Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My Public Portal
About
Resolution 17-27 McCall Transportation Master Plan
City of McCall RESOLUTION 17-27 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MCCALL, IDAHO, ADOPTING THE 2017 TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN, PROVIDING FOR RELATED MATTERS, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the McCall McCall Transportation Master Plan was prepared by Logan Simpson and sub -consultants Kittleson Associates, and is the first transportation master plan for the City of McCall; and WHEREAS, the City of McCall conducted an extensive planning process involving members of the McCall community which examined the vision, data, recommendations, and a capital improvement plan; and WHEREAS, the results of the planning process with technical expertise were used to develop the Plan; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing regarding adoption of the McCall Transportation Master Plan was held by the McCall Planning and Zoning Commission on November 7, 2017; and WHEREAS, the McCall Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the proposed McCall Transportation Master Plan; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing regarding adopting the McCall Area Transportation Master Plan to incorporate the recommendation from the McCall Planning and Zoning Commission was held by the McCall City Council November 30, 2017. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Mayor and City Council of the City of McCall, Valley County, Idaho that: The McCall Transportation Master Update is adopted and a copy of the Plan is attached hereto as Exhibit 1, and by this reference incorporated herein. This resolution shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and approval. Adopted this AT ES BessieJo W 30th day ot‘Novtlmrl2017 *. • �cCALt #0 r �6t A. 'y s E„ '� SEA o= k O gner, rrc O,'Z`-4` • McCall in motion McCall Area Transportation Master Plan Adopted November 2017 Resolution 17-27 McCall 3McCall Area Transportation Plan | McCall Acknowledgments Thank you to everyone who participated in McCall In Motion by attending a meeting, taking a survey, spreading the word, or in any other way to make McCall’s future brighter. MCCALL CITY COUNCIL Jackie Aymon, Mayor Nic Swanson, President Marcia Witte, Council Member Laura Scott, Council Member Bob Giles, Council Member VALLEY COUNT Y COMMISSION Elting Hasbrouck, District 1 Gordan Cruickshank, Chair, District 2 Bill Willey, District 3 MCCALL AREA PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Scott Tunnell, Impact Area Representative Amanda Thompson, City Representative Fallon Fereday, City Representative R. Derek Williamson, Impact Area Representative Steve Callan, City Representative Nancy Farnsworth, City Representative Steve Clements, Impact Area Representative CITY STAFF Michelle Groenevelt, Community Development Director Nathan Stewart, Public Works Director Phillip Bowman, City Engineer Cris Malvich, Streets Superintendent Delta James, City Planner John Powell, Building Official Morgan Bessaw, Permit Technician Erin Greaves, Communications Manager Garrett Mapp, GIS Analyst John Driessen, GIS Technician Carol Coyle, Grant Writer CONSULTANTS Nick Foster, Kittelson & Associates, Inc. John Ringert, Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Jamie Markosian, Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Bruce Meighen, Logan Simpson Krissy Gilmore, Logan Simpson Bryan Foote, Horrocks Engineers Heidi Carter, Horrocks Engineers Kip Davidson, Horrocks Engineers Ellen Campfield-Nelson, Agnew::Beck Contents 1. TAKE OFF ..............................................................................................................1 1.1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................................................2 1.2 A COORDINATED VISION ..............................................................................................................................................4 1.3 OUR COMMUNITY VISION ...........................................................................................................................................6 2. CLIMB ....................................................................................................................9 2.1 TRANSIT AND PARKING ................................................................................................................................................10 2.2 OUR STREETS ............................................................................................................................................................................15 2.3 OUR PATHWAYS ....................................................................................................................................................................24 3. RECOMMENDED PROJECTS .......................................................29 3.1 TRANSIT AND PARKING ................................................................................................................................................30 3.2 OUR STREETS ..........................................................................................................................................................................32 3.3 CAPITAL AND MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT PLANS ...............................................................47 3.4 ROADWAY ENHANCEMENT PROJECTS FOR FUTURE STUDY AND PROGRAMMING ...........................................................................................................................................................................53 3.5 OTHER PROJECTS ................................................................................................................................................................54 3.6 OUR PATHWAYS ....................................................................................................................................................................57 4. COAST (IMPLEMENTATION) .........................................................61 4.1 PRIORITIZED PROJECTS .................................................................................................................................................62 4.2 PROJECT SUMMARY .........................................................................................................................................................63 4.3 PROJECT FUNDING...........................................................................................................................................................69 4.4 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................................................73 5. APPENDICES APPENDIX A;SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT APPENDIX B;EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 1 APPENDIX C;PROJECT ALTERNATIVES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2 APPENDIX D;HORROCKS TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 3 Tables /Figures FIGURE 1. RED LINE TRANSIT ROUTE MAP AND PUBLISHED STOPS ..................................11 TABLE 1. OVERALL PARKING UTILIZATION IN DOWNTOWN MCCALL .........................12 TABLE 2. WEDNESDAY AND SATURDAY PARKING UTILIZATION .........................................12 FIGURE 2. PARKING ANALYSIS ZONES ...........................................................................................................13 FIGURE 3. PAVED NETWORK REMAINING SERVICE LIVE .............................................................16 FIGURE 4. UNPAVED NETWORK REMAINING SERVICE LIFE .....................................................18 FIGURE 5. MONTHLY CHANGE IN DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES ON SH 55 .....................21 FIGURE 6. AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES ..........................................................22 FIGURE 7. ESTIMATE YEAR 2040 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES 23 FIGURE 8. EXISTING BICYCLE NETWORK ....................................................................................................26 FIGURE 9. EXISTING WALKING NETWORK .................................................................................................27 FIGURE 10. ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS .............................................................33 FIGURE 11. TYPICAL ROADWAY CROSS-SECTION - ARTERIAL STREETS .........................35 FIGURE 12. TYPICAL ROADWAY CROSS-SECTION - COLLECTOR STREETS ...............36 FIGURE 13. TYPICAL ROADWAY CROSS-SECTION - LOCAL STREETS ................................37 FIGURE 14. SAMPSON TRAIL CROSS-SECTION ........................................................................................38 FIGURE 15. KRAHN LANE CROSS-SECTION ................................................................................................38 FIGURE 16. DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN CROSS-SECTIONS.....................................................39 FIGURE 17. 10-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN .....................................................................49 FIGURE 18. 10-YEAR MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT PLAN .....................................................51 FIGURE 19: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN TABLE AND PROJECT LIST..........................52 FIGURE 20. PROPOSED ROADWAY PROJECTS ........................................................................................55 FIGURE 21. PLANNED BIKEWAY NETWORK ................................................................................................56 FIGURE 22. PLANNED WALKWAY NETWORK ...........................................................................................58 TABLE 3. COMPREHENSIVE PROJECT SUMMARY .................................................................................63 FIGURE 23. CIP & MIP SPENDING SUMMARY ..........................................................................................69 FIGURE 24. CIP & MIP IMPLEMENTATION RESULTS ............................................................................71 FIGURE 25. CIP & MIP SPENDING SUMMARY ............................................................................................71 TABLE 4. EXTERNAL SOURCES FOR PROJECT PROGRAMMING .............................................72 Photo Credit of ABCIdaho, West Central Mountain Economic Strategy 1McCall Area Transportation Plan | 1. Take off M cCall’s Transportation Master Plan is the City’s blueprint for an accessible and connected community. Today, McCall is known as a community with beautiful natural areas, a unique small town mountain character, world class recreation opportunities, and a mountain retreat for Treasure Valley residents. McCall’s success today isn’t a fluke. It stems from decades of community work, foresight, and planning. This Plan seeks to continue to enhance those qualities that make McCall a special place and outline the vision for McCall’s future transportation facilities and policy. 