Tucson - Pima Association of Governments

2005 – 2010
Regional Transportation System
Performance
Assessment
Feb. 2013

86
t
t a
C
C e n
86
W e
s t
B
O
t a
l
77
77
C r u z R i v e r
BSN
19
BSN
19
BSN
19
Ri lito
Cr
e
d
l
r
C
r
Ve
s h
r d e
C r
83
The 2005-2010 Regional Transportation System Performance
Assessment presents an evaluation of the transportation system
in the Tucson metropolitan region, an area encompassing
all of Pima County and covering nearly 9,200 square miles.
An estimated 95 percent of the region’s population and a
comparable share of the region’s jobs are concentrated in
eastern Pima County, which includes the towns of Marana,
Sahuarita, and Oro Valley, the cities of Tucson and South Tucson,
and the most populous places in unincorporated Pima County.
This report, prepared by Pima Association of Governments
(PAG), reviews growth trends, travel conditions and system
improvements. It is the first such report to be prepared since the
establishment of the 2006 voter- approved, $2.1 billion Regional
Transportation Authority (RTA) plan and reflects many of the
improvements made during the first period (FY 2007-2011)
of the 20-year plan. Through its first five-year period, the RTA
funded 420 projects regionwide.
The period covered by this report was one in which the nation
and region struggled through a once-in-a-generation housing
crisis and economic recession, resulting in high unemployment,
and lower-than-expected population growth and home building.
Because of the unprecedented volatility of the latter part of the
decade, many population and travel estimates for the inter-
Census period were unreliable and required downward revisions
following the release of 2010 Census data. The Performance
Assessment uses the most recently available data based on the
2010 Census to report on the system.
S a n t a
Ironwood
Forest
National
Monument
C r u z
Sanders Rd
R i v e r
10
Schuk Toak District
of the Tohono
O’odham
Nation
C e n t r a l A
r i z o n a
Marana
Northwest
Regional
Airport
Sandario Rd
P r o j e c
C e n t r a l A r i z o n a
t C a n a l
Avra Valley Rd
Saguaro
National Park
(West Unit)
P r o
Marana
Twin Peaks Rd
j e c
Ryan
Airfield
Tucson
Mountain
Park
C a n a l
S a n
Tangerine Rd
r u
Ajo Hwy
San Xavier District
of the Tohono O’odham
Nation
2006 Eastern Pima County
MILES
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
z R
i v e r
10
Pascua Yaqui
Tribe
Tortolita
Mountain
Park
Thornydale Rd
Arthur
Pack
Regional
Park
La Cholla
Airpark
C a ñ a d a d e l
10
t r a l A r i z o n a P r o j e c t C a n a
P I N A L C O U N T Y
Oro
Valley
r o
Silverbell Rd
S a n
r a n c h
C r u z
R i v e r
P I M A C O U N T Y
La Canada Dr
Ina Rd
19
Oracle Rd
South
Tucson
Mission Rd
Duval Mine Rd
19
S a n t a
Introduction
Tucson Metropolitan Region
1st Ave
Oracle Rd
River Rd
Prince Rd
6th Ave
Campbell Ave
P i m a
C a ñ a d a
W a s h
6th St
Tucson
Valencia Rd
10
Sahuarita
Old Tucson-Nogales Hwy
O r o
Catalina
State Park
Alvernon Wy
Swan Rd
Tucson
International
Airport
Grant Rd
Speedway Blvd
Kolb Rd
Pantano
Golf Links Rd
Davis-Monthan
Air Force
Base
Irvington Rd
Santa Rita
Experimental
Range
Wash
22nd St
Sabino Cyn Rd
S a b
S a b i n o C
i n o
Bear Cyn Rd
T a n q u e
C r
Ve r d e
10
B e a r
C r
Broadway Blvd
Southeast
Regional
Park
Coronado
National
Forest
Snyder Rd
Catalina Highway
Harrison Rd
Houghton Rd
Valencia Rd
A g u a
T a n q u e
Coronado
National
Forest
C a l
Tanque Verde Rd
Sahuarita Rd
P a n t a n o W a
i e n t e W a s h
Saguaro
National Park
(East Unit)
Cienega Creek
Preservation Area
Whitehouse Canyon Rd
Pima County, Arizona
The roadway system in eastern Pima County consists of approximately 4,715 lane
miles of freeways , parkways, and major and minor arterial roadways, which
together carry an estimated 85 percent of total vehicle miles travelled in the region.
Empire-
Cienega Resource
Conservation Area

