AGENDA ITEM #10 - I-11.PDF

Agenda Item #10
MARICOPA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
INFORMATION SUMMARY... for your review
DATE:
May 2, 2017
SUBJECT:
Major Amendment to the Regional Transportation Plan - Interstate 11, 1-10 to US-93
SUMMARY:
On February 27, 2008, the MAG Regional Council accepted the findings from the Interstate
10/Hassayampa Valley Framework Study and amended the MAG Regional Transportation Plan to
include the study's recommendations, including the Hassayampa Freeway corridor, as illustrative
projects for future planning. Since this acceptance, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st
Century Act (MAP-21) and Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST), were signed into law
in 2012 and 2015, respectively, designating the Interstate 11 corridor between Nogales, Arizona, and
Reno, Nevada, passing through the Phoenix Metropolitan Area. At the time these Acts were signed
into law by President Obama, the thinking was to locate Interstate 11 along the illustrative
Hassayampa Freeway corridor in the West Valley. The requested action is to recommend submitting
as a Major Amendment the proposal to add the Interstate 11 corridor from Interstate 10 to US-93 in
the West Valley into the MAG 2040 Regional Transportation Plan, presently in draft form. An
illustration of the corridor is attached to this transmittal summary, based upon reasonable
expectations of funding.
Various planning efforts have been conducted for Interstate 11. Prior to MAG Regional Council
acceptance, Buckeye adopted its General Plan on January 18, 2008, incorporating the Framework
Study's recommendations. These recommendations included the illustrative Hassayampa Freeway
corridor within its municipal planning area that aligns as a north-south corridor between 1-10 and
US-93. Buckeye voters ratified the General Plan on May 20, 2008.
In September 2011, MAG responded to a request by the Brookings Institute that identified
Interstate 11 as a transformative investment for the Western United States. A white paper was
prepared in response that outlined a vision for a interstate connection extending beyond Phoenix to
the south and Las Vegas to the north as a means to enhance intercity freight and goods movement,
provide congestion relief to the Interstate 5 and Interstate 15 corridors, connect military installations,
and to provide alternative routes during emergency situations.
Upon enacting the MAP-21 Act, the United States Congress designated US-93 as Interstate 11. With
this designation, the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) and Nevada Department of
Transportation (NDOT), started thel-11 and Intermountain West Corridor Study. The study included
detailed corridor planning of a possible interstate link between Phoenix and Las Vegas, and
high-level visioning for extending the corridor south to Mexico and potentially north to Canada.
Completed in November 2014, the study noted how Interstate 11 will promote freight linkages in a
vision for border-to-border connections to provide the foundation of a stronger and more diversified
economy in the Western United States.
The 1-11 and Intermountain West Corridor Study's detailed corridor planning concluded with
identifying 18 Segments of Independent Utility (SIU) to initiate the next steps in environmental studies
to eventually identify the centerline for the interstate. The subject of this proposed Major Amendment
to the Regional Transportation Plan is SIU 4 for identifying the link between Interstate 10 near

Buckeye and US-93 near Wickenburg. In the ADOT/NDOT study, seven broad alternatives were
considered between Interstate 17 in Downtown Phoenix and the La Paz County line, 70 miles to the
west. The study's recommendation for SIU 4 is to locate the freeway within a corridor between 459th
Avenue and SR-85 west of the White Tank Mountains, meeting US-93 north and west of SR-89. On
March 26, 2014, the MAG Regional Council approved a resolution supporting these
recommendations for this location of the Interstate 11 corridor.
After the I-11 and Intermountain West Corridor Study was completed in November 2014, the Fixing
America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST), was signed into law by President Obama extending
the Interstate 11 designation north of Las Vegas to Reno in Nevada, and south of Phoenix to Nogales
in Arizona. Subsequently, ADOT initiated a Tier I Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) study that
will identify a wide corridor, but not provide a centerline. The Tier I EIS study limits for this portion
of Interstate 11 is between Wickenburg and Nogales, including the SIU 4 segment. A Tier I EIS
allows the environmental planning for the Interstate to continue and narrows the width of the corridor
to roughly 2000-feet. However, the Tier I EIS does not establish a freeway centerline that would
provide certainty in both public- and private-sector planning along the corridor.