2 | MCCALL IN MOTION 1.1 INTRODUCTION Take Off McCall In Motion is an initiative founded on the idea that, knowing how closely linked land use and transportation are, a combined process for the future of the McCall Area (the City Limits and Impact Area), developed through a robust community engagement process, will lead to a healthier, more economically competitive, and socially equitable future for the area. McCall In Motion updates both the Comprehensive Plan and Transportation Master Plan, focusing on the creation and preservation of the area’s character, economy, connections, streets, and pathways. This integrated approach maximizes efficiency and effectiveness of McCall’s plans, continuing the efforts to create a more fun, efficient, sustainable, and vibrant community. Collectively, the process to develop these plans is called “McCall In Motion.” 1.1.1 WHAT IS A TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN? The Transportation Master Plan describes how McCall will invest in its transportation infrastructure to achieve the community’s vision, as it is laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. This plan covers a breadth of topics ranging from how the current system will be maintained to how it will be expanded to meet the diverse needs of different users over time. Key elements of this plan include: • The vision and priorities described by the community during the public outreach process • A description of existing and projected future conditions • 10-year maintenance and enhancement plans: −Maintenance Improvements Plan covers relatively minor, but important, maintenance −Capital Improvements Plan includes roadway reconstruction and enhancement projects • Public transportation strategies • Parking management and expansion strategies • Roadway projects for further study and design • Incorporation of, and updates to, the 2012 McCall Area Pathways Master Plan • Other projects, policies, and plans related to the operation of the transportation system and the City’s Streets Department. 3McCall Area Transportation Plan | 1.1.2 HOW TO USE THE PLAN The TMP contains goals, policies, and projects for operating and investing in the transportation system. It also includes an overview of strategies and investment programs the city and community intend to accomplish in the next 20 years. • Chapter 1 provides an introduction to the plan and summarizes feedback received from the public and defines the community’s goals, values and vision for current and future transportation infrastructure. • Chapter 2 summarizes the existing conditions of McCall’s multimodal transportation system and projects future traffic volumes. • Chapter 3 describes the projects, plans, and policies to be undertaken over the next 20 years. • Chapter 4 speaks to how the plan will be implemented and how near-term projects will be funded. • Appendix A Summarizes the public involvement efforts • Appendix B Describes existing and future conditions • Appendix C Analyzes potential future projects • Appendix D Describes the development of the CIP and MIP An interactive website has been built that presents all aspects the transportation plan and its supporting documents so that online information can updated through time. 1.1.3 PLAN INTENT The intent of this plan is to outline the necessary steps to achieve the transportation vision set forth by the Community within the context of how the City and State can operate and manage the system. It includes near-term projects that are expected to be funded through existing sources (e.g., the Maintenance and Capital Improvements Plans), policies that will be implemented with the adoption of this plan, and projects and plans that will require further study to identify a preferred approach and funding source. This plan will be dynamic over time, as future studies may result in changes to what is recommended in this plan and that changing future conditions may warrant updates to this plan before its 20-year horizon has been exhausted. The City will regularly assess the implementation of this plan and determine when an update may be required. 4 | MCCALL IN MOTION 1.2 A COORDINATED VISION 1.2.1 COMPONENT OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The TMP expands the vision for the McCall Area Comprehensive Plan into actionable mobility- related goals and objectives to guide McCall’s near- and long-term transportation investments. As a component of the Comprehensive Plan, the TMP provides an integrated approach to planning for all modes of our transportation system and recognizes how access and mobility are essential to quality of life for McCall residents and visitors. Additionally, McCall’s land use policies and patterns are key factors influencing the motivation for people to drive, walk, and bike or access transit. Improvement in these areas must be integrational with the Comprehensive Plan goals to support the overall system. 1.2.2 ASSOCIATED PLANS, POLICIES, AND CODES To ensure this plan meets all requirements and is consistent with other planning efforts, several relevant plans, policy documents, and codes were reviewed and incorporated. The following are some of the most referenced previous plans: • McCall Area Pathways Master Plan (2012) • McCall Downtown Master Plan (2013) • City of McCall Access Management Policy • City of McCall Downtown Parking Study & Needs Assessment (2009) • City of McCall Complete Streets Policy (City Council Resolution 11-2 TRANSPORTATION PRIORITIES The City began this effort with existing priorities from previous outreach efforts and technical analyses. These priorities include (and not necessarily in priority order): 1) Improving the condition of McCall’s existing roadways so that maintenance of them becomes more economically efficient; 2) Expanding the City’s network of pathways, bike lanes, and sidewalks by implementing the City’s Complete Streets Policy and Pathways Master Plan (these first two items were both part of the City’s recent successful effort to pass a streets focused local option tax); 3) Providing clear direction to area businesses, land owners, and residents on how the transportation network will be built out as funding becomes available and development occurs; and 4) Managing demand during the peak summer season to make the most efficient use of the City’s infrastructure. 5McCall Area Transportation Plan | Improved pedestrian connections are necessary to encourage multimodal transportation, tourism, and livability in the city. Sidewalks and pathway connections and improvements are a priority to the community. Transportation facilities should serve the needs of the entire community. Increase mobility by exploring complete streets, roundabouts, stoplights, low- stress bike lanes and crosswalks in appropriate locations. Sidewalks improvements are a priority to residents and visitors throughout the city, but especially in the downtown core. Parking management is key to meeting the TMP goals. Parking strategies are essential for an accessible multimodal, walkable, and compact downtown. Expand transit service and transportation options. Giving priority for transit service expansion along key corridors is important to improving the community. Core elements such as frequency, branding, and direct routing are highly valued, as well as creative transit such as bike share services. Prioritize existing infrastructure first. Repair existing street infrastructure before investing in new streets and improving unpaved roads. 1.2.3 WHAT DID THE COMMUNITY SAY? This Transportation Master Plan update, as part of the McCall in Motion process, started with extensive listening and learning from the community. Outreach included public open houses and workshops, attendance at festivals and city events, online surveys, and presentations to boards and commissions. For more information on public outreach see Appendix “A.” The following themes were heard from the public: 6 | MCCALL IN MOTION The process to develop a new vision for McCall engaged thousands of residents over a year and a half period beginning with the kickoff of the planning process in January 2016. Through community forums, social media, surveys, small meetings, and special events, residents described their ideas for the area’s future. Based on public input, the vision statement of the 2007 Comprehensive Plan was confirmed and will continue as the overarching vision for the McCall area. Based on public comment, the Comprehensive Plan vision is separated into five general themes: Our Character, Our Economy, Our Connections, Our Streets, and Our Pathways. Our Character and Our Economy are themes specific to the Comprehensive Plan update, while Our Streets and Our Pathways are themes specific to the Transportation Master Plan. The Our Connections Vision Statement overlaps and connects the two documents. To review the Our Character and Our Economy Vision themes please reference the Comprehensive Plan Issue 3: Vision In Motion. Transportation Master Plan Vision Themes: Our Connections focuses on connections in and around McCall through transportation, such as vehicles and bicycles, as well as connections to nature and play through parks and recreation system. Our Streets focuses on street circulation and infrastructure. Our Pathways focuses on McCall’s system of pathways and pedestrian amenities. The Vision Statements for the overall community vision and separate themes can be viewed on the following page. 1.3 OUR COMMUNITY VISION 7McCall Area Transportation Plan | Vision Statements (Transportation Related) Our Vision McCall is a diverse, small town united to maintain a safe, clean, healthy and attractive environment. It is a friendly, progressive community that is affordable and sustainable. Our Connections Foster a sense of exploration and seek to enhance the recreational experience and mobility within the City for visitors and residents through safe walkable places, diverse transportation modes, and efficient transit choices. Our Streets Support an efficient circulation system that contains well- maintained and diverse street types that allow for ease of traffic flow and provide comfort and safety in all seasons. Our Pathways Encourage an accessible and connected pathway system, with safe pedestrian and bicycle routes that serve residents and visitors. 8 | MCCALL IN MOTION 9McCall Area Transportation Plan | 2. Climb McCall’s multimodal surface transportation system includes streets, sidewalks, bike lanes, bike routes, pathways, parking spaces, and bus transit service. Demands and needs on the system vary by season, ranging from wintertime snow removal to the influx of summertime visitors. Residents and visitors alike appreciate the existing pathways in the City and there is typically adequate capacity for motor vehicle travel and parking throughout much of the year. Challenges and opportunities include managing summertime peak season demand at certain intersections and parking areas, better connecting existing walking and bicycling infrastructure, improving transit service, snow removal, and maintaining infrastructure in a state of good repair in a harsh climate. This section summarizes the analysis of existing and projected future conditions on the transportation system. Topics covered include: • Transit service • Parking demand • Roadway conditions • Pathways, sidewalks, bike lanes, and bike routes More detailed information on these topics can be found in Appendices “B” and “C.” CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES • Managing peak summertime demand • Improving bicycling and walking connections • Enhancing transit service • Year-round maintenance • Reconstruction of deficient infrastructure 10 | MCCALL IN MOTION Climb 2.1 TRANSIT AND PARKING Transit service plays an important role in connecting the McCall community by providing a transportation option for those who are not able to travel via other means and by helping to manage demand for roadway and parking capacity. Parking in and around the downtown core allows residents and visitors to connect with McCall businesses, essential municipal services, and lake-oriented recreational opportunities. The following section describes existing transit service and existing and projected future parking demand. 