Housing
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
Residential Building Permits
0
Issued
2000 - 2010 2001-2005 2006-2010
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
2001-2005 2006-2010
Outside City of Tucson
Between 2000 and 2010, the population of Pima County
Within City of Tucson
grew by 16 percent, from 843,746 to 980,263. Approximately
75 percent of population growth and 70 percent of housing
growth occurred outside of the Tucson city limits in rapidly
growing suburban areas.
Residential Building Permits by Housing Type
2001 - 2005 2006 - 2010
40,500
350 4,600
350
3,500
Single Family Residential
Townhome
Mobile Home
Multifamily
Outside City of Tucson
Within City of Tucson
Source: Pima County
18,000
650
1,150
Source: Pima County
Housing, Population and Employment
Population
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
South
Tucson
Jurisdictional Population Growth Growth
2000 - 2010 - 2010
Tucson
Unincorporated
Pima Cty
Oro
Valley Marana Sahuarita
2000: 5,490 486,699 305,059 19,657 13,556 3,242
2010: 5,652 520,116 353,264 41,011 34,961 25,259
3% Growth 7% Growth 16% Growth 109% Growth 158% Growth 679% Growth
700%
600%
500%
400%
300%
200%
100%
0%
In the last decade, the share of the region’s population that is 65
years or older grew by 8.5 percent. As the region’s population
continues to age, we will need to expand mobility services for a
growing non-driving population.
Employment
Total Employment
2000 2005 2010
393,716 418,214 433,806
Source: U.S. Census
Total employment in the region grew by 10.2 percent from 2000
to 2010, peaking at 446,651 in 2008 (Source: Arizona Department of
Administration, Office of Employment and Population Statistics).
Traffic Growth
2005 2010
Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) 18,301,643 20,767,534
Daily Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT) 463,462 518,698
Daily VMT/Capita 19.23 21.19
Daily VHT/Capita 0.49 0.53
Daily Vehicle Trips 2,661,925 2,799,985
Average Network Speed (mph) 39.49 40.04
Sun Tran Annual Bus Revenue Miles 6,913,227 7,950,999
Sun Tran Annual Bus Revenue Hours 532,792 593,773
Ratio Vehicle Passenger Miles/
Transit Passenger Miles 113/1 98/1
Average Transit Speed 12.98 13.39
From 2005 to 2010, daily vehicle miles traveled (VMT) increased
13.5 percent, while daily vehicle hours traveled (VHT) increased
by 11.9 percent.
As transit services were expanded in the region, the total number
of passenger miles traveled by transit increased relative to
those traveled by car. (Passenger miles traveled is calculated by
multiplying miles traveled by number of passengers.)
Vehicle numbers provided in this table are computed using the PAG travel demand
model, which is an estimation tool that only includes travel on major streets in the
regional network. Trips taken on local roads are excluded from the model.
Numbers may vary from earlier VMT estimates since the model was recently updated
to include 2010 Census data and newer socio-demographic information. Earlier VMT
estimates were based on population assumptions that were shown to be too high for
the region during the inter-Census period.

Traffic Volume
PAG collects traffic volume data annually on roadway segments.
The table below shows the 20 busiest segments based on average
daily traffic (ADT). Daily traffic on most of the busiest segments
increased during the five-year period. For more detailed
information on specific segments, visit http://www.pagnet.org/
applications/trafficcounts/
Average Daily Traffic: 20 Busiest Segments
2005 2010
I-10: Speedway to Park 160,000 173,000
Grant Rd: Swan to Craycroft 51,259 61,523
Speedway Blvd: Country Club to Alvernon 52,951 56,474
Golf Links Rd: Swan to Craycroft 55,033 55,482
Oracle Road: Orange Grove to Magee 53,013 54,993
Campbell Ave: 6th St to Broadway 40,494 54,941
Tanque Verde: Kolb to Sabino Canyon 59,604 53,855
22nd St: Tucson Blvd to Country Club 49,686 53,488
Grant Rd: Wilmot to Tanque Verde 48,999 53,205
Wilmot Rd: 5th St to Speedway 42,489 53,146
Valencia Rd: I-19 to 12th Ave 51,609 52,635
Golf Links Rd: Craycroft to Wilmot 56,676 52,401
River Rd: 1st Ave to Campbell 36,139 51,901
Tanque Verde Rd:
Sabino Canyon to Camino Pio Decimo 52,257 51,687
Broadway Blvd: Craycroft to Wilmot 53,030 50,965
Speedway Blvd: Craycroft to Wilmot 47,843 50,951
Broadway Blvd: Country Club to Alvernon 43,880 50,094
Speedway Blvd: Tucson to Country Club 55,898 50,077
Kolb Rd: 22nd St to Broadway 53,570 49,915
Valencia Rd: Mission to I-19 47,360 49,911
Note: 2005 counts occurred 2004-2006, 2010 counts occurred
2009-2011
The table below shows the top 10 locations for total peak bicycle
activity as reported in the 2010 PAG regional bicycle count. The
numbers represent the sum of cyclists counted during a single
2-hour AM and a single 2-hour PM peak period.
10 Busiest Peak Hour Bike Locations
1 3rd St / Campbell Ave 992
2 University Blvd / Park Ave 986
3 Helen St / Mountain Ave 771
4 2nd St / Highland Ave 566
5 Old Spanish Trail /
Freeman Rd Weekend 487
6 3rd St / Country Club Rd 340
7 Blacklidge Dr / Mountain Ave 307
8 Rillito Pathway /
Mountain Ave - North Weekend 292
9 University Blvd / Stone Ave 291
10 9th St / 4th Ave 271
The table below shows the 10 busiest Sun Tran routes for 2010
as measured by the number of passengers that board buses each
year.
10 Highest Ridership Bus Routes
Route# Description Total Passengers
1 8 Broadway/South 6th Ave 3,228,740
2 16 12th Ave/Oracle 1,933,424
3 4 Speedway 1,654,037
4 11 Alvernon/Ajo 1,328,097
5 6 South Park/North First Ave 1,265,221
6 3 6th St/Wilmot 945,612
7 17 Country Club/29th St 892,460
8 9 Grant 785,954
9 7 22nd St 782,808
10 34 Craycroft 658,295

