-13

2.3.1. Background ..................................................................................................................... 2-13
2.3.2. Environmental Justice Considerations ................................................................................ 2-15

3.0

EXISTING TRANSPORTATION NETWORK........................................................ 3-1

3.1

CHARACTERISTICS OF EXISTING STUDY AREA ROADWAY NETWORK ......................... 3-1

3.1.1. Existing Roadway Network ................................................................................................. 3-1
3.1.2. Major Traffic Generators .................................................................................................... 3-7
3.1.3. Crash and Safety Issues .................................................................................................... 3-11

3.2

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND ALTERNATIVE TRAVEL MODES ................................ 3-13

3.2.1. Existing Public Transit Service ........................................................................................... 3-13
3.2.2. Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities ........................................................................................ 3-13

4.0

ENVIRONMENTAL SUMMARY ........................................................................ 4-1

4.1

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ................................................................................ 4-1

4.1.1. Biotic Communities ............................................................................................................. 4-1
4.1.2. Wildlife ............................................................................................................................. 4-1
4.1.3. Sensitive Species and Habitat ............................................................................................. 4-2

4.2

NATURAL RESOURCES ................................................................................... 4-2

FINAL REPORT
i

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

4.2.1.
4.2.2.
4.2.3.
4.2.4.

4.3
4.4

Water Resources................................................................................................................ 4-3
Air Quality ........................................................................................................................ 4-5
Noise ................................................................................................................................ 4-7
Visual and Aesthetic Character ........................................................................................... 4-8

HAZARDOUS MATERIAL CONCERNS ................................................................. 4-8
CULTURAL RESOURCES................................................................................... 4-8

4.4.1. Archaeological and Prehistoric Sites .................................................................................... 4-9
4.4.2. Historic Sites .................................................................................................................... 4-10

4.5
5.0

SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES ............................................................................ 4-11
DRAINAGE SUMMARY .................................................................................. 5-1

5.1
5.2

NATURAL DRAINAGE AND FLOODPLAINS ........................................................... 5-1
EXISTING DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ................................................................ 5-1

5.2.1.
5.2.2.
5.2.3.
5.2.4.

6.0

East Mesa Area Drainage Master Plan Update..................................................................... 5-1
Rittenhouse Road Drain ...................................................................................................... 5-4
Dike and Channel along Meridian Road Alignment .............................................................. 5-4
Drainage Inlets and Chases ................................................................................................ 5-5

UTILITIES SUMMARY ...................................................................................... 6-1

6.1

ELECTRIC .................................................................................................... 6-1

6.1.1. Underground Electrical Lines............................................................................................... 6-1
6.1.2. Overhead Electrical Lines ................................................................................................... 6-1

6.2

NATURAL GAS ............................................................................................ 6-3

6.2.1. SRP ................................................................................................................................... 6-3
6.2.2. City of Mesa ...................................................................................................................... 6-3
6.2.3. Southwest Gas ................................................................................................................... 6-3

6.3

WATER ..................................................................................................... 6-3

6.3.1. Town of Queen Creek ........................................................................................................ 6-3
6.3.2. City of Mesa ...................................................................................................................... 6-4

6.4

SEWER ...................................................................................................... 6-4

6.4.1. Town of Queen Creek ........................................................................................................ 6-4
6.4.2. City of Mesa ...................................................................................................................... 6-5
6.4.3. Town of Gilbert.................................................................................................................. 6-5

6.5
6.6
7.0

FIBER OPTICS .............................................................................................. 6-5
TELEPHONE................................................................................................. 6-5
COMMITTED, PROGRAMMED, AND PLANNED TRANSPORTATION
IMPROVEMENTS ........................................................................................... 7-1

7.1
7.2
7.2.1.
7.2.2.
7.2.3.
7.2.4.
7.2.5.

COMMITTED AND PROGRAMMED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS ................................. 7-1
PLANNED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS ............................................................... 7-2
Maricopa County Plans ...................................................................................................... 7-2
Pinal County Plans ............................................................................................................. 7-4
ADOT Plans ...................................................................................................................... 7-4
MAG Arterial Life Cycle Program ........................................................................................ 7-6
Town of Queen Creek Plans ................................................................................................ 7-7

FINAL REPORT
ii

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

7.2.6. Town of Gilbert Plans ......................................................................................................... 7-7
7.2.7. City of Mesa Plans ............................................................................................................. 7-8

7.3
7.4
7.5

PLANNED PUBLIC TRANSIT SERVICE ................................................................... 7-8
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES ................................................................. 7-9
BASE FUTURE TRAVEL CONDITIONS ................................................................ 7-10

7.5.1.
7.5.2.
7.5.3.
7.5.4.

8.0

Travel Demand Analysis Methodology ............................................................................... 7-10
Proposed Base Future Roadway Network ........................................................................... 7-10
Analysis of Base Future Conditions at Buildout ................................................................... 7-11
Analysis of Base Future Conditions – Year 2020 ................................................................ 7-14

ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION ......................................... 8-1

8.1
8.2

GERMANN ROAD ALIGNMENT ........................................................................ 8-1
CONNECTIVITY ANALYSIS .............................................................................. 8-1

8.2.1. Network Connectivity Option 1: Grade Separation of Sossaman Road and Germann Road .... 8-1
8.2.2. Network Connectivity Option 2: Grade Separation of Sossaman Road Only with Germann Road
T-Intersection at Sossaman Road ......................................................................................... 8-4
8.2.3. Network Connectivity Option 3: Grade Separation of Germann Road Only with Sossaman Road
T-Intersection at Germann Road .......................................................................................... 8-4
8.2.4. Network Connectivity Option 4: Grade Separation of Sossaman Road with Germann Road TIntersection at Pecos Road .................................................................................................. 8-6
8.2.5. Network Connectivity Option 5: Grade Separation of Germann Road Only with Access to
Sossaman Road ................................................................................................................. 8-6
8.2.6. Findings and Conclusions from the First-Level Screening ....................................................... 8-7

8.3

CONCEPTUAL ENGINEERING INTERSECTION DESIGN TREATMENTS ............................ 8-8

8.3.1. Germann Road/Sossaman Road Intersection ....................................................................... 8-8
8.3.2. Germann Road/Meridian Road Intersection....................................................................... 8-16

8.4
8.5
9.0

PROJECT COST ESTIMATE ............................................................................. 8-21
RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................. 8-22
ACCESS MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS .................................................. 9-1

9.1
9.2

EXISTING ACCESS ........................................................................................ 9-1
FUTURE ACCESS .......................................................................................... 9-2

9.2.1. Maricopa County ............................................................................................................... 9-2
9.2.2. Pinal County ...................................................................................................................... 9-3

10.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ................................................................................ 10-1
APPENDIXES
Appendix A: Conceptual Germann Road Corridor Plan Sheets
Appendix B: Level of Service Worksheets
Appendix C: Public Involvement Summary

FINAL REPORT
iii

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1-1 PROJECT LOCATION AND STUDY AREA .............................................................. 1-2
FIGURE 1-2 GERMANN ROAD/SOSSAMAN ROAD INTERSECTION ............................................ 1-3
FIGURE 1-3 GERMANN ROAD/MERIDIAN INTERSECTION ....................................................... 1-5
FIGURE 2-1 STUDY AREA GEOGRAPHICAL SETTING .............................................................. 2-1
FIGURE 2-2 STUDY AREA TOPOGRAPHY ............................................................................ 2-2
FIGURE 2-3 MAJOR PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS OF ARIZONA .................................................. 2-3
FIGURE 2-4 LAND OWNERSHIP ....................................................................................... 2-5
FIGURE 2-5 EXISTING ZONING........................................................................................ 2-7
FIGURE 2-6 KNOWN ACTIVE AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS ................................................ 2-9
FIGURE 2-7 EXISTING LAND USE.................................................................................... 2-10
FIGURE 2-8 FUTURE LAND USE ...................................................................................... 2-12
FIGURE 2-9 RELEVANT STUDY AREA CENSUS TRACTS.......................................................... 2-16
FIGURE 2-10 POPULATION AND ETHNICITY BY CENSUS TRACT .............................................. 2-17
FIGURE 2-11 MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY CENSUS TRACT ............................................ 2-22
FIGURE 3-1 EXISTING AREA ROADWAY NETWORK .............................................................. 3-2
FIGURE 3-2 EXISTING INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS AND TURNING-MOVEMENT VOLUMES .............. 3-8
FIGURE 3-3 MAJOR TRAFFIC GENERATORS......................................................................... 3-9
FIGURE 3-4 STUDY AREA CRASHES BETWEEN 2008 AND 2010 ........................................... 3-11
FIGURE 3-5 STUDY AREA CRASH CHARACTERISTICS BETWEEN 2005 AND 2010 ....................... 3-12
FIGURE 4-12 POTENTIAL DRY WASH IN STUDY AREA ........................................................... 4-4
FIGURE 4-23 GENERAL LOCATION OF CULTURAL RESOURCE SITES ......................................... 4-10
FIGURE 5-1 NATURAL DRAINAGE AND FLOODPLAINS ........................................................... 5-2
FIGURE 5-2 EXISTING GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS .......................... 5-3
FIGURE 7-1 RECOMMENDED ALIGNMENT OF SR 24 (FORMERLY SR 802):
LOOP 202 TO IRONWOOD ROAD .................................................................. 7-3
FIGURE 7-2 CONSTRUCTION TIMELINE: SR 24 (FORMERLY SR 802) –
LOOP 202 TO IRONWOOD ROAD .................................................................. 7-5
FIGURE 7-3 RELATION OF NORTH-SOUTH CORRIDOR ROUTE SEGMENTS TO STUDY AREA .............. 7-6
FIGURE 7-4 QUEEN CREEK TRAILS AND PATHS PLAN ............................................................ 7-9
FIGURE 7-5 COMPARISON OF AVAILABLE SOURCES FOR CORRIDOR FORECAST TRAVEL DEMAND ... 7-11
FIGURE 7-6 FUTURE BASE ROADWAY NETWORK DEFICIENCIES UNDER BUILDOUT CONDITIONS ..... 7-13
FIGURE 7-7 FUTURE BASE ROADWAY NETWORK DEFICIENCIES UNDER YEAR 2020 CONDITIONS .. 7-16
FIGURE 8-1 RECOMMENDED ALIGNMENT OF GERMANN ROAD:
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD .............................................................. 8-2
FIGURE 8-2 RECOMMENDED CROSS-SECTION FOR GERMANN ROAD ....................................... 8-3
FIGURE 8-3 NETWORK CONNECTIVITY OPTION 1 ................................................................ 8-4
FIGURE 8-4 NETWORK CONNECTIVITY OPTION 2 ................................................................ 8-5
FIGURE 8-5 NETWORK CONNECTIVITY OPTION 3 ................................................................ 8-5
FINAL REPORT
iv

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 8-6
FIGURE 8-7
FIGURE 8-8
FIGURE 8-9

NETWORK CONNECTIVITY OPTION 4 ................................................................ 8-6
NETWORK CONNECTIVITY OPTION 5 ................................................................ 8-7
ALTERNATIVE A – GRADE SEPARATION OF SOSSAMAN ROAD AND GERMANN ROAD .. 8-9
ALTERNATIVE B – GRADE SEPARATION OF GERMANN ROAD ONLY
WITH ACCESS TO SOSSAMAN ROAD ............................................................. 8-11
FIGURE 8-10 ALTERNATIVE C – GRADE SEPARATION OF GERMANN ROAD ONLY WITH RAMP TO
NORTHBOUND SOSSAMAN ROAD AND CONNECTOR TO SOSSAMAN ROAD .......... 8-13
FIGURE 8-11 GERMANN/MERIDIAN INTERSECTION ALTERNATIVE 1 – SOUTH DOG LEG.............. 8-18
FIGURE 8-12 GERMANN/MERIDIAN INTERSECTION ALTERNATIVE 2 – NORTHERN DIVERSION ...... 8-19

LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 2-1
TABLE 2-2
TABLE 2-3
TABLE 2-4
TABLE 2-5
TABLE 2-6
TABLE 3-1
TABLE 3-2
TABLE 3-3
TABLE 3-4
TABLE 6-1
TABLE 7-1
TABLE 7-2

EXISTING AND FUTURE POPULATION ................................................................... 2-6
EXISTING AND FUTURE EMPLOYMENT .................................................................. 2-6
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE POPULATION GROUPS BY CENSUS TRACT ......................... 2-18
PRESENCE IN THE STUDY AREA OF ELDERLY AND FEMALE HEADS OF HOUSEHOLDS ....... 2-19
PRESENCE IN THE STUDY AREA OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES ................................ 2-20
MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY CENSUS TRACT ............................................... 2-21
KEY EXISTING ROADWAY SEGMENTS .................................................................. 3-3
RIGHT-OF-WAY OF GERMANN ROAD: AUTUMN DRIVE TO SUBURBAN AVENUE ........... 3-5
GERMANN ROAD CROSS-SECTION BY SEGMENT ................................................... 3-6
LOCATION OF BICYCLE LANES IN THE STUDY AREA ............................................... 3-14
UTILITIES CONTACTED ..................................................................................... 6-1
PROGRAMMED AND PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS: MAG ARTERIAL LIFE CYCLE PROGRAM .. 7-7
SUMMARY OF FORECAST DAILY TRAVEL DEMAND AND NETWORK PERFORMANCE
UNDER BUILDOUT CONDITIONS .................................................................... 7-12
TABLE 7-3 SUMMARY OF FORECAST DAILY TRAVEL DEMAND AND NETWORK PERFORMANCE:
YEAR 2020 ........................................................................................... 7-15
TABLE 8-1 EVALUATION OF CONCEPTUAL ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES .................................. 8-15
TABLE 8-2 PLANNING LEVEL COSTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR ....... 8-22
TABLE 8-3 COMPARISON OF PLANNING LEVEL COSTS FOR POTENTIAL GRADE SEPARATION .......... 8-22
TABLE 9-1 DRIVEWAY SPACING GUIDELINES....................................................................... 9-3

FINAL REPORT
v

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

1.0 INTRODUCTION
A corridor improvement study (CIS) is a long-range transportation planning study aimed at
identifying the ultimate needs for a particular roadway. The Germann Road CIS has been
undertaken to examine the transportation demands and future right-of-way (ROW)
requirements of a portion of East Germann Road located between South Power Road in the
town of Queen Creek in Maricopa County, and North Ironwood Road in northern Pinal
County (Figure 1-1). This chapter provides an overview of the project purpose, a statement
of the problem being addressed, a discussion of key issues and challenges, and the study
goals and objectives.

1.1

PROJECT OVERVIEW

The principal focus of this CIS is the determination of future travel demands and
identification of transportation improvements needed to satisfy those demands. A CIS helps
preserve corridors for future roadway development, thereby providing guidance to
communities and developers as actual construction of new development occurs. The CIS
establishes the facility type, number of lanes, ROW needs, and general alignment required
to accommodate forecast traffic growth and enhance safety on Germann Road between
Power and Ironwood roads. It also provides the Arizona Department of Transportation
(ADOT), Maricopa County Department of Transportation (MCDOT), the town of Queen
Creek, the city of Mesa, and other jurisdictions and major stakeholders with a general
timeframe within which anticipated needs will manifest. Thus, the analyses address the
long-range demands and future roadway improvements that ultimately are needed under
buildout conditions. (Buildout assumes development fulfilling expectations of the general
plans for communities in the study area that is likely to occur in the next 40 to 60 years.)

1.2

PURPOSE AND NEED

The planned extension of Germann Road to the east from Meridian Road to Ironwood Road,
in concert with growth and development already projected to occur in and around the
existing corridor, is anticipated to alter travel patterns. Although much of the study area is
sparsely developed today, the zoning and land use plans of the town of Queen Creek and
city of Mesa indicate a six-lane roadway is likely to be required to serve future travel
demand when land adjacent to Germann Road is fully developed. Planning today for the
future minimizes the potential effects of future roadway widening by ensuring that adequate
public ROW is available.
Implementing improvements to accommodate expected growth requires a coordinated,
cooperative effort involving state, regional, and local entities. Therefore, it is reasonable that
an evaluation of potential future growth and attendant effects involve ADOT, the town of
Queen Creek, the city of Mesa, the town of Gilbert, MCDOT, Pinal County Department of
Transportation (PCDOT), Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG), Central Arizona
FINAL REPORT
1-1

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 1-1 PROJECT LOCATION AND STUDY AREA

FINAL REPORT
1-2

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Governments (CAG), and other agencies and developers, as required. Specific, identifiable
issues already have been noted during previous planning studies, as described below.
1.2.1. Sossaman Road Grade Separation at the Union Pacific Railroad
A key corollary objective of this corridor study is the establishment of future ROW needs for
the planned grade-separated crossing at South Sossaman Road and the Union Pacific
Railroad (UPRR) (Figure 1-2). Conceptual design alternatives for improvement of the
Germann Road/Sossaman Road intersection and potential grade separation from the UPRR
track account for the geometrics of the two arterial roadways, the UPRR track, the
Rittenhouse Road Drain, and proximity of a grade-separated intersection to East Rittenhouse
Road.
FIGURE 1-2
GERMANN ROAD/SOSSAMAN ROAD INTERSECTION

The UPRR track has a southeast-by-northwest alignment. The presence of the track has
dictated the current location and discontinuity of Germann Road. This track is part of the
UPRR Phoenix Subdivision and is under consideration for future commuter rail service. Rail
operations on the line are controlled through direct traffic control (DTC) and automatic block
FINAL REPORT
1-3

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

signaling (ABS), permitting a maximum operating speed of 60 miles per hour (mph) for
passenger trains and 40 mph for freight trains. UPRR ROW is 240 feet through this segment
of its line, and becomes 285 feet in the immediate area of the Germann Road/Sossaman
Road intersection. Figure 1-2 shows how Germann Road terminates at Rittenhouse Road
west of the track.
The Rittenhouse Road Drain runs parallel to the north side of the UPRR ROW. This facility
was constructed by the Flood Control District of Maricopa County (FCDMC) based on a
recommendation of the Queen Creek Area Drainage Master Study (ADMS) in 1990. The
drain consists of an earthen channel running from just west of the Ellsworth Road/Queen
Creek Road intersection to the East Maricopa Floodway west of Power Road. It provides
100-year flood protection to the Queen Creek School (east of Ellsworth Road) and reduces
the floodplain on the north side of the railroad corridor. The FCDMC was the lead agency
for project construction and is responsible for operation and maintenance of the drain. The
drain was constructed to avoid impacting the Germann Road/Sossaman Road intersection;
consequently, there is a bend in it at this location.
Rittenhouse Road intersects Germann Road 0.25 miles west of the intersection of Sossaman
Road and the UPRR track. This roadway curves south and then east to intersect Sossaman
Road south of its intersection with the UPRR track. A portion of the Cortina subdivision is
located in the southeast quadrant of the Sossaman Road/UPRR intersection. Combined with
the presence of the Rittenhouse Road Drain, this mosaic of development features needs to be
carefully evaluated to determine the most effective and efficient means of extending
Germann Road east to Sossaman Road.
1.2.2. Germann Road/Meridian Road Intersection
A second issue involving roadway geometrics in the Germann Road corridor is present at
Meridian Road. Meridian Road is named for a north-south survey line established during
the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey and identifies the boundary between
Township 2 South/Range 7 East (T2S/R7E) and T2S/ Range 8 East (R8E). The Germann
Road alignment shifts approximately 250 feet to the north, due to adjustments made during
the survey (refer to Figure 1-3). In addition to the jog in the alignment, there is an
established well and pump station belonging to the city of Mesa located in the northwest
quadrant of the intersection of Germann Road with the Meridian Road alignment. A large
settling pond for a nearby dairy is located in the southeast quadrant. The Maricopa County
assessor records show the established Meridian Road ROW south of Germann Road as
55 feet whereas the ROW north of Germann Road is 75 feet. Added to these two matters of
alignment and ROW is the convergence of major east-west and north-south, high-voltage
power corridors at the intersection and two distribution lines. Also parallel to the Meridian
Road alignment is a bermed drainage ditch on the east side, carrying runoff to a diversion
dike at Moeur Road, approximately 0.5 miles north of Germann Road.
FINAL REPORT
1-4

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 1-3
GERMANN ROAD/MERIDIAN INTERSECTION

1.3

STUDY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The ultimate goal of a CIS is to define the preferred roadway alignment so that sufficient
ROW can be preserved to accommodate future roadway needs. Specific goals and
objectives are adopted to define and guide the planning and engineering studies that
support the Germann Road CIS. These goals and objectives are as follows:


Document existing corridor characteristics to identify constraints that may affect
roadway alignments.



Determine future travel demands in the corridor.



Identify the facility type/number of lanes needed to address travel demands.



Make a determination of the regional basis, that is, functional classification, for the
roadway.

FINAL REPORT
1-5

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study



Identify and evaluate feasible roadway design/improvement alternatives;



Determine a preferred alignment.



Establish a roadway footprint and ROW requirement.



Communicate findings and conclusions with the town of Queen Creek, the city of
Mesa, MCDOT, stakeholders, and the public.



Build consensus regarding the preferred roadway design/improvement alternative.



Achieve a balanced access, mobility, and traffic management strategy that promotes
safety and efficiency of travel for existing and future residents.



Develop a phased implementation plan and recommendations for implementation
actions by study participants geared to a timeline for integrating elements of the
recommended design/improvement alternative within the corridor.

1.4

STUDY PROCESS

Several key issues, as referenced above, need to be understood, addressed, and resolved to
successfully develop conceptual and candidate alignment alternatives and recommend a
preferred corridor alignment. Therefore, the study process followed a two-phase approach,
addressing general tasks discussed below. Review and feedback from the Technical
Advisory Group (TAG) at key project milestones were essential in guiding the process.