2.1.1 EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICE Public transit services in McCall are provided by Treasure Valley Transit (TVT). Services include local circulation via the Red Line and city-to-city service between McCall and Cascade via the Green Line. The Red Line service throughout the City is free to use and operates with a deviated fixed-route system (riders may flag the bus for pick-up anywhere it is safe to do so) from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., seven days a week. The Red Line operates on approximately one- hour headways and allows for route deviation within ¾-mile from the published route. Monthly Change in Daily Traffic Volumes on SH 55 shows the existing Red Line route map and published bus stops. Based on the most recent data available, there are over 31,000 riders of the Red Line and 20,000 riders of the Green Line annually (Reference 1). Additional city-to-city services are supported by St. Luke’s, which has partnered with Salmon River Transit and Connecting U-McCall to provide free weekly bus service between Riggins and McCall. Several private organizations also run local shuttle services between their place of business and other destinations. Other shared transportation services in McCall include local taxi service and on-demand ride hailing services. 11McCall Area Transportation Plan | Figure 1. Red Line Transit Route Map and Published Stops "U "U"U "U "U "U"U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U PilgrimCoveRdMoonridgeDrBrookDrClubHillBlvdValley View Ln McCallAve1stStPayetteDrReedy LnMeadows RdStibnite St LupineLnIdaho St ChadDr Knights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdBitterro o t D r C h r i s L n ClubRd LichenLnCoyRdMoon Dr W Forest S t Stockton Dr C o l o r a d o S t WhitetailDr OspreyViewDrS undanceDrJohnAldenStateParkRdErn e s t o D r AspenRidgeLnShelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln SvcRd N S a ms onTrlChipmunk Ln F airway Dr Ridge R dBearBasinRd ValleyRim R dCrowleyLn NisulaRdMigratoryRidgeWayRawhideLoopF a w nlullyDr MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStWL a k e S t Mission StSpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdStE Lake St BoydstunStLick Creek Rd S 3rd St Wooley AveWarrenWagonRd E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionSt S Samson TrlWDeinha r d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan August 2017 ¯ Red Line Transit Route Map and Published Stops McCall, Idaho H:\19\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Transit System_No#.mxd - jmarkosian - 1:59 PM 8/14/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Bus Routes Seasonal Route "U Bus Stop Locations City Limits 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles Figure 1 12 | MCCALL IN MOTION Table 1. Overall Parking Utilization in Downtown McCall TIME PERIOD OVERALL PARKING UTILIZATION (%) 1 Wednesday 10:00 AM Wednesday 1:00 PM Wednesday 4:00 PM Saturday 10:00 AM Saturday 1:00 PM Saturday 4:00 PM Peak Season Existing Year 2016 33%52%45%44%59%53% Projected Year 2026 45%69%59%57%78%70% Projected Year 2036 55%85%73%70%96%87% Off-Peak Season Existing Year 2016 19%29%27%21%29%31% Projected Year 2026 25%37%35%28%38%41% Projected Year 2036 31%46%43%34%46%50% 1The percentages above represent the overall parking utilization across all four parking zones. Percentages are out of 1,772 total spaces. 2Bold and italicized percentages indicate where the entire parking system exceeds 85% utilization, which is generally considered the effective capacity of a parking system. Table 2. Wednesday and Saturday Time Periods Projected to Experience Over 85% Utilization TIME PERIOD TOTAL TIME PERIODS EXCEEDING 85% UTILIZATION Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Wed Sat Wed Sat Wed Sat Wed Sat Peak Season Existing Year 2016 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 Projected Year 2026 0 0 2 3 0 1 0 0 Projected Year 2036 0 1 2 3 1 2 0 0 Off-Peak Season Existing Year 2016 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Projected Year 2026 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Projected Year 2036 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.1.2 EXISTING AND PROJECTED PARKING DEMAND Parking in McCall consists of public on-street parking, a parking structure, and public and private surface parking lots. There are currently two hour time limits on all street spaces to encourage turnover. Fees are not charged for parking within any of the surveyed lots or street spaces. A parking demand analysis was completed based on observations of current conditions during the peak and off-peak periods, as well as for forecasted future conditions. Table 2 illustrates the four zones that were used to analyze parking conditions in the City. The zones focus around the downtown core. Table 1 illustrates the overall parking utilization across all zones for each analyzed time period (i.e., existing year 2016, projected year 2026, and projected year 2036 conditions). While the entire system shows adequate parking supply for most time periods across both peak and off-peak seasons, each zone experiences different demand. Below shows the total number of Wednesday and Saturday time periods (maximum of three for each day) that experience, or are projected to experience, parking utilization over 85%, which is generally considered the effective capacity of a parking system. 13McCall Area Transportation Plan | Figure 2. Parking Analysis Zones W o o le y A v e Thompson Ave Wanda Ave 1st StIdaho St Fir St Greys t o n e D r Roosevelt AveHemlock St 4thStE Park St N3rdStWard St2ndStPine StMill RdWashington St McCallAveN S a ms o n T rl M c G i n nis St Lenora St Alpine StColorado St E Forest St E Lake St Railroad AveDwyZONE 1 ZONE 2 ZONE 3 ZONE 4 McCall Transportation Master Plan August 2017 ¯ Parking Analysis Zones McCall, Idaho H:\19\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Parking Map_No#.mxd - jmarkosian - 2:00 PM 8/14/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall Figure 2 14 | MCCALL IN MOTION Some key findings from this parking analysis are: • Overall supply is currently adequate for demand on the aggregate across all zones. This is projected to remain the case until the year 2036 during the summertime peak period. −Zone 2 experiences the heaviest demand due to its proximity to downtown and recreational activities. It is common for Zone 2 to reach utilizations at or above 85% under existing conditions on a Saturday in July. −These findings point to the need to ensure people are aware of other parking opportunities in the downtown core and to provide travel options for people within the downtown core once they have parked their vehicle (e.g., by walking, shuttle, or bicycling). • Compared to the 2009 Downtown Parking Study (Reference 2) observed parking occupancies were about 20% greater during the peak season.* −The 2009 study used land use projections for housing and retail to determine the parking demand in the 10- and 20-year future windows. Based on these projections, the 2009 study estimated that there would be sufficient supply for the 10-year period, but that there would be shortage of approximately 114 to 240 spaces, depending on the type of development in downtown, by the end of the 20-year period. −This finding is consistent with the results of this updated study, which showed that approximately 170 parking spaces would need to be added to the total system over the next 20 years to maintain a utilization of 85% or less during the summertime peak. More information regarding the parking demand analysis can be found in Section 3 of Appendix “B.” * Though the peak seasons for this study was in July, while the 2009 study observed Labor Day weekend, so at least some of this difference is to be expected. 15McCall Area Transportation Plan | The City of McCall owns and maintains approximately 50 centerline miles of public roadways. In addition to the City’s roads, one State Highway (SH) runs through the City, SH 55 (aka 3rd Street/Lake Street). SH 55 is owned and maintained by the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). The following section describes the existing and projected conditions of those roadways, including existing pavement condition, existing and projected traffic volumes and operations, and existing crash trends. 2.2.1 EXISTING ROADWAY PAVEMENT CONDITIONS To evaluate the condition of the City’s roadways, the Transportation Asset Management Software (TAMS) has been utilized to conduct surface inventories of the asphalt and gravel surfaced roadways. TAMS allows agencies to measure the condition of their roadway infrastructure in terms of remaining service life (RSL). The definition of RSL is the anticipated remaining years a roadway segment has until failure, or is considered unacceptable. The RSL measurement is a snapshot in time of how a street pavement section is operating structurally and of the severity of its deficiencies. The most recent pavement inventory was completed for the paved and unpaved roads within City limits in June 2016. Figure 3 and Figure 4 contain the pavement inventory data for paved and unpaved surfaces, color-coded per segment of the City’s network. These figures are helpful during the improvement planning process by identifying roadways in the city that group well together based on geography and pavement condition. For instance, the downtown core (1st Street, 2nd Street, Park Street, Lenora Street) is noticeably in worse condition compared to the streets in its vicinity. Using a weighted average of each segment RSL and the surface area of the segment’s asphalt pavement, an average RSL of the entire paved network can be calculated. The average RSL based on the 2011, 2013, and 2016 pavement inventories can be viewed below. This measure is a macroscopic look at how the network, as a whole, is maintaining its structural integrity. Since 2011, the health of the city’s pavement has gradually worsened, and will likely continue to degrade if an effective pavement management plan is not executed. 