Revenue and Expenditures
The region’s transportation system is funded from a mix of local,
regional, state and federal sources.
Revenue
Local Funding
Local funding for transportation comes from various jurisdictional
impact fees, general funds, construction sales taxes, transit
fares and other sources.
Regional Funding
In 2006, voters approved the $2.1 billion, 20-year Regional Transportation
Authority (RTA) plan, paid for with a half-cent countywide
sales tax in Pima County. Since its passage, the revenue
raised through the RTA has been vital for funding many transportation
projects in the region, some years accounting for as
much as 60 percent to 70 percent of the programmed funds for
regional transportation projects. The RTA plan contains a number
of roadway, safety, environmental and economic vitality, and
transit improvements. Between FY 2007-2008 and FY 2010-2011,
the RTA collected $283.9 million in sales tax revenue.
State Funding
State funding for transportation comes primarily from the Highway
User Revenue Fund (HURF), which is raised through gasoline
taxes, vehicle registration fees, vehicle license taxes and other
sources. State HURF funds typically are allocated for roadway
projects, unlike other funding sources which are generally more
flexible and can be used for transit, bike, pedestrian and other
projects. The current
Arizona fuel tax rate is 19
cents per gallon for gas
and 27 cents per gallon
for diesel fuel, of which
18 cents and 26 cents,
respectively, is committed
to the state HURF.
Federal Funding
Federal funding for
transportation comes
from a wide variety of
federal programs including
the Surface Transportation
Program (STP),
which provides flexible
funding that may be
used for projects on any
roadway that is eligible
to receive federal funds.
The current federal gas
tax rate, the primary
source of STP funding, is
18.4 cents per gallon.
Selected RTA-Funded System
Improvements FY2006-2011
Total centerline
roadway miles added 19
Intersection safety and
capacity improvements 95
Park and rides built 6
Bus pullouts built 44
Bus services
Expanded evening and
weekend services 44
Frequency and
overcrowding relief projects 6
Express service added 7
Neighborhood circulator
routes started 11
Safety
Bike facility miles added 162
Sidewalk miles added 101
Pathway miles added 18
HAWK pedestrian crossing
signal installations 42
Expenditures
Operations and Maintenance
Currently, PAG member jurisdictions spend a combined total
of roughly $120 million annually on maintaining and operating
the region’s transportation system. This includes funding spent
on local roads and roads of regional significance as well as on
regional transit services. While considerable, the amount spent
on operations and maintenance falls short of what is needed to
maintain the transportation system at a high level.
Projects
Although costs can vary year-to-year, the region typically
programs between $150 million to $280 million annually for
transportation projects of regional significance based on funding
availability and project schedules. In 2010, $185 million was
programmed in the region.
The RTA funded 420 projects through the first five-year period of
the plan, resulting in expanded transit service, completion of a
number of safety and intersection projects, the addition of over
100 miles each of bike facilities and sidewalks, and increased
roadway capacity.
*Bike facilities include bike routes, bike routes with striped shoulders,
shared use paths, and bus/bike lanes.

Congestion and Pavement Conditions
Roadway Congestion
Volume-to-Capacity Ratio (V/C ratio)
One way to measure roadway congestion is with a roadway
volume-to-capacity ratio (V/C ratio). Congestion levels are defined
as follows:
Severe Congestion: V/C Ratio Greater than 1 (0.56% of VMT in 2010)
Heavy Congestion: V/C Ratio .75 to 1: (4.96% of VMT in 2010)
Moderate Congestion: V/C Ratio .5 to .74: (21.05% of VMT in 2010)
Low to No Congestion: V/C Ratio less than .5: (73.43% of VMT in 2010)
In 2010, about 5.5 percent of total VMT in the region occurred
under heavy to severe congestion conditions, up from 4.5 percent
in 2005.
Note: VMT traveled under heavy to severe congestion is considerably lower than what
was estimated in some past reports, owing to a change in the way in which the V/C
ratio is calculated. Earlier reports, such as the 2000 to 2005 System Performance Assessment,
derived the V/C ratio by using an Average Daily Traffic method to measure
traffic volume, an approach that tends to result in higher congestion level estimates.
V/C ratio is now calculated by modeling peak period and non-peak period volumes
proportional to total VMT, a method that yields a more accurate reflection of actual
travel conditions.
Percent
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Roadway Congestion
2005-2010
Low to No
Congestion
Moderate
Congestion
2005
2010
Heavy
Congestion
Severe
Congestion