Current Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) policy does not allow the centerline to be identified
unless a project level environmental study, such as a Tier II EIS, is completed. Demonstration of
reasonable expectation of funding is needed to place the project in the Regional Transportation Plan
prior to the initiation of a Tier II EIS. Based upon the fiscal projections of revenues identified in the
MAG 2040 Regional Transportation Plan, currently in draft form, reasonable expectation of funding
for the Interstate 11 SIU 4 segment can be identified. Once the project is in the funded portion of the
Regional Transportation Plan, a segment would need to be included in the MAG Transportation
Improvement Program, which would initiate a Tier II Environmental Impact Statement study that
would provide a centerline. The following table provides more information on the differences in Tier
1 and Tier II EIS studies.
Activities Tier i "Programmatic" EIS Tier 2 "Project" Environmental Reviews
NEPA Class Action of Tier 1 EIS EIS, EA, or CE
Purpose and • Refine purpose and need from prior feasibility study • Refine purpose and need from Tier 1
Need • Consider federal, state, regional, and local needs • Address needs specific to proposed project
Alternatives • Develop, evaluate, and screen corridor alternatives • Define project alignment and configuration
• Identify types of proposed transportation facility • Identify potential design options
• Very conceptual design • More refined engineering
Engineering • Typical sections for proposed transportation facility • Detailed drawings, vertical profiles, and typical
• Phased Implementation Plan for smaller proposed sections
projects • Access details and interchange design
Analysis • • Relies Broad, heavily high-level on readily available information • Site-specific resource Information, impacts, and
• Primarily geographic information system (C IS) based mitigation
Agency and • Identify key issues early • Established relationships
Public Input • Build consensus • No surprises
• Select Preferred Corridor Alternative (2000 feet wide) • Select well-defined project alignment and
Proposed Action • Proposed transportation facility configuration
• Phased Implementation Plan • Right-of-way (ROW) requirements
• Mitigation strategies • Specific mitigation commitments
Regulatory Other Information Obtained from Existing Sources / Detailed Studies and Impact Assessments /
Compliance Agencies involved Agency Actions
• species Minimize impacts to critical habitat for protected • Presence/absence surveys, species protocol surveys,
Species Endangered Act • • Strategies for mitigation commitments • Specific additional mitigation field studies, commitments and Biological Assessments
• United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and • USFWS action to provide concurrence
Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD)
If recommended, this proposed Interstate 11 action would initiate the process for a MajorAmendrinent
to the Regional Transportation Plan. According to A.R.S. 28-6353, the Major Amendment process
2

begins with consultation with the State Transportation Board, the Maricopa County Board of
Supervisors, the Regional Public Transportation Authority, the Indian Communities, the cities and
towns in Maricopa County, and the Citizens Transportation Oversight Committee. Before final action
can be taken, a finding of air quality conformity would also be needed. Based upon this information,
the following schedule has been identified for the Interstate 11 Major Amendment process:
April 19, 2017 - Transportation Policy Committee may make a recommendation for approval
of submitting the Major Amendment to the MAG Regional Council for consultation
consideration.
April 26, 2017- MAG Regional Council may approve the concept and requests consultation.
April 27, 2017 and May 10, 2017 - Respectively, Transportation Review Committee and
Management Committee receives Major Amendment briefing, for information and discussion.
June and July 2017- Meet with the State Transportation Board, the Maricopa County Board
of Supervisors, the Regional Public Transportation Authority, and the Citizens Transportation
Oversight Committee, and MAG member agencies as needed, for information, discussion,
and possible action to recommend the Major Amendment.
August 16, 2017 - Transportation Policy Committee may recommend the Major Amendment
to the MAG 2040 Regional Transportation Plan to the MAG Regional Council, contingent upon
a finding of air quality conformity.
August 30, 2017- MAG Regional Council may approve the Major Amendment to the MAG
2040 Regional Transportation Plan, contingent upon a finding of air quality conformity.
After air quality conformity finding, MAG Regional Council may take action to amend the RTP
and TIP on September 27, 2017.
• US Department of Transportation Finding of Conformity in October 2017.
Additional information about the ADOT studies completed and underway for the Interstate 11 corridor
may be found at http://i1lstudy.com/. Links on this website are also provided to the Nevada DOT's
construction efforts for the Boulder City Bypass freeway that will represent the first segment of 1-11
opening to traffic in 2018. 1-11 will be signed from the junction of 1-215 and 1-515 in Henderson,
Nevada to the Hoover Dam Bypass bridge, for a distance of approximately 22-miles.