2.2 OUR STREETS City of McCall’s Average Paved Network RSL August 2011 – 12.8 Years August 2013 – 10.4 Years June 2016 – 10.0 Years 16 | MCCALL IN MOTION Figure 3. Paved Network Remaining Service Live Figure 3 17McCall Area Transportation Plan | Figure 3a 18 | MCCALL IN MOTION Figure 4. Unpaved Network Remaining Service Life Figure 4 19McCall Area Transportation Plan | Figure 4a 20 | MCCALL IN MOTION 2.2.2 TRAFFIC VOLUMES The following sections describe existing, and projected future year 2040, traffic volumes. More information regarding traffic volumes can be found in Appendix “B.” Existing Traffic Volumes Traffic volumes were collected on various segments through McCall by ITD, the City, and Valley County. Due to McCall’s attractiveness as a seasonal tourist destination, traffic volumes can fluctuate widely from one time of the year to another. Figure 5 illustrates the monthly change in daily traffic volumes on SH 55, as reported by the automatic traffic recorder (ATR) located in Donnelly. In order to understand both high demand and more typical demand conditions, traffic counts were conducted during peak (i.e., from the 4th of July weekend to late August) and off-peak (i.e., April, May, early June, September, and October) times of the year. Average annual daily traffic (AADT) volumes were estimated for each location that was counted by multiplying the off- peak weekday counts, where available, by a seasonal factor obtained from ITD. Figure 6 shows the estimated AADT volumes in the City. Projected Future Traffic Volumes Year 2040 future traffic volumes were projected based on population growth estimates prepared for the Comprehensive Plan update and recent growth trends on SH 55 provided by ITD staff. Based on this data, a 3 percent annual growth rate was applied to the 2016 volumes to estimate year 2040 traffic volumes. Figure 7 shows the projected year 2040 AADT volumes. EXISTING AND PROJECTED FUTURE TRAFFIC OPERATIONS Traffic operations (i.e., capacity and delay) were analyzed at the following intersections for both peak (i.e., summertime) and off-peak (i.e., spring or fall) conditions during a typical weekday p.m. peak hour: • Boydstun Street/E Lake Street (SH 55); • 2nd Street/E Lake Street (SH 55); • 3rd Street (SH 55)/Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street; • 3rd Street (SH 55)/Park Street; and, • 3rd Street (SH 55)/Colorado Street These analyses were conducted using both existing and projected year 2040 future volumes. The results of these analyses has been summarized as follows: • Existing Conditions (Off-Peak) −There is adequate capacity for all movements and low-to-moderate delay for side-street traffic turning onto or driving across SH 55. • Existing Conditions (Peak) −There is adequate capacity for most movements and moderate delay for side-street traffic turning onto or driving across SH 55 at most intersections, except for left-turns and through movements from: »Lenora Street - Railroad Avenue »Park Street −Traffic volumes are high enough to warrant signals at Park Street and Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street intersections of SH 55 during the peak summertime season and some of the off-peak season (i.e., using counts from May/June). 21McCall Area Transportation Plan | • Future Conditions (Off-Peak) −There is adequate capacity for most movements and low-to-moderate delay for side-street traffic turning onto or driving across SH 55 at most intersections, except for left-turns and through movements from: »Railroad Avenue »Park Street (westbound only) • Future Conditions (Peak) −There is adequate capacity for most movements; however, most side-street left-turns and through movements will experience moderate to high delays. There is also projected to be inadequate capacity for the left-turn and through movements from: »Lenora Street- Railroad Avenue »Park Street More information on the traffic operations analysis can be found in Appendix “B.” EXISTING CRASH TRENDS Crash data provided by ITD revealed the following crash trends in the City from 2010 to 2014: • The proportion of crashes resulting in an injury or fatality is roughly similar to those reported for other like-sized cities in Idaho (Reference 3); • Fixed object and other run-off-the-road crashes are the most common crash type, with nearly one-third of all reported crashes falling into this category; • There were two reported crashes involving a person bicycling and no reported crashes involving a person walking during this time period; and, • Generally, crashes were concentrated on roads with higher volumes, including the SH 55 corridor and Deinhard Lane. More information on recent crash trends can be found in Appendix “B.” Figure 5. Monthly Change in Daily Traffic Volumes on SH 55 22 | MCCALL IN MOTION Figure 6. Estimated Existing Current Average Annual Daily Traffic Volumes Mo`sWay Valley View Ln McCall AveCarico RdReedy Ln Jacob St MeadowsRd PilgrimCoveRdSmittyAveRowlandStMajesticViewDrPottsDrEvergree n D r Idaho St C h a d D r BradyDrKnights RdThulaStRiver Ranch RdMill RdLouisa AveKaren St Bitterroot DrBirdieDr VeritaRdCoy Rd WForestSt HelmichStStockton DrAlpine StF i r S t Cece Way Koski Dr F ox Rid g eLnEagleDrBoydst unLnEllisRdCedar LnMarywoodDr DivotLnM c G i n nis St Violet Way Ern e s t o D r Shelia Ln Krahn Ln Wood lands Dr Strawberry Ln Flynn Ln F i r e w e e d D r SvcRd Conifer Ln Chipmunk Ln Fairway Dr Ridge R d ValleyRimRdMoonridge Dr MorganDr RawhideL o o p Floyde St MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd N Sam son T r l NMissionStMission StL i c k C r e e k R d SpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdStBoydstun StS 3rd StWarrenWagonRdW Lake St Elo RdS Mission StS Samson TrlW Deinh a r d L n ÉÈ55 Payette Lake 6502,240 7,810 1,3102,18057010,72010,630 190 60 10,640190 6,060 230 11,5203,920 1 , 7 8 0 1,6501,480 940 6,760 2,2406,630 11,5307802,6703,430670202,2901,650 1,340 1,6202,2801,1404,9201,670460 8 7 0 740 1,5704,1002,610 3501,8202,890 McCall Transportation Master Plan August 2017 ¯ Existing Year 2016 AADT Volumes McCall, Idaho H:\19\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Daily Volumes_AADT_No#.mxd - jmarkosian - 9:02 AM 8/30/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, ITD, Valley County, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Segment AADT 0 - 1,500 1,501 - 4,000 4,001 - 8,000 8,001 - 12,000 Water Parks City Limits Figure 6 23McCall Area Transportation Plan | Figure 7. Estimate Year 2040 Average Annual Daily Traffic Volumes Mo`sWay Valley View Ln McCall AveCarico RdReedy Ln Jacob St MeadowsRd PilgrimCoveRdSmittyAveRowlandStMajesticViewDrEvergree n D r Idaho St C h a d D r BradyDrKnights RdThulaStRiver Ranch RdMill RdLouisa AveKaren St Bitterroot DrBirdieDr VeritaRdCoy Rd WForestSt HelmichStStockton DrAlpine StF i r S t Cece Way Koski Dr F ox Rid g eLnEagleDrBoydst unLnHewitt St EllisRdCedar LnMarywoodDr DivotLnM c G i n nis St Violet Way Ern e s t o D r Shelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Strawberry Ln Flynn Ln F i r e w e e d D r SvcRd Conifer Ln Chipmunk Ln Fairway Dr Ridge R d ValleyRimRdMoonridge Dr MorganDr RawhideL o o p Floyde St MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd N Sam son T r l NMissionStMission StLick Creek Rd SpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdStW Lake S t Boydstun StS 3rd StWarrenWagonRdElo RdS Mission StS Samson TrlW Deinh a r d L n ÉÈ55 Payette Lake 1,1203,850 13,4303,75018,280 330 100 18,300330 10,420 400 6,740 3 , 0 6 0 2,8402,550 1,620 11,630 3,85011,400 19,8301,3404,5905,9001,150303,9402,840 2,300 2,7903,9201,9608,4602,870790 1,500 1,270 2,7007,0504,490 6003,1304,970 McCall Transportation Master Plan August 2017 ¯ Projected Year 2040 AADT Volumes McCall, Idaho H:\19\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Daily Volumes_AADT_Future_No#.mxd - jmarkosian - 9:03 AM 8/30/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, ITD, Valley County, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Segment AADT 0 - 1,500 1,501 - 4,000 4,001 - 8,000 8,001 - 12,000 12,001 - 16,000 16,001 - 20,000 Water Parks City Limits Figure 7 24 | MCCALL IN MOTION McCall’s existing network of paths, sidewalks, bike lanes, and bike routes are prized by the community. Public input during this plan noted that the paths can be a destination themselves in McCall and not just a means to get around. Enhancing the walking and bicycling network in McCall has been a priority for the City, evidenced by the McCall Area Pathways Master Plan, adopted in 2012. The existing bicycle network in McCall consists of shared-use pathways, bike lanes, shoulders, and low- volume roadways, as shown in Figure 8 (Figure 21 from Technical Memorandum #1). The existing walking network consists of sidewalks and shared-use paths, as shown in Figure 9 (Figure 22 from Technical Memorandum #1). Notable gaps in the existing bicycling and walking systems include: • 3rd Street/SH-55 (from Colorado Street to Deinhard Lane): missing sidewalks and bike lanes • Lake Street (Bear Basin Connector Trail west of Boydstun Street to 1st Street): missing sidewalks and bike lanes • Davis Avenue (Ponderosa State Park to Thompson Avenue): missing sidewalks and bike lanes • Wooley Avenue (Davis Avenue to Spring Mountain Boulevard): missing sidewalks and bike lanes • Lick Creek Road (Davis Avenue to Spring Mountain Boulevard): missing sidewalks and bike lanes • Several locations in downtown McCall: missing sidewalk) 2.3 OUR PATHWAYS Benefits of Walking and Biking Increased walking and biking in McCall can provide many benefits to McCall residents and visitors • Less traffic congestion • Manage parking demand (12 bikes can park in the same space as a single car!) • Biking and walking are good for business: −Contributes to McCall’s reputation as a recreation destination −People walking and biking tend to frequent businesses more often • Increased physical activity can reduce sickness and health care costs • Less wear and tear on our City streets Photo Credit of http://www.californiawithkids.com/pacific-northwest/201308290336/mccall-idaho-does-safety-flags-to-benefit-everyone/ 25McCall Area Transportation Plan | 2.3.1 PARKS PATHWAYS VS. STREETS PATHWAYS Pathways typically serve two primary functions: recreation and transportation. Paved pathways designed to meet the requirements associated with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) are an important part of the transportation network, providing options for people to walk or bike to their destination. They also serve a recreational purpose, too, and as such can be a destination themselves. Paved pathways may be built as part of transportation projects (e.g., street reconstruction projects), with development, or as part of a Parks Department project with either transportation or recreation-focused funding sources. Unpaved, or natural surface, pathways, primarily serve a recreational purpose (e.g., mountain biking, trail running, hiking). They may sometimes be used for transportation purposes, too, but this is not their primary focus and they are not usually accessible to all users. Natural surface pathways are likely to be built using recreational focused funding sources and be under the purview of the Parks Department. The McCall Area Pathways Master Plan includes both paved and natural surface trails. This TMP incorporates this recommended pathway network. However, the primary focus of the TMP is on paved pathways, given their role in the transportation network. 