Sandario Sandario Rd Rd
Sandario Rd
Cam. de Oeste Cam. de Oeste
La Canada La Canada Dr Dr
La Cholla La Blvd Cholla Blvd
La Cañada La Dr Cañada Dr
1st Ave
Swan Rd
Thornydale Thornydale Rd Rd
Kolb Rd
Houghton Houghton Rd Rd
Kolb Rd
Harrison Harrison Rd Rd
Craycroft Craycroft Rd Rd
Sandario Sandario Rd Rd
Cam. de Oeste Cam. de Oeste
La Canada La Canada Dr Dr
La Cholla La Blvd Cholla Blvd
La Cañada La Dr Cañada Dr
1st Ave
1st Ave
Swan Rd
Swan Rd
Thornydale Thornydale Rd Rd
Kolb Rd
Houghton Houghton Rd Rd
Kolb Rd
Kolb Rd
1st Ave
Swan Rd
Cam. de Oeste
La Canada Dr
La Cholla Blvd
La Cañada Dr
1st Ave
Swan Rd
Houghton Rd
Kolb Rd
Harrison Rd
Harrison Harrison Rd Rd
Craycroft Rd
Sandario Rd
Thornydale Rd
La Cañada Dr
Craycroft Craycroft Rd Rd
1st Ave
Swan Rd
Cam. de Oeste
Thornydale Rd
La Canada Dr
La Cholla Blvd
Houghton Rd
Harrison Rd
Craycroft Rd
Roadway Congestion
2010 TUCSON METRO TRAFFIC CONGESTION (MORNING PEAK HOURS AND AFTERNOON PEAK)
2010 TUCSON 2010 Max TUCSON METRO V/C Ratio METRO TRAFFIC - AM TRAFFIC Peak CONGESTION CONGESTION (MORNING (MORNING PEAK Max HOURS PEAK V/C HOURS Ratio AND - AFTERNOON PM AND Peak AFTERNOON PEAK) PEAK)
Max V/C Max Ratio V/C - AM Ratio Peak - AM Peak
Max V/C Max Ratio V/C - PM Ratio Peak - PM Peak
Max V/C Ratio – Morning Peak Hours
Max V/C Ratio – Afternoon Peak Hours
2010 Tucson Metro Traffic Congestion Maps – Morning Peak Hours vs. Afternoon Peak Hours
!a
!a
!a
Avra Valley Rd
Avra Valley Rd
Twin Peaks Rd
Tangerine Rd
Tangerine Rd
Avra Valley Rd
Tangerine Rd
?Ä
?Ä ?Ä
PINAL COUNTY
PIMA COUNTY
PINAL COUNTY PINAL COUNTY
PIMA COUNTY PIMA COUNTY
!a
!a
!a
Avra Valley Rd
Avra Valley Rd
Twin Peaks Rd
Tangerine Rd
Tangerine Rd
Avra Valley Rd
Tangerine Rd
?Ä
?Ä ?Ä
PINAL COUNTY
PIMA COUNTY
PINAL COUNTY PINAL COUNTY
PIMA COUNTY PIMA COUNTY
Twin Peaks Rd
Twin Peaks Rd
Ina Rd
Twin Peaks Rd
Twin Peaks Rd
Ina Rd
Ina Rd
Sunrise Dr
Ina Rd
Ina Rd
Sunrise Dr
Ina Rd
Ajo Hwy
Ajo Hwy
?Ï
?Ï
Ajo Hwy
Valencia Rd
Silverbell Rd
Gates Pass Rd
Gates Pass Rd
Kinney Rd
Valencia Rd
Silverbell Rd
Kinney Rd
?Ï
Mission Rd
Mission Rd
Irvington
Irvington
Valencia Rd
Silverbell Rd
Gates Pass Rd
Kinney Rd
Rd
Rd
!d
!d
Mission Rd
Irvington
Nogales Nogales Hwy Hwy
Rd
Alvernon Alvernon Way Way
!d
Grant Rd
Wilmot Rd Wilmot Rd
Sunrise Dr Sunrise Dr
River Rd
Grant Rd
Nogales Hwy
River Rd
Alvernon Way
Wilmot Rd
Sahuarita Rd
Tanque Verde Rd
River Rd
Grant Rd
Tanque Verde Rd Tanque Verde Rd
Sahuarita Rd Sahuarita Rd
Speedway Blvd Speedway Blvd
22nd St
Irvington Rd
Speedway Blvd
Broadway Blvd
Golf Links Rd
Broadway Blvd Broadway Blvd
Escalante
22nd St
Rd
22nd St
Golf Links Rd
Golf Links Rd
Escalante Rd Escalante Rd
Irvington Rd Irvington Rd
!a
!a !a
Ajo Hwy
Ajo Hwy
?Ï
?Ï
Ajo Hwy
Valencia Rd
Silverbell Rd
Gates Pass Rd
Gates Pass Rd
Kinney Rd
Valencia Rd
Silverbell Rd
Kinney Rd
?Ï
Mission Rd
Mission Rd
Irvington
Irvington
Valencia Rd
Silverbell Rd
Gates Pass Rd
Kinney Rd
Rd
Rd
!d
!d
Mission Rd
Irvington
Nogales Nogales Hwy Hwy
Rd
Alvernon Alvernon Way Way
!d
Grant Rd
Wilmot Rd Wilmot Rd
Sunrise Dr Sunrise Dr
River Rd
Grant Rd
Nogales Hwy
River Rd
Alvernon Way
Wilmot Rd
Sahuarita Rd
Tanque Verde Rd
River Rd
Grant Rd
Tanque Verde Rd Tanque Verde Rd
Sahuarita Rd Sahuarita Rd
Speedway Blvd Speedway Blvd
22nd St
Irvington Rd
Speedway Blvd
Broadway Blvd
Golf Links Rd
Broadway Blvd Broadway Blvd
Escalante
22nd St
Rd
22nd St
Golf Links Rd
Golf Links Rd
Escalante Rd Escalante Rd
Irvington Rd Irvington Rd
!a
!a !a
Average V/C ratio: 0.36
Maximum V/C ratio: 1.87
Average V/C ratio: Average V/C 0.36ratio: 0.36
Maximum V/C Maximum ratio: 1.87 V/C ratio: 1.87
p
V/C (Volume/Capacity) is the ratio of travel
demand during a certain time period
V/C (volume) (Volume/Capacity) to the V/C number (Volume/Capacity) is of the vehicles ratio of the is travel the ratio of travel
street demand can during hold demand (capacity). a certain during time a period certain time period
(volume) to the (volume) number to of the vehicles number the of vehicles the
street can hold street (capacity). can hold (capacity).
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
The above maps show AM (6:30 to 8:30 a.m.) and PM (4:00 to
6:00 p.m.) peak hour congestion levels on major and minor arterial
roads and collector streets for eastern Pima County.
Between 2005 and 2010, the region increased roadway capac-
p
?Ë
?Ë
0 5 10
0 Miles 50 105 10
Heavy (0.76 - 1.00) Low (0.00 - 0.50)
Severe (1.01 - 2.00) Severe (1.01 Moderate - 2.00) (0.51 Moderate - 0.75) (0.51 - 0.75)
Miles
?Ë
Miles
Average V/C ratio: 0.38
Maximum V/C ratio: 1.76
Average V/C ratio: Average V/C 0.38ratio: 0.38
Maximum V/C Maximum ratio: 1.76 V/C ratio: 1.76
Severe (1.01 - 2.00)
Moderate (0.51 - 0.75)
Heavy (0.76 - 1.00) Heavy (0.76 Low - 1.00) (0.00 - 0.50) Low (0.00 - 0.50)
ity by 3.2 percent, adding roughly 145 miles of new travel lanes.
However, roadway demand, which is measured in VMT, increased
by 13.5 percent during the same period, leading to a slight increase
in congestion levels.
?Ë
?Ë
?Ë
Pavement Condition
The International Roughness Index (IRI) is a measure used to
assess the ride quality, or pavement condition, of the roadway.
IRI is recorded using the Automated Road Analyzer (ARAN) van,
which is driven along the region’s roads capturing a data point
every 26.4 feet. The ARAN van is operated on behalf of the PAG
region by agreement between PAG and the City of Tucson. The
chart to the right represents the roadway pavement condition
for combined data points recorded from 2008 to 2010.
IRI Pavement Condition
for the Tucson Region
21.57%
Good
Pavement condition
IRI Pavement Condition for the Tucson Region
52.40%
Poor
4.54%
Excellent
21.49%
Fair