1.4.1. Phase 1 – Develop Base Data
Existing and Future Corridor Conditions
The work effort began with comprehensive definitions of study area characteristics. Detailed
data were gathered relative to existing and future land use and zoning, major physical
features of the corridor study area (both natural and manmade), and operational
characteristics of the existing and future roadway network. A large portion of the data and
information required were obtained from review of relevant previous reports and studies.
Available information and data were supplemented by interviews with key project
stakeholders and field review, as necessary. The Project Team utilized assembled
information and data to prepare base maps, identify corridor characteristics, and establish
potential alignment constraints. These maps assisted in developing conceptual alignment
alternatives and identifying potential fatal flaws. All information, data, analysis results, and
findings associated with this phase of the study are contained herein.
Environmental Overview
An environmental overview (EO) was conducted early in the planning and design process to
identify and define potential issues, concerns, and opportunities associated with sensitive
environmental resources. The goal of this effort was to assist the Project Team and
FINAL REPORT
1-6

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

stakeholders in determining environmental issues that may be encountered, the regulatory
process regarding those issues, and potential mitigation requirements. The EO identifies
notable constraints and opportunities, thereby contributing to development of a range of
candidate alternatives. The EO includes a cultural resource inventory, a preliminary initial
site assessment for a determination of the possible presence of hazardous materials, a
biological review, identification of potential Clean Water Act jurisdictional waters and
permitting requirements, identification of sensitive noise receptors, air quality, and a
compilation of socioeconomic data to identify the presence of protected populations and the
potential for Environmental Justice impacts.
Conceptual Drainage Report
A conceptual drainage analysis was conducted to provide an overview of drainage issues
and constraints within the study area. The analysis maximized the use of existing hydrology
and floodplain studies to establish estimates of 50-year and 100-year discharges. Detailed
drainage data was available to assist the Project Team in reducing the number of cross
drainage structures and avoiding complicated drainage conditions, where feasible.

1.4.2. Phase 2 – Develop Candidate Transportation Improvement
Alternatives and Identify a Preferred Roadway Design
Information and data developed during Phase 1 was utilized to define conceptual
transportation improvement alternatives for further study. Schematics were developed for
each of the candidate transportation improvement alternatives and detailed conceptual
engineering design drawings prepared. These planning tools were employed to develop
detailed impact assessments for each alternative. During this phase of the study, travel
demand modeling was conducted and a segment-based analysis of future levels of service
was performed for future planning year horizons. As determined necessary, more detailed
studies were conducted relative to focused analysis areas (e.g., intersections). Preliminary
conceptual engineering cost estimates were developed.
A two-level screening process followed to assess the desirability and effectiveness of
potential improvement alternatives. The first-level screening evaluated general connectivity
issues and constraints, particularly as this matter related to the grade separation of
Sossaman Road and the future intersection with Germann Road. Subsequent to agreement
among project partners regarding study area and regional connectivity matters, the
evaluation of project alternatives focused on the Germann Road/Sossaman Road
intersection options and the matter of the jog in Germann Road at Meridian Road.

1.4.3. Public Involvement
Successful completion of this CIS required execution of a comprehensive public involvement
process. Therefore, the Germann Road CIS involved a cooperative planning process
including public agency staff from each of the planning partners, key stakeholders, and the
FINAL REPORT
1-7

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

general public. The ADOT Multimodal Planning Division (MPD) and Communication
Division worked collaboratively with affected jurisdictions and stakeholders to build
consensus regarding study findings and recommendations. Information was presented to
and feedback solicited from affected agencies and organizations, stakeholders, and the
public.

1.5

ORGANIZATION OF THIS REPORT

This final report on the Germann Road CIS presents information and data supporting the
identification, assessment, and selection of a preferred transportation improvement scenario
for the Germann Road corridor between South Power Road in Queen Creek and North
Ironwood Road in northern Pinal County. This report documents the general social, physical,
and environmental conditions of the study area and presents information relating to special
topics of interest to ADOT, the town of Queen Creek, the city of Mesa, and other jurisdictions
with interests relating to actions in the study area, stakeholders, and the public. In addition,
it presents an evaluation of the Germann Road corridor and connecting roadway network.
The report also identifies current and expected future connectivity and mobility deficiencies
and establishes the basis for determining future multimodal transportation needs that have
been translated into conceptual engineering solutions.
Following this introductory chapter, the report contains the following chapters focused on
presenting detailed information regarding existing and future conditions in the study area:


Chapter 2.0 – ―Corridor Features and Characteristics‖
Topics include: location and topography, existing and future socioeconomic data,
existing land use, future land use, Environmental Justice



Chapter 3.0 – ―Existing Transportation Network‖
Topics include: existing corridor roadway network and intersections, posted speed
limits, crash and safety issues, public transportation, pedestrian and bicycle facilities



Chapter 4.0 – ―Environmental Summary‖
Topics include: biological resources, water resources, air quality, noise, visual and
aesthetic qualities, hazardous materials, cultural resources, Section 4(f) properties



Chapter 5.0 – ―Drainage Summary‖
Topics include: hydrology, existing drainage and floodplains, irrigation facilities,
storm drainage facilities



Chapter 6.0 – ―Utilities Summary‖
Topics include: electric, gas, water, sewer, fiber optics, telephone



Chapter 7.0 – ―Committed, Programmed, and Planned Transportation Improvements‖

FINAL REPORT
1-8

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Topics include: committed and programmed transportation improvements, planned
improvements, travel demand analysis, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, proposed
future roadway network, base future operating conditions


Chapter 8.0 – ―Alternatives Development and Evaluation‖
Topics include: connectivity analysis and first-level screening, conceptual intersection
treatments and second-level screening of alternatives, Germann Road alignment



Chapter 9.0 – ―Access Management Considerations‖
Topics include: existing access, future access, MCDOT access guidelines, and Pinal
County access guidelines



Chapter 10.0 – ―Public Involvement‖
Topics include: Technical Advisory Group, public meetings, outreach methods, public
comments

FINAL REPORT
1-9

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

2.0 CORRIDOR FEATURES AND CHARACTERISTICS
This chapter provides detailed information and data describing the physical features and
characteristics of the Germann Road corridor between Power Road in eastern Maricopa
County and Ironwood Road in northern Pinal County.

2.1

PHYSICAL FEATURES

This section highlights the physical features of the study area that define the characteristics of
the land and its capacity for development, including topography, physiography, hydrology,
and drainage conditions.
2.1.1. Location
The study area occupies an eight-square-mile portion of eastern Maricopa County,
extending into north Pinal County (Figure 2-1). The corridor is one mile south of the
Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport and the former General Motors Proving Grounds. The
former is being developed to play a significant role in regional aviation needs, and the latter
was purchased several years ago with the intent of creating a major mixed-use
development. Two miles south of the Germann Road corridor is the Queen Creek Town
Center at Ellsworth and Ocotillo roads. Directly west of the corridor are the rapidly growing
town of Gilbert and community of Higley. Rural subdivisions characterize the area in Pinal
County east of the corridor, although the new Combs High School and Ranch Elementary
School, 0.5 miles east of Ironwood Road, indicate the area is poised for growth.
FIGURE 2-1 STUDY AREA GEOGRAPHICAL SETTING

FINAL REPORT
2-1

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

2.1.2. Topography
The Germann Road project area is seven miles in length with a gentle slope from east to
west (Figure 2-2). The local elevation is 1,480 feet above mean sea level (ABMS) at
Ironwood Road, descending to 1,340 feet ABMS at Power Road. There are no significant
topographic features within the corridor. Two physical features are prominent: Germann
Road crosses the Rittenhouse Road Drain just east of Sossaman Road and will need to cross
the UPRR corridor just west of Sossaman Road.
FIGURE 2-2 STUDY AREA TOPOGRAPHY

2.1.3. Physiography
Physiography may be considered the definition of broad-scale geographic subdivisions
based on terrain texture, rock type, and geologic structure and history. Arizona is
dominated by two physiographic regions–the Colorado Plateau and the Basin and Range
Province–which are separated by a transition zone, a northwest-trending escarpment of
mountainous terrain that includes the Rim Country (Figure 2-3). The study area is located in
the southern Basin and Range Province, which is characterized by steep, linear mountain
ranges rising up to heights greater than 9,000 feet (2,700 meters) interspersed with
extensive desert basins. The biological islands with cool-climate plants and animals
associated with some mountain ranges contrast sharply with the Sonoran Desert, although it
also is home to a diverse population of flora and fauna due to the two rainy seasons.
The study area is situated on the southwest-trending alluvial fan of the Superstition
Mountains to the east and northeast. Lands within the study area are flat, with small,
shallow drainages flowing east to west through the study area. According to information
developed for the Signal Butte Road corridor improvement study, two soil associations
characterized the study area:
Torrifluvents and Mohall-Vecont-Pinamt.
These are
well-drained soils on deep, nearly level to gently sloping lands. Torrifluvents are stratified
and formed on floodplains and lower alluvial fans. Mohall-Vecont-Pinamt soils are
moderately fine and fine-textured and gravely, moderately fine-textured, and formed on
broad valley plains (Hendricks 1985).
FINAL REPORT
2-2

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 2-3 MAJOR PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS OF ARIZONA

STUDY AREA

FINAL REPORT
2-3

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

2.2

SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS

This section provides information and data identifying land ownership, population and
employment characteristics, and existing and future land use. The final section addresses
concerns associated with the potential for disproportionate impacts on low-income, minority,
and other sensitive population groups within the study area.
2.2.1. Land Ownership
The majority of land in the study area is privately controlled (Figure 2-4). Four public
entities own scattered parcels. Maricopa County and the FCDMC own linear segments of
land that cross or directly impact potential long-term roadway improvements along the
Germann Road corridor.
2.2.2. Population and Employment Data
Estimates of existing and future population and employment growth were developed by
examining MAG 2007 projections for Maricopa County and portions of Pinal County.
MAG identified 14 socioeconomic analysis zones (SAZs) that are coincident in part with the
study area. Year 2005 and future Year 2035 population and employment figures values
were determined from these sources for each transportation analysis zone (TAZ). Figures for
Years 2010, 2015, and 2020 then were calculated through extrapolation of the Year 2005
through Year 2035 trend. Because only part of each TAZ lies within the study area, figures
were apportioned to reflect the area of the TAZ within the study area. The extrapolated
values for Year 2010 population and employment were then adjusted to reflect actual
development in the study area at this time. This was accomplished through review of aerial
imagery provided by MCDOT and available on the Internet through Bing Maps.
Table 2-1 shows the estimated existing (2010) and future population associated with the
Germann Road corridor study area. It is readily apparent that limited residential growth is
expected in the Mesa portion of the study area, which is slated in future land use plans to be
devoted to industrial enterprises. In contrast, substantial residential growth is expected in
portions of the study area in Queen Creek, Gilbert, and Pinal County, where the population
is projected to more than double. The study area as a whole is projected to experience
approximately a 50 percent increase in population.
Table 2-2 shows the estimated existing and future employment for the study area. A large
portion of the study area is slated for industrial and commercial land uses; therefore, an
employment increase of over 300 percent is projected.

FINAL REPORT
2-4

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 2-4 LAND OWNERSHIP

FINAL REPORT
2-5

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

TABLE 2-1
EXISTING AND FUTURE POPULATION
YEAR
Jurisdiction

2010

2015

2020

2035

Queen Creek

2,022

2,564

3,105

4,728

Mesa

236

237

239

242

Gilbert

1,724

2,104

2,484

3,623

844

n/a

n/a

n/a

Pinal County

Prepared by Wilson & Company, November 2011.
Source: Socioeconomic Projections of Population, Housing and Employment by Municipal Planning Area and Regional Analysis Zone, TAZi03, Maricopa
Association of Governments (MAG), May 2007.
Note: MAG projections by TAZ are adjusted to reflect the current level of development in the study area in 2010 and then extrapolated to 2015, 2020, and
2035 based on MAG original growth rates for each TAZ.

TABLE 2-2
EXISTING AND FUTURE EMPLOYMENT
YEAR
Jurisdiction

2010

2015

2020

2035

Queen Creek

719

1,068

1,432

2,502

Mesa

943

1,282

1,622

2,640

Gilbert

124

213

256

383

8

n/a

n/a

n/a

Pinal County

Prepared by Wilson & Company, November 2011.
Source: Socioeconomic Projections of Population, Housing and Employment by Municipal Planning Area and Regional Analysis Zone, TAZi03, Maricopa
Association of Governments (MAG), May 2007.
Note: MAG projections by TAZ are adjusted to reflect the current level of development in the study area in 2010 and then extrapolated to 2015, 2020, and
2035 based on MAG original growth rates for each TAZ.

2.2.3. Zoning and Development
Zoning
Three separate municipal governments currently assert zoning authority in the study area.
Figure 2-5 is a composite of the zoning maps created by these entities. Pinal County’s
zoning ordinance is currently being updated and , therefore no zoning map designating
development types or categories is available. For this information, please refer to sections
2.2.4, “Existing Land Use ―and 2.2.5., “Future Land Use” below.
Zoned land in the Maricopa County portion of the study area is almost equally divided
between residential and commercial/industrial uses. Residential zoning dominates south of
Germann Road and west of 220th Street/Merrill Road. Commercial zoning mostly is
concentrated along Power Road, with two corner commercial centers zoned at the Ellsworth
Road/Pecos Road intersection.

FINAL REPORT
2-6

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 2-5 EXISTING ZONING

FINAL REPORT
2-7

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Light industrial zoning and agriculture are the principal zones north of Germann Road west
of Crismon Road. General and heavy industrial zones are located east of Crismon Road
north of Germann Road and east of 220th Street/Merrill Road, south of Germann Road.
Known Active Developments
There are seven known housing developments in the study area. Future development activity
is expected to be associated with two subdivisions located within the study area. The known
status of each of the seven developments is cited below:
1. Power Ranch/Sunbelt Holdings-DMB Assoc.: 95 percent built out in study area
2. Cortina Subdivision by Fulton Homes: fully built out in study area
3. Remington Heights: 75 percent built out, south of study area
4. La Jara Farms: 96 lots platted: no construction to date
5. Ellsworth Suburban Mini-Farms: fully built out
6. Queens Park: fully built out
7. Barney Family Residential Development: planning stages (see discussion below)
The majority of the land between 220th Street/Merrill Road and Meridian Road is under the
control of the Barney family. A general plan amendment in 2009 changed the designation
of 275 acres of land fronting Meridian Road between Germann and Queen Creek roads
from heavy industrial uses to residential. The proposed development calls for 975 homes. In
addition, a minor general plan amendment (GP 10-040) was proposed to amend the
transportation element to incorporate realignment and connection of Signal Butte and
Meridian roads to reflect this change in zoning associated with Barney Farms. Figure 2-6
shows the locations of these and other active developments in the study area.
2.2.4. Existing Land Use
Current land use within the study area is predominantly devoted to agriculture and
silvaculture pursuits (Figure 2-7). The western end of the corridor largely comprises singleand multi-family residential developments. Commercial development is located along Power
Road, primarily in the northeast quadrant of the Power Road/Germann Road intersection.
Land along the UPRR, Rittenhouse Road Drain, is vacant to Sossaman Road, north of
Germann Road. A high-voltage power line runs along the western side of the UPRR tracks.
East of Sossaman Road, there is a mixture of residential, commercial, and agricultural land
uses. The UPRR and parallel high-voltage power line, along with the Rittenhouse Road
Drain, bisect a one-quarter-mile-square area that is largely vacant. Isolated residential
parcels and some commercial parcels are present near the Germann Road/Sossaman Road
intersection. The power line runs south along the east side of Sossaman Road to a substation
at the northeast corner of Sossaman and Ryan roads.

FINAL REPORT
2-8

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 2-6 KNOWN ACTIVE AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS

FINAL REPORT
2-9

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 2-7 EXISTING LAND USE

FINAL REPORT
2-10

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Agriculture and silvaculture interests generally dominate land uses in the study area to the
east of Sossaman Road to Meridian Road. There are isolated commercial parcels on the
north side of Germann Road and south side of Pecos Road. The La Jara Farms subdivision is
platted with 95 lots directly west of Hawes Road on the south side of Germann Road. Also
on the south side of Germann Road between Hawes and Ellsworth roads is the 62-lot
Ellsworth Suburban Mini-Farms, a residential development; to the north is Queens Park, a
residential development of 49, one-acre lots. Between the Signal Butte Road alignment and
Meridian Road on the north side of Germann Road is TRW Vehicle Safety Systems (TRW)
and the Commercial Metals Company (CMC), representing the principle industrial activity in
the study area.
The eastern end of the corridor (beyond Meridian Road) is mostly vacant. Undeveloped
Arizona State Trust land flanks Germann Road on the north. A dairy occupies the
southeastern quadrant of the Germann Road/Meridian Road intersection, but there is a
one-quarter-mile-square vacant parcel between the dairy and Ironwood Road. Two mobile
home communities and low-density suburban residential occupy the southeastern quadrant
of Germann and Ironwood roads.
2.2.5. Future Land Use
Future land use, shown in Figure 2-8, was determined through examination of the general
plans of the towns of Queen Creek and Gilbert and the city of Mesa. The adopted
Municipal Planning Area (MPA) of Queen Creek extends east of Meridian Road to Ironwood
Road and north of Germann Road. Therefore, the Queen Creek future land use plan
identifies expected land use in this area of Pinal County.
Future land use in the Germann Road corridor study area reflects a mixture of residentialand employment-based activities. Land use north of Germann Road from the UPRR to
Suburban Avenue in Pinal County is planned for light industrial and general industrial
activities. The exceptions to this pattern are: a small low-density residential zone in a
one-third-mile square in the northwest quadrant of Germann Road and 88th Street and a
community commercial development planned for the southwest and southeast quadrants of
Ellsworth Road at its intersection with Pecos Road.
West of the UPRR, the area of land served by Rittenhouse Road at the northwest quadrant of
the Power Road/Germann Road intersection is planned to be fully devoted to
employment-based activities. One regional commercial center zone and other commercial
services zones already are established between Rittenhouse and Germann roads on the east
side of Power Road.

FINAL REPORT
2-11

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 2-8 FUTURE LAND USE

FINAL REPORT
2-12

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

A zone slated for Employment Type A fills out this area to the east, along with a small
neighborhood commercial portion.1 The northwest quadrant of the Power Road/Germann
Road intersection already is developed with a predominance of medium density residential
zones with a general commercial zone at the intersection flanked by higher density
residential developments.
The plan includes a greater mix of land uses for the south side of Germann Road than for the
north side, which mostly is in the city of Mesa and oriented to activities at the Phoenix-Mesa
Gateway Airport. West of Power Road, the south side of Germann Road is fully developed
with medium density and higher density residential land uses with a general commercial
zone at the southeast corner of the Power Road/Germann Road intersection. Medium
density residential development continues between Power Road and the UPRR with a small
community services zone planned for the southeast corner of the Sossaman Road/Germann
Road intersection.
Except for the one-half-mile-by-one-mile very low density Residential zone between Hawes
and Ellsworth roads, the south side of Germann Road east of the UPRR to one-quarter mile
east of Signal Butte Road is planned for employment-type activities. Employment type A is
planned for the area between the UPRR and the residential area and the area directly east of
the residential area. Half-way between Ellsworth Road and Crismon Road, planned land
use changes to employment type B.2 This more intensive employment zone gives way to a
recreation/conservation/parks area and a medium density residential zone. A third area of
employment type A, where currently there is a dairy farm, has been designated for the
southeast quadrant of the Meridian Road/Germann Road intersection. The portion of the
study area directly east to Ironwood Road is planned for medium density residential zoning.
Between Ironwood Road and Suburban Avenue in Pinal County and outside the Queen
Creek MPA, there is an established mix of high density mobile home parks and very low
density rural residential zones, which is inferred to reflect the future land use condition.

2.3

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

2.3.1. Background
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and subsequent related statutes prohibit discrimination
on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, sex, and disability in association with any
program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. Executive Order 12898, ―Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
1

The employment type A designation permits a range of employment uses from light manufacturing to light industrial and office uses and
implements the Industrial I zoning district and, therefore, is comparable to the city of Mesa light industrial classification on the north side
of Germann Road.

2

The employment type B land use designation is intended to encourage general industrial uses that implement Industrial II zoning districts
in the zoning ordinance and, therefore, is comparable to the city of Mesa general industrial classification on the north side of Germann
Road.