26 | MCCALL IN MOTION Figure 8. Existing Bicycle Network PilgrimCoveRdMoonridgeDrBrookDrClubHillBlvdValley View Ln McCallAve1stStReedy LnMeadows RdStibnite St ShadyLn LupineLnIdaho St ChadDr Knights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdBitterro o t D r C h r i s L n ClubRd LichenLnCoyRdMoon Dr W Forest S t Stockton Dr C o l o r a d o S t WhitetailDr OspreyViewDrS undanceDrJohnAldenErn e s t o D r AspenRidgeLnShelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln Svc Rd N S a ms onTrlStateParkRdChipmunk Ln F a irway Dr Ridge R dBearBasinRd ValleyRim R dCrowleyLn NisulaRdMigratoryRidgeWayRawhideLoopF a w nlullyDr MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStWL a k e S t Mission StSpringMountainBlvdWarrenWagonRdDavis AveN3rdSt Lick Creek Rd E Lake St BoydstunStS 3rd S t Wooley Ave E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionStS Samson TrlWDeinha r d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan August 2017 ¯ Existing Bicycle Network McCall, Idaho H:\19\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Pathway Network_No#.mxd - jmarkosian - 2:10 PM 8/14/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Bike Lane Natural Surface Path Separated Path Share the Road Parks City Boundary 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles E Park St N 3rd StRailroad AveE Lake St Wanda Ave N Samson T r lKasper StColorado StSmitty AveWard St2nd S t 1st StThula StWashington St Lenora St Plac id S t Idaho St Timm StELakeSt AnnStAlpine StE Forest St E Park St M c G i n n is S tStibnite St Payette Lake Downtown McCall Figure 8 27McCall Area Transportation Plan | Figure 9. Existing Walking NetworkMoonridgeDrBrook DrValley View Ln McCallAve1stStReedy LnMeadows RdStibnite St LupineLnIdaho St ChadDr Knights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdClubHillBlvdBitterro o t D r C h r i s L n ClubRd LichenLnCoyRdMoon Dr W Forest S t Stockton Dr C o l o r a d o S t WhitetailDr OspreyViewDrS undanceDrErn e s t o D r AspenRidgeLnShelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln SvcRd N S a ms onTrlChipmunk Ln F a irway Dr Ridge R d ValleyRim R dCrowleyLn NisulaRdMigratoryRidgeWayRawhideLoopF a w nlullyDr MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStWL a k e S t Mission StSpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdSt E Lake St BoydstunStS 3rd St Lick Creek Rd WarrenWagonR d Wooley Ave E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionSt S Samson TrlWDeinha r d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan August 2017 ¯ Existing Walking Network McCall, Idaho H:\19\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Walking Network_No#.mxd - jmarkosian - 2:11 PM 8/14/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Feature Sidewalk Separated Path Natural Surface Path Parks City Boundary 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles Pine St 4th S t2nd StKasper St1st StSyringaDrE Forest St Washington St E Park St Idaho St Lenora St E LakeStAnnStRailroad AveWanda Ave N S a ms onTr l E Park St N 3rd StPine St Thompson AveE Lake St RailroadAvePayette Lake Downtown McCall Figure 9 28 | MCCALL IN MOTION 29McCall Area Transportation Plan | 3. Recommended Projects The following plan for McCall’s transportation system provides a set of projects that will be undertaken to implement the City’s transportation vision. These projects range from policies to capital projects to maintenance and cover walking, bicycling, driving, and transit service options. They have been identified from the following sources: • Public input received during the development of this plan; • Adopted plans (e.g., McCall Downtown Master Plan, McCall Area Pathways Master Plan, previous Comprehensive Plan); • Review of practices in peer cities; and • Technical analysis completed for this plan (see Appendix “C” and Appendix “D” for more information). 30 | MCCALL IN MOTION Recommended Projects Transit and parking related projects are discussed in the following sections. There is a direct relationship between these areas, as transit service can be used to manage parking demand (and conversely, transit demand may increase as parking utilization increases in the future) and efforts on these two fronts should be coordinated. 3.1.1 TRANSIT PROJECTS Transit-related projects include: • Work with Mountain Community Transit to evaluate and develop a plan for enhanced transit service, including: • Increased summertime service in key areas (e.g., downtown core and lakefront), potentially through a summertime only loop that is more compact and able to run more frequently than current City-wide service • Evaluating service along Spring Mountain Boulevard • Coordinating service within McCall with the Green Line route to Cascade • E xploring bike share service • Better publicizing transit schedules • More closely aligning the transit service brand with the City’s brand, so that people understand it is a service sponsored by the City • Develop the transportation hub planned for the southwest corner of the 2nd Street/Park Street intersection A primary challenge with implementing some of these projects is the lack of a dedicated public transportation funding source in Idaho. The City will continue to look for opportunities to impress upon the State legislature its desire to develop a dedicated State funding source. In the meantime, the City may also look to develop creative ways to cost-effectively implement these projects, including partnering with local businesses and other transportation providers. More information about transit projects can be found in Appendix “C.” 3.1 TRANSIT AND PARKING TRANSIT & PARKING CONNECTIONS Transit and parking strategies can be supportive of each other and should be coordinated. For instance, in developing this plan, there was public support for providing a summertime transit service focused on the downtown core and lakefront. This service could help move people from further out parking areas, or new satellite parking lots, to popular destinations. 31McCall Area Transportation Plan | PARKING PRIORITIES • Manage demand to ensure existing supply is efficiently used • Look for opportunities to cost-effectively increase parking supply 3.1.2 PARKING STRATEGIES AND POLICIES Priorities for parking in downtown McCall are: 1) managing demand to ensure efficient use of the existing parking supply; and 2) looking for opportunities to increase parking supply in and/ or near downtown. The highest priority is given to managing demand to ensure existing parking facilities are efficiently used, since it is projected they provide adequate overall capacity for most time periods. Further, focusing on management strategies should help avoid overbuilding parking capacity that will only be used for a limited time throughout the year and allow downtown land to be used more productively. To this end, the City will develop a parking management plan focused on improving efficiency of existing parking supply, managing demand, and opportunistically increasing capacity over the long term. More information on potential parking strategies that could be included in such a plan are described in Appendix “C.” 32 | MCCALL IN MOTION Roadway related projects are described in the following sections. These projects include: • An updated Functional Classification Map and corresponding typical street cross-sections • A Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) developed to improve pavement conditions on roads that need to be reconstructed and enhance walking and bicycling safety at the same time • A Maintenance Improvements Plan (MIP) focused on preserving pavement condition • Enhancement projects for further investigation and programming • Other projects related to the function of the City’s Streets department 3.2.1 FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION AND CROSS-SECTIONS Functional classification is based on the type of service that a roadway is intended to provide within the context of the transportation system. The functional classification of a roadway determines a number of its characteristics, including how access is provided to surrounding land uses, the desirable amount of right-of-way, and the width and design of the road. Functional classification is also a component of how State and Federal funding is allocated. Within McCall, roadways may be classified as Principal Arterials, Major or Minor Collectors, and Local streets. These classifications are described further below: • Arterial streets typically carry the highest traffic volumes in a city. One of their primary functions is moving people and goods across longer distances. Consequently, access from adjacent properties is limited by the City’s Access Management Policy. • Collector streets complement the arterial system and facilitate local circulation and access. Major collectors augment the atrial system to provide access within areas of the City. Minor collectors generally provide access to the local street system within residential and commercial areas. Access to Major Collectors is governed by the City’s Access Management Policy. • Local streets provide access to individual land- uses and provide the highest level of access since they typically serve individual homes and businesses. They generally have the lowest traffic volumes and speeds in a city. The existing functional classification system was reviewed with City staff and against existing traffic volumes and function. Based on this review, an updated functional classification map was developed. The City’s updated functional classification map is shown in Figure 10. More information on the specific changes that were made to the map can be found in Section 2 of Appendix “C.” This updated map will become the City’s functional classification map with the adoption of this plan. Coordination with the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) will be required to implement these changes to the Federal Functional Classification designations, which are part of determining how funding is allocated to the City and to specific projects. 