Performance
PAG evaluates intersection performance by traffic delay and
traffic volume. Delay per vehicle (sec/veh) measures the average
amount of time it takes for a vehicle to move through an intersection,
while traffic volume is a measurement of the total number
of vehicles that move through an intersection during combined
morning and evening peaks hours. The chart below shows the 15
most congested intersections based on vehicle delay.
Traffic volumes can fluctuate significantly from year-to-year
Congested Intersections
Busiest Intersection Based on Weighted Average
Peak Hour Delay/Vehicle (Seconds/Vehicle)
Intersection Average Weighted Vehicle Delay Volume
Ajo Way/Alvernon Way 199.18 12459
Ina Rd/SR77 115.78 14740
Irvington/Kolb Rd 115.73 9480
Valencia Rd/Kolb Rd 112.22 10621
Orange Grove Rd/Camino de La Tierra 99.05 7112
Cortaro Farms Rd/Shannon Rd 98.85 5054
Golf Links/Wilmot Rd 97.36 12417
River Rd/La Cañada Dr 90.15 10126
Golf Links/Swan Rd 89.10 13723
Sunrise Dr/Kolb Rd 88.37 5306
Tanque Verde/Grant Rd 83.54 15988
River Rd/Craycroft Rd 80.73 6303
Tanque Verde/Sabino Canyon Rd 74.38 12617
Wetmore Rd/La Cañada Dr 72.32 9632
Broadway Blvd/Pantano Rd 66.18 11792
depending on the exact time intersections are counted. These
counts represent a sample from December 2011.
Some high-volume intersections do not result in long delays
(ex. 22nd/Kolb) because they have improved lane capacity and
configuration, as well as good signal timing. Conversely, intersections
showing high average vehicle delay with relatively low
traffic volumes (ex. Sunrise/Kolb) often have poor left turn and
through capacity.
Busiest Intersection Based on
AM-PM Peak Hour Volume
Intersection – Volume
Intersection Average Weighted Vehicle Delay Volume
Tanque Verde/Grant Rd 83.54 15988
Broadway Blvd/Kolb Rd 59.94 15738
Speedway Blvd/Wilmot Rd 45.61 15070
Ina Rd/SR77 115.78 14740
22nd St/Kolb Rd 32.73 14590
Golf Links/Kolb Rd 42.04 14444
Speedway Blvd/Kolb Rd 46.43 14248
Broadway Blvd/Wilmot Rd 56.09 14139
Congress/I-10 EB Frontage Rd 26.07 13960
22nd St/Wilmot Rd 45.57 13897
Broadway Blvd/Craycroft Rd 27.03 13803
Golf Links/Swan Rd 89.10 13723
Speedway Blvd/Campbell Ave 41.36 13557
22nd St/Alvernon Way 35.30 13504
22nd St/Craycroft Rd 42.01 12864
Improvements to Grant / Craycroft were done as part of the
RTA’s Intersection project category. The project included the
addition of dual left turn bays and right turn bays in all directions
as well as new traffic signal timing plans. The results have
shown notable improvements to the operation of the intersection
with significant reductions in overall delay and vehicle
stops. The project resulted in a delay reduction of 24 percent
for the morning rush hour with 19 percent fewer stops. The
evening rush hour resulted in a delay reduction of 36 percent
with 31 percent fewer stops.
Grant and Craycroft Intersection Performance
Before RTA After RTA Percent
Improvements Improvements Reduction
Total AM Peak Hour Delay 15.7 hours 11.7 hours 25.48%
AM Stops 868 703 19.01%
Total PM Peak Hour Delay 21.1 hours 13.4 hours 36.49%
PM Stops 1262 868 31.22%