FINAL REPORT
2-13

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Population,‖ dated February 11, 1994, directs federal agencies (and programs and
activities receiving federal financial assistance) to ―…make achieving environmental justice
part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities
on minority populations and low-income populations.‖ ―Disproportionately high and
adverse‖ effects means the effect(s) of the proposed action:
―
(1) is (are) predominately borne by a minority population and/or a low-income
population, or
(2) will be suffered by the minority population and/or low-income population and is
appreciably more severe or greater in magnitude than the adverse effect that will be
suffered by the non-minority population and/or non-low-income population. ‖
There are three fundamental environmental justice principles:
1. Ensure full and fair participation by all potentially affected communities in the
transportation decision-making process.
2. Avoid, minimize, or mitigate disproportionately high and adverse human health and
environmental effects, including social and economic effects, on minority populations
and low-income populations.
3. Prevent the denial of, reduction in, or significant delay in the receipt of benefits to
minority and low-income populations.
USDOT Order 5610.2, ―Environmental Justice in Minority and Low-Income Populations,‖
defines minority and low-income populations as ―any readily identifiable groups … who live
in geographic proximity, and if circumstances warrant, geographically dispersed/transient
persons (such as migrant workers or Native Americans) who will be similarly affected by a
proposed DOT program, policy or activity.‖ The order identifies four minority groups:
(1) Black (a person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa);
(2) Hispanic (a person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American, or
other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race);
(3) Asian American (a person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far
East, Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, or the Pacific Islands); and
(4) American Indian and Alaskan Native (a person having origins in any of the original
people of North America and who maintains cultural identification through tribal
affiliation or community recognition).
Additionally, the USDOT order specifies a low-income person as a person whose median
household income is at or below the Department of Health and Human Services poverty
FINAL REPORT
2-14

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

guidelines. It should be noted that ADOT guidance with respect to Environmental Justice
clearly indicates that considerations of age, gender, and disability also should be
incorporated in this assessment. Age specifically refers to person 60 years old and older.
Gender is evaluated in terms of female heads of households.
2.3.2. Environmental Justice Considerations
An assessment of the demographic composition of the study area was based on data
available through the American Community Survey (ACS) published by the U.S. Census
Bureau. Detailed information from the 2010 Census is available by tract only for population
characteristics. Economic and income information is available only through the 2005-2009
ACS compilations. The 2010 data are reported for different Census Tract boundaries;
however, the information provided for both periods is valid and adequate for assessing
potential impacts on minority and low-income population characteristics of the study area.
Figure 2-9 graphically depicts the location of seven Census Tracts associated with the study
area. Census Tracts not incidental with the study area are shown for reference only. The
standard of disproportionate effects generally is examined by comparing the Census Tract
representation of race/ethnicity with that of a larger political jurisdiction, such as a county.
Population information for the seven Census Tracts displayed in Figure 2-10 is presented in
tabular form in Table 2-3. Table 2-3 reveals that Maricopa and Pinal Counties together
have a White population representing almost 59 percent of the total population of the two
counties. Table 2-3 also reveals every Census Tract has some minority population groups
that constitute a greater proportionate share than in the two counties combined. In all cases
but one, this disproportionate share is very small and, therefore, not significant. However,
where this occurs, there still is the potential that the population group could be
disproportionately affected by proposed transportation improvements, depending on their
location and concentration. The most notable sensitive condition is associated with Census
Tract 8176, where the representative share of the Hispanic/Latino persons is almost 10
percentage points higher than the share of this group in the two counties combined.
Cells highlighted in Table 2-3 indicate proposed improvements could result in
disproportionate impacts to the identified population groups, if such groups are concentrated
in the immediate vicinity of proposed improvements. Depending on the location and
concentration of the Hispanic/Latino population in Census Tract 8176, impacts could be
disproportionately greater than potential impacts to other, nonminority persons living in the
study area. Additional, more-detailed assessment of the location of these persons relative to
preliminary design of proposed improvements is necessary to determine whether mitigating
actions must be taken to adhere to the principles and objectives of Environmental Justice.
Arizona also considers potential impacts on elderly persons, female heads of households,
and individuals with disabilities with regard to Environmental Justice. Elderly refers to

FINAL REPORT
2-15

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 2-9 RELEVANT STUDY AREA CENSUS TRACTS

FINAL REPORT
2-16

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 2-10 POPULATION AND ETHNICITY BY CENSUS TRACT

FINAL REPORT
2-17

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

TABLE 2-4
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE POPULATION GROUPS BY CENSUS TRACT
Population Group
White
African American
AIAN (1)
Asian
NHPI (2)
Some Other Race
Two or More Races
Hispanic or Latino (3)
Total Population

Maricopa &
Share of
Pinal
Two-County
Counties Population

Tract
8158

Share of
Tract
Population

Tract
8162

Share of
Tract
Population

Tract
8165

Share of
Tract
Population

Tract
8166

Share of
Tract
Population

Tract
8168

Share of
Tract
Population

Tract
8176

Share of
Tract
Population

Tract
2.04

Share of
Tract
Population

2,460,541

58.68%

2,869

70.27%

2,771

69.59%

3,042

78.34%

3,077

71.93%

2,109

73.36%

570

57.11%

4,693

71.00%

193,497

4.61%

144

3.53%

188

4.72%

80

2.06%

132

3.09%

69

2.40%

2

0.20%

214

3.24%

76,662

1.83%

42

1.03%

30

0.75%

26

0.67%

38

0.89%

5

0.17%

21

2.10%

34

0.51%

134,415

3.21%

235

5.76%

161

4.04%

96

2.47%

224

5.24%

86

2.99%

7

0.70%

199

3.01%

8,212

0.20%

3

0.07%

14

0.35%

2

0.05%

8

0.19%

1

0.03%

0

0.00%

23

0.35%

5,995

0.14%

9

0.22%

1

0.03%

12

0.31%

1

0.02%

2

0.07%

0

0.00%

12

0.18%

77,847

1.86%

95

2.33%

121

3.04%

55

1.42%

125

2.92%

55

1.91%

9

0.90%

130

1.97%

1,235,718

29.47%

686

16.80%

696

17.48%

570

14.68%

673

15.73%

548

19.06%

389

38.98%

1,305

19.74%

4,192,887

100%

4,083

100%

3,982

100%

3,883

100%

4,278

100%

2,875

100%

998

100%

6,610

100%

Differential Share Relative to Two Counties
African American

-1.09%

0.11%

-2.55%

-1.53%

-2.21%

-4.41%

-1.38%

Asian

2.55%

0.84%

-0.73%

2.03%

-0.21%

-2.50%

-0.20%

AIAN

-0.80%

-1.07%

-1.16%

-0.94%

-1.65%

0.28%

-1.31%

NHPI

-0.12%

0.16%

-0.14%

-0.01%

-0.16%

-0.20%

0.15%

Some Other Race

0.08%

-0.12%

0.17%

-0.12%

-0.07%

-0.14%

0.04%

Two or More Races

0.47%

1.18%

-0.44%

1.07%

0.06%

-0.95%

0.11%

Hispanic or Latino

-12.67%

-11.99%

-14.79%

-13.74%

-10.41%

9.51%

-9.73%

Prepared by Wilson & Company , Nov ember 2011.
NOTES:
(1) AIAN refers to American Indian and Alaskan Nativ e.
(2) NHPI refers to Nativ e Haw aiian & other Pacific Islander.
(3) Includes Hispanics or Latinos w ho also reported being part of the sev en other groups. This number represents a separate reporting and these persons are not counted in the groups abov e.
Shading indicates representation of the Population Group w ithin the Census Tract is greater than the proportionate share w ithin the Maricopa and Pinal Counties combined.
Source: American FactFinder, DP-1, Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010, U.S. Census Bureau.

FINAL REPORT
2-18

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

individuals 60 years of age and over. Non-institutionalized civilians, who are 16 years of
age and older, are considered to have a disability if they report a mobility disability, a
self-care limitation, or work-related disability. Female heads of household are identified as
females with no spouse present, regardless of whether any children younger than 18 years
of age are present in the household. Table 2-5 shows the number of elderly persons and
female heads of households associated with the 2010 Census Tracts. The data reveals that
three Census Tracts (81528, 8162, 2.04) have a slightly greater proportion of female heads
of households than is present among the three municipalities and the two counties. The
differential from three municipal areas and the two counties is not significant; therefore, the
potential for adverse disproportional impacts on these populations is unlikely.
TABLE 2-6
PRESENCE IN THE STUDY AREA OF ELDERLY AND FEMALE HEADS OF HOUSEHOLDS
Age 60 Years and Older
Geographic Area

Total
Population

Number of
Persons

Percent of
Geographic
Area

Census Tract 8158

4,083

165

4.04%

Census Tract 8162

3,982

220

5.52%

Census Tract 8165

3,883

451

11.61%

Census Tract 8166

4,278

263

6.15%

Census Tract 8168

2,875

199

6.92%

Census Tract 8176

998

118

11.82%

Census Tract 2.04

6,610

933

14.11%

673,855

106,427

4,192,887

726,614

Three Municipality Total
Maricopa & Pinal Counties

Difference
from Three
Municipal
Areas

Female Head of Household
Difference
from TwoCounty Area

Number of
Persons

Percent of
Geographic
Area

Difference
from Three
Municipal
Areas

Difference
from TwoCounty Area

157

3.85%

1.28%

1.19%

189

4.75%

2.18%

2.09%

86

2.21%

87

2.03%

71

2.47%

25

2.51%

-0.35%
-0.53%
-0.10%
-0.06%

-0.44%
-0.62%
-0.19%
-0.15%

211

3.19%

0.63%

0.54%

15.79%

17,285

2.57%

17.33%

111,377

-11.75%
-10.27%
-4.18%
-9.65%
-8.87%
-3.97%
-1.68%

-13.29%
-11.80%
-5.71%
-11.18%
-10.41%
-5.51%
-3.21%

2.66%
Prepared by Wilson & Company , Nov ember 2011.

Source: American FactFinder, DP-1, Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010, U.S. Census Bureau.

Table 2-5 provides information regarding the number and proportion of persons who have
one or more disabilities. Information reported by Census Tract is from the 2000 Census, as
more current information is not yet available at this level from the recent 2010 Census.
Table 2-5 shows that Census Tract 2.02 in Pinal County had a slightly larger share of
persons with disabilities than Maricopa and Pinal counties combined. Available data from
the 2010 Census provides information at the municipal level. Compared to Maricopa and
Pinal counties, the city of Mesa has a slightly greater share of persons with disabilities. In
the case of both Census Tract 2.04 and the city of Mesa, the differential proportions are not
sufficiently great to expect disproportionate impacts on persons with disabilities.

FIINAL REPORT
2-19

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

TABLE 2-7
PRESENCE IN THE STUDY AREA OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES (2010)
Geographic Area

Total
Population

Disabled

Percent of
Difference from
Geographic Area Two-County Area

2000 Census Information
Census Tract 5227.45

4,305

521

12.1%

-6.17%

Census Tract 5227.46

2,464

241

9.8%

-8.50%

Census Tract 5227.57

455

62

13.6%

-4.65%

Census Tract 5228

892

65

7.3%

-10.99%

Census Tract 2.02

5,404

1,036

19.2%

0.89%

2,955,705

540,202

18.3%

Maricopa & Pinal Counties
Town of Gilbert

2010 Census Information
208,453
12,302

City of Mesa
Town of Queen Creek

439,041
26,361
4,192,887

Maricopa & Pinal Counties

5.9%

-3.8%

45,619
1,445

10.4%
5.5%

0.72%
-4.2%

405,589

9.7%

Prepared by Wilson & Company , Nov ember 2011.
Source: American FactFinder, U.S. Census Bureau - PCT26. Sex by Age by Ty pes of Disability for the Civ ilian
Noninstitutinalzed Population 5 Years and Ov er; and DP-1, Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics:
2010.

Income data through the U.S. Census Bureau is available only through ACS for the years
2005 through 2009.3 Table 2-6 and Figure 2-11 shows the median household income in
each of seven Census Tracts reported through the ACS. The weighted average median
household income of Maricopa and Pinal Counties for 2009 was reported to be
approximately $55,000 (Maricopa County reported $55,223 and Pinal County reported
$49,301). The reported median household income of all but two Census Tracts –
Tracts 5227.57 and 5228 –are significantly greater than the two-county average. Census
Tract 5227.57 includes an area dominated by agricultural and industrial pursuits, as well as
the former 5,000-acre General Motors Proving Ground. Only a few isolated residential
units and one subdivision with one-acre lot home sites are present in the study area on the
north side of Germann Road. Census Tract 5228 is associated with the Phoenix-Mesa
Gateway Airport, Arizona State University Polytechnic Campus, and campus-related student
housing. Only the southernmost tip of the Census Tract touches the northern boundary of the
study area. The data and geography of these two Census Tracts indicate that it is unlikely
projects undertaken to improve transportation systems and services in the study area will
have a disproportionate impact on low-income populations.
3

Conversation with US Census Technical Aide, October 6, 2011.

FIINAL REPORT
2-20

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

TABLE 2-8
MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY CENSUS TRACT
Geographic Unit
Tract 5227.03
Tract 5227.45
Tract 5227.46
Tract 5227.47
Tract 5227.57
Tract 5228
Tract 2.02
Maricopa & Pinal Counties

Median
Household
Income
$100,387
$85,665
$82,680
$72,120
$54,000
$34,583
$62,111
$54,919*

Relative to Two
County Average
182.79%
155.99%
150.55%
131.32%
98.33%
62.97%
113.10%

Prepared by Wilson & Company, October 2011.
* Weighted Average Household Income of the two counties.

FIINAL REPORT
2-21

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 2-11 MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY CENSUS TRACT

FINAL REPORT
2-22

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

3.0 EXISTING TRANSPORTATION NETWORK
This chapter discusses the existing and planned transportation network serving the study
area. The first section provides an inventory of the roadway network integrated with the
Germann Road corridor. The subsequent section identifies planned and committed
transportation improvements expected to affect accessibility and mobility within the study
area. This section also includes an assessment of the potential for future transit services.

3.1

CHARACTERISTICS OF EXISTING STUDY AREA ROADWAY NETWORK

The existing corridor roadway network includes all roads within the study area and those
critical for travel into and out of the study area. The inventory in this section includes:
assessment of intersection operations, evaluation of access management along roadways,
identification of major generators that impact traffic volumes and travel patterns, and
examination of crash history and safety.
3.1.1. Existing Roadway Network
The existing study area roadway network consists of arterial, collector, and local street
segments, most of which do not support through movements. Only three of the arterial
streets with four to six lanes support movements into or through the study area relative to
external origins/destinations:
Power Road, Ellsworth Road, and Ironwood Road
(Figure 3-1). Each of these facilities has a north-south travel orientation. Two other four- to
six-lane arterial-type facilities (Germann Road and Rittenhouse Road) serve east-west travel
but only at the western end of the study area, west of the UPRR corridor. Germann Road,
the object of this study, is the only east-to-west mile-road alignment passing through the
study area; however, Germann Road is currently not a continuous facility.
The discontinuity of Germann Road is particularly characteristic of the southeastern corner of
Maricopa County. Figure 3-1 shows that between the newly constructed Loop 202 (Santan
Freeway) and Hunt Highway/Empire Boulevard, a distance of 8.5 miles, there is no regional
facility supporting east-west through movements. Particular to the study area, Pecos Road
stops at Ellsworth Road going east. Germann Road is discontinuous at the UPRR and
between Meridian Road and Ironwood Road. Queen Creek Road directly south of the study
area also is discontinuous due to the presence of an educational institution campus, the
UPRR, and the Rittenhouse Road Drain, and, like Germann Road, also between Meridian
Road and Ironwood Road where it becomes Pima Road. The only continuous east-west
facility from Power Road eastward is Ocotillo Road, which is two miles south of Germann
Road. However, Ocotillo Road does not extend westward from Power Road, terminated (at
least in the short-term) due to the presence of Sonoqui Wash. In the north-south direction,
Hawes Road does not enter the study area: it terminates at Rittenhouse Road on the west
side of the UPRR corridor and is blocked from the north by the airport.

FINAL REPORT
3-1

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 3-1 EXISTING AREA ROADWAY NETWORK

FINAL REPORT
3-2

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Crismon Road, Signal Butte Road, and Meridian Road do not extend into the study area
from the north or south. Table 3-1 identifies the key roadway facilities in the study area
today and provides basic descriptive information.
TABLE 3-1
KEY EXISTING ROADWAY SEGMENTS
Roadway
Name

Segment

No. of Lanes

North-South Facilities
Queen Creek Rd. to Rittenhouse Rd.
6, divided
Rittenhouse Rd. to Pecos Rd.
5, divided
North of Pecos Rd.
2
Power Rd. to 650′ east of 187th St.
4 w/center left-turn lane and
bike lane
Rittenhouse Road
650′ east of 187th St. to Sossaman Rd.
4, divided w/bike lane
Rittenhouse Road
Sossaman Rd. to 330′ east of Sossaman Rd.
4 , divided
Rittenhouse Road
330′ east of Sossaman Rd. to 1,000′ east of
3, divided
Sossaman Rd.
Rittenhouse Road
1,000′ east of Sossaman Rd. to Hawes Rd.
2
Sossaman Road Queen Creek Rd. to ¼ mile north of Queen Creek
2
Rd.
Sossaman Road ¼ mile north of Queen Creek Rd. to 1/8 mile north
2 w/center left-turn lane
of Rittenhouse Rd.
1/8 mile north of Rittenhouse Rd. to Germann Rd.
Sossaman Road
2
Sossaman Road
Germann Rd. to Pecos Rd.
2
Sossaman Road
North of Pecos Rd.
2
Hawes Road
Germann Rd. to Ryan Rd.
2, paved, unmarked
Ellsworth Road
Queen Creek Rd. to Germann Rd.
4
Ellsworth Road
Germann Rd. to Pecos Rd.
4, divided w/bike lane
Ironwood Road
Through the study area
4, divided
East-West Facilities
Pecos Road
West of Power Rd.
6, divided
Pecos Road
Power Rd. to Ellsworth Rd.
2 w/paved shoulder
Germann Road
West of Power Rd. to 186th Dr.
6, divided
Germann Road
186th Dr. to 188th St.
5, divided
Germann Road
188th St. to Rittenhouse Rd.
3, divided
Germann Road
Sossaman Rd. to east of Signal Butte Rd.
2
Germann Road
East of Signal Butte Rd. to Commercial Access
2 w/center left-turn lane
Rd.
Germann Road
Commercial Access Rd. to Meridian Rd.
2
Germann Road
Meridian Rd. to Half-Mile Rd.
2 (dairy farm access road)
Ryan Road
Sossaman Rd. to Ellsworth Rd.
2, paved, unmarked
Prepared by Wilson & Company, October, 2011.
Power Road
Power Road
Power Road
Rittenhouse Road

Posted Speed
(mph)
45
45
45
45
45
35
35
35
None
None
None
45
45
25
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
35
45
45
45
Private drive
25

Germann Road Alignment
The alignment of Germann Road is an integral element of the surveyed mile grid based on
the original Public Land Survey System (PLSS) that dominates the Phoenix metropolitan
area. At the Meridian Road alignment, a survey adjustment was made; therefore,

FINAL REPORT
3-3

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Germann Road east of the Meridian Road alignment is offset to the north approximately
230 feet (refer to Figure 1-3).
Right of Way
The existing ROW along the alignment of Germann Road varies considerably. As
development has occurred, ROW has been established. This has led to a scalloped
roadway, which primarily is a two-lane roadway that has been widened on the north side
to accommodate commercial and industrial developments.
Table 3-2 provides a
preliminary inventory of the Germann Road ROW for reference purposes.
Existing Roadway Cross section
Table 3-3 provides information regarding the characteristics of roadways in the study area
and, particularly, Germann Road. Table 3-3 summarizes the cross sections associated with
roadway segments of Germann Road.
Major Intersecting Roadways
Germann Road has traffic control at intersections with four major north-south arterial
roadways. Three intersections are signalized.
Power Road: The two Germann Road approaches at this intersection have a six-lane cross
section with bike lanes and left-turn lanes. The west approach incorporates a twelve-foot
median island. The cross section of Power Road is similar to that of Germann Road with
the addition of a dedicated right-turn lane at each approach.
Sossaman Road: Germann Road intersects Sossaman Road, a two-lane roadway, at a
slight angle from the east. Germann Road also has a two-lane cross section at this
intersection. A right-turn slip ramp has been constructed to facilitate movements from
northbound Sossaman Road to eastbound Germann Road (refer to Figure 1-2). There is
no connection at this intersection with Germann Road to the west, as the UPRR corridor has
effectively blocked such a development. An at-grade railroad crossing of Sossaman Road
at the UPRR exists less than 100 feet south of the intersection.
Ellsworth Road: Germann Road intersects Ellsworth Road three miles east of Power Road.
Each approach of Germann Road includes a right-turn lane, a through lane, and a left-turn
lane. Ellsworth Road has a four-lane cross section. The cross section north of Germann
Road incorporates a bike lane. Both approaches have a left-turn lane, but only the north
approach has a right-turn lane. Therefore, the geometry of this intersection is slightly
skewed.

FINAL REPORT
3-4

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

TABLE 3-2
RIGHT OF WAY OF GERMANN ROAD: AUTUMN DRIVE TO SUBURBAN AVENUE
Roadway Segment
Autumn Dr. to Power Rd.
Power Rd. to 188th St.
188th St. to Pelican Ct.
Pelican Ct. to Rittenhouse Rd.
Germann Road./Rittenhouse Road. intersection
Intersection to Power/Railroad Corridor
Rittenhouse Rd. Drain ROW to 196th St.
196th St. to W. side of 197th Pl. (center of La Jara
Farms)
Center of 197th Pl. to 513′ feet to the east
513′ to the east to 1,018′ to the east
1,018′ to the east to W. side of 201st Pl. (86th Pl., Mesa)
201st Pl. (86th Pl., Mesa) to W. side of 204th St. (88th St.,
Mesa)
204th St. (S. 88th St., Mesa) to 442′ to the east
442′ to the east to 1,038′ to the east
1,038′ to the east to 1,364′ to the east
1,364′ to the east to 1,532′ to the east
1,532′ to the west to W. side of Ellsworth Rd.
E. side of Ellsworth Rd. to 595′ to the east
595′ to the east to 837′ to the east
837′ to the east to E. side of Crismon Rd.
E. side of Crismon Rd. to W. side of Signal Butte Rd.
E. side of Signal Butte Rd. to 560′ to the east
560′ to the east to 850′ W. of W. side of Meridian Rd.
E. side of Meridian Rd. to 2,744′ to the east
2,744′ E. of Meridian Rd. to W. side of Ironwood Rd.
Ironwood Road/Germann Road Intersection
East of Ironwood Road/Germann Road intersection to
785′ to the east
785′ to the east to 1,272′ to the east
1,272′ to the east to 1,434′ to the east
1,434′ to the east to 1,924′ to the east
1,924 to the east to W. side of Terrace View Ave.
E. side of Terrace View Ave. to W. side of Suburban
Ave.

Right of Way (1)

Pavement Width (2)

130′, demarcated
140′, demarcated
70′, demarcated
70′, demarcated
163′-164′, demarcated

102′
100′
70′-60′
60′-54′
108′ W. of intersection; 100′ E. of
Intersection
No roadway
28′ (3)

70′, demarcated
66′, demarcated, plus 22′
easements on both sides
103′, demarcated, plus 22′
easement - north side
135′, demarcated
125′, demarcated
109′, demarcated, plus 22′
easement - north side
124′-126′, demarcated

28′
28′
28′
28′
28′

132′, demarcated
135′, demarcated
125′-130′, demarcated
108′, demarcated
130′, demarcated
120′, demarcated
88′, demarcated, plus 22′
easement - south side
66′, demarcated, plus 22′
easements - both sides
34′, demarcated, plus 54′
easement - north side & 22′
easement - south side
108′, demarcated, plus 22′
easement - south side
98′, demarcated, plus 22′
easement - south side
Private road, no formal ROW
Private land, no roadway, no
formal ROW
105′ east & W. side of
96′intersection
(Estimated)

56′
56′
56′
30′
30′-68′
68′
48′

72′ W. of intersection, 45′ E. of intersection
45′

96′-98’ (Estimated)
70′-76’ (Estimated)
104′ (Estimated)
84′-80′
70′

45′-33′
33′-30′
30′
30′
30′

28′
28′
28′-45′
45′
N/A
N/A

Prepared by Wilson & Company, October 2011.
Source: Maricopa County Assessor Parcel Viewer Application.
(1) Demarcated means the ROW is clearly designated as belonging to the County. Easements have been identified by strips of land paralleling Germann Road, some of
which include physical portions of the existing roadway, and when taken together with the demarcated dimension constitute the ROW of the road. In some cases, the
strips are still identified as owned by a private party; in these cases, the total ROW is narrowed at these points.
(2) Pavement width has been determined through measurements from the source imagery for informational purposes only. More precise specifications of ROW will be
established during the corridor roadway planning phase of this study.
(3) Germann Road departs from ROW approx. 575′ east of Sossaman Road., passing through Maricopa County Flood Control District property, connecting to Sossaman
Road approx. 100′ north of UPRR and within UPRR ROW.

FINAL REPORT
3-5

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

TABLE 3-3
GERMANN ROAD CROSS SECTION BY SEGMENT
Roadway Segment
Autumn Dr. to Power Rd.
Power Rd. to 1,184′ E. of Power
Rd.
1,184′ east of Power Rd. to 188th
St.

Other Features

Roadway Cross-Section(1)
•
•
•
•
•
•

188th St. to Rittenhouse Rd.

•
•

Rittenhouse Rd. to Sossaman Rd.