3.2 OUR STREETS 33McCall Area Transportation Plan | Figure 10. Roadway Functional Classifications PilgrimCoveRdMoonridgeDrBrookDrClubHillBlvdValley View Ln McCallAve1stStPayetteDrReedy LnMeadows RdStibnite St LupineLnIdaho St ChadDr Knights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdBitterr o o t D r C h r i s L n ClubRd LichenLnCoyRdMoon Dr W Forest S t Stockton Dr C o l o r a d o S t WhitetailDr OspreyViewDrS undanceDrJohnAldenStateParkRdErn e s t o D r AspenRidgeLnShelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln SvcRd N S a ms onTrlChipmunk Ln F a irway Dr Ridge R dBearBasinRd ValleyRim R dCrowleyLn NisulaRdMigratoryRidgeWayRawhideLoopF a w nlullyDr MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStWL a k e S t Mission StSpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdSt E Lake St BoydstunStLick Creek Rd S 3rd St Wooley AveWarrenWagonRd E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionSt S Samson TrlWDeinha r d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan August 2017 ¯ Roadway Functional Classifications McCall, Idaho H:\19\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Proposed Functional Roadway Classifications_No#.mxd - jmarkosian - 2:12 PM 8/14/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Functional Classifications Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Major Collector Minor Collector Local City Limits 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles Figure 10 34 | MCCALL IN MOTION 3.2.2 TYPICAL ROADWAY CROSS-SECTIONS Standard cross-sections based on functional classification have been updated to reflect the values identified in the public outreach effort for this plan, the City’s Complete Streets policy, and plans that have been adopted since the current Comprehensive Plan was adopted. They have been designed to be flexible so that they can be adapted, as necessary, to the surrounding land-use context and physical constraints, but also provide the required components (drive lanes, paved shoulders, sidewalks, etc.) that can be used to guide future development and land use application requirements throughout the City. These cross-sections are shown in Figure 11, Figure 12, and Figure 13. The typical cross-sections will be used as the starting point for identifying the standard that new roadways will be built to and that existing roadways may be required to be upgraded to when development occurs along them. In addition to these typical sections, cross-sections have been developed for several streets that will be reconstructed as part of separate efforts. These include Sampson Trail and Krahn Lane, Figures 14 and 15, as well as the Downtown Master Plan in Figure 16. More information on these is included in Appendix “C.” 35McCall Area Transportation Plan | 8’-10’Sidewalk 8’-10’Sidewalk11’Travel Lane 11’Travel Lane10’-11’Center Turn Lane 80’ Right of Way • Sidewalk width may be increased from maximum if determined there is not a need for center turn lane• Assumes underground stormwater facilities are provided; otherwise drainage will need to be provided via surface based methods which may impact section that can be built• On-street parking may be optional if there is insufficient right-of-way• Street trees and lighting may be required 6’-8’Parking 5’-7’Bike Lane 5’-7’Bike Lane2’Curb & Gutter 2’Curb & Gutter 6’-8’Parking Arterial - Urban 6’-10’Sidewalk 6’-10’Sidewalk10’-11’Travel Lane 10’-11’Travel Lane 70’ Right of Way • Assumes underground stormwater facilities are provided; otherwise drainage will need to be provided via surface based methods which may impact sec-tion that can be built• Provision of a bike lane is dependent on McCall Area Pathways Master Plan or McCall Transportation Master Plan and consultation with City staff• On street parking is dependent on right-of-way and need for center turn lane• Street trees and lighting may be required 7’-8’Parking 5’-7’Bike Lane 5’-7’Bike Lane2’Curb & Gutter 2’Curb & Gutter 7’-8’Parking Collector - Commercial and High Density Residential (R8 - R16 Zoning) 10’ minMulti Use Path11’Travel Lane 11’Travel Lane • Minimum width of drainage or landscaping buffer will depend on drainage needs. Minimum width shown is based on a standard swale treatment. Less width may be required for other stormwater treatments.• Shoulder width improvements depend on Pathways Master Plan, development considerations, and city code 80’ Right of Way 6-8’Paved Shoulder 6-8’Paved Shoulder14’ minDrainage Swale 14’ minDrainage Swale orLandscape Buffer Arterial - Rural 10’-12’Multi Use Path10’-12’Travel Lane 10’-12’Travel Lane • Minimum width of drainage or landscaping buffer will depend on drainage needs. Minimum width shown is based on a standard swale treatment. Less width may be required for other stormwater treatments• Provision of a path or bike lane is dependent on designation in McCall Area Pathways Master Plan or McCall Transportation Master Plan. Consult with City staff 70’ Right of Way 1’-6’Paved Shoulder 1’-6’Paved Shoulder13’ minDrainage Swale 14’ minDrainage Swale Collector - Rural and Low Density Residential (RR - R4 Zoning) Figure 11. Typical Roadway Cross-Section - Arterial Streets 36 | MCCALL IN MOTION 8’-10’Sidewalk 8’-10’Sidewalk11’Travel Lane 11’Travel Lane10’-11’Center Turn Lane80’ Right of Way• Sidewalk width may be increased from maximum if determined there is not a need for center turn lane• Assumes underground stormwater facilities are provided; otherwise drainage will need to be provided via surface based methods which may impact section that can be built• On-street parking may be optional if there is insufficient right-of-way• Street trees and lighting may be required6’-8’Parking 5’-7’Bike Lane 5’-7’Bike Lane2’Curb & Gutter 2’Curb & Gutter6’-8’ParkingArterial - Urban 6’-10’Sidewalk 6’-10’Sidewalk10’-11’Travel Lane 10’-11’Travel Lane 70’ Right of Way • Assumes underground stormwater facilities are provided; otherwise drainage will need to be provided via surface based methods which may impact sec-tion that can be built• Provision of a bike lane is dependent on McCall Area Pathways Master Plan or McCall Transportation Master Plan and consultation with City staff• On street parking is dependent on right-of-way and need for center turn lane• Street trees and lighting may be required 7’-8’Parking 5’-7’Bike Lane 5’-7’Bike Lane2’Curb & Gutter 2’Curb & Gutter 7’-8’Parking Collector - Commercial and High Density Residential (R8 - R16 Zoning) 10’ minMulti Use Path11’Travel Lane 11’Travel Lane • Minimum width of drainage or landscaping buffer will depend on drainage needs. Minimum width shown is based on a standard swale treatment. Less width may be required for other stormwater treatments.• Shoulder width improvements depend on Pathways Master Plan, development considerations, and city code 80’ Right of Way 6-8’Paved Shoulder 6-8’Paved Shoulder14’ minDrainage Swale 14’ minDrainage Swale orLandscape Buffer Arterial - Rural 10’-12’Multi Use Path10’-12’Travel Lane 10’-12’Travel Lane • Minimum width of drainage or landscaping buffer will depend on drainage needs. Minimum width shown is based on a standard swale treatment. Less width may be required for other stormwater treatments• Provision of a path or bike lane is dependent on designation in McCall Area Pathways Master Plan or McCall Transportation Master Plan. Consult with City staff 70’ Right of Way 1’-6’Paved Shoulder 1’-6’Paved Shoulder13’ minDrainage Swale 14’ minDrainage Swale Collector - Rural and Low Density Residential (RR - R4 Zoning) Figure 12. Typical Roadway Cross-Section - Collector Streets 37McCall Area Transportation Plan | 10’-11’Travel Lane 10’-11’Travel Lane • Minimum width of drainage or landscaping buffer will depend on drainage needs. Minimum width shown is based on a standard swale treatment. Less width may be required for other stormwater treatments• Shoulder width improvements depend on Pathways Master Plan, development considerations, and city code • Minimum drainage assumes city’s standard swale. Less width may be required for other storm water treatments 60’ Right of Way 6’-8’Paved Shoulder or Curb Protected Walkway 1’-6’Paved Shoulder or Curb Protected Walkway 13’ minDrainage Swale13’ minDrainage Swale Local Rural and Low Density Residential (RR-R4 Zoning) 10’-11’Travel Lane 10’-11’Travel Lane • Minimum width of drainage or landscaping buffer will depend on drainage needs. Minimum width shown is based on a standard swale treatment. Less width may be required for other stormwater treatments• Urban section assumes underground stormwater facilities are provided; otherwise drainage will need to be provided via surface based methods• Shoulder width improvements depend on Pathways Master Plan, development considerations, and city code• Minimum drainage assumes city’s standard swale. Less width may be required for other storm water treatments 60’ Right of Way 1’-6’Paved Shoulder 13’ minDrainage 6’-8’Paved Shoulder or Parking Local Commercial and High Density Residential (R8-R16 Zoning) 6’-10’Sidewalk6-10’Sidewalk 2’Curb & Gutter UrbanRural 10’-11’Travel Lane 10’-11’Travel Lane • Minimum width of drainage or landscaping buffer will depend on drainage needs. Minimum width shown is based on a standard swale treatment. Less width may be required for other stormwater treatments• Can be applied to commercial or residential streets• Shoulder width improvements depend on Pathways Master Plan, development considerations, and city code • Minimum drainage assumes city’s standard swale. Less width may be required for other storm water treatments 60’ Right of Way 1’-6’Paved Shoulder Local with Multi-Use Path (Commercial or Residential) 10’-12’Multi Use Path13’ minDrainage 14’ minDrainage Figure 13. Typical Roadway Cross-Section - Local Streets 38 | MCCALL IN MOTION 44 Figure 20: Typical Interior Street Cross Section Figure 21: Samson Trail Cross Section Figure 22: Krahn Lane Cross Section 44 Figure 20: Typical Interior Street Cross Section Figure 21: Samson Trail Cross Section Figure 22: Krahn Lane Cross Section Figure 14. Sampson Trail Cross-Section Figure 15. Krahn Lane Cross-Section 39McCall Area Transportation Plan | Figure 16. Downtown Master Plan Cross-Sections 40 | MCCALL IN MOTION 3.2.3 STREET SECTIONS PUBLIC MEETINGS The City of McCall hosted public meetings with residents and stakeholders to brainstorm possible design options for five regionally significant streets that have been identified for re-construction in the next 10 years. The purpose of these meetings was to allow the community an opportunity to provide input on the future street section, and identify areas of concern, so that these design considerations can be planned for in the future roadway reconstruction projects for these corridors. The recommended street sections will also serve to guide the right-of- way requirements and pathways planning as future development occurs along these corridors. The five street sections that were discussed at public open houses held on April 19, 2017 and April 20, 2017 were: • Mission Street between Deinhard Lane and the smokejumper base • Lake Street between Mather Road and 1st Street • Idaho Street between Mission Street and 1st Street • Davis Avenue between Wooley Avenue and Agate Street • Wooley Avenue between Davis Avenue and Spring Mountain Ranch Boulevard Participants identified general themes, locations of significance, street priorities, and design preferences for each street. The documentation and summaries of the public input received at these meetings can be viewed in Appendix D. 3.2.4 RECOMMENDED STREET SECTIONS Each of the streets discussed during the public meetings, held April 19 and 20, 2017, has its own design challenges and individual character. Meeting attendees expressed their ideas and important design priorities of each street, which are summarized below in order of frequency. As a result of the meeting, the consultant team and City staff developed the following recommended street sections. These sections take into consideration various design constraints, such as the existing topography and right-of-way, while still providing accommodations for the many pedestrians and bicyclists that travel these roadways. These recommended street sections should be carried forward for planning purposes. However, these sections may be modified in the future based on topographical, right-of-way, funding or other design constraints that will be evaluated during the design phase of each individual project. The complete findings from each meeting can be viewed in Appendix D. 41McCall Area Transportation Plan | Mission Street Approximately 8 people participated in the Mission Street public meeting on April 19, 2017, and provided