Transit, Bike and Pedestrian Performance
Transit
Transit ridership on Sun Tran increased by 25 percent from 2005
to 2010 far outpacing the region’s population growth. Much
of the growth in ridership was due to additional service hours
made possible with RTA funding. Additionally, Sun Shuttle, a
neighborhood circulator service that connects to Sun Tran, was
launched in 2009 greatly expanding transit services in more rural
areas and outlying neighborhoods.
Transit 2005-2010 comparison
2005 2010
Annual revenue miles* 9,485,954 11,208,607
Average weekday ridership* 56,389 70,652
Sun Tran annual ridership* 16,620,475 20,847,575
Sun Tran on-time performance
(monthly avg.) 87%
Annual operating expenses* $48,734,815 $63,815,959
Vehicles operated at
maximum service* 249 318
Neighborhood circulator
annual ridership** 80,698 197,337
Neighborhood circulator
revenue miles** 393,015 1,025,782
Percent of population living
within 1/4 mile of a transit stop N/A 48%
*Includes Sun Tran fixed-route bus service as well as Sun Van paratransit service
**Neighborhood circulator service expanded and renamed Sun Shuttle in 2009
Source: National Transit Database and Sun Tran and Sun Shuttle Monthly Reports
Job access
An important goal for any transit system is to provide access to
employment opportunities. Employment access also can serve
as a proxy measure for transit access to many goods, services
and destinations. Within the PAG region roughly 79 percent of
employers are located within ¼ mile of a bus stop.
Employers Accessible to Transit
by Number of Employees
1 - 9
10 - 49
50 - 99
100 - 499
500 +
Bike and Pedestrian
The Tucson region is widely recognized as one of the leading
bike-friendly communities in the country, currently holding a
gold designation from the League of American Bicyclists. Since
2000, the region has more than doubled the number of bike
facility lane miles.
Total Miles of Bike Facilities 2000-2010 comparison
2000 2010
Total miles of bike facilities 439 966
Miles per 100,000 residents 52 98
Regional Bike and Pedestrian Count
Each year in October, Pima Association of Governments conducts
a bike and pedestrian count at selected intersections across the
region. The count consists of PAG staff and volunteers counting
bike activity for two hours during morning and evening peak
travel times.
In 2010, 20,896 cyclists and 14,248 pedestrians were counted at
98 locations. The busiest bike and pedestrian areas are located in
high-activity areas around the University of Arizona and downtown
1 Tucson. - 9
The same 39 core locations have been counted every year since
2008 and average 6,533 bikes per year combined for all locations.
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
Bike Count of Core Locations
2008 2009 2010 2011
Pedestrian Infrastructure
In 2012, PAG and the City of Tucson released the ADA Sidewalk
Inventory Study Report, which examined pedestrian accessibility
along the region’s arterial and collector roads. The inventory
identified approximately 3,670 miles of roadway in the region
with sidewalks on both sides of the road. However, of the
sidewalk segments studied, many were found to contain physical
barriers, such as missing sidewalks or ramps, that left them
totally or partially inaccessible to many users. The most inaccessible
parts of the sidewalk network were concentrated primarily
in older areas developed before the 1980s or in parts of the
region with a more rural character.
The RTA has addressed some of these gaps by funding more
than 100 miles of new sidewalks with another 170 miles in design
or under construction.

Environment
Air Quality
In 2011, cars, buses and trucks emitted about 318 U.S. tons of
pollutants per day in eastern Pima County (CO, NOx, and VOC
emissions). According to a 2008 report from the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, on-road emissions account for
roughly 40 percent of the region’s total emissions.
PAG’s On-Road Mobile Emissions Inventory for
Pima County (2008)
environmental impacts. While total CO2e emissions in Pima
County have increased since 1990, per capita emissions have
fallen around 3.8 percent to 16.7 U.S. tons per person. This was
slightly lower than the United States as a whole, which emitted
19.6 U.S. tons per person.
On-road sources contribute roughly one third of all CO2e emissions
in eastern Pima County. Since 1990, per capita on-road
emissions have fallen by more than 10.5 percent due largely to
the improved fuel economy of all classes of vehicles.
on-Road Mobile Only (U.S. tons)
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 132,700
Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) 22,883
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 11,766
Total on-road emissions 167,349
In 2010, eastern Pima County emitted around 15.8 million U.S.
tons of greenhouse gases from all sources. Measured in terms of
carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e), excessive emissions of greenhouse
gases are widely considered to have harmful long-term
Millions
6
4
2
0
On-Road CO 2 e Emissions
1990 - 2010
1990 2000 2005 2010
Total on-road CO 2 e emissions (U.S. tons)
On-road CO 2 e emissions per capita (U.S. tons)
5
3
1
3-Year Average of the 4th Highest 8-Hour Ozone Concentration
0.10
0.08
0.06
Fairgrounds
Tangerine
22nd St./Craycroft
Saguaro Nat’l Park East
Pre-2008 Ozone Standard
Current Ozone Standard
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Ozone is a naturally occurring gas that forms in the upper atmosphere.
However, at ground level, ozone is a harmful respiratory
irritant, particularly to children and the elderly, and can damage
local plants. Ozone is formed when volatile organic compounds
(VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) emitted from tailpipes and
stationary sources react in the presence of sunlight. Ozone concentrations
in Pima County have remained relatively stable over
the last 10 years and are currently at 90 percent of the 0.075ppm
federal standard. In 2013, the EPA is expected to propose new
ozone standards which may be lower than the current standard.
Lowering the ozone standard could potentially place Pima
County in violation and result in environmental and monetary
sanctions.
Pollution Control Measures
Clean Cities
The Clean Cities program is a voluntary national effort to increase
clean fuel vehicle usage. The Tucson region received its
initial Clean Cities designation in 1999. Since 2002, the number
of clean fuel vehicles on the road has increased by an estimated
238 percent. In 2010 alone these vehicles were largely responsible
for displacing 12.1 million gasoline gallon-equivalents with
other fuel sources.
Travel Reduction Program
Pima Association of Governments’ Travel Reduction Program
is mandatory for employers that have more than 100 full-time
equivalent employees at a single or contiguous worksite, and
voluntary for those with fewer employees. The purpose of the
program is to improve air quality in the region by encouraging
employees to take alternative modes of transportation to work.
There are currently 290 employers enrolled in the program, representing
128,690 employees.
In 2011, TRP employers helped improve the environment by saving
an estimated:
83.8
$46.1
million
vehicle miles
million savings
(due to reduction in fuel use and maintenance costs)
U.S. tons of onroad
emissions 3.7 gallons
million
(CO, NOx, VOC) of gasoline
1,200
46,307 tons of C0 2 e