•
•

130′: 6-lanes w/bike lanes, divided w/center island
Occasional right-turn lanes
Left-turn lane at Power Rd. on west approach
140′: 6-lanes w/bike lanes, center left-turn lane
Left-turn lane at Power Rd. on east approach
140′: 5-lanes (3 W; 2 E) w/bike lanes, Divided
w/center island
Left-turn and right-turn lanes
86′-72′: 5-lanes w/bike lane on the south side,
divided w/striping
Left-turn and right-turn lanes
Roadway does not exist

• 6′ sidewalk separated by landscaped
buffer

• Curb and gutter
• Curb and gutter
• Curb and gutter
• Curb and gutter on south side
• Unimproved shoulder on north side
N/A

Sossaman Rd. to S.
St.
(S. 88th St., Mesa)
S. 204th St. (S. 88th St., Mesa) to
S. 206th St. alignment

• 50′-60′: 2-lanes

• Unimproved shoulders

• 92′-88′: 2-lanes
• Exaggerated right-turn lanes

• 6′ sidewalk separated by landscaped

S. 206th St. alignment to Ellsworth
Rd.
Ellsworth Rd. to approx. 830′ east
of Ellsworth Rd.
Approx. 830′ east of Ellsworth Rd.
to approx. 620′ east of Signal
Butte Rd.
Approx. 620′ east of Signal Butte
Rd. to approx. 300′ west of
Meridian Rd.

•
•
•
•
•

E. side of Meridian Rd. to 2,744′
to the east
2,744′ east of Meridian Rd. to W.
side of Ironwood Rd.
E. side of Ironwood to approx.
800′ east of Ironwood
Approx. 800′ east of Ironwood Rd.
to Suburban Ave.

• Private road, no formal ROW

N/A

• Roadway does not exist

N/A

• 85′: 3-lanes, divided w/striping
• Left-turn lane on east approach to Ironwood Rd.
• 85-30: 2-lanes

•
•
•
•

204th

75′-110′: 2-lanes to 4-lanes at Ellsworth
Right-turn and left-turn lanes on west approach
94′-54′: 4-lanes at Ellsworth to 2-lanes
Right-turn and left-turn lanes on east approach
54′: 2-lanes

• 70′: 2-lanes w/center left-turn lane

buffer on north side

• Curb and gutter on north side
• Unimproved shoulder on south side
• Unimproved shoulders
• Unimproved shoulders
• Unimproved shoulders
• 6′ sidewalk separated by landscaped
buffer on north side

• Curb and gutter on north side
• Unimproved shoulder on south side

Unimproved shoulders
Drainage channels on both sides
Unimproved shoulders
Drainage channel on north side

Prepared by Wilson & Company, October 2011.
Source: Field survey and review of aerial photography at http://www.bing.com/maps.
(1) Roadway cross-section has been determined through measurements from the source imagery for informational purpose only. More precise specifications will
be established during the corridor roadway planning phase of this study.

FINAL REPORT
3-6

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Ironwood Road: Germann Road has an intersection with Ironwood Road, which is
1.15 miles east of the Meridian Road alignment and is boundary between Maricopa
County and Pinal County. Ironwood Road is a four-lane, divided roadway with left-turn
lanes installed for the north- and south-bound approaches. The Germann Road west
approach has a four-lane cross section with a left-turn lane. The east approach has a
left-turn lane and a through/right-lane. Although through movements are not blocked,
Germann Road does not continue west from the intersection (there is only 150 feet of
paved roadway west of the intersection).
Peak hour traffic volumes are highest in the western portion of the Germann Road corridor,
particularly between Power Road and Ellsworth Road. Figure 3-2 shows the geometry and
peak-hour traffic volumes for key intersections in this portion of the corridor.
3.1.2. Major Traffic Generators
The study area is largely undeveloped with agriculture and vacant activities the
predominant land use. Thus, there are few social or economic functions that generate high
volumes of traffic. Nevertheless, there are activities that attract significant levels of traffic,
on a day-to-day basis, and have the potential to influence traffic levels in the study area.
These activities are highlighted in Figure 3-3. Some estimates of traffic activity have been
provided in the summaries below; however, this is only for reference purposes.
A
comprehensive analysis of travel demand is presented in chapter 4.
1. Santan Village Mall: This regional shopping attraction is located four miles to the
northwest of the study area. It includes more than 100 stores and is described as the first
super-regional shopping center in Arizona to combine department and specialty stores
with a major cinema, indoor food court, and office and residential offerings.
2. Arizona State University (ASU) Polytechnic Campus: This regional attraction is located
directly north of the study area, occupying almost one square mile of the former Williams
Field. Power Road and Sossaman Road provide direct access to ASU’s growing east
campus. In the area directly north of the study area, which includes this regional education
complex and accounts for the majority of social and economic activity, employment was
estimated at approximately 3,500 in 2005.4
3. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport: This regional, reliever airport recently was cited as
―the fastest growing commercial airport in the country.‖5 Airport growth was on a course
to reach one million passengers by the end of the 2011. Assuming the airport achieves
this level of operation, airport ingress/egress travel associated with the daily average
2,700 passengers alone could range between 4,700 and 10,200 average daily trips.
Power Road and Sossaman Road provide direct access to this regional airport/education
4

Transportation Analysis Memorandum prepared in support of the Mesa Gateway Strategic Development Plan, January 23, 2009.

5

Economic Reporter, city of Mesa Office of Economic Development, Third Quarter 2011.

FINAL REPORT
3-7

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 3-2 EXISTING INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS AND TURNING-MOVEMENT VOLUMES

FINAL REPORT
3-8

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 3-3 MAJOR TRAFFIC GENERATORS

FINAL REPORT
3-9

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

complex. Sossaman Road directly serves the passenger terminal. Therefore, a share of these
trips occurs on roadways in the study area.
4. Former General Motors Proving Ground: This 5,000-acre property has been turned over
the private marketplace and plans are being formulated to create a major regional,
mixed-use destination-type development.
5. Rittenhouse District Park (Planned): This 165-acre facility, being developed by the town of
Gilbert in partnership with the FCDMC, is located directly north of Pecos Road and west of
Power Road. The designated park area, flood control/storm water retention basin, is
bordered by the East Maricopa Floodway (EMF), Power Road, and the UPRR/Rittenhouse
Road Drain alignment. Park and recreation amenities are to include: 18 acres for
high-intensity activities, 115 acres for medium-intensity activities, and 32 acres for
low-intensity activities.
6. Power Road Commercial District: At the west end of the study area, the triangle formed
by Power Road, Germann Road, and the UPRR corridor has become a focus of commercial
activity, including The Home Depot, banking, retail stores, services, and professional offices.
Although currently only partially developed north and south of Rittenhouse Road, this area
today is a significant attraction, and the number of trips associated with retail, commercial,
and office activities are expected to only increase as development occurs.
7 & 8. Southgate Commerce Park and Gateway Airport Commerce Park: These two
commercial/office developments are located between Germann Road and Pecos Road east
of 88th Street. Although only partially developed at this time, Southgate Commerce Park
encompasses 27 platted lots for commercial development and Gateway Airport Commerce
Park encompasses 32 separate pads for business development. It is not clear at this time the
type of commercial activity that is planned to occupy these two parks. Assuming 5 to 10
employees per lot/pad, when fully developed, these two sites have the potential to support
300 to 600 employees, attracting/generating a significant number of daily trips.
9. TRW Vehicle Safety Systems, Inc. (TRW): TRW occupies a 0.6-square-mile site on the
north side of Germann Road, which is contiguous on the west with the Signal Butte Road
alignment and Pecos Road on the north. This commercial enterprise employs 400 persons,
according to a list of Mesa Large Employers provided on the city’s web site.
10. Commercial Metals Company (CMC), Arizona: CMC operates a micromill facility at a
0.3-square-mile site at the northwest corner of Germann Road, bordering the Maricopa
County boundary and Meridian Road alignment. This facility at full operation employs
approximately 200 persons.
11. Downtown Queen Creek: The town of Queen Creek adopted its first Town Center Plan
in 1994, developed an update in 2002, and adopted a second update in March 2011. The
plan is a challenging endeavor designed to create a downtown from ―raw‖ land –a mixed
FINAL REPORT
3-10

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

area with appropriate housing densities and with large- and small-scale commercial
development planned to serve not only Queen Creek residents but also a community-wide
and regional market.
12. Horseshoe Park and Equestrian Centre: This new facility developed by the town of
Queen Creek offers opportunities for events of all sizes, including: English and Western
equestrian meets, home shows, RV and car shows, concerts, and weddings. The facility has
two arenas twice the size of a football field and seating for more than 3,500 spectators. The
center is billed as a ―community arena,‖ but has hosted events drawing participants and
spectators from neighboring communities, the Phoenix region, and the state.
3.1.3. Crash and Safety Issues
Analysis of the number of crashes and characteristics of crashes (e.g., time of occurrence,
type of collision, etc.) aids in identifying how safe a roadway or intersection is for vehicle
operations. Generally, when vehicular crashes are examined over several years, patterns
may be revealed that identify geometric deficiencies, capacity issues, excessive access to the
roadway, or traffic control issues. Data was obtained from ADOT’s Accident Location
Identification Surveillance System (ALISS) database for the period from 2008 through 2010.
During this three-year period, a total of 55 crashes occurred in the study area. Figure 3-4
graphically displays the number of crashes by year for the reported period. The incident of
crashes within the corridor remained relatively consistent during the analyzed period.
FIGURE 3-4 STUDY AREA CRASHES BETWEEN 2008 AND 2010
20
Number of Crashes

20

20
15

15
10
5
0
2008

2009

2010

Year

Figure 3-5 summarizes study area crashes during the same period by intersection type,
collision type, collision manner, and injury severity. The charts show that 75 percent of all
crashes occurred at an intersection or a driveway access.

FINAL REPORT
3-11

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 3-5
STUDY AREA CRASH CHARACTERISTICS BETWEEN 2005 AND 2010

Source: Accident Location Information Surveillance System (ALISS), Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) Multimodal Planning
Division, August 2005 through August 2010.

FINAL REPORT
3-12

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Most collisions (80 percent) involved two or more motor vehicles; however, single-vehicle
crashes represented 18 percent of all crashes. Less than 1 percent of reported motor vehicle
collisions involved a pedestrian or bicyclist.

3.2

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND ALTERNATIVE TRAVEL MODES

Public transportation takes the form of scheduled, fixed-route transit services provided in the
Valley by light rail transit (LRT) and buses. Alternative travel modes of interest are
pedestrian facilities, such as sidewalks and trails/paths, and bicycle facilities, such as bike
lanes on roadways, bike paths, and multiuse paths.
3.2.1. Existing Public Transit Service
There is no public transit service available in the study area, but there are opportunities to
access regional transit services.
Fixed-Route Bus Service: The closest fixed-route transit service is located at Power Road and
Williams Field Road. Route 156, Chandler Boulevard/Willliams Field Road, and Route 184,
Power Road, converge to serve the ASU Polytechnic Campus.
Express Bus Service: The closest access to regional express bus service is located 8.5 miles
away at a park-and-ride (P&R) at the southwest corner of Germann Road and Hamilton
Street.
Metro LINK Bus Service: Valley Metro LINK -– Main Street can be accessed at the
Superstition Springs Transit Center, which is located at the northwest corner of Power Road
and US 60. This service provides direct access to the METRO Light Rail route at Main Street
and Sycamore in downtown Mesa. METRO Light Rail provides service to Arizona State
University (ASU), downtown Tempe, Sky Harbor International Airport (via the Sky Train),
downtown and uptown Phoenix, and the north central Phoenix/Camelback Corridor.
East Valley Ride Choice: This program provides direct, door-to-door transit service through
a variety of options. East Valley Dial-a-Ride (EVDAR) provides transit service to residents
and employees in the East Valley, including Mesa and Gilbert. EVDAR service in Mesa and
Gilbert specifically is available to those residents qualifying under the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA). Advance reservations are required. Therefore, persons residing in
portions of the study in Mesa and Gilbert may avail themselves of this service.
3.2.2. Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
A survey of the study area revealed a limited number of pedestrian and bicycle facilities
have been developed in the study area.
Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian facilities primarily are limited to sidewalks in the developed commercial and
residential areas at the eastern and western ends of the study area. Eight-foot sidewalks
FINAL REPORT
3-13

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

with linear buffer have been installed along the north and south side of Germann Road west
of Power Road and on the north side between Power Road and 188th Street in Queen Creek.
They also have been installed on the south side between Power Road and Rittenhouse Road.
Eight-foot sidewalks with linear buffer have been installed along the majority of Power Road
on both sides. There is a six-foot sidewalk along the west side of Sossaman Road from
Seagull Drive (approximately 300 feet south of the Germann Road alignment) south to
Queen Creek Road. Portions have a buffer on the roadway side. Approximately 370 feet
of sidewalk with buffer was installed on the east side with the widening of Sossaman Road,
when a church was constructed.
There are intermittent accommodations for pedestrian traffic on Germann Road between
Sossaman and Ironwood roads. Slightly more than 1,200 feet of six-foot sidewalk with
buffer has been installed on the north side of Germann Road, where it was widened for
commercial development between 88th and 90th streets (in Mesa). Approximately 4,000
linear feet of six-foot sidewalk with buffer has been installed along the north side of
Germann Road between the alignments of Signal Butte and Meridian roads. Corner
sidewalks with accommodations for wheelchairs have been installed at the following
signalized intersection along the Germann Road corridor: Power, Sossaman, Ellsworth, and
Ironwood roads.
Bicycle Facilities
Bicycle traffic can be accommodated by bike lanes or bike paths on the edge of roadways,
multiuse paths designed for nonmotorized travel modes, and trails.
Bicycle Lanes/Paths
Bicycle lanes/paths have been established along three roadway segments within the study,
as identified in Table 3-4.
TABLE 3-4
LOCATION OF BICYCLE LANES IN THE STUDY AREA
Roadway Segment

Location

Facility Description

Rittenhouse Rd
Rittenhouse Rd
Germann Rd
Germann Rd
Germann Rd
Germann Rd
Sossaman Rd

Power Rd. to 650′ east of 187th St.
650′ east of 187th St. to Sossaman Rd.
Autumn Dr. to Power Rd.
Power Rd. to 1,184′ east of Power Rd.
1,184′ east of Power Rd. to 188th St.
188th St. to Rittenhouse Rd.
Rittenhouse Rd. to Queen Creek Rd. and south of
study area
Germann Rd. to Pecos Rd. and north of study area

4 lanes, center left-turn lane
4 lanes, divided w/center island
6 lanes, divided w/center island
6 lanes, center left-turn lane
5 lanes (3 w; 2 e), divided w/center island
5 lanes, divided w/striping
3 lanes, center left-turn lane

Ellsworth Rd

4 lanes, divided w/center island
Prepared by Wilson & Company, October 2011.

FINAL REPORT
3-14

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Multiuse Paths
An eight-foot multiuse path, separated from the roadway by a landscaped buffer, exists
along both sides of Germann Road: west of Rittenhouse Road on the south side and west of
188th Street on the north side (see discussion of sidewalks previously). These connect at
various points with paths constructed within residential and commercial areas developed
north and south of Germann Road. A similar multiuse path has been established on both
sides of Rittenhouse Road, as abutting parcels along this roadway have been developed.
Wider, eight-foot buffered multiuse paths have been developed along both sides of Power
Road, where abutting parcels have been developed (see discussion of sidewalks previously).
No other paths are apparent within the study area.
Rittenhouse Trail
The town of Gilbert has a long-range plan to construct a multiuse trail from Power Road to
Williams Field Road along the former alignment of Rittenhouse Road, which parallels the
UPRR corridor. Current thinking anticipates a trail consisting of a ten-foot wide concrete
walk, six-foot landscaped area, and ten-foot wide decomposed granite path as well as
benches, kiosks, and interpretive signage.

FINAL REPORT
3-15

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SUMMARY
This section identifies and discusses the potential presence within the study area of sensitive
biological and natural resources; highlights potential concerns regarding air quality, noise
aesthetics, and hazardous materials (HazMats); and addresses potential effects on historical
and cultural resources.

4.1

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.1.1. Biotic Communities
The purpose of the biotic overview is to summarize existing biological communities and
determine whether the study area supports —or potentially supports —species that are
subject to regulatory oversight by agencies at the federal, state, and/or local governmental
level. The dominant native vegetation community found in the study area is the Lower
Colorado River Valley subdivision of the Sonoran Desert Scrub Community. Native Sonoran
Desert Scrub Community is primarily found on the eastern end of the study area. This native
desert vegetation is dominated by creosote (Larrea tridentate), and other species commonly
found in this community include desert broom (Baccharis sarothroides), velvet mesquite
(Prosopis velutina), and wolfberry (Lycium spp.).
However, this native vegetation community has been greatly reduced by agricultural,
residential, and commercial development. Agricultural land is the predominant type of land
use found in the study area. These lands are either currently farmed or were previously
farmed. Agricultural lands typically lack native vegetation, and their disturbed soils result in
favorable growing conditions for noxious weeds. Developed lands include both residential
and commercial uses. These areas have expanded in recent years, resulting in the loss of
some native Sonoran Desert Scrub Community and natural habitat for wildlife.
4.1.2. Wildlife
Despite the loss of natural habitat in the study area due to agricultural and development
practices, avian, mammal, and reptile wildlife species associated with the Sonoran Desert
Scrub Community have been able to take advantage of the rural agricultural lands and
remaining native desert habitats.


Avian species found in the study area include: cactus wren (Campylorhynchus
brunneicapillus), mourning dove (Zenaida asiatica), white-winged dove (Zenaida
aisatica), Gambel’s quail (Callipepla gambelii), roadrunner (Gecoccyz californicus),
and Costa’s hummingbird (Calypte costae).



Mammals likely to be present in the study area include: coyote (Canis latrans), blacktailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus), desert cottontail (Sylvilagus auduboni), Harris
antelope squirrel (Ammospermophilus harrisii), and pocket mice (Perognathus spp.).

FINAL REPORT
4-1

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study



Reptiles likely to occupy the study area include: western diamond-backed rattlesnake
(Crotalus atrox), common side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), tiger whiptail
(Aspidoscelia tigris), and gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer).

4.1.3. Sensitive Species and Habitat
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) list of candidate, threatened, and endangered
species occurring in Maricopa and Pinal counties was reviewed to determine their potential
for occurrence within the study area. Table 3.1 identifies USFWS-listed species for
Maricopa and Pinal counties and provides a study area habitat assessment for each species.
Seventeen species were identified during the review; none of the species currently are known
to be present in the study area. No species habitat or critical habitat on the USFWS listing
occurs within the study area.
A list of sensitive species known to occupy the study
area was requested from the Arizona Game and
Fish Department (AZGFD) Natural Heritage
Program. In response to this request, AZGFD
identified only the western burrowing owl as
occurring in close proximity to the study area
(Figure 4-1). The western burrowing owl is one of
the many bird species that is protected by the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Western burrowing
owls inhabit open and sparsely vegetated desert
habitats. They nest in burrows associated with
mammals and prefer flat terrain that allows for
good visibility.

FIGURE 4-1 WESTERN BURROWING OWL

The Germann Road study area has suitable burrowing owl habitat, such as agricultural
lands (especially fallow agricultural lands that have not been recently farmed and, therefore,
provide foraging habitat). Nevertheless, as stated previously, the majority of the study
area’s native desert habitat has been converted to active agricultural and residential uses.
Converted lands are seldom occupied by sensitive species. Therefore, the potential risk of
impacting a sensitive species or species habitat within the study area is very low. A listing of
potential federal candidate, threatened, and endangered species, as well as Arizona species
of concern, may be referenced in Draft Working Paper No. 2, Environmental Overview.

4.2

NATURAL RESOURCES

Natural resources take many forms and are considered at various levels of attention and
concern. This section addresses issues, concerns, and potential impacts regarding water
resources, air quality, ambient noise environment, and the visual/aesthetic values of the
study area.
FINAL REPORT
4-2

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

4.2.1. Water Resources
Waters of the United States
Waters of the United States (WOUS) are protected under Section 404 of the Federal Clean
Water Act of 1972, as amended. WOUS fall under the jurisdiction of the United States
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Section 404 requires issuances of a permit for the
discharge of dredged or fill material into navigable waters.
The state of Arizona interprets its surface water quality standards to apply to ―intermittent,
non-navaigable tributaries.‖ The state also assigns water quality standard rules to
intermittent surface waters. The state regulates these hydrologic features as WOUS, because
it is estimated that approximately 95 percent of surface waters in Arizona are intermittent or
ephemeral. Generally, WOUS in Arizona includes: rivers/streams, dry washes/arroyos,
ponds/lakes, wetlands, and constructed canals/laterals fed by or conveying natural
drainage flows.
There is a potential dry wash within the study area and two drainage channels crossing the
project corridor (Figure 4-2). The potential dry wash shows up as a blue line on
topographic maps prepared by the U.S. Geologic Service (USGS). The main tributary is
located north of the Germann Road alignment in undeveloped land controlled by the ASLD.
It drains from a point east of Ironwood Road to the Diversion Dike at the Meridian Road
alignment. As dry washes/arroyos are considered WOUS under Arizona’s interpretation,
this drainage feature would be regulated under the jurisdiction of USACE in accordance
with the Clean Water Act, as amended. Therefore, a jurisdictional delineation will need to
be prepared for the potential dry wash as proposed improvements to Germann Road
proceed. A southern tributary south of the Germann Road alignment has been significantly
disrupted by residential development east of Ironwood Road and rerouted/displaced by a
major dairy operation in the southeast quadrant of the Meridian Road/Germann Road
intersection.
In addition, there are two man-made drainage features within the study area that may be
considered WOUS candidates: the drainage channel (an informal ditch and containment
berm) located on the east side of the Meridian Road alignment, and the Rittenhouse Road
Drain. Based on the interpretation established by Arizona, there is the potential that these
three water courses may be considered WOUS. Thus, additional, more detailed review of
these features will be necessary to determine whether they qualify as WOUS and what type
of Section 404 permit will be required, if any, based on the potential for project-related
impacts. Modifications to these water courses will likely be allowed even if they are
determined to be jurisdictional, but permitting may be needed. Therefore, project
development actions should involve early coordination with USACE to assess jurisdictional
status of these water courses prior to detailed design of transportation improvements for the
corridor.
FINAL REPORT
4-3

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 4-12 POTENTIAL DRY WASH IN STUDY AREA

Unique Waters
Arizona’s Outstanding Natural Resource Waters (ONRWs) are called ―Unique Waters.‖
Rules governing unique waters are outlined in the Arizona Administrative Code at section
R18-11-112. The director of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)
classifies surface waters as unique through a finding that the river or stream is an
―outstanding state resource water,‖ based on the application of specific criteria. Currently,
there are 18 unique waters identified within the state, none of which are located within or
proximate to the study area. The ADEQ has not identified any impaired or outstanding
Arizona waters within or adjacent to the project corridor.
Wetlands
For regulatory purposes under the Clean Water Act and Arizona regulations, wetlands refer
to areas inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation
typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. There are a few locations in the study
area that show evidence of wet conditions for extended periods of time and, thus, could
have potential to support some species of wetland vegetation. These locations include flat
areas associated with the Rittenhouse Road Drain and some roadside ditch sections that
appear to receive seepage from nearby irrigation ditches. A more detailed examination
and evaluation of these potential wetlands will be necessary through early coordination with
the ADEQ to determine the need for a Section 404 permit for any project-related impacts.
FINAL REPORT
4-4

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Water Quality
No specific identification of water quality issues associated with the study area was found in
a search of the ADEQ website. It is anticipated that runoff from improvements constructed in
the Germann Road corridor ultimately will discharge to FCDMC facilities and will be subject
to their regulations. Temporary measures to control discharges of sediment and other
pollutants will be required during construction. Permanent storm water pollution control
measures also likely will be required. The FCDMC regulations encourage the use of natural
processes in the treatment of storm water. Treatment is commonly accomplished in retention
basins, which also help to mitigate potential negative effects from increased storm water
runoff associated with the construction of impervious surfaces, associated with roadway
facilities.
4.2.2. Air Quality
The Clean Air Act of 1970 established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
for six pollutants. These pollutants, referred to as the ―Criteria Pollutants,‖ are: carbon
monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NOx), ozone (O3), particulate matter (PM), sulfur dioxide
(SOx), and lead (Pb). Details associated with these standards, as promulgated by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are presented Draft Working Paper No. 2,
Environmental Overview. The state of Arizona standards are identical to NAAQS. Motor
vehicle use is a key emissions source for the three pollutants. In the past, the Phoenix
metropolitan area was in violation of CO. Currently, the metro area is experiencing
violations of the O3 and PM standards.
Status of the Study Area
The Germann Road study area is located within three different, overlapping areas with air
quality regulatory requirements. The relationship of the study area to these requirements is
summarized below:


CO Maintenance Area —The CO maintenance area boundary encompasses 1,814
square miles (approximately 20 percent) of Maricopa County, including that portion
of the study area in Maricopa County. The portion of the study area in Pinal County
is not included in the official CO maintenance area. However, Arizona House Bill
2538 specifically defines an area outside Maricopa County within Pinal County
surrounding the town of Queen Creek that must create and enforce a CO
Maintenance Area, which requires certain actions to reduce CO emissions.