input on how the street should be designed for the future. It was determined that Mission Street from Deinhard Lane to the smokejumper base has the opportunity for two different roadway sections. It is recommended that the section from Deinhard Lane to Helmich Street include bike lanes. A separated pathway is recommended from Helmich Street to the smokejumper base to connect the existing pathway that ties into Mission Street south of Helmich Street to the existing pathway that was recently constructed south of the smokejumper base. Below are the recommended street sections: Mission Street Design Priorities: bike lanes, crosswalks/crossings, multi-use pathway, stormwater/drainage, signage, visibility, snow removal/storage, driveway access 42 | MCCALL IN MOTION Lake Street Approximately 7 people participated in the Lake Street public meeting on April 19, 2017, and provided input on how the street should be designed for the future. Lake Street is under the jurisdiction of the Idaho Transportation Department, therefore all future design efforts will need to be coordinated between the City and ITD. Lake Street/SH-55 has a narrow 50’ existing right-of-way with significant development on both the north and south side of the roadway which presents design constraints that were taken into consideration when developing the proposed roadway sections. These design constraints are the reason for the differing sections from Mission Street to 1st Street and Mission Street to Mather Road as shown. Below are the recommended street sections based on these existing constraints as well as the input received at the public meeting: (sidewalk on the north side where possible and separated pathway on the south side where possible) W. Lake Street and E. Lake Street Design Priorities: bike lanes, sidewalks, multi-use pathway, crosswalk/ crossings, stormwater/drainage, snow removal/storage, private property FROM MISSION ST. TO 1ST ST. 43McCall Area Transportation Plan | Idaho Street Approximately 10 people participated in the Idaho Street public meeting on April 19, 2017, and provided input on how the street should be designed for the future. Based on this input it was determined that the preference was for parking on the south side with curb and gutter from Mission Street to Kasper Street on the north side of the roadway. Below was the recommended street section based on this public input: Idaho Street Design Priorities: stormwater/drainage, multi-use pathway, parking, snow removal/storage, driveway access/private property, landscaping, better road surface, slower vehicle speeds Idaho Street is programmed for construction in 2018, therefore an additional public meeting was held on August 21 to present design alternatives for the project. Three alternatives were presented: • Alternative 1, parking on the north side, • Alternative 2, parking on south side with adjacent pathway, and • Alternative 3, parking on south side with separated pathway. Based on the input received at the public meeting, and through the on-line survey, Alternative 3 was chosen as the preferred alternative that would be carried forward to design: 20’ ± WITH 44 | MCCALL IN MOTION Davis Avenue Approximately 10 people participated in the Davis Avenue public meeting on April 20, 2017, and provided input on how the street should be designed for the future. There were three subsections of Davis identified based on the varying roadway characteristics within this corridor: • SOUTH (Wooley Ave. to Wanda Ave.) – retain low-volume neighborhood character with no major changes to roadway design • MIDDLE (Wooley Ave. to Lick Creek Rd.) – better accommodate mix of roadways users and better separate pedestrians and less experienced bikers from vehicle traffic • NORTH (Lick Creek Rd. to Agate St.) – prefer pathway to transition to park and open space Based on the public input it was determined that Davis Avenue, south of Wooley Avenue should maintain the current roadway section with shared travel lanes and no bike lanes. Davis Avenue from Wooley Avenue to Fairway Drive, as well as Davis Avenue from Lick Creek Road to Agate Street, should provide for bike lanes. A pathway was considered from Lick Creek Road to Agate Street based on public input, however the limited right-of-way will make this difficult. Davis Avenue from Fairway Drive to Lick Creek Road could potentially allow for a separated pathway along the golf course, therefore the preferred roadway section shows a pathway on the east side of the roadway. The preferred roadway sections are shown below: Davis Avenue Design Priorities: multi-use pathway, snow removal/storage, signage, crosswalk/crossings, bike lanes, safer bus stops, stormwater/drainage, better road surface, wider shoulders, lighting 45McCall Area Transportation Plan | Wooley Avenue Approximately 12 people participated in the Wooley Avenue public meeting on April 20, 2017, and provided input on how the street should be designed for the future. Highlights from the meeting discussions as well as a review of written feedback shows support and preferences for the following design elements and approaches on Wooley Avenue: • Participants agreed that Wooley Avenue is a critical bike/ped connection that is heavily used, and better accommodations for these uses should be made. • Participants were enthusiastic about the idea of a separated pathway wherever possible along Wooley. A “boardwalk style,” separated path was particularly appealing. • Where a separated pathway is not possible, participants generally liked at least some separation from the vehicle lanes (e.g., valley gutter, bollards, temporary curb, etc.) Based on the public input, preferred roadway sections were developed for two segments of Wooley Avenue: one segment being from Davis Avenue to Divot Lane and one being Divot Lane to Spring Mountain Ranch Boulevard. The Davis Avenue to Divot Lane segment has limited opportunities for a separated pathway due to the existing development adjacent to the roadway. Therefore, an attached multi-use pathway is shown in this area. However, a separated pathway could potentially be constructed in the wetlands area on the south side of Wooley Avenue between Divot Lane and Spring Mountain Ranch Boulevard. The recommended roadway sections are shown below: (separated pathway on the south side where possible) Wooley Avenue Design Priorities: multi-use pathway, stormwater/drainage, bike lanes, crosswalks/crossings, snow removal/storage, sidewalks, slower vehicles, better road surfaces, slower vehicles, driveway access, signage, natural areas, visibility, private property 46 | MCCALL IN MOTION Wooley Ave 2-WAY BIKE PATH BOARDWALK W/ SEATING & INTERPRETIVE SIGNS WOOLEY AVE. This artist rendering depicts what a section of Wooley Avenue could look like when reconstructed 47McCall Area Transportation Plan | The City has developed two 10-year (i.e., 2017-2026) plans to guide its near- term roadway investments, the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and Maintenance Improvement Plan (MIP). These plans are focused on improving the overall state of repair of the City’s roadway network to provide for more economically efficient maintenance of the roadway system going forward. The CIP, in conformance with the City’s Complete Streets Policy (City Council Resolution 11-20), also opportunistically includes several enhancements to existing roadways to provide for more walking and bicycling opportunities (i.e., new paths, bike lanes, and sidewalks) when the roads are reconstructed. Each of these plans is summarized in the following sections. Appendix “D” provides more information on the plans. 3.3.1 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN (CIP) The 10-year CIP utilizes the results of an asset management program developed for the City and described in Appendix “D.” The 10-year CIP is graphically presented in Figure 17. Improvement projects are specifically summarized for years 2017- 2026, and another 16 capital improvement projects have been identified for preliminary development. Projects beyond the 10-year window have been identified in the event additional funding becomes available or other opportunities to implement all or a portion of the projects becomes possibles. Additionally, as supplementary grant money or other revenue is gathered, these projects may be moved into the 10-year CIP as needed. The CIP incorporates the projects and construction timelines that have been suggested by the Downtown Core Feasibility Study and approved by City Council. Projects outside the downtown core were prioritized based on the following criteria, in order of importance: • Remaining Service Life of existing facility • Function Classification of street and traffic volume • Community value (vicinity to schools, hospitals, recreation, etc.) • Need for pathway, storm drain, or utility improvements • CIP program funding and outside funding sources The 2017-2026 CIP proposes improvements to twelve streets, one alley, and the construction of a storm drain facility. The plan encompasses 3.8 centerline miles of roadway, which constitutes 8.6% of the city’s paved network. The estimated cost for the proposed CIP is approximately $11,000,000. Reconstruction of the downtown core 1st, 2nd, Lenora, Park, and stormwater facilities represents 45% of the 10 year investment. The list of preliminary projects, which are next in line to be adopted into the 10-year CIP, totals 5.8 centerline miles, or 13.6% of the paved network. The estimated construction costs of these projects are approximately $13,000,000. Each improvement project will implement strategies outlined in the City’s Complete Streets Policy. Full details regarding the 10-year CIP and the projects that have been identified for preliminary development can be found in Appendix “D.” 3.3 CAPITAL AND MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT PLANS RESULTS OF IMPLEMENTING THE CIP & MIP • More cost-effective maintenance of the City’s roads • Efficient implementation of priority walking and bicycling projects 48 | MCCALL IN MOTION The MIP proposes a detailed approach to maintaining the existing paved streets in the City. The goal of the proposed MIP is to prevent good-conditioned streets from falling into a condition that would require a more expensive treatment.