PUBLIC INPUT:
As the Interstate 10/Hassayampa Valley Framework Study was developed, more than 175 meetings
were conducted between 2006 and 2008 with stakeholders to obtain consent for the Framework's
recommendations. At the time of these meetings, there were no discussions about the illustrative
Hassayampa Freeway corridor becoming part of the greater Interstate 11 corridor, as this concept
was not discussed until after the MAG Regional Council accepted the Framework in February 2008.
During development of the ADOT/NDOT 1-11 and Intermountain West Corridor Study, three public
meetings were conducted at various locations in Maricopa County. Stakeholder input from these
meetings was used by ADOT to recommend the general location of 1-11 S1U 4 in the West Valley.
Upon the initiation of the Tier 1 EIS study, ADOT held public scoping meetings in Casa Grande,
Buckeye and Nogales in June 2016. Data from these meetings is presently being used in EIS
alternatives development to identify a 2000-foot corridor for Interstate 11 between 1-10 near Buckeye
and US-93 north and west of Wickenburg. The next public meetings are scheduled for May 2017.
3

PROS & CONS:
PROS: Congressional designation of Interstate 11 addresses a need for additional interstate routes
in the Western United States to provide better connections between major population centers. At
the time the Interstate System was signed into law by President Eisenhower in 1956, the combined
populations of Tucson, Phoenix, Las Vegas, and Reno was less than 700,000. Today, this
population exceeds eight million with the Phoenix metropolitan area representing the largest activity
center. Interstate routes provide connectivity for freight and goods movement and can serve as the
foundation of a stronger and more diversified economy in the Intermountain West, This linkage, as
demonstrated by other interstate corridors, stimulates the development of new crossroads, spurring
community and economic development opportunities throughout the entire Interstate 11 route.
Recent FAST Act legislation has identified funding for improvements to freight corridors throughout
the United States. Interstate 11 could qualify for this funding.
CONS: Although a congressional designation has been made for Interstate 11 between Reno,
Nevada and Nogales, Arizona, no committed funding is available for the entirety of corridor, outside
of the initial 22-mile segment in southern Clark County, Nevada. Additional studies, in particular
those EIS studies conducted under the guidance of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
are needed to identify the interstate's centerline that allows continuing public- and private-sector
planning. However, before the Federal Highway Administration can identify the outcome of an EIS
study, construction funding must be identified.
TECHNICAL & POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
TECHNICAL: By incorporating this segment of Interstate 11 into the Regional Transportation Plan,
ADOT has the opportunity to initiate a Tier II Environmental Impact Statement study to locate the
freeway centerline. A centerline provides greater certainty for both public- and private-sector
planning along the corridor.
POLICY: Adding Interstate 11 to the Regional Transportation Plan requires a Major Amendment.
The process has been identified in A.R.S. 28-6353 requiring consultation with the State
Transportation Board, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, the Regional Public Transportation
Authority, the Indian Communities, the cities and towns in Maricopa County, and the Citizens
Transportation Oversight Committee.
ACTION NEEDED:
Information and discussion.
PRIOR COMMITTEE ACTIONS:
On April 26, 2017, the MAG Regional Council approved submitting as a Major Amendment to the
Regional Transportation Plan the proposal to add the Interstate 11 corridor from Interstate 10 to
US-93 in the West Valley into the MAG 2040 Regional Transportation Plan, presently in draft form,
contingent upon a finding of air quality conformity, for consultation with the State Transportation
Board, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, the Regional Public Transportation Authority, the
Indian Communities, the cities and towns in Maricopa County, and the Citizens Transportation
Oversight Committee, as required by A.R.S. 28-6353,
MEMBERS ATTENDING
Mayor Greg Stanton, Phoenix, Chair Councilmember David L. Smith,
Mayor Jackie Meck, Buckeye, Vice Chair Cave Creek
* Councilmember Robin Barker, Mayor Jay Tibshraeny, Chandler
Apache Junction Mayor Lana Mook, El Mirage
* Mayor Kenneth Weise, Avondale Mayor Tara Walter, Florence
* Councilnnember Mike Farrar, Carefree
4

* President Bernadine Burnette, Fort * Mayor Cathy Carlat, Peoria
McDowell Yavapai Nation Supervisor Todd House, Pinal County
* Councilmennber Nick DePorter, Mayor Gail Barney, Queen Creek
Fountain Hills * President Delbert Ray, Salt River
Mayor Tommy Lee Sikes, Gila Bend Pima-Maricopa Indian Community
* Governor Stephen Roe Lewis, Gila River Mayor W.J. "Jim" Lane, Scottsdale
Indian Community Mayor Sharon Wolcott, Surprise
Mayor Jenn Daniels, Gilbert Mayor Mark Mitchell, Tempe
Mayor Jerry Weiers, Glendale Mayor Anna Tovar, Tolleson
Mayor Georgia Lord, Goodyear Mayor Everett Sickles, Wickenburg
# Mayor Valerie Molina, Guadalupe Mayor Michael LeVault, Youngtown
# Mayor Thomas Schoaf, Litchfield Park Mr. Roc Arnett, Citizens Transportation
Mayor Christian Price, City of Maricopa Oversight Committee
Supervisor Denny Barney, Maricopa Co. Mr. Joseph La Rue, State Transportation
Mayor John Giles, Mesa Board
Councilmember Mark Stanton for Mayor Mr. Jack Sellers, State Transportation
Michael Collins, Paradise Valley Board
* Those members neither present nor represented by proxy.