8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area —The 8-hour ozone nonattainment area covers
approximately 4,880 square miles of Maricopa County, including that portion of the
study area in Maricopa County. The official nonattainment area does not include the
Pinal County portion of the study area. However, Arizona House Bill 2538
specifically defines an area outside Maricopa County within Pinal County

FINAL REPORT
4-5

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

surrounding the town of Queen Creek that must create and enforce an ozone
maintenance area, which requires certain actions to reduce ozone emissions.


PM-10 Nonattainment Area —The PM-10 nonattainment area encompasses 2,916
square miles, a portion of the study area in Maricopa County and a six-mile square
of Pinal County concerning Apache Junction. The portion of the study area in Pinal
County does not fall under the boundary of the PM-10 nonattainment area.

Conformity
The Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) enacted in 1990 and published in the Federal
Register on November 30, 1993, defined conformity as meaning ―conformity to a SIP’s
[State Implementation Plans] purpose of eliminating or reducing the severity and number of
violations of the NAAQS.‖ Conformity determinations for federal actions related to
transportation projects must meet the requirements of 40 CFR Parts 51 and 93,
Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments to Implement Provisions Contained in the 2005
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users
(SAFETEA–LU).
Transportation control measures (TCMs) have been adopted as part of the SIPs and Federal
Implementation Plans (FIPs). The portion of the Germann Road study area in Maricopa
County is in air quality nonattainment areas for O3 and PM10. Therefore, any given
individual project will need to be included in an approved Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) for at least one year, and no more than three years, prior to construction.
That TIP will have to be approved by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and EPA
as conforming to the SIP and the FIP. Thus, future transportation improvements must follow,
to the extent possible, recommendations established in MAG’s Regional Transportation Plan
(RTP).
The MAG RTP indentifies Germann Road as a new/improved arterial between Ellsworth
Road and the Signal Butte Road alignment. Meridian Road, north of Germann Road, has
been similarly identified. To ensure improvements to Germann Road remain in conformance
with regional air quality goals, improvements extending from Power Road to Ironwood
Road, once defined by this study, must be considered for inclusion in the RTP and accounted
for in the Conformity Analysis.
The MAG RTP and the Conformity Analysis ensure additional roadways do not cause or
contribute to new violations of the air quality standards and assists in maintaining the
conformity of existing air quality improvement plans. Construction activities have a high
potential to result in deterioration of existing air quality on a temporary basis. Such impacts
will be localized. Dust generated by construction activities will be controlled in accordance
with Maricopa County Air Pollution Regulations (MCAQD Rule 310) and as stipulated in the
required Dust Control Permit.
FINAL REPORT
4-6

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

4.2.3. Noise
Existing Noise Receptors
Noise attributes of the study area are typical of an area in transition from rural agrarian
lifestyle to an urban lifestyle. There is very little regular traffic operating over the majority of
Germann Road at this time; therefore, traffic noise is not an issue. There are higher levels of
traffic present west of Sossaman Road, where intensive residential developments and
commercial activity is present. Traffic speeds are 45 mph and less. FHWA has established
Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) in 23 CFR § 772 for various categories of social
interaction. These criteria have been adopted as part of the ADOT Noise Abatement Policy,
effective July 23, 2011. The NAC specify an allowable hourly traffic noise level for the
different categories of land uses and activities. Additional detail regarding FHWA and
ADOT policies is available for review in Draft Working Paper No. 2, Environmental
Overview.
There are few particularly noise-sensitive receptors in the study area. Much of the land
within the study area falls under Activity Categories F and G, which include agricultural
land, industrial facilities, and undeveloped lands that are not permitted. Category B,
Residential, receptors are concentrated in three areas: between Power Road and Sossaman
Road south of Germann Road; between Hawes Road and Ellsworth Road north and south of
Germann Road; and, east of Ironwood Road south of Germann Road. There also are a few
scattered individual residences fronting Germann Road. Category C includes locations
requiring a certain degree of quiet for the reasonable conduct of activities, such as schools,
amphitheaters, and parks. There are two schools associated with the master-planned
residential communities at the western end of the study area. A church is located on the east
side of Sossaman Road, south of Rittenhouse Road.
Noise Impact Assessment
The principal noise issue in the study area is aircraft operations associated with
Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport, located one mile north of Germann Road. The latest
available interpretation of noise conditions associated with Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport
is presented in the Strategic Development Plan prepared by the city of Mesa in 2008. The
Preferred Concept: Study Area Land Uses map indicates the 60 decibel (dBA) noise contour
intersects Germann Road between Ellsworth and Signal Butte roads. The town of Queen
Creek General Plan depicts the 60 dBA noise contour extending south beyond Ocotillo
Road. The 65 dBA noise also cross Germann Road, extending to a point between Queen
Creek and Ocotillo roads. Refer to the Draft Working Paper No. 2, Environmental Overview
for graphic representations of airport-related noise contours as defined by these two sources.

FINAL REPORT
4-7

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

4.2.4. Visual and Aesthetic Character
The viewshed of the Germann Corridor varies by location, but includes a mixture of areas of
undeveloped desert landscape, residential land use, agriculture, and transportation
infrastructure. Based on aerial photographs, the majority of the study area is devoted to
agricultural consisting of field crops and nursery products (e.g., shrubs and trees). A large
area in the eastern portion of the corridor remains in its natural state; however, it is
bordered to the west by two large industrial complexes. Modern disturbances, such as
high-voltage power lines, irrigation canals, drainage channels, intensive residential
development, and commercial and industrial facilities create a visual contrast with the
natural setting of mountains in the distance.

4.3

HAZARDOUS MATERIAL CONCERNS

A review of the various state and federal databases for hazardous materials was conducted
for the study area; a review of aerial photographs and a detailed search of these databases
were not performed. According to information available from the above named sources,
there are no currently known Superfund, Water Quality Assurance Revolving Fund
(WQARF), Underground Storage Tank (UST), Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST),
inactive landfill, septic haulers, or drywell sites present in the study area.
A search of the Arizona Targeted Site Investigation (TSIS) Program, Toxic Substance Control
Act (TSCA), ADEQ Hazardous Material Incident Logbook, and National Response Center
databases did reveal two TSCA facilities in the study area:


TRW Vehicle Safety System at 11202 East Germann Road; and



CMC Rebar Arizona at 11444 East Germann Road.

There have been reports of four releases at these sites in the past 20 years.
Germann Road is one mile south of the property boundary line of Phoenix-Mesa Gateway
Airport, which formerly was Williams Air Force Base. This facility is listed on the National
Priority List (NPL) as a federal Superfund site. Conditions at this site are being addressed by
the United States Air Force (USAF) through a Federal Facilities Agreement with the EPA,
ADEQ, and the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR).

4.4

CULTURAL RESOURCES

Several federal, state, and local laws have been enacted to preserve cultural resources.
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966
(16 U.S.C. § 470 et seq.) requires federal agencies to take into account the effects of
proposed undertakings on historic properties and afford the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings. The ―Section 106‖
process by which this Council review must occur is defined in 36 CFR § 800 16 (y),
Protection of Historic Properties. The National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) of 1969
FINAL REPORT
4-8

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

(40 CFR § 1500) requires projects involving a significant federal action to be evaluated for
impacts to the human and natural environment. Other acts, including the Archaeological
Resources Protection Act of 1979 (16 U.S.C. § 70aa-mm), the Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (25 U.S.C. § 3001-3013), the American Indian
Religious Freedom Act (42 U.S.C. § 1996 and 1996a), and Section 4(f) of the Department
of Transportation Act of 1966 (23 U.S.C. § 138) also ensure review and evaluation of
potential impacts on cultural resources relative to projects proposed on federal lands, funded
by federal monies, or requiring a federally-issued permit. Similarly, Arizona Revised
Statutes (ARS), Sections 41-841 through 41-847 and 41-861 through 41-881, require
protection of cultural resources and Native American graves during undertakings in Arizona
that do not fall under federal jurisdiction. The Arizona State Historic Preservation Act of
1982 directs state agencies to consider impacts that agency sponsored or funded projects
may have on historic properties owned or controlled by the agency.
Cultural resource considerations within the study area were identified from information
gathered from AZSite, Arizona’s electronic inventory of cultural resources maintained by the
Arizona State Museum (ASM) at the University of Arizona. Information also was gathered
from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in Phoenix, and the National Park
Service’s National Register Information System (NRIS) was used to determine if any
NRHP-listed properties are located in the study area. In addition, historic cadastral survey
maps available from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) were reviewed. A detailed
assessment of cultural resources is presented in Draft Working Paper No.2, Environmental
Overview. Findings associated with this review are discussed in the following subsections.
4.4.1. Archaeological and Prehistoric Sites
Surveys have been performed for a variety of projects, including development, road
construction, fiber optic, power, and gas lines, a cellular tower, a power substation, and an
irrigation canal. These studies have revealed three sites of interest within the Germann Road
corridor: two segments of the Southern Pacific Railroad (historic), and a large Hohokam
ballcourt village (prehistoric).
Southern Pacific Railroad Segments
The two railroad alignments passing through the western portion of the study area are both
segments of the former Southern Pacific Railroad (SPRR), which was acquired in 1996 by the
current operator of the line, the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR). The historic rail line includes
the Wellton to Phoenix to Eloy spur and the Mesa to Winkelman spur. Segments of both
railroad alignments have been determined eligible for the NRHP by SHPO under criterion A
(for association with a significant event).

FINAL REPORT
4-9

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Southwest Germann Site – Prehistoric Hohokam Ballcourt Village
A large Hohokam ballcourt village, referred to as the Southwest Germann Site, is a
prehistoric cultural resource considered eligible for listing on the NRHP under criterion D (for
potential to provide cultural information). This settlement area, shown in Figure 4-3, was
likely developed and used between the years A.D. 775 (the start of the Hohokam ―Pioneer
Period‖) and A.D. 1450 (end of the Hohokam ―Classic Period‖). The site has been
documented since the 1930s, by which time substantial disturbance had already occurred.
Numerous archaeological investigations since 2000 have confirmed that surface and
subsurface features still exist.
FIGURE 4-23
GENERAL LOCATION OF CULTURAL RESOURCE SITES

Source: Exhibit E, Scenic Areas, Historic Sites, and Archaeological Sites in Application for a Certificate of Environmental
Compatibility, SRP Abel-Moody 230kV Transmission Project, June 2009.

Complete studies relating to this site indicate several investigators have concluded the
Southwest Germann Site should be viewed not as one site, but as an archaeological district
that reflects a settlement system composed of closely related residential areas. This
archaeological site is not unique, as there are ballcourt villages and other Hohokam ruins
nearby and outside of the study area. Additional details regarding this site are included in
Appendix B of Draft Working Paper No. 2, Environmental Overview.
4.4.2. Historic Sites
Historical materials provide evidence of the presence of Queen Creek Road, one unnamed
road, and the Arizona Eastern Railroad (AZER) in Sections 25 and 26 in Township 2 South,
Range 7 East. The AZER operated lines in the late 1800s serving the mining districts. The
AZER still operates today, with active lines from Globe and Clifton south to the UPRR
FINAL REPORT
4-10

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

east-west Sunset Route. Nevertheless, these features are south of the study area and would
not be directly impacted by any improvements in the Germann Road Corridor. Additional
information regarding historic sites is included in Appendix B of Draft Working Paper No. 2,
Environmental Overview.

4.5

SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act (DOT Act) of 1966 directs federal
transportation agencies to avoid use of land from public park and recreation lands, wildlife
and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites (publicly or privately owned).
Federal
transportation funds cannot be approved for projects with such uses unless there is no
feasible and prudent alternative, and all possible planning must be done to minimize harm
to the resource. Section 4(f) restrictions apply to historic sites that are listed or eligible for
listing on the NRHP, if any funding or other approval by a USDOT agency is associated with
implementing Germann Road improvements. Accordingly, the restrictions would apply to
the historic railroad segments and the archaeological Southwest Germann Site discussed
previously in Section 2.6.1.
With regard to other potential Section 4(f) resources, land use plans for the town of Queen
Creek indicate a parcel of land owned by the town has been designated for
recreation/conservation/parks uses (refer to Figure 4-3). This parcel is located one-quarter
mile east of the Signal Butte Road alignment; its northern extent is approximately 700 feet
south of Germann Road.

FINAL REPORT
4-11

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

5.0 DRAINAGE SUMMARY
This section provides a summary of the existing drainage conditions in the study area and
specifically along the Germann Road corridor.

5.1

NATURAL DRAINAGE AND FLOODPLAINS

Natural drainage tendencies largely have been controlled with systems of channels, canals,
and ditches. There are no natural perennial water courses, wetlands, or bodies of water
present in the study area; all drainage events are seasonal in nature. Figure 5-1 shows the
existing drainage pattern along the project corridor. The figure shows the presence of a
100-year floodplain identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
along the east side of the Meridian Road alignment and just north of the study area.

5.2

EXISTING DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS

The majority of the existing Germann Road has a rural cross-section without curbs. In areas
where curbs have been constructed, drainage inlets or chases also have been constructed at
various intervals to remove storm water from the roadway. The inlets typically discharge
runoff to adjacent retention ponds through short segments of storm sewer. Chases typically
discharge either directly to retention ponds or to drainage channels that lead to retention
ponds. The more significant facilities are discussed in subsequent sections.
5.2.1. East Mesa Area Drainage Master Plan Update
The majority of the Germann Road corridor is located within the study area of the East Mesa
AMDP. The original East Mesa AMDP was completed by the FCDMC in 1998. Since that
time several of the recommended drainage features identified in the ADMP have been
constructed, and others are in development or construction stages (Figure 5-2). Significant
development also has occurred in the watershed since 1998. The FCDMC currently is
preparing the ADMP Update to reflect the existing condition and current land use planning
for the future condition in the designated plan area.
The first step associated with the AMDP Update was preparation of a Hydrologic Analysis
Report. The Hydrologic Analysis Report establishes for the Germann Road Corridor study
area the assumption that runoff from areas upstream (i.e., east) of Meridian Road and
adjacent to the south side of Germann Road will be conveyed west along the south side of
Germann Road to the Rittenhouse Road Drain, also referred to as the Rittenhouse Channel.
This assumption derives from the breech of a dike and channel along the east side of the
Meridian Road alignment in the early 1990s. Given the failure of this dike, it was concluded
the dike will breech in significant runoff events and, therefore, is not worthy of consideration
as a flood control facility.

FINAL REPORT
5-1

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 5-1 NATURAL DRAINAGE AND FLOODPLAINS

Source: Technical Memorandum No. 2, Conceptual Drainage Report, Germann Road Corridor Improvement Study, Power Road to
Ironwood Road, March, 2012.

FINAL REPORT
5-2

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 5-2 EXISTING GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS

Source: Technical Memorandum No. 2, Conceptual Drainage Report, Germann Road Corridor Improvement Study, Power Road to
Ironwood Road, March, 2012.

FINAL REPORT
5-3

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Preliminary alternatives developed in conjunction with the ADMP Update considered a future
regional drainage channel along the south side of Germann Road between Meridian Road
and the Rittenhouse Road Drain. However, the town of Queen Creek expressed the
preference to not include any major drainage channels in the corridor, and so other
conveyance schemes for this flow will be investigated as the study proceeds toward
recommendations.
5.2.2. Rittenhouse Road Drain
The Rittenhouse Road Drain (or Rittenhouse Channel), which intersects Germann Road just
east of Sossaman Road, is a facility developed and maintained by the FCDMC. Its primary
function is to mitigate capacity problems associated with the EMF west of the study area.
The EMF's design capacity of 8,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) was determined to be
inadequate for supporting the existing condition 100-year flows of 16,000 cfs for the
drainage area. In the study area, the Rittenhouse Road Drain consists of an earthen channel
that runs along Ryan Road from Crismon Road to the UPRR, where it turns to run parallel
with the railroad corridor to the EMF. It mitigates the capacity problem of the EMF by
providing a large, off-line detention basin and associated channel and structure
improvements and provides 100-year flood protection to the school. The channel also
reduced the floodplain on the north side of the railroad.
The Hydrologic Analysis Report prepared for the ADMP Update indicates existing channel
capacity is capable of conveying the 100-year existing condition discharge with some slight
freeboard deficiencies in the reach upstream of Germann Road. Freeboard in this case
pertains to the vertical distance between the calculated water surface elevation in the channel
at the design flow rate and the elevation that the channel banks would overflow.
Freeboard is required by agency criteria to provide a factor of safety. The Hydrologic
Analysis Report also indicates that future condition peak rates will be higher, and channel
containment issues are likely in the area upstream (i.e. east and south respectively) of the
Sossaman and Germann road crossings. The report further indicates that freeboard
deficiencies will be widespread along the channel in the future condition. It is anticipated
that the ADMP Update will result in development of a solution to mitigate expected freeboard
deficiencies. Potential solutions could include: modifications to the existing structures under
Sossaman and Germann roads and adjacent deficient channel sections; upstream diversion
of flows to other outfall; or additional detention or retention of runoff to reduce peak flow
rates in the channel.
5.2.3. Dike and Channel along Meridian Road Alignment
This earthen facility is located along the east side of the Meridian Road alignment as it
crosses the study area. There is some indication that this facility was constructed to protect

FINAL REPORT
5-4

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

downstream farmland. As noted previously, the dike was breeched in the 1990s. No other
definitive documentation of this facility was discovered.
5.2.4. Drainage Inlets and Chases
The majority of the existing Germann Road has a rural cross-section without curbs. In areas
where curbs have been constructed, drainage inlets or chases also have been constructed at
various intervals to remove storm water from the roadway. The inlets typically discharge
runoff to adjacent retention ponds though short segments of storm sewer. Chases typically
discharge either directly to retention ponds or to drainage channels that lead to retention
ponds.

FINAL REPORT
5-5

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

6.0 UTILITIES SUMMARY
There are several types of physical, man-made features in the study area reflecting growth
and development actions. Since the early 19th Century, when the earliest homesteaders
started farming and ranching along Queen Creek Wash, developers and residents have
been creating roadways, building homes, establishing places of commerce, and constructing
utilities to support a growing population. Table 6-1 provides a summary of utility
stakeholders identified with facilities in the study area and the type of utility. This section
describes the most significant utility facilities that could influence the identification and
implementation of transportation improvements in the study area.
TABLE 6-1
UTILITIES CONTACTED
Utility/Agency
City of Mesa Gas
City of Mesa Water
Salt River Project (SRP)
Cox Communications
CenturyLink
ADOT Utility Coordinator

6.1

Service Provided
Natural Gas
Water
Water, Gas, Electric
Cable TV, Telephone, Internet
Telephone, Internet
Traffic Signal Operations

ELECTRIC

6.1.1. Underground Electrical Lines
Electric lines are underground west of Sossaman Road, having become the standard for
newer developments. Primary 12 kV underground electrical (UGE) lines run down the center
of Power Road and along the east side of the roadway ROW. Similar electrical service lines
also run along the north side of Germann Road from Power Road to 188th Street and along
the south side from Power Road to Sossaman Road. 12 kV UGE lines also have been
installed along both sides of Rittenhouse Road north and south of Germann Road. There are
small sections of 12 kV UGE lines east of Sossaman Road associated with newer commercial
and industrial developments and certain residential properties. A 69 kV UGE line extends
north to Pecos Road from the substation at the northeast corner of Germann Road and the
Signal Butte Road alignment.
6.1.2. Overhead Electrical Lines
Overhead electrical (OHE) lines are prominent at the intersection of Germann and Sossaman
roads. A 12 kV OHE line follows the west side of the UPRR corridor and former alignment
of Rittenhouse Road, crossing Sossaman Road and the Germann Road alignment. This utility
corridor once supported a 69 kV OHE line for its full length through the study area. With
realignment of Rittenhouse Road north of Germann Road, the 69 kV line was truncated
FINAL REPORT
6-1

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

approximately 0.7 miles north of Germann Road and 0.4 miles south of Germann Road.
Two other OHE lines in this area follow Sossaman Road: a 12 kV line runs north along the
west side of the roadway from the Germann Road/Sossaman Road intersection; a second
line runs along the east side of the roadway from a connection with the lines in the UPRR
corridor to a substation approximately one-half mile south.
A 12 kV OHE line runs the full length of existing Germann Road between Sossaman Road
and the Meridian Road alignment along the north side. Branching lines exist at the
following locations:


Hawes Road



Ellsworth Road



Crismon Road alignment



220th Street alignment (Queen Creek) – 0.5 miles west of Signal Butte Road alignment



226th Street alignment (Queen Creek) – 0.25 miles east of Signal Butte Road
alignment



Meridian Road alignment



Ironwood Road

In addition, there are numerous local (i.e., residential and commercial) service lines
extending from the Germann Road line and branching lines.
There are three other 69 kV lines in the eastern portion of the study area. A 69 kV OHE line
extends south from the substation to the line running along the north side of Germann Road.
A second 69 kV OHE line is located along the west side of the Meridian Road alignment,
extending south from a substation approximately 0.5 miles north of Germann Road to the
12 kV OHE line running along the north side of Germann Road. The third 69 kV OHE line
parallels the other 69 kV OHE line west of the Meridian Road alignment to the north side of
the Germann Road alignment, then turns east and continues out of the study area.
A 12 kV line also parallels the Meridian Road alignment from a substation just north of the
69 kV substation. This line connects with the 12 kV OHE line running along the north side of
Germann Road. The 12 kV line continues south following the Meridian Road alignment and
turns east along the south side of the Germann Road alignment, which shifts to the north
approximately 250 feet to Ironwood Road. A separate 12 kV OHE line on the west side of
Ironwood Road terminates at the Germann Road/Ironwood Road intersection, and there is a
second line on the east side of Ironwood Road between Germann Road and Pheasant Run
Road.