Safety
Mirroring national trends, Pima County’s traffic accident, injury
and fatality rates decreased dramatically from 2005 to 2010.
The fatality rate in particular – measured in fatalities per
100 million VMT – fell by 26 percent during the period.
Across the country, driving on our roads and highways has never
been safer, with the nation achieving a historically low national
traffic fatality rate of 1.11 per 100 million VMT in 2010.
Vehicle crashes by type Pima County
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Fatalities per 100 million VMT
Pima County and Arizona
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0
2005 2008 2010
0.00
2005 2008 2010
Total Crashes
Crashes with
property
damage only
Total Injuries
Crashes with
injuries
Pima County
Arizona
Each year bicyclists and pedestrians represent a disproportionate
share of the region’s total traffic fatalities, often accounting
for 15 percent to 25 percent of those who lose their lives in
accidents.
Vehicle-Pedestrian Crashes by Type 2005-2010
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Total pedestrian
Crashes 262 262 280 299 288 261
Injury or Possible Injury 220 225 242 265 246 218
Fatalities 28 20 24 13 19 19
Vehicle-Bicycle Crashes by Type 2005-2010
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Total Bicycle Crashes 319 328 360 359 352 309
Injury or Possible Injury 276 282 310 314 287 271
Fatalities 6 6 2 7 4 0*
All data comes from Arizona statewide crash database. It is estimated
that there were 4 bicycle fatalities in 2010, which are not
represented in the data.
Crashes per 100 million VMT Pima County and Arizona
300.00
250.00
200.00
150.00
100.00
50.00
0.000
2005 2008 2010
Pima County
Arizona
High-intensity Activated Crosswalks
To date, the RTA has funded 42 high-intensity activated crosswalk
(HAWK) projects as a way to improve pedestrian safety in
the region, a measure that was pioneered in Tucson and is now
being used in cities nationwide.
In order to quantify the effectiveness of HAWK installations, the
Federal Highway Administration conducted a three-year study
of a sample of HAWK crossings in the Tucson region. The study
found that those crossings with HAWK treatments experienced
a 29 percent reduction in total crashes, a 15 percent reduction in
severe crashes and a 69 percent reduction in pedestrian crashes.

Regional Comparison
The following chart shows how the Tucson region compares to
other similarly sized or western metropolitan regions in terms
of transportation system performance. The Tucson region has a
higher number of bike, pedestrian and transit commuters than
many other communities. Commute time is about average, and
Pima County has the 3rd highest traffic fatality rate as compared
to other communities in this set. Note: Data refer to a variety of
geographic scales and should be used for comparative purposes
only.
Regional Comparison
Population Drive to Work Public Travel Time Travel Time Freeway Daily Transit Traffic
City MSA* Alone♎ Carpool♎ Transportation♎ Walk♎ Bike♎ to Work☨ Index# Miles# Ridership♈ Fatalities♓
Tucson, AZ 980,263 75.74% 10.97% 2.51% 2.67% 1.32% 23.9 1.11 253 57,117 10.81
Fresno, CA 930,450 76.31% 12.64% 1.47% 2.17% 0.60% 21.5 1.07 303 48,844 12.04
Albuquerque, NM 887,077 78.47% 11.53% 1.66% 1.80% 0.88% 23.6 1.10 338 34,579 7.40
Rochester, NY 1,054,323 81.52% 8.41% 2.05% 3.49% 0.42% 20.4 1.05 550 47,229 6.58
Oklahoma City, OK 1,252,987 88.26% 11.74% 0.55% 1.66% 0.30% 21.4 1.10 778 7,687 11.20
Tulsa, Ok 937,478 81.61% 11.25% 0.52% 1.46% 0.14% 20.9 1.08 758 7,446 9.45
El Paso, TX 800,647 79.45% 11.01% 1.85% 2.13% 0.13% 22.4 1.16 449 41,028 6.87
Austin, TX 1,716,289 75.14% 12.02% 2.61% 1.69% 0.62% 25.3 1.28 836 98,245 7.62
Portland, OR 2,226,009 71.43% 10.13% 6.17% 3.28% 2.01% 24.8 1.25 793 285,978 4.22
McAllen, TX 774,769 76.63% 13.69% 0.34% 1.39% 0.16% 21.0 1.10 306 294 9.03
Salt Lake City, UT 1,124,197 75.97% 12.10% 3.24% 2.28% 0.80% 22.2 1.11 576 105,106 5.44
Las Vegas, NV 1,951,269 78.17% 11.54% 3.64% 1.81% 0.46% 24.3 1.24 566 157,299 7.40
Phoenix, AZ 4,192,887 75.83% 12.75% 2.21% 1.70% 0.73% 26.2 1.21 1,594 160,577 8.17
Notes:
*Source: Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census for Metropolitan
Statistical Areas
♎Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006-2010 American Community
Survey, Table B08301 Means of Transportation to Work for
Metropolitan Statistical Areas
☨Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006-2010 American Community
Survey, Table DP03 Selected Economic Characteristics for
Metropolitan Statistical Areas
#Source: Texas Transportation Institute, 2011 Annual Urban Mobility
Report Summary Tables. Urban Area Data Only (note: Urban
Area refers only to locations exceeding a density of 1,000 people
per square mile) Travel Time Index (TTI) is a congestion measure
developed by the Texas Transportation Institute that measures the
ratio of travel time during peak-period to travel time during free
flow conditions.
♈Source: Federal Transit Administration, National Transit Database
♓(Traffic Fatalities per 100,000 Population) source: National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fatality Analysis Reporting
System. Fatality rate based on county level data of principle county
within the Metropolitan Statistical Area.