# Attended by telephone conference call. + Attended by videoconference
On April 19, 2017, the Transportation Policy Committee recommended approval of submitting as a
Major Amendment to the Regional Transportation Plan the proposal to add the Interstate 11 corridor
from Interstate 10 to US-93 in the West Valley into the MAG 2040 Regional Transportation Plan,
presently in draft form, contingent upon a finding of air quality conformity, for consultation with the
State Transportation Board, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, the Regional Public
Transportation Authority, the Indian Communities, the cities and towns in Maricopa County, and the
Citizens Transportation Oversight Committee, as required by A.R.S. 28-6353.
MEMBERS ATTENDING
Mayor John Giles, Mesa, Chair Mr. Charles Huellmantel, Huellmantel and
Mayor Kenneth Weise, Avondale, Affiliates
Vice Chair Mayor Georgia Lord, Goodyear
* Mr. F. Rockne Arnett, Citizens * Mayor Mark Mitchell, Tempe
Transportation Oversight Committee * Mayor Lana Mook, El Mirage
Mr. Dave Berry, Swift Transportation Mayor Christian Price, City of Maricopa
Vice Mayor Bridget Binsbacher, Peoria Mr. Mark Reardon, Vulcan Materials Co.
Mayor Jenn Daniels, Gilbert * Mr. Jack Sellers, State Transportation
Mr. Doug DeClusin, Sunland Asphalt Board
Councilmember Nora Ellen, Chandler * Councilmember David N. Smith, Scottsdale
Vice President Martin Harvier, Salt River Mayor Greg Stanton, Phoenix
Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Ms. Karrin Kunasek Taylor, Arizona
Supervisor Clint Hickman, Maricopa County Strategies, LLC
* Mayor Jerry Weiers, Glendale
Mayor Sharon Wolcott, Surprise
* Not present
# Participated by telephone conference call + Participated by videoconference call
On March 26, 2014, the MAG Regional Council adopted a resolution supporting the I-11 and
Intermountain West Corridor Study recommendation to locate the SIU 4 segment between Interstate
10 in Buckeye and US-93 north of Wickenburg in a corridor between 459th Avenue and SR-85. No
other committee actions have been taken on this matter.
5

CONTACT PERSON:
Bob Hazlett, Senior Engineering Manager, 602 254-6300.
* This corridor represents an Illustrative transoorfatton corndor
Prescott N.F. included the MAG Regional Transportation Program and
was accepted by the MAG Regional Council. This is one of
numerous corridors that may be considered in subsequent
environmental studies A preferred corridor tub not be
recommended without review and approval of the FHWA
71 under the provisions of the National Environmental Policy
3 Act (NEPA).
pickenburg YAVAriA, COUNry
• • COUNT,
Tonto N.F
SRFMIC
111" 212= Apeche
!tett - n6tilbri
I 1...em4gfill_
R7
Gila
Bend
MIA
87
Barry M. Goldwater
Air Force Range
Alternative alignments may Tohono O'odharn
vary within shaded area R.
Capri
Legend
I County Boundary Railroad Local or State Parks mi National Park Service U.S. Forest Service
- Freeway Bufeau of Land Management Planned Recreation Private National Monument
- Slate/US Highway Bureau of Reclamation Management Area State Land 11101 SIU #3: I-85-10 (Casa Grande)
Major Street Tribal Lands Miktary U.S. Fish and VVildlite to, and including. I•10 (Buckeye) 0 25 5 i5
41101. SW ilk 1-10 (Buckeye) I I I I II I
to US 93 (Wickenburg)
6