FINAL REPORT
6-2

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

6.2

NATURAL GAS

There are three natural gas providers serving the study area:
Southwest Gas.

SRP, city of Mesa, and

6.2.1. SRP
SRP gas lines run along the north and south side of Germann Road from the western edge of
the study area boundary (Autumn Drive) to Power Road. East of Power Road, there is only a
single 12‖ steel line on the south side of the street for 0.5 miles. A second 4‖ plastic gas line
sporadically joins and leaves the main line. The main gas line runs under Sossaman Road
and continues along the north side of Germann Road to Hawes Road, where a second line
begins on the south side of the street. The secondary line continues to Ellsworth Road, while
the high pressure line continues 1.5 miles to 220th Street/Merrill Road.
6.2.2. City of Mesa
The city of Mesa has a high pressure gas main that runs from Signal Butte Road to the
Meridian Road alignment along the south side of the Germann Road. This line includes
intermittent crossings to serve facilities on the north side of the street.
A gas line is located in the middle of Power Road north of Germann Road. South of
Germann Road, the gas line shifts to the east side of Power Road.
6.2.3. Southwest Gas
There is a Southwest Gas (SWG) high-pressure gas line running along a sixty- foot offset to
the southwest of the UPRR in the same utility corridor used by SRP for its OHE electrical lines.
In this same area, there also is a SWG line located 60 feet east of the center of the ROW
between Germann Road and Sossaman Road.
There is a second SWG high-pressure gas line that parallels the eastern side of the UPRR
corridor and Rittenhouse Road Drain. As it crosses Sossaman Road, it follows the flood
control channel to the north side of Germann Road, following Germann Road for
approximately 0.25 miles before turning south and rejoining the path parallel to the UPRR
corridor and Rittenhouse Road Drain. A SWG substation is located at the southeast corner
of the intersection of Germann Road and 195th Street (in Queen Creek).

6.3

WATER

6.3.1. Town of Queen Creek
The town of Queen Creek has located a 12‖ water line under the outside travel lane of
Germann Road between Power and Rittenhouse roads. The water line follows Rittenhouse
Road to Sossaman Road, crossing perpendicular to the UPRR tracks to rejoin Germann
Road. The line drops down to an 8‖ diameter approximately 500 feet after crossing the

FINAL REPORT
6-3

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

UPRR tracks and continues along the southern side of Germann Road. One-half mile east of
Hawes Road, it drops in size again to a 6‖ pipe, terminating at Ellsworth Road.
There are several places where the Germann Road water line branches off to feed residential
and commercial developments. In all but one instance, the branches are a smaller size than
the main water line, (e.g., 12‖ to 8‖ or 8‖ to 6‖). The one exception is a branch that goes
north at a point 0.25 miles to the east of Power Road; this water line remains a 12‖ pipe.
There are 12‖ branches extending north on Power Road, north and south along Rittenhouse
Road, and south along Sossaman Road. Six-inch water lines run south along Hawes Road
and Ellsworth Road.
6.3.2. City of Mesa
Mesa has a 16‖ water line running along the Hawes Road alignment from a
20‖ transmission main between Pecos Road and Germann Road. The line turns west for
0.25 miles to serve a residence and public storage business on the north side of the
roadway. This transmission main also serves the commercial development on the south side
of Pecos Road 0.5 miles east of Sossaman Road. The city also has a 12‖ line that runs for
approximately 0.25 miles east of 88th Street (between Hawes and Ellsworth roads) under the
southern edge of the road. All distribution lines that connect to it are 8‖ pipes.
In addition, there are two city of Mesa well sites located along the Meridian Road alignment:
one at the northwest corner of its intersection with Germann Road and the other 0.5 miles
north on the west side of the Meridian Road alignment. These sites are connected with a
12‖ line owned by Mesa that starts several hundred feet west of Signal Butte Road and runs
along the north side of Germann Road to the Meridian Road alignment, where it turns north
expanding to 16‖ approaching Pecos Road.

6.4

SEWER

6.4.1. Town of Queen Creek
The town of Queen Creek has a temporary force main running along Power Road from
Queen Creek Road to Germann Road. The force main extends approximately 0.33 miles
along the north edge of Germann Road from Power Road. There are two other areas that
have sewers installed, but these lines are not yet connected into the larger system. This is
sewer service installed by developers in anticipation of future connection when the system is
extended to the development by the town. One area is a small system installed to serve the
public storage business and residence located along the north side of Germann Road
directly west of Hawes Road. The other installed but not connected sewer system is located
between the Signal Butte Road and Meridian Road alignments. In both cases, the sewer
runs underneath the existing roadway.

FINAL REPORT
6-4

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

6.4.2. City of Mesa
The city of Mesa has installed and maintains a sewer line along Pecos Road. This line serves
commercial developments with access to Pecos Road, including Pecos Sossaman Commerce
Center, Pecos Gateway, Gateway Airport Commerce Park, and Southgate Commerce Park.
The latter two developments front the north side of Germann Road 0.25 miles west of
Ellsworth Road. An extension of this sewer service is present under Germann Road for
0.125 miles east of Atwood Road.
6.4.3. Town of Gilbert
The town of Gilbert has a sewer main running south under Power Road to Germann Road,
where it turns west, exiting the study area.

6.5

FIBER OPTICS

ATT, MCI, Will Tell, and CenturyLink all have fiber-optic cables running along the UPRR
corridor with a ninety-foot offset to the southwest. L3 Communications has a line that
appears to cross the railroad tracks just south of the Germann Road alignment. There also is
a fiber-optic conduit owned by the city for traffic signal connections located 3 feet north of
the northern edge of pavement at the Germann Road/Sossaman Road intersection.

6.6

TELEPHONE

CenturyLink has telephone lines running along both sides of Germann Road for its entire
length.

FINAL REPORT
6-5

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

7.0 COMMITTED, PROGRAMMED, AND PLANNED
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS
Prior to developing concepts for future transportation improvements in the Germann Road
corridor, adopted plans must be reviewed and other research conducted to identify
committed and planned roadway and transit improvements. Committed improvement
projects are those identified in a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) or the State
Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP).
These projects have been approved for
implementation and a funding source(s) has been identified. Only projects in the current
fiscal year (FY) are considered committed, because funding has been allocated for
implementation. Programmed improvements constitute projects identified for implementation
during the remaining years of the CIP or STIP, normally four years.
Planned improvement projects are those incorporated in mid- to long-term plans (10 to
20 years and beyond) adopted by various jurisdictions with the authority to identify and
develop transportation projects in the study area. Planned projects are likely to be initiated;
however, because funding commitments have not been established, these projects may not
occur or could be implemented in an altered form, depending on timing and availability of
funding. Still, they are relevant to the future conditions of the Germann Road corridor, as
they reflect current thinking about projects that should be implemented to respond to both
existing and future transportation needs.
The following sections summarize the results of this review/research of adopted planning
documents of the town of Queen Creek, Maricopa County, Pinal County, ADOT, city of
Mesa, and town of Gilbert.

7.1

COMMITTED AND PROGRAMMED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS

Germann Road – Ironwood Road to Meridian Road: This is a new construction project to
create a two-lane roadway, which has been designated a Regionally Significant Route
(RSR). The Pinal County FY 2009-2013 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) included
funding of $1.15 million toward this project, but the project was delayed. The Pinal County
Five-Year Transportation Improvement & Maintenance Program (FY 2011-2016) identifies a
commitment of $250,000 for right of way acquisition and utility relocation in FY 20112012. However, this facility is an integral element of this study supported by FY 2010-2011
funding of $150,000. It is assumed that the $250,000 will be moved forward with
completion of this study to facilitate right of way acquisition and utility relocation.
Construction of the facility is programmed for FY 2013-2014 with county funding of
$350,000 and non-county funding sources providing $1 million.
Power Road – Loop 202(Santan Freeway) to Pecos Road: This project represents Phase III of
the Power Road improvement action and includes widening the facility from four to six lanes

FINAL REPORT
7-1

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

with raised median, street lighting, landscaping, bike lanes, curb and gutter. FY 2011-2012
funding of $5.2 million by the city of Mesa and $4.5 million by Maricopa County is
supporting ROW acquisition, design, and various construction actions. This principal
arterial will have dual left-turn lanes at arterial intersections and exclusive right-turn lanes at
selected intersections where traffic volumes warrant such an improvement. It is being
implemented in partnership with the town of Gilbert and Maricopa County and is eligible for
reimbursement through MAG (refer to Section 7.2.4, MAG Arterial Life Cycle Program).
Power Road/Pecos Road UPRR Crossing: The town of Gilbert has expended $7.465 million
thus far on improving this intersection directly north of the Germann Road corridor study
area. The town has scheduled an additional $50,000 in its 2011-2016 CIP to complete
construction actions association with this improvement. The crossing is programmed for
$3 million of operating funding annually.
188th Street at Germann Road: The town of Queen Creek CIP includes $383,500 in funding
for intersection improvements at this location for FY 2011-2012.
Operations and
maintenance funding also has been provided to support intersection improvements at this
location in the CIP. Funding at the level of $5,202 is scheduled for FY 2011-2012.
State Route 24 (Gateway Freeway): ADOT is working with the FHWA to develop a
high-capacity, east-west, access-controlled transportation facility to serve projected Buildout
of eastern Maricopa County and northern Pinal County (Figure 7-1). Initial design plans for
the segment of SR 24 (formerly SR 802) between Loop 202/Santan Freeway and Ellsworth
Road are being prepared for this new freeway, which runs north of the Phoenix-Mesa
Gateway Airport; construction is scheduled for 2016. Alternatives to the east have been
considered to complete the link with US 60 or SR 79 in the vicinity of Florence Junction. The
study, design, and eventual construction of this facility are included in the MAG RTP for
Maricopa County and funded through the voter-approved half-cent sales tax. Full
implementation of this transportation improvement is anticipated in the period 2016-2020.
The portion of SR 24 proposed to continue east into Pinal County has been suspended,
awaiting advancement by ADOT of the North-South Corridor Study.

7.2

PLANNED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS

7.2.1. Maricopa County Plans
Maricopa County owns and maintains Germann Road between Sossaman Road and the
Meridian Road alignment, which is the boundary with Pinal County. The County also owns
and maintains Power Road within the study area as well as other roads that have not been
turned over to municipal jurisdictions.

FINAL REPORT
7-2

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 7-1 RECOMMENDED ALIGNMENT OF SR 24 (FORMERLY SR 802): LOOP 202 TO
IRONWOOD ROAD

NOTE: The initial phase of State Route 24
(previously SR 802) will be a one-mile
stretch beginning at Loop 202 (Santan
Freeway) near the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway
Airport and ending at Ellsworth Road. The
image below shows the potential alignment
for SR 24 (SR 802) relative to the Germann
Road Corridor study area, and is provided
for reference only. Additional phases of this
project and final alignment of this facility
have been suspended by ADOT until the
North-South Corridor Study in Pinal County
advances.

Source: State Route 24 (Gateway
Freeway) Project Overview at
www.valleyfreeways.com, July
2013.

Potential transportation improvements previously identified in the County include:
Queen Creek Road/Germann Road Connector: Queen Creek Road will be extended from
Ellsworth Road along the north side of the UPRR/Rittenhouse Road Drain corridor,
connecting with Germann Road between Sossaman and Hawes roads.
Hawes Road: Hawes Road, which will tie into Pecos Road one-half mile north of Germann
Road (established prior to 2020), is planned to be widened from two to four lanes.
Crismon Road, North of Germann Road: This new roadway construction calls for widening
of a four-lane roadway (established prior to 2020) to six lanes.
Crismon Road, South of Germann Road: This improvement would involve widening Crismon
Road south of Germann Road (established prior to 2020) from two to six lanes.
Signal Butte Road: This improvement project is a planned widening of Signal Butte Road
south of Germann Road (established prior to 2020) from two to six lanes.
FINAL REPORT
7-3

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Meridian Road: This new roadway construction calls for widening of a four-lane roadway
(established prior to 2020) to six lanes.
In addition to the six roadway improvements cited above, improvements to Power Road from
the Germann Road Corridor study area north to the Loop 202 (Santan Freeway) represents
a major enhancement of regional mobility.
Power Road – Loop 202 (Santan Freeway) to Pecos Road (underway): The Maricopa
County TIP for FY 2011-2015 includes this project that could influence travel in the study
area. ―This project is Phase III of the Power Road Corridor and will improve Power Road to
a six-lane urban principal arterial with raised medians, bike lanes, curb and gutter,
driveways, landscape and street lighting. The city of Mesa has completed the alignment
study and is beginning the design phase. Mesa will be the lead for right-of-way acquisition.
The town of Gilbert will be the lead agency for utilities and construction.‖6 Funding of
$4.5 million for ROW acquisition has been programmed for FY 2013 - 2014. The project is
included in the current MAG RTP for Maricopa County (refer to MAG Arterial Life Cycle
Program -section 7.2.4).
7.2.2. Pinal County Plans
Previous capital improvement projects adopted by Pinal County have included improvements
yet to be implemented.
Germann Road – Ironwood Road to Meridian Road: This construction project has been
initiated to create a two-lane roadway, which has been designated a RSR. Funding of
$250,000 was identified for FY 2011-2012 to move forward with ROW acquisition and
utility relocations. An additional $1.35 million was programmed in FY 2013-2014 for
construction. Recent information from Pinal County indicates that the roadway is still in the
design phase, and anticipated date of construction is not known at this time.
Pima Road (Queen Creek Road) – Meridian Road to Ironwood Road: This is a new
construction project to create a two-lane roadway. A funding level of $850,000 was
identified for 2010; however, this facility has yet to be constructed.
7.2.3. ADOT Plans
The 2011 - 2015 Five-Year Transportation Facilities Construction Program published by
ADOT contains no projects within the study area. However, there are two projects just
outside the study area that would influence travel demand and traffic levels within the study
area.
State Route 24 (Gateway Freeway): As noted previously, designs are being prepared for
the portion of this facility between Loop 202 (Santan Freeway) and Ellsworth Road with
6

Project Listings FY 2011-2015, Transportation Improvement Program, Fiscal Year 2011-2015, Maricopa County Department of Transportation, Approved by
the Board of Supervisors, June 21, 2010.

FINAL REPORT
7-4

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

anticipated construction in 2016. The recommended alignment (refer to Figure 7-2) includes
extension to Meridian Road in Maricopa County. As shown in Figure 7-2, funding has not
been obtained for the segment between Meridian Road and Ironwood Road in Pinal County
and the portion of SR 24 proposed to continue east into Pinal County has been suspended
until advancement by ADOT of the North-South Corridor Regional Study.
FIGURE 7-2 CONSTRUCTION TIMELINE: SR 24 (FORMERLY SR 802) – LOOP 202 TO
IRONWOOD ROAD

Source: SR 802 Loop 202 to Ironwood Road Design Concept Report & Environmental Study, Public Hearing, November 9,
2010, Arizona Department of Transportation at http://www.azdot.gov/Highways/Valley_Freeways/SR24/pdf/2010-1109SR802Nov.pdf.

North-South Corridor Regional Study (Ongoing): This study is directed toward evaluating a
range of possible route alternatives. The study also involves evaluation of a no build option
that would result in no improvements at the scale of a freeway corridor. An initial
900-sqaure-mile study area has been refined to 300 square miles, and the study area has
been divided into multiple segments for detailed analysis and evaluation. Figure 7-3 shows
the portion of the study area and study segments nearest the Germann Road corridor study
area. Potentially an alignment for this north-south, high-capacity facility linking I-10 to the
south with US 60 to the north could be located within a few miles of the study area.
Depending on the final location and linkages to the study area, this project could influence
traffic levels in the Germann Road corridor study area.
FINAL REPORT
7-5

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 7-3 RELATION OF NORTH-SOUTH CORRIDOR ROUTE SEGMENTS TO STUDY AREA

7.2.4. MAG Arterial Life Cycle Program
The MAG Arterial Street Life Cycle Program (ALCP) implements arterial street projects
identified in the MAG RTP and represents current thinking for the region. Funding to widen
existing streets, improve intersections, and construct new arterial segments is derived from
federal, state, and regional sources. The current ALCP for FY 2012 provides project
information spanning a 20-year period or life cycle and identifies location, level of regional
funding, year of work, type of work, status of project, and the lead agency.7 As a result of
the national and global economic downturn that began in 2007, the ALCP experienced a
deficit of program funds.
In response to the economic recession and to maintain the fiscal balance of the program, the
MAG Transportation Policy Committee (TPC) in February, 2011, recommended a
proportional reduction of remaining reimbursements based on each agency’s original
allocation of regional funds. ―Due to the deficit and the extent of the reprogramming effort,
Lead Agencies were provided the opportunity to delete, consolidate, and/or reprioritize
programmed reimbursements as well as increase/decrease the regional budgets based on

7

FY 2012 Arterial Life Cycle Program, Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG), September 21, 2011.

FINAL REPORT
7-6

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

local priorities.‖8 Table 7-1 summarizes the projects anticipated for the Germann Road
Corridor study area contained in the MAG ALCP.
TABLE 7-1
PROGRAMMED AND PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS: MAG ARTERIAL LIFE CYCLE PROGRAM

7.2.5. Town of Queen Creek Plans
188th Street at Germann Road: The town of Queen Creek has funded operations and
maintenance in the CIP to support intersection improvements at this location. Funding at the
level of $5,306 is scheduled for FY 2011-2012, increasing to $5,521 in FY 2014-2015.
7.2.6. Town of Gilbert Plans
Power Road – Loop 202 (Santan Freeway) to Pecos Road (underway): The town of Gilbert is
contributing to the widening of Power Road from four to six lanes between Pecos Road,
directly north of the study area, to Loop 202 (Santan Freeway). This project is part of the
2011-2015 MAG RTP and the town has scheduled expenditures totaling $4.1 million for
FY 2012-2013. The town has identified funding of $190,000 in operating expenses for
Power Road in its 2011-2016 CIP for FY 2014-2015 and FY 2015-2016.

8

Ibid.

FINAL REPORT
7-7

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Power Road/Pecos Road UPRR Crossing: This crossing is programmed in the town’s
2011-2016 CIP for $3 million of operating funding in FY 2012-2013 through
FY 2015-2016.
7.2.7. City of Mesa Plans
Power Road-Loop 202 (Santan Freeway) Regional Park-and-Ride: The city of Mesa is
planning to construct a regional P&R in the vicinity of Power Road and Loop 202 (Santan
Freeway). Total cost of the project is $1.8 million, which includes FY 2009 5309-FGM
(Fixed Guideway Modernization) funds.
Power Road – Loop 202 (Santan Freeway) to Pecos Road (underway): The city of Mesa is
contributing to the widening of Power Road from four to six lanes between Pecos Road,
directly north of the study area, to Loop 202 (Santan Freeway). This project is part of the
2011-2015 MAG RTP and the city has scheduled expenditures totaling $5.2 for
FY 2012-2013 through FY 2013-2014.

7.3

PLANNED PUBLIC TRANSIT SERVICE

The Queen Creek Small Area Transportation Study (SATS) published May, 2007, introduced
concepts for transit service. Consideration has been given to local circulator service;
however, a potential or probable route for this service was not defined. Express bus service
between Queen Creek and Tempe was initiated in 2007; however, this route has been
discontinued. The MAG High Capacity Transit Study and Commuter Rail Strategic Plan have
concluded that a commuter rail line along the UPRR Southeast line of the Phoenix
Subdivision with service to Queen Creek and Pinal County would be a feasible enterprise.
The commuter rail station likely would be located in downtown Queen Creek, which is
associated with the intersection of Ellsworth and Ocotillo roads two miles south of the
Germann Road corridor.
Transit Concepts presented in The Mesa Gateway Strategic Development Plan (December,
2008) include ―…transit connections from external locations as well as an internal
circulation component to provide direct access between major activity centers within the
area.‖ The concept plan identifies local transit routes serving Pecos Road at the northern
edge of the Germann Road corridor study area with intersecting north-south routes on
Power, Sossaman, Ellsworth, and Signal Butte roads. All routes, except the Power Road
route, are shown passing through the study area. The Mesa plan anticipates high-capacity
regional transit service on Power and Ellsworth roads, also passing through the study area.
In addition, the Transit Concepts map shows commuter rail service on the UPRR line,
although a station is not identified.

FINAL REPORT
7-8

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

7.4

BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES

The Queen Creek Parks, Trails and Open Space Master Plan includes a trails and paths plan
map. The portion relevant to the Germann Road corridor study area has been extracted
and included as Figure 7-4. The plan identifies four different types of facilities within the
study area:


Paved path, shared use, (10-12 feet wide);



Town unpaved trail, shared use, (12 feet wide);



Wide, unpaved shoulder, shared use, (4 feet wide); and



Neighborhood unpaved trail, shared use, (8 feet wide).

There are no trails or paths proposed within the study area by the town of Gilbert, city of
Mesa, or Pinal County. The availability and development of future facilities such as these
will be guided by roadway design guidelines.