Safety
Conclusion
As a result of the national recession, population estimates were
highly unpredictable during the second half of the last decade,
resulting in downward revisions to traffic estimates following the
release of the 2010 Census numbers.
• The region grew much faster in suburban areas than in the
urban core, and the vast majority of new housing units were
single-family detached homes.
Between 2005 and 2010, growth in the number of vehicle miles
traveled once again outpaced the rate at which the region
increased roadway capacity, demonstrating that, even in a sluggish
economy with lower-than-expected population growth, it
is very difficult, if not impossible, to manage congestion through
road building alone.
• Pavement maintenance continues to be a challenge in the
region, with over 50 percent of recorded ARAN data points
in poor condition.
• 15 percent of intersections at morning peak hour and 19
percent of intersections at evening peak hour experience
traffic movements with an F level of service, meaning vehicles
are delayed 80 seconds or more.
• 5.5 percent of the total vehicle miles traveled in the region
are under severe or heavy congestion, a slight increase over
2005.
• Traffic accident and fatality rates have decreased since 2005,
falling at a faster rate than the state as a whole.
The $2.1 billion RTA plan, approved by voters in 2006 has offered
a balanced solution to the region’s transportation challenges by
funding 420 regional projects in the first five-year period of the
RTA plan. The plan includes a mix of bike and pedestrian, safety,
environmental, transit, intersection and roadway projects. The
investment has resulted in both improvements in safety and
growth in alternative modes usage.
• Transit services have been expanded in the region to provide
more express routes, neighborhood circulators and
increased frequency. Transit ridership grew substantially
between 2005 and 2010, and nearly 50 percent of Pima
County’s residents now live within ¼ mile of a bus stop.
• Pedestrian and bike activity continues to be heaviest in
areas with high concentrations of jobs and housing, such
as around the University of Arizona and near downtown
Tucson. The RTA has funded a number of infrastructure
improvements for pedestrians and cyclists.
• Transportation accounts for roughly 40 percent of all air
pollutants emitted in the region. Per capita greenhouse gas
emissions fell slightly between 1990 and 2010, but overall
emissions are up. Ozone concentrations will continue to be
a concern in the future as the federal government considers
enacting more stringent standards.
• The Tucson region compares favorably to peer communities
in several priority areas. Fewer residents commute to
work alone as compared to many other regions. The Tucson
region also has a relatively high number of bike, pedestrian
and transit commuters. On the other hand, even though
accident rates have been falling, the Tucson region still has a
relatively high fatality rate per 100,000 residents, as compared
to similarly sized regions.

notes
notes

t
t
l
r
d
Tortolita
Mountain
Park
P I N A L C O U N T Y
P I M A C O U N T Y
C
N
C e n t r a l A
r i z o n a
arana
orthwest
egional
irport
P r o j e c
t C a n a l
Avra Valley Rd
Marana
Twin Peaks Rd
S a n
Tangerine Rd
t a
C r u z
R i v e r
10
Thornydale Rd
Arthur
Pack
Regional
Park
La Cholla
Airpark
C a ñ a d a d e l
O
r o
Oro
Valley
La Canada Dr
Oracle Rd
P i m a
W a s h
e
C a ñ a d a
l
O
r o
Catalina
State Park
C e n t r a l A r i z o n a
Saguaro
National Park
(West Unit)
P r o
Tucson
Mountain
Park
j e c
C a n a l
Ryan
Airfield
Ajo Hwy
86
10
Silverbell Rd
Ina Rd
C r u z R i v e
77
Oracle Rd
South
Tucson
19
77
1st Ave
River Rd
Prince Rd
6th Ave
Rillito
Cr
6th St
Tucson
BSN
19
Campbell Ave
Valencia Rd
10
Alvernon Wy
Swan Rd
Grant Rd
Speedway Blvd
Kolb Rd
Pantano
Davis-Monthan
Air Force
Base
Irvington Rd
Wash
22nd St
S a b
Sabino Cyn Rd
S a b i n o C r
Golf Links Rd
i n o
T a n q u e
C r
Bear Cyn Rd
Ve r d e
C
r
B e a r
C
Snyde
Catalina
Broadway Blvd
Harrison Rd
Pascua Yaqui
Tribe
t
W e s
B
t a
r a n c h S a n
Tucson
International
Airport
Valencia Rd
Sandario Rd
San Xavier District
of the Tohono O’odham
Nation
C e n
r a l A r i z o n a P r o j e c t C a n a
Mission Rd
19
S a n t a
C r u z R i v e r
10
Southeas
Regiona
Park
BSN
19
stern Pima County
MILES
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Duval Mine Rd
Sahuarita
BSN
19
177 N. Church Ave., Suite 405
Tucson, AZ 85701
(520) 792-1093 [tel] Santa Rita
(520) 620-6981 Experimental
[fax]
Range
PAGregion.com
Old Tucson-Nogales Hwy
Whitehouse Canyon Rd