} The Streets Department utilized asset management strategies to identify specific routine, preventative, and rehabilitative pavement treatments for the city’s paved network over a 10-year horizon. Maintenance planning was completed to minimize spending long-term by applying the appropriate pavement treatment at the correct time using the RSL measure. For instance, a chip seal treatment is known to be most beneficial to the life of a pavement when the segment is classified in the 8 to 14-year RSL range. Similarly, it is not cost effective to chip seal a pavement segment classified in the 4 to 8-year RSL range because the pavement is passed the point of no return, and a more expensive treatment is warranted to replace the existing pavement. In some cases it is economical to allow a pavement segment to further degrade to the point in which full reconstruction of the pavement section is warranted. Reconstruction projects, although expensive, allow the city to plan for future improvements to pathways, storm drain systems, water and sewer systems, and parking areas. Results of the pavement inventory have made it possible to identify streets that should receive similar surface treatments and that can be grouped together for cost savings. A budget of $350,000 per year for MIP projects was used for project identification. Any funds not spent during the year it is collected from the Streets Local Option Tax (LOT, discussed in a subsequent section) will be carried over to subsequent years. The Streets Department will spend less than the budgeted amount in 2017 and 2018 for the purpose of using the rollover funds to complete larger maintenance projects, and to implement economy of scale strategy. The June 2016 pavement inventory identified a large percentage of the paved network that falls in the preventative and routine maintenance spectrum. The goal of the proposed MIP is to prevent good- conditioned streets to degrade to a condition that would constitute a more expensive treatment. Initial planning utilized the concept of a 5-year cycle. One 5-year cycle consists of three heavy routine and preventative maintenance years and two rehabilitative maintenance years on streets where improvements have not been identified. Rehabilitative measures, as part of the MIP, are completed on pavement that have reached the end of their useful life. Additionally, the MIP incorporates routine and preventative treatments for streets that are planned for reconstruction. The goal is to apply a preventative measure to newly constructed streets within two to three years of completion to protect the City’s investment in improved street facilities. Likewise, many streets will receive multiple maintenance treatments. For example, roadways that receive a rehabilitative treatment as identified in the CIP or MIP, depending on size, will typically receive a preventative chip seal several years after the initial treatment. The 10-year MIP is presented in Figure 18. Full details of the MIP can be found in Appendix H. The presented MIP proposes 39.1 centerline miles of routine, preventative, and rehabilitation maintenance treatments. Proposed spending on MIP projects is approximately $350,000 per year. Additional Streets L.O.T. revenue that is allocated for maintenance projects may be used for additional routine maintenance on streets that have received preventative treatments. 3.3.2 MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT PLAN (MIP) The goal of the proposed MIP is to prevent good-conditioned streets from falling into a condition that would require a more expensive treatment. Gravel roads have not been considered for the MIP or the CIP because annual maintenance is adequate to upkeep the integrity of the surface. Unpaved streets are typically in residential areas and do not receive heavy-vehicle traffic. 49McCall Area Transportation Plan | Figure 17. 10-Year Capital Improvements Plan AlleyAlley SSvvccRRddNNSS aa mmss oo nn TTrrllDwyDwy MMoorrggaann DDrr 1st St1st StFloyde StFloyde St Davis AveDavis AveMill RdMill RdE Park StE Park StW Fore s t S t W Fore s t S t MMaatt hh eerr RRdd Stibnite StStibnite St N Mission StN Mission StRRii oo VViissttaaBBllvvdd Krahn LnKrahn Ln S Samson TrlS Samson TrlDavis AveDavis AveN Samson TrlN Samson TrlRR aaiillrrooaaddAAvveeWWoooolleeyy AAvvee Elo RdElo RdSSMMiissssiioonnSSttE Deinhard LnE Deinhard LnNNMMiissssiioonnSStt SSpprriinnggMMoouunnttaaiinnBBllvvddWW DD ee ii nn hh aa rr dd LL nnHill LnS u itor Ln ParLnEJacobStMay RdCamas PlEagle DrRiverRanchRdDivotLnValleySpringsRdRa w hideLoop Fairway Dr Jacob St Carme n Dr Carico RdClements RdScott St McCallAve2nd StReedy Ln Hemlock St Colo rado St PonderosaStThula StGarnet St Brown DrOpal St Buckb o ardWayFloyde StAspen StThompson Ave Fir St GambleRdRice St Idaho St Louisa AveBitterroot DrState StDawsonAveHill RdBridle Path Way WardStL i c k Creek Rd Kasper StDiamond St Washington StNeal StSimmons StStockton DrE Lake StCamp RdRuby St Shelia LnEismanStAgate St K ikiCtL e n o raS tE Forest St CammyDrSuns e t S tPlacid StR i n gelS t Cece Way Lawren ceDrEllisRdEagle Shores CtChu la Rd Sam son CtCrossRdNSamsonTrl T i m m StEdgewaterCirAnn StAspen Aly McBride St Spruce St Firew e e d D rWildhorse DrS u n n y Way Saddlehorn Ln Gab i L n RooseveltAve Broken Rein R dFairway LoopBur n s Rd RailroadA v e B r un d ageDrHewitt St Commerce StMcGi n n i s St Woo d l a nds D rSmittyAveBaycolt WayAlle n AveJulies RdHelmich StCarico Ct DeerF ore st Dr Ernesto DrFox LnSyringaD r Ch a d LoopSvcRd M e moCir Fox Ridge LnN 3rd StN 3rd StW Lake S t W Lake S t State Hwy 55State Hwy 55 E Lake StE Lake St S 3rd StS 3rd St Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Capital Improvement Plan 0 0.5 10.25Miles Legend CIP Roads Other Roads Future improvement projects beyond 10 Years Reconstruction & improve in next 10 years Years 2017 - 2026 and Future Projects Mather Rd 2021 Construction - Replace pavement section - Improve roadside drainage - Upgrade main stormwater pipe Idaho and Brown Ct 2018 Construction - Replace pavement section - Improve roadside drainage - Add separated pathway Park St and Thompson Ave 2025 Construction - Replace pavement section - Improve roadside drainage - Add Pedestrian Facilities Wooley Ave 2026 Construction - Replace pavement section - Improve roadside drainage - Add separated pathway E, Deinhard Ln 2023 Construction - Replace pavement section - Improve separated pathway - Upgrade access to businesses Commerce St 2017 Construction - Replace pavement section - Install roadside ditches - Improve access to businesses S. Mission St 2022 Construction - Federally Funded Project - Replace pavement section - Connect existing pathway to existing buffered bike lane Downtown Core Projects 2018 - 2020 Construction - 2nd and Lenora streets complete in 2019 - Veteran's Alley and Park St complete in 2020 - Replacement of entire core, which is important to McCall's overall character - Improve sidewalks, on-street parking, street lighting and event space - 1st St parking lot improvements anticipated in 2024 Figure 17 50 | MCCALL IN MOTION !!!!!! AlleyAlley SSvvcc RRdd DDwwyyMorgan DrMorgan Dr 2nd S t2nd S t 1st St1st StEELLaakkeeSSttColorado StColorado St E Park StE Park St N Mission StN Mission StLakeside AveLakeside Ave W Forest StW Forest St MM aatthheerrRRdd Stibnite StStibnite St Rio Vista BlvdRio Vista Blvd Chad DrChad DrBoydstun StBoydstun StE Deinhard LnE Deinhard Ln S Mission StS Mission StN Mission StN Mission StW Deinhard LnW Deinhard Ln Hill LnS cottSt Hayes St W h it e t a il D r W Forest St Valley View Ln E Park StScott St Fir St Hayes St 2nd StSunset St Timberc r e s t L o o p Thula StBrown DrRowland StFloyde StAspen StPinedale S t Karen St GambleRdR omine Dr Rice St Idaho St Jacob StState StHill RdRiver St Kasper StC o y R d Washington StNeal StSimmons StE Lake StKikiCtE Forest St CammyDrTimm S tCece WayEagleShoresCtVeritaRdChulaRdLardo StGena W ayCrossRdEdgewa terCirMcBride StBoydstunSt SunnyWayJasper DrGab i L nB urnsRd RailroadAveCarmenDr Hewitt St R id g e R d P ineTerraceDr Chad Loop Placid StInd u s t ri a lLoopHelmich StH errick S tHubbard DrErnest o D r Brundage Dr ValleyRimRdSvcRd M emoCirN 3 rd S tN 3 rd S t W Lake StW Lake St E Lake StE Lake St Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Maintenance Improvement Plan 0 0.25 0.50.125Miles LegendMIP Roads Phase 1 !!! !!!!!! !!!2017, Micro seal2017, Rehabilitate pavement2018, Chip Seal2018, Fog Seal2019, Chip Seal 2020, Chip Seal2020, Rehabilitate Pavement2021, Chip Seal2021, Fog Seal2021, Rehabilitate Pavement2022, Chip Seal 2022, Rehabilitate Pavement2023, Chip Seal2024, Rehabilitate Pavement2025, Rehabilitate Pavement2026, Chip Seal MIP Roads Phase 2 2026, Chip Seal 2024, Chip Seal 2023, Chip Seal Years 2017 - 2026 West Figure 18 51McCall Area Transportation Plan | Figure 18. 10-Year Maintenance Improvement Plan !!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!! !! AlleyAlley SSvvccRRddNN SSaammssoonnTTrrll DD ww yy Floyde StFloyde StEELLaakkeeSSttCCoolloorraaddooSSttMill RdMill RdS Samson TrlS Samson TrlDavis AveDavis AveN Samson TrlN Samson TrlRRaaiillrrooaaddAAvveeLick Creek RdLick Creek Rd WW oo oo lleeyy AAvvee E Deinhard LnE Deinhard Ln SSpprriinnggMMoouunnttaaiinnBBllvvddDavis AveDavis AveEEllddeerrbbeerrrryyLLoooopp DDooggwwoooodd LLoooopp Cottage Ct W o o d y D r Suitor Ln Par LnQuakie LnBir d i eBlvdC o l u m b in e P lE Jacob StMay RdC am a s P lEagle DrPenstemenPlDivot LnValleySpringsRdMilesS ta n d is h Rd TimberCirD r a gonfly LoopFairway Dr Jacob St Clements RdSnowberry PlMcCallAve ShadyLnEllis RdCarico RdReedy LnHemlock St Mo`s Way Colorado St PonderosaStGarnet St Bitterroot Dr Opal St Bu ckboar dWayPottsDrThompson Ave Floyde St Fir St BlackwellAveLouisa AveEParkStBalshae DrDawsonAveHill RdBridle Path Way WardStL ic k CreekRd SandW edgeCt Diamond St KaitlynLoo p Railroad AveE Lake StCamp RdR uby St Washington St EismanStAgate St McBride St Strawberry Ln LenoraStMayflo w erRdBe llflowerPlSuns e t S t StocktonCtBlueHazeWay R ingelS t MajesticViewDrLawren ceDrSam son Ct NSamsonTrl T im m S tAnnSt Aspen Aly Stockton DrAlpine StSpruce St Wi ldhorse Dr Saddlehorn LnUniversityLnRooseveltAve HeavensGateCtBrok enReinR d Dou g l a s D rFairwayLoop W o o d l ands Dr Graham Dr Commerce StMcGi n n is S t Vi o l e t W a y Flynn Ln F irew eed Dr Conifer Ln Chipmunk Ln Pilgrim Cove RdM o untain Meadow Dr SmittyAveSwanie WayBaycolt WayAllen AveBrady D r Koski Dr Knights RdAspenRidgeLnCarico C t DeerFo r e s t Dr FoxLnSyringaDr Kaitlyn L oopGinneyWayCe darLn Cee Way Loop Fox Ridge Ln FoxRidgeLnN 3 rd S tN 3 rd S t S 3 r d S tS 3 r d S t Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Maintenance Improvement Plan 0 0.25 0.50.125Miles Years 2017 - 2026 East Figure 18a 52 | MCCALL IN MOTION YEAR GROUP NO.DESCRIPTION TOTAL LENGTH (MILES) % OF NETWORK FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION GROUP TOTAL COST ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION GROUP TOTAL COST STORMWATER GROUP TOTAL COST MULTIMODAL CONSTRUCTION COST CONTINGENCY (25%) DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING COST (25%) TOTAL PROJECT COST 201727 Commerce St**0.2 0.6%Local $417,313 $109,900 $0 $527,213 na $157,283 $684,500 0.2 0.6%$417,313 $109,900 $0 $527,213 na $157,283 $690,000 201845, 18 Idaho St & Brown Drive 0.3 0.7%Local $594,979 $86,760 $37,654 $719,393 $71,939 $197,833 $989,165 0.3 0.7%$594,979 $86,760 $37,654 $719,393 $71,939 $197,833 $990,000 3 2nd St from E. Lake to Park 0.1 0.3% Minor Collector $616,253 $57,600 $169,310 $843,163 $210,791 $263,488 $1,317,442 52 Lenora St from 3rd to 1st St 0.1 0.3% Minor Collector $667,640 $77,000 $106,082 $850,722 $212,681 $265,851 $1,329,253 0.3 0.3%$1,283,893 $134,600 $275,392 $1,693,885 $423,471 $529,339 $2,650,000 7 Veterans' Alley 0.2 0.4% Minor Collector $130,629 $10,500 $0 $141,129 $35,282 $44,103 $220,514 62 Park St from 1st to 3rd 0.2 0.4% Minor Collector $629,862 $44,000 $115,691 $789,553 $197,388 $246,735 $1,233,677 0.3 0.8%$760,491 $54,500 $115,691 $930,682 $232,671 $290,838 $1,460,000 202154c Mather Rd from Mission to Brundage *0.3 0.7% Minor Collector $141,000 $75,305 $0 $216,305 $54,076 $67,595 $337,977 0.3 0.7%$141,000 $75,305 $0 $216,305 $54,076 $67,595 $340,000 57 S. Mission St from Deinhard to City Limits* +