FIGURE 7-4 QUEEN CREEK TRAILS AND PATHS PLAN
Enhanced Multi-Use
At-Grade Crossings

FINAL REPORT
7-9

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

7.5

BASE FUTURE TRAVEL CONDITIONS

Base future travel conditions represent travel facilities, connections, and opportunities
potentially available in the future based on the combination of existing roadways defined by
the committed, programmed, and planned projects discussed in the previous section.
7.5.1. Travel Demand Analysis Methodology
To better define future ROW requirements to accommodate geometric needs at key
intersections and the proposed grade separation of Sossaman Road at the UPRR track, it is
necessary to understand anticipated travel demand in the corridor. Several travel demand
forecasts have been developed that include the Germann Road corridor and are available
for review, including:


Year 2035 forecasts adopted by MAG for the RTP;



Year 2035 forecasts derived from a sketch model prepared in conjunction with the
Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Eastside Transportation Study; and



Year 2020 forecasts documented in the Southeast Mesa Queen Creek Area Traffic
Study.

Figure 7-5 provides a comparison of forecast traffic volumes derived from each of these
three models for various segments of the corridor. It is clear from the graph that there is
considerable variation among the forecasts.
Model results were presented to the TAG earlier in the project process, at which point it was
agreed that the most appropriate forecasting tool was the travel demand model currently
being utilized in conjunction with the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Eastside Transportation Study.
This model was acquired by the Germann Road CIS project team and modified to better
reflect the proposed roadway network within the project study area.
7.5.2. Proposed Base Future Roadway Network
Sections 7.1 and 7.2 presented various committed and planned roadway improvements
within and influential to the project study area. In order to best reflect anticipated effects of
these expected improvements on the study area roadway network, the travel demand model
was modified to include each of the anticipated changes to the base roadway network
identified in these sections.
In addition to improvements discussed previously,
recommendations from the Signal Butte CIS also were incorporated in the project travel
demand model.

FINAL REPORT
7-10

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 7-5 COMPARISON OF AVAILABLE SOURCES FOR CORRIDOR FORECAST TRAVEL
DEMAND
70000

Forecast Daily Traffic Volume

60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
Power to
Sossaman

Sossaman to
Hawes

Hawes to
Ellsworth

Ellsworth to
Crismon

Crismon to Signal Butte to
Signal Butte
Meridian

Roadway Segment
2035 MAG RTP
2020 SE Mesa Queen Creek Area Traffic Study

2035 Gateway Eastside Transportation Study

7.5.3. Analysis of Base Future Conditions at Buildout
Future improvements resulted in a shift in travel patterns in the eastern portion of the study
area associated with realignment of Signal Butte and Meridian roads. Forecasted daily
traffic volumes were compared to roadway segment capacities to determine anticipated
long-range performance of the roadway network (Table 7-2). Potential impacts on future
base roadway network level of service (LOS) for the buildout condition are depicted in
Figure 7-6. This analysis confirms the need for the six-lane arterial cross section on
Germann Road to support anticipated future travel demands.

FINAL REPORT
7-11

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

TABLE 7-2
SUMMARY OF FORECAST DAILY TRAVEL DEMAND AND NETWORK PERFORMANCE UNDER BUILDOUT
CONDITIONS
Street

From (West/North)

To (East/South)

Germann
Germann
Germann
Germann
Germann
Germann
Germann
Germann
Germann
Power
Power
Power
Power
Sossman
Sossman
Sossman
Sossman
Ellsworth
Ellsworth
Ellsworth
Crismon
Crismon
Crismon
Signal Butte
Signal Butte
Signal Butte
Meridian
Meridian
Meridian
Rittenhouse
Rittenhouse
Rittenhouse
QC Parkway
80th Street

West
Power
Rittenhouse
Sossman
Queen Creek Parkway
Ellsworth
Crismon
Signal Butte
Meridian
North
Pecos
Rittenhouse
Germann
North
Pecos
Germann
Rittenhouse
North
Pecos
Germann
North
Pecos
Germann
North
Pecos
Germann
North
Pecos
Germann
North
Germann
Sossman
Germann
Germann

Power
Rittenhouse
Sossman
Queen Creek Parkway
Ellsworth
Crismon
Signal Butte
Meridian
East
Pecos
Rittenhouse
Germann
South
Pecos
Germann
Rittenhouse
South
Pecos
Germann
South
Pecos
Germann
South
Pecos
Germann
South
Pecos
Germann
South
Germann
Sossman
East
Ellsworth
Pecos

Volume Lanes
68,000
57,000
47,000
50,000
43,000
46,000
36,000
31,000
28,000
44,000
53,000
37,000
44,000
31,000
39,000
35,000
32,000
54,000
55,000
53,000
34,000
25,000
26,000
57,000
41,000
48,000
58,000
40,000
32,000
27,000
31,000
41,000
11,000
27,000

6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
4
6
6
6
6
6
6
4
4
4
6
6
6
6
6
6
4
4
4
4
4

Lane
V/C
Relation to
Capacity
Capacity
Ratio
Capacity
7,800
46,800 1.45 Over Capacity
7,800
46,800 1.22 Over Capacity
7,800
46,800 1.00 Over Capacity
7,800
46,800 1.07 Over Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.92
At Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.98
At Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.77 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.66 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.60 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.94
At Capacity
7,800
46,800 1.13 Over Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.79 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.94
At Capacity
7,800
31,200 0.99
At Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.83 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.75 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.68 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 1.15 Over Capacity
7,800
46,800 1.18 Over Capacity
7,800
46,800 1.13 Over Capacity
7,800
31,200 1.09 Over Capacity
7,800
31,200 0.80 Under Capacity
7,800
31,200 0.83 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 1.22 Over Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.88
At Capacity
7,800
46,800 1.03 Over Capacity
7,800
46,800 1.24 Over Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.85
At Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.68 Under Capacity
7,800
31,200 0.87
At Capacity
7,800
31,200 0.99
At Capacity
7,800
31,200 1.31 Over Capacity
7,800
31,200 0.35 Under Capacity
7,800
31,200 0.87
At Capacity

LOS
F
F
F
F
E
E
D
C
B
E
F
D
E
E
D
D
C
F
F
F
F
D
D
F
E
F
F
E
C
E
E
F
A
E

Prepared by Wilson & Company, June 2013.

i ndi ca tes s egments wi th LOS E
i ndi ca tes s egments wi th LOS F

FINAL REPORT
7-12

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 7-6 FUTURE BASE ROADWAY NETWORK DEFICIENCIES UNDER BUILDOUT CONDITIONS

Indicates segments operating over capacity (LOS F)
Indicates segments operating at capacity (LOS E)

FINAL REPORT
7-13

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

As illustrated in Figure 7-6, forecast travel demand on the majority of the Germann Road
corridor and arterial crossing facilities within the study area is anticipated to approach or
exceed available capacity, particularly in the western portion of the study area. Preliminary
analysis of corresponding peak hour traffic volumes, documented in Appendix B, confirms
this finding, indicating that expansion of the footprint of major intersections to include dual
left-turn lanes and a right-turn lane on all approaches may provide sufficient capacity in the
eastern portion of the corridor, but intersections west of Crismon Road may still operate with
unacceptable delays during peak travel periods.
7.5.4. Analysis of Base Future Conditions – Year 2020
An analysis of Year 2020 traffic conditions was conducted to identify potential deficiencies
in the near-term. Forecasted daily traffic volumes from the Southeast Mesa Queen Creek
Area Traffic Study were compared to roadway segment capacities to determine anticipated
performance of the Year 2020 roadway network. The results are summarized in Table 7-3.
Figure 7-7 illustrates those facilities expected to be operating at LOS E and F.

FINAL REPORT
7-14

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

TABLE 7-3
SUMMARY OF FORECAST DAILY TRAVEL DEMAND AND NETWORK PERFORMANCE: YEAR 2020

Street

From (West/North)

To (East/South)

Germann
Germann
Germann
Germann
Germann
Germann
Germann
Germann
Germann
Power
Power
Power
Power
Sossman
Sossman
Sossman
Sossman
Ellsworth
Ellsworth
Ellsworth
Crismon
Crismon
Crismon
Signal Butte
Signal Butte
Signal Butte
Meridian
Meridian
Meridian
Rittenhouse
Rittenhouse
Rittenhouse
QC Parkway
80th Street

West
Power
Rittenhouse
Sossman
Queen Creek Parkway
Ellsworth
Crismon
Signal Butte
Meridian
North
Pecos
Rittenhouse
Germann
North
Pecos
Germann
Rittenhouse
North
Pecos
Germann
North
Pecos
Germann
North
Pecos
Germann
North
Pecos
Germann
North
Germann
Sossman
Germann
Germann

Power
Rittenhouse
Sossman
Queen Creek Parkway
Ellsworth
Crismon
Signal Butte
Meridian
East
Pecos
Rittenhouse
Germann
South
Pecos
Germann
Rittenhouse
South
Pecos
Germann
South
Pecos
Germann
South
Pecos
Germann
South
Pecos
Germann
South
Germann
Sossman
East
Ellsworth
Pecos

Volume Lanes
49,800
44,300
44,800
44,800
30,700
40,100
34,600
6,100
0
48,900
49,100
15,900
32,100
21,500
29,500
29,500
20,900
46,400
49,500
31,900
0
9,100
9,100
30,800
2,300
49,800
7,700
13,400
8,800
33,900
34,800
36,400
32,100
17,600

6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
4
6
6
6
6
6
6
4
4
4
6
6
6
6
6
6
4
4
4
4
4

Lane
V/C
Relation to
Capacity
Capacity
Ratio
Capacity
7,800
46,800 1.06 Over Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.95
At Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.96
At Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.96
At Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.66 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.86
At Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.74 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.13 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.00 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 1.04 Over Capacity
7,800
46,800 1.05 Over Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.34 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.69 Under Capacity
7,800
31,200 0.69 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.63 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.63 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.45 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.99
At Capacity
7,800
46,800 1.06 Over Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.68 Under Capacity
7,800
31,200 0.00 Under Capacity
7,800
31,200 0.29 Under Capacity
7,800
31,200 0.29 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.66 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.05 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 1.06 Over Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.16 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.29 Under Capacity
7,800
46,800 0.19 Under Capacity
7,800
31,200 1.09 Over Capacity
7,800
31,200 1.12 Over Capacity
7,800
31,200 1.17 Over Capacity
7,800
31,200 1.03 Over Capacity
7,800
31,200 0.56 Under Capacity

LOS
F
E
E
E
C
E
D
A
A
F
F
A
C
C
C
C
A
E
F
C
A
A
A
C
A
F
A
A
A
F
F
F
F
B

Prepared by Wilson & Company, June 2013.

i ndi ca tes s egments wi th LOS F
i ndi ca tes s egments wi th LOS E

FINAL REPORT
7-15

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 7-7 FUTURE BASE ROADWAY NETWORK DEFICIENCIES UNDER YEAR 2020 CONDITIONS

Indicates segments operating over capacity (LOS F)
Indicates segments operating at capacity (LOS E)

FINAL REPORT
7-16

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

8.0 ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION
The development and assessment of alternative corridor improvement strategies was
conducted through a tiered evaluation process. The initial evaluation of potential
improvement scenarios for the Germann Road corridor involved an assessment of future
connectivity options for both Germann Road and Sossaman Road to assure that the
connectivity associated with any potential grade separation met long-term regional travel
objectives of the town of Queen Creek and city of Mesa. Conceptual design solutions were
then developed for the corridor, including the potential grade separation of the UPRR and
the Germann Road alignment at Meridian Road.

8.1

GERMANN ROAD ALIGNMENT

The Germann Road alignment is established and has been established for a number of
years. Therefore, alternatives for the main line were not investigated in great detail.
Generally, the recommended roadway design follows the existing alignment, as shown in
Figure 8-1. There are certain locations where the alignment shifts north or south to minimize
impacts to existing structures or utilities.
Figure 8-2 shows the typical cross-section for a town of Queen Creek six-lane principal
arterial roadway. This cross-section was selected by the TAG for use in developing the
conceptual layout of Germann Road. Detailed conceptual engineering design drawings are
presented in Appendix A.

8.2

CONNECTIVITY ANALYSIS

The analysis of regional connectivity for the Germann Road corridor recognized that forecast
traffic volumes (as discussed in Section 7.5) will greatly influence geometric requirements for
any proposed grade-separated crossing at the UPRR. The issue was not simply grade
separation of Germann Road at the UPRR track, but maintaining connectivity with Sossaman
Road. The question of connectivity between Sossaman and Germann roads required a more
complex solution. Therefore, five distinct connectivity scenarios were defined to resolve this
overarching issue.
8.2.1. Network Connectivity Option 1: Grade Separation of Sossaman Road and
Germann Road
Option 1 was a geometric design intended to accommodate through travel on both
Germann Road and Sossaman Road commensurate with the forecast level of demand on
both facilities. Figure 8-3 illustrates a conceptual solution that would provide the desired
connectivity. This option calls for grade separation of both roadways at the UPRR track,
resulting in two bridges spanning the UPRR ROW and the Rittenhouse Road Drain.

FINAL REPORT
8-1

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 8-1 RECOMMENDED ALIGNMENT OF GERMANN ROAD: POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD

FINAL REPORT
8-2

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 8-2 RECOMMENDED CROSS-SECTION FOR GERMANN ROAD

FINAL REPORT
8-3

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 8-3 NETWORK CONNECTIVITY OPTION 1

8.2.2. Network Connectivity Option 2: Grade Separation of Sossaman Road Only
with Germann Road T-Intersection at Sossaman Road
Option 2 was a geometric design intended to accommodate through travel on Sossaman
Road with a new grade separation at the UPRR track on Sossaman Road only (Figure 8-4).
Through travel on Germann Road would not be accommodated – however, option 2
essentially maintains the current at-grade connectivity north of the Sossaman Road bridge
crossing of the UPRR. This option would require only a single bridge for the Sossaman Road
grade separation. However, the alternative fails to address a primary goal of the Germann
Road CIS to identify options that provide east-west connectivity across the UPRR.
8.2.3. Network Connectivity Option 3: Grade Separation of Germann Road Only
with Sossaman Road T-Intersection at Germann Road
This option would consist of geometric alternatives to accommodate through travel on
Germann Road with a grade separation at the UPRR track. However, there would be no
through travel on Sossaman Road. Figure 8-5 illustrates a sample option that would provide
this connectivity. As depicted in the figure, a single bridge would be required.

FINAL REPORT
8-4

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 8-4 NETWORK CONNECTIVITY OPTION 2

FIGURE 8-5 NETWORK CONNECTIVITY OPTION 3

FINAL REPORT
8-5

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

8.2.4. Network Connectivity Option 4: Grade Separation of Sossaman Road with
Germann Road T-Intersection at Pecos Road
This option would consist of geometric alternatives to realign Germann Road north making a
connection directly to Pecos Road (Figure 8-6). It is anticipated that such an alignment
would provide east-west connectivity, while decreasing travel demand on Germann Road
between Power and Sossaman roads where substantial development already exists. This
existing development limits opportunities to acquire additional ROW necessary to provide
the unique geometric solutions required to accommodate forecast level of demand. It is
anticipated that travel demand would shift to Pecos Road, placing a higher travel burden on
this corridor, particularly west of Ellsworth Road. A review of available aerials, however,
indicates the Pecos Road Corridor may provide more opportunities for acquiring additional
ROW necessary to accommodate increased travel demand.
FIGURE 8-6 NETWORK CONNECTIVITY OPTION 4

8.2.5. Network Connectivity Option 5: Grade Separation of Germann Road Only
with Access to Sossaman Road
This option would consist of geometric alternatives to accommodate through travel on
Germann Road with a grade separation at the UPRR track. It would maintain through travel
on Sossaman Road and provide access to Sossaman Road from Germann Road. Figure 8-7

FINAL REPORT
8-6

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

illustrates a sample option that would provide this connectivity. As depicted in the figure, a
single bridge would be required.
FIGURE 8-7 NETWORK CONNECTIVITY OPTION 5

8.2.6. Findings and Conclusions from the First-Level Screening
Options 1 through 4 were submitted to the TAG for review. Following discussions with the
TAG, the four network connectivity options were reviewed and discussed with appropriate
representatives from the town of Queen Creek, city of Mesa, and town of Gilbert to obtain
feedback on the feasibility of each scenario. The TAG indicated that if any connectivity
scenario was deemed undesirable, that scenario would not be moved forward for
consideration when developing geometric alternatives for the grade-separated crossing.
Based on discussions with the municipal jurisdictions, it was determined that only the
connectivity presented as Option 1 was uniformly supported by both the town of Queen
Creek and the city of Mesa. These discussions led to definition of an additional connectivity
option. Option 5 (identified above) is similar to Option 3 - Grade Separation of Germann
Road Only; however, the existing at-grade crossing of the UPRR at Sossaman Road would
remain. The principal difference is that through movement would be retained for both
Germann and Sossaman roads. A separate connector road is shown that would facilitate
movements between Germann Road and Sossaman Road.

FINAL REPORT
8-7

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

8.3

CONCEPTUAL ENGINEERING INTERSECTION DESIGN TREATMENTS

Subsequent to the 1st Level Screening and the results derived from discussions with project
partners, attention was given to refining the potentially viable Options 1 and 5 for the
Germann Road/Sossaman Road intersection. Important to this refining process was creation
of feasible grade separation concepts at the UPRR track. This section provides additional
details regarding the conceptual engineering required for this intersection. It also details
similar concepts developed for addressing the jog at Meridian Road.
8.3.1. Germann Road/Sossaman Road Intersection
Two connectivity options (Options 1 and 5 discussed in the previous section) for the
Germann Road/Sossaman Road intersection were carried forward from the 1st Level
Screening. Each concept represents an attempt to enhance mobility in the Germann Road
and Sossaman Road corridors.
Conceptual Design Alternatives
Alternative A – Grade Separation of Sossaman Road and Germann Road
This conceptual alternative flows directly from Connectivity Option 1 evaluated in the
1st Level Screening. Both Germann Road and Sossaman Road would be grade separated
from the UPRR track (Figure 8-8). Engineering requirements include two bridges, each
approximately 400 feet in length, spanning the UPRR ROW and the Rittenhouse Road Drain.
The drain would be realigned to remove the jog constructed to avoid the original Germann
Road/Sossaman Road intersection. East of its existing intersection with Sossaman Road,
Germann Road would divert to the north in order to establish a more direct crossing of the
UPRR and Drain and minimize the length of the bridge structure. Similarly, Sossaman Road
would be rerouted to the east between Pecos and Rittenhouse roads.
This engineering concept would create an at-grade intersection of Germann Road with
Sossaman Road approximately 1,000 feet northeast of the existing intersection. Germann
Road would be a six-lane divided arterial roadway with left-turn and right-turn bays at the
Sossaman Road intersection. Sossaman Road would be a four-lane divided arterial also
with left- and right-turn bays.
Sossaman Road between Pecos and Rittenhouse roads would be abandoned, as would the
section of Germann Road, approximately 1,000 feet in length, east of the existing
intersection. Access to properties on the south side of Germann Road would be established
in the vicinity of South 195th Street. New ROW would need to be acquired to implement this
conceptual design treatment. Expanded ROW requirements are associated with the two
crossings of the UPRR track and drain to accommodate the bridge structure.

FINAL REPORT
8-8

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 8-8 ALTERNATIVE A – GRADE SEPARATION OF SOSSAMAN ROAD AND GERMANN ROAD

FINAL REPORT
8-9

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Alternative B – Grade Separation of Germann Road Only with Access to
Sossaman Road
This conceptual alternative is intended to maintain through movements on both Germann
and Sossaman roads. Germann Road would be grade separated across the UPRR track,
Rittenhouse Road Drain, and Sossaman Road (Figure 8-9). This would require one bridge
approximately 450 feet in length. The existing Sossaman Road crossing of the UPRR track
would be improved and upgraded. East of its existing intersection with Sossaman Road,
Germann Road would divert to the north in order to establish a more direct crossing of the
UPRR and drain and minimize the length of the bridge structure. A connecting roadway
would be constructed to facilitate northbound and southbound travel along Sossaman Road
from Germann Road.
This engineering concept would create two at-grade intersections joined by the connector
roadway. One intersection of the Germann Road/Sossaman Road connector would be
approximately 1,200 feet east of the existing intersection. Germann Road would be a
six-lane divided arterial roadway with two left-turn bays in the eastbound direction (to the
connector) and one right-turn bay in the westbound direction (to the connector). The
Germann Road/Sossaman Road connector would be a four-lane divided roadway with two
right-turn bays for westbound Germann Road traffic and one left-turn bay for eastbound
Germann Road traffic.
A second T-Intersection, where the connector roadway joins with Sossaman Road, would be
constructed a similar distance to the north of the existing intersection. At this intersection, the
traffic on the Germann Road/Sossaman Road connector would have a left- and right-turn
lane for southbound and northbound movements, respectively, at Sossaman Road.
Sossaman Road would be a five-lane arterial roadway with a center left-turn lane/left-turn
bay in the southbound direction, permitting access to the Germann Road/Sossaman Road
connector. Northbound traffic would have a through lane and a through/right-turn lane
that would facilitate access to the connector.
The section of Germann Road, approximately 1,000 feet in length, east of the existing
intersection would be abandoned. Access to properties on the south side of Germann Road
would be established in the vicinity of South 195th Street. New ROW would need to be
acquired to implement this conceptual design treatment. Expanded ROW requirements are
associated with the crossing of the UPRR track and Drain to accommodate the bridge
structure.
Alternative C – Grade Separation of Germann Road Only with Ramp to
Northbound Sossaman Road and Connector to Sossaman Road
This alternative represents a variation of Alternative B and is intended to alleviate the need
for the double left-turn at the Germann Road/Sossaman Road connector. A hybrid
FINAL REPORT
8-10

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 8-9 ALTERNATIVE B – GRADE SEPARATION OF GERMANN ROAD ONLY WITH ACCESS TO SOSSAMAN ROAD

FINAL REPORT
8-11

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

T-Intersection would be created where the connector joins Germann Road (Figure 8-10).
Germann Road would be a six-lane divided arterial roadway. But, in the eastbound
direction, there would be three through lanes, and no left turns would be accommodated.
Access to northbound Sossaman Road, instead would be accommodated by a right-turn bay
and direct ramp under Germann Road. Germann Road in the westbound direction would
have three through lanes with a right-turn bay to the Germann Road/Sossaman Road
connector. The Germann Road/Sossaman Road connector would be a two-lane divided
road with a left- and right-turn lane for westbound and eastbound movements, respectively,
at Germann Road.
The T-Intersection, where the Germann Road/Sossaman Road connector joins with
Sossaman Road, would be constructed with a left- and right-turn lane for southbound and
northbound movements, respectively, at Sossaman Road. Sossaman Road would be a
five-lane arterial roadway with a center left-turn lane/left-turn bay in the southbound
direction, permitting access to the Germann Road/Sossaman Road connector. Northbound
traffic would have two through lanes and the auxiliary lane serving the ramp facilitating the
eastbound Germann Road to northbound Sossaman Road movement. The auxiliary lane
would extend to the Germann Road/Sossaman Road connector.
This alternative would include realignment of the Rittenhouse Road Drain to remove the jog
created to circumvent the existing Germann Road/Sossaman Road intersection. The
addition of the direct ramp to accommodate eastbound Germann Road to northbound
Sossaman Road traffic requires that the bridge structure crossing over the UPRR track,
Rittenhouse Road Drain, and Sossaman Road be approximately 560 feet in length.
The section of Germann Road, approximately 1,000 feet in length, east of the existing
intersection would be abandoned. Access to properties on the south side of Germann Road
would be established in the vicinity of South 195th Street. New ROW would need to be
acquired to implement this conceptual design treatment. Expanded ROW requirements are
associated with the crossing of the UPRR track and drain to accommodate the bridge
structure.
Evaluation of Alternatives
Due to the complexity of the Germann Road/Sossaman Road intersection, the alternative
concepts described above were evaluated using a matrix incorporating the criteria identified
below:


Compatibility with existing/planned development



Transportation system continuity



Safety



Environmental compatibility

FINAL REPORT
8-12

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 8-10 ALTERNATIVE C – GRADE SEPARATION OF GERMANN ROAD ONLY WITH RAMP TO NORTHBOUND SOSSAMAN ROAD AND CONNECTOR TO SOSSAMAN ROAD

FINAL REPORT
8-13

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study



Drainage/irrigation impacts



Utility infrastructure impacts



Building/property impacts



Public acceptability



Estimated cost.

The evaluation of conceptual transportation improvement alternatives at the Germann
Road/Sossaman Road intersection is shown in Table 8-1. The three conceptual alternative
engineering solutions are compared against the alternative of doing nothing, the ―no-build
alternative.‖ Values, as shown in the table, were attached to the degree of compatibility of
each alternative with respect to the evaluation criteria. Three points were awarded if the
alternative fully satisfied the criteria. At the opposite end of the scale, an alternative
completely, or almost completely incompatible, with the criteria received zero points.
Alternative B – Grade separation of Germann Road only with connector to Sossaman Road,
which would provide a continuous, grade-separated Germann Road with a connector
roadway to Sossaman Road, has the greatest potential for supporting existing, expanding,
or new development. The connector roadway, in particular, provides direct access to large
parcels that could benefit from access to a roadway connecting two arterials. In contrast,
the no build alternative, although also providing access to adjacent parcels, must withstand
the disadvantage of periodic traffic backups and delays associated with operations on the
UPRR track.
Alternative A – grade separation of Germann and Sossaman roads clearly stands out as the
best solution in terms of transportation system continuity and safety. Alternative A would
assure full, unimpeded through movements on Germann and Sossaman roads and eliminate
the delays associated with operations on the UPRR track. As development continues to occur
in and adjacent to the study area, delays due to railroad operations will increase. The
elimination of any railroad crossing also gives Alternative A a favorable evaluation.
All alternatives fair well with regard to environmental compatibility. However, the no build
alternative with no elevated structures must be considered most favorable when general
aesthetic and visual impacts are considered.
The no build alternative and Alternative B – grade separation of Germann Road with
connector to Sossaman Road would have the fewest direct impacts on drainage and
irrigation facilities in the study area. And, the no build alternative also would be considered
most compatible with existing and future utility infrastructure and existing buildings and
property uses; nevertheless, these features are relatively limited in presence and scope within
the study area.

FINAL REPORT
8-14

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

TABLE 8-1 EVALUATION OF CONCEPTUAL ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES
Evaluation Criteria
Support existing, expanding, or new
development
Compatibility with Existing /Planned
Development
Minimize daily vehicle travel
Minimize number of vehicle stops at
intersections
Maximize compatibility with pedestrian and
bicycle facilities
Minimize travel delay due to RR crossing
Maximize continuity/connectivity of future
roadway network
Transportation System Continuity
Minimize the number of RR/motor vehicle
conflicts
Maximize emergency access
Safety
Minimize impacts to resources protected
under Section 4(f) – Parks, and Section 6(f) –
Historic & Archaeological Sites
Minimize impacts to known or likely habitat for
Threatened, Endangered, and other Sensitive
species
Minimize impacts to wildlife corridors
Minimize negative aesthetic and visual
impacts
Environmental Compatibility
Minimize impacts on or disturbance of
drainage features
Drainage & Irrigation Impacts
Minimize need to relocate major utilities
Utility Infrastructure Impacts
Minimize number of impacted parcels
Building & Property Impacts
Maximize ease of use/driver expectancy
Minimize community & traffic disruption
associated with construction process
Public Acceptability
Minimize construction and maintenance cost
Minimize right of way costs
Minimize user costs (vehicle miles and delay)
Cost
GRAND TOTAL

No-Build
Alternative

Grade Separation Alternative
Alternative A
Alternative B
Alternative C









0

2

3

1









































0

15

5

8










0


6





2

3

































12

9

11

10









3

3

3


1

0

0






3



6
30

3



3
39

3

2





2

1





2

1









4

2









5
37

4
32

Alternative A – Grade Separation of Germann and Sossaman Roads
Alternative B – Grade Separation of Germann Road Only with Connector to NB & SB Sossaman Road
Alternative C – Grade Separation of Germann Road with Ramp to NB Sossaman Road and Connector to NB & SB Sossaman Road
____________________

Most compatible with specified criteria, 3 points

More compatible with specified criteria, 2 point

Less compatible with specified criteria, 1 point

Least compatible with specified criteria, 0 points

FINAL REPORT
8-15

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Alternative A would be the most desirable in terms of driver expectations and ease of use, as
it would provide a standard 4-way, directional intersection. This factor is important when
public acceptability is evaluated. In contrast, the no-build alternative would have high public
acceptability with respect to the absence of construction activity and traffic disruptions.
Nevertheless, there will be improvements in the area in the future, and travel disruptions are
a fact of life, particularly in growing communities. As an example, Power Road is being
reconstructed as a six-lane arterial north of Pecos Road to the Loop 202 (Santan Freeway).
Thus, one could argue that ease of use and understanding of the roadway mechanics, which
would be provided with Alternative A, should be given greater emphasis.
Finally, it is clear that doing nothing, called for by the no-build alternative, would be less
costly than any of the other alternatives – a fact confirmed in Table 8-1. However, as noted
above in the discussion of public acceptability, the cost of improvements in a growing
community generally will be incurred; it will only be a matter of time. Thus, the fact that
Alternative A would be more compatible with long-term costs incurred by drivers through
reduced delay and fewer miles driven, may be viewed as having greater value.
The result of the evaluation, as displayed in the matrix, indicates Alternative A (39 points)
and Alternative B (37 points) are superior to the No-Build Alternative (30 points) and
Alternative C (32 points). As noted in the discussion above, there are perceptions and
conditions that must be considered in interpreting the rating of the alternatives. Although all
criteria are important, the fact that this is a transportation study aimed at creating a system
that will serve the community and region long term might suggest that certain criteria
necessarily should be given greater weight. In this case, transportation system continuity,
safety, driver expectations, and user costs may be considered of greater import to the
decision-making process. Adopting this frame of reference, the evaluation results point
toward Alternative A as the most desirable, most feasible, and most compatible design
treatment relative to the goals and objectives of the study and the project.
It should be noted that these three alternatives do not represent an exhaustive list of potential
configurations for the grade separation of Germann and Sossaman roads, but rather
feasible configuration options for connectivity of the roadway network. Additional detailed
study and public and stakeholder vetting will be required before a preferred layout for the
grade separation at this location will be defined.
8.3.2. Germann Road/Meridian Road Intersection
Study Area Conditions and Considerations
The offset of the ROW at Meridian Road is a key factor in determining the alignment for
Germann Road. This offset or jog in the roadway alignment derives from official surveys of
the area that created the standard Township and Range (T&R) system. In the Phoenix
metropolitan area, the T&R grid often has been the determinant for roadway alignments.
FINAL REPORT
8-16

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Major mile roads and half-mile roads common in most communities are based on the T&R
survey. The curvature of the earth requires that surveys be adjusted periodically or the
north-south survey lines would converge, resulting in offsets like that at Meridian Road.
In addition to the offset, there are two land use features at this future intersection location
that must be considered. In the northwest quadrant, there is a well site and pumping station
that is part of the city of Mesa water supply. In addition there are two high-voltage OHE
lines crossing through the intersection area. A dairy occupies the southeast quadrant of the
intersection area. While the dairy itself is not a significant factor in the alignment of
Germann Road (although access will need to be provided), there is a retention/settling pond
directly in line with the alignment west of Meridian Road (refer to Figure 1-3). This pond
contains on-site runoff from the feeding pens of the dairy. As general drainage in the area
is east to west and south to north, relocating this facility essential to dairy operations may be
problematic.
Conceptual Design Alternatives
Two conceptual designs were developed for the Germann Road/Meridian Road intersection.
One alternative takes a direct jog from the alignment west of Meridian Road to the
alignment east of Meridian Road. The other diverts Germann Road to the north prior to
Meridian Road and ties back into the Germann Road alignment east of Meridian Road.
Alternative 1 – South Dog Leg
This alternative holds to the traditional connection between offset alignments by crossing
Meridian Road through a slightly skewed intersection to tie into the Germann Road
alignment 250 feet north on the east side of Meridian Road (Figure 8-11). Both roadways
are six-lane arterials with dual left-turn and single right-turn lanes.
Alternative 2 – Northern Diversion
This alternative shifts Germann Road to the north 1,100-1,200 feet west of the Meridian
Road alignment. It crosses Meridian Road through a right-angle intersection approximately
350 feet north of the Germann Road alignment west of Meridian Road (Figure 8-12).
Germann Road then shifts south approximately 100 feet to the Germann Road alignment
east of Meridian Road. The cross sections of the two roads are as described for
Alternative 1.

FINAL REPORT
8-17

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 8-11 GERMANN/MERIDIAN INTERSECTION ALTERNATIVE 1 – SOUTH DOG LEG

FINAL REPORT
8-18

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

FIGURE 8-12 GERMANN/MERIDIAN INTERSECTION ALTERNATIVE 2 – NORTHERN DIVERSION

FINAL REPORT
8-19

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Evaluation of Alternatives
The two alternatives were reviewed for consistency with project goals and objectives and
examined with regard to potential impacts on traffic flow and roadway geometrics, land
use, environmental features, utilities, and drainage. These issues were the most prominent in
the intersection study area and needed the greatest attention when engineering an alignment
for Germann Road. Specific issues associated with each alternative are summarized in
Figure 8-13. The magnitude of multiple potential effects favors Alternative 1 – South Dog
Leg.
FIGURE 8-13 EVALUATION OF GERMANN/MERIDIAN INTERSECTION ALETRNATIVES
Alternative 1 – South Dog Leg

Alternative 2 – Northern Diversion

Skewed Intersection Geometrics

Right-Angle Intersection Geometrics

Relocation of Local Service Power Line (69kV) on South
Side of the Germann Road Alignment east of Meridian
Road

Relocation of OHE line on South Side of Germann east
of Meridian Road

Relocation/Restructuring of Dairy Retention/Settling
Pond (potential hazardous substances site)

Relocation of OHE line on North Side of Germann west
of Meridian Road

Change of Access for Existing Land Uses

Minor (even avoidable) Impact on the Dairy
Retention/Settling Pond
Relocation of a Approximately 700 feet of the
High-Voltage OHE Line on the North Side of the
Germann Road Alignment east of Meridian Road
Change of Access for Existing Land Uses with
Alteration of Commercial Metals Company Drive

While the multiplicity of potential effects/impacts makes Alternative 2 look like the least
favorable design treatment for this intersection, there are other advantages of favoring
Alternative 2 over Alternative 1. The two primary disadvantages of Alternative 1 are the
skewed intersection, which creates issues for traffic flow and sight distances that affect safety,
and direct impact to the dairy retention/settling pond. This type of intersection has greater
safety implications than Alternative 2, which can be developed with the approaches
perpendicular creating right angles. The dairy retention/settling pond has been in place for
some time and, no doubt, has a significant accumulation of animal waste carried by runoff
from the feeding pens. While restructuring this facility is possible, doing so could be
problematic, due to the special requirements that would be associated with the handling of
wastes and other substances that could be in the pond.
Furthermore, Pinal County is currently designing an interim extension of Germann Road as a
two-lane facility between Meridian and Ironwood roads. Plans indicate that the proposed
alignment would follow that of Alternative 2. Thus, Alternative 2 presents the most efficient
treatment for this intersection, as it would minimize throw away of constructed facilities.
FINAL REPORT
8-20

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

Care should be taken when finalizing the design of the interim two-lane facility to assure that
it is consistent with the ultimate six—lane facility footprint.

8.4

PROJECT COST ESTIMATE

Preliminary, planning-level cost estimates were developed to estimate the potential level of
funds required to construct improvements in the corridor. Estimates were developed with the
following assumptions:


Total road reconstruction: Germann Road – six-lane arterial per the town of Queen
Creek standards



Signalized intersections at each major one mile intersection



No street lighting costs were included



Earthwork costs were assumed to be minimal along the corridor assuming the
roadway would be at or near existing grade except for the area of the profile change
for the UPRR grade separation (5 percent of new structure costs)



Structure unit costs were $110/sq ft



Removal costs of existing features were derived as a percentage (1 percent of new
construction items)



Drainage costs were derived as a percentage (8 percent of total new roadway items)



Utility relocation costs were derived as a percentage of total construction costs



Canal reconstruction unit costs were $35/sq yd



New right of way was valued at $8/sq ft based on the Signal Butte Road Corridor

Improvement Study Final Report 2009

The following tables presents the overall preliminary, planning-level project cost estimate
which includes the construction costs for the preferred Germann Road alignment, as well as
design costs (10 percent of the construction costs), construction management costs (15
percent of the construction costs), and administration costs (10 percent of the construction
costs). Table 8-2 provides a summary of the costs associated with the majority of the
corridor, excluding the area surrounding the potential grade separation of Germann and
Sossaman roads at the UPRR. Separate planning-level cost estimates were developed for the
three grade separation alternatives, as summarized in Table 8-3.

FINAL REPORT
8-21

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

TABLE 8-2 PLANNING LEVEL COSTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR
Germann Road
Cost Category
Power Road to Ironwood Road
Cost ($)
Roadway and Traffic
18,531,000
Structures and Drainage
1,482,000
Total Construction Costs
29,112,000
Construction Management (15%)
4,366,800
Administration (10%)
2,911,200
Contingency (5%)
1,455,600
Right of Way
19,028,100
Utility Relocation (5%)
1,455,600
Final Design Costs (10%)
3,784,560
Total Alternative Costs
62,113,860
TABLE 8-3 COMPARISON OF PLANNING LEVEL COSTS FOR POTENTIAL GRADE SEPARATION
Alternative A
Alternative B
Alternative C
Cost Category
Cost ($)
Cost ($)
Cost ($)
Roadway and Traffic
5,376,000
6,259,000
5,891,000
Structures and Drainage
10,362,000
6,669,000
8,549,000
Total Construction Costs
22,893,000
18,805,000
21,005,000
Construction Management (15%)
3,433,950
2,820,750
3,150,750
Administration (10%)
2,289,300
1,880,500
2,100,500
Contingency (5%)
1,144,650
940,250
1,050,250
Right of Way
9,409,500
6,482,100
7,492,750
Utility Relocation (5%)
1,144,650
940,250
1,050,250
Final Design Costs (10%)
2,976,090
2,444,650
2,730,650
Total Alternative Costs
43,291,140
34,313,500
38,580,150

8.5

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the preceding analyses, it is recommended that the following steps be taken to
ensure that Germann Road will provide the necessary future capacity and connectivity to
area residents and businesses:


The town of Queen Creek and city of Mesa should work with developers to preserve
the 140 feet of ROW required to accommodate the six-lane arterial cross section, as
depicted in the conceptual alignment layouts contained in Appendix A.



Maricopa County, the town of Queen Creek, and the city of Mesa should participate
in conduct of a Design Concept Report to further define a recommended
configuration and/or grade separation of Germann and Sossaman roads in the
vicinity of the UPRR. This will allow further stakeholder and public vetting of potential
alternatives prior to identification of a preferred configuration and associated ROW.

FINAL REPORT
8-22

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

9.0 ACCESS MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
The efficiency and safety of a street or highway facility depends largely on the number and
character of actions that interfere with the efficiency flow of traffic. Specifically, vehicles
entering, leaving, or crossing the road, at intersecting streets and driveways interfere with or
impede traffic flow. Access management (or access control) defines the practice of
managing points of access along a roadway to minimize these occurrences. Access
management aims to reduce the number of conflict areas and, thereby, increase the
efficiency and safety of traffic flow. It attempts to balance the rights of roadway users and
property owners, who have certain rights of access to abutting property, with other roadway
users, who have the right to travel with relative safety and freedom from interference. When
access rights/needs conflict with and mobility requirements of the roadway, access
management principles are applied to reconcile the differences.
Access management addresses the basic question of when, where, and how access should
be provided. It is achieved through design and regulatory practices that identify appropriate
locations for driveways, median locations, intersections with other roads, and interchanges.
The level of access provided along a roadway is dependent on its type and purpose. When
access management is actively practiced, local roads generally have unlimited access, while
regional highways generally have severe constraints on access. Thus, the appropriate
degree of access to a roadway varies according to traffic characteristics and volume, the
character of adjacent land uses, and long-term planning objectives for the area or region.
Germann Road, in Maricopa County, is a county roadway and will be developed in
accordance with standards and guidelines established by the MCDOT. Germann Road also
is a county roadway within Pinal County that will be developed by the county’s public works
department. As an arterial street in Maricopa County serving Queen Creek and Mesa and
a RSR in Pinal County, Germann Road must be capable of accommodating moderate to high
traffic volumes and a moderate level of property access. The following guidelines or
principles of access management should be applied during final design of Germann Road.

9.1

EXISTING ACCESS

The matter of existing points of access is relevant only to Maricopa County. Existing access
points, even if not in use, may not be relocated, altered, or reconstructed without approval
from MCDOT and a permit issued by the department. When access to a roadway via a
curb and gutter is abandoned, it must be replaced by a full height curb across the
abandoned access and the depression behind must be filled. When access to a roadway
via a shoulder and ditch is abandoned, it must be replaced by a matching existing shoulder
and ditch.

FINAL REPORT
9-1

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

9.2

FUTURE ACCESS

9.2.1. Maricopa County
The MCDOT Roadway Design Manual (Chapter 7, Access to Maricopa County Roadway
System) adopts a relatively straight forward and strict access management posture for
Maricopa County’s roadway system. It states ―all construction to connect or change
driveways entering County roads must first be authorized by a valid MCDOT Permit.‖
Noting that the number of access points should be kept to a minimum, the manual states
―access points may not be approved without an acceptable project site plan.‖
The manual provides general guidelines identifying conditions that would result in a change
of access points on public road. When these conditions occur, a new driveway, or access
permit in the case of an intersecting street, maybe required. Five conditions are highlighted:


When the use of the access increases in actual or proposed vehicular volume by 20
percent or more;



When a particular directional characteristic (such as left turns) increases by 20
percent or more



When a change in the use of a property causes the flow of entering vehicles to be
restricted, or causes such vehicles to lineup or be otherwise delayed on a public road;



When use of the access by vehicles exceeding 30,000 pounds gross vehicle weight
increases by 20 percent or 10 vehicles per day; and



When a direct access onto a public road has not been used for more than 4 years
and improvements are needed.

Design of a six-lane roadway on the Germann Road alignment, as recommended, will result
in changes in the conditions of access at many properties abutting the roadway and at
intersecting streets. The guidance provided in this Manual will need to be followed to assure
the new facility functions according to its intended classification and results in safe traffic
movements.
Future commercial/industrial driveways on Germann and Sossaman roads, as a result of the
recommended improvements, should adhere to guidelines set forth in the MCDOT Roadway
Design Manual. This manual provides in Section 7.9 driveway spacing guidelines for
arterial/collector roadways as measured from driveway centerline to driveway centerline
(Table 9.1). Joint access to multiple abutting parcels may be approved when new access
does not meet the spacing requirements. Section 7.9 also includes guidelines for driveway
corner clearances and other design factors (e.g., driveway storage, sight distances,
acceleration/deceleration lanes, driveway location coordination), which should be
referenced during final design of recommended improvements.

FINAL REPORT
9-2

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

TABLE 9-1
DRIVEWAY SPACING GUIDELINES

9.2.2. Pinal County
It is assumed that Germann Road in Pinal County will be classified as a principal arterial.
These are major roadways expected to support a high level of travel mobility (i.e., high
traffic volumes), which calls for a low level of access to abutting land. Four to six lanes, two
to three in each direction, are considered to be the minimum number of lanes for this class of
roadway. Typically, ROW requirements will be 130 feet to 150 feet (refer to Figure 9.1 for
the typical section of an RSR principal arterial). The primary characteristics of a Pinal
County RSR are:


High level of service for automobiles and transit, reducing travel times;



High degree of access management;



High level of safety;



Connectivity between urban areas and major activity centers;



Connectivity to state highway system and major urban arterials; and



Continuity across the county and through urban areas.

Access management strategies to accomplish the intended purposes of the RSR principal
arterial include:


Continuous median barriers;



Prohibition of left-out movements from driveways and minor side streets (i.e.,
right-in/right-out access only);



Driveway consolidation; and



Possibility of frontage roads.

FINAL REPORT
9-3

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

10.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Stakeholders and the public provided feedback at key milestones during the study.
A TAG consisting of key project stakeholders convened to provide feedback and direction at
key project milestones. The group met on the following dates:
September 28, 2011
November 3, 2011
May 28, 2012
June 13, 2013
The study also included a public meeting on November 7, 2011 to present the study purpose
and objectives. A second public meeting was held on June 18, 2013 to present the results
and findings of the study.
Details regarding the project outreach are included in the Public Involvement Summary
attached as Appendix C.

FINAL REPORT
10-1

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

APPENDIXES

FINAL REPORT

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

APPENDIX A
Conceptual Germann Road Corridor Plan Sheets

FINAL REPORT

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

APPENDIX B
Level of Service Worksheets

FINAL REPORT

GERMANN ROAD CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY
POWER ROAD TO IRONWOOD ROAD
A Planning Assistance for Rural Areas Study

APPENDIX C
Public Involvement Summary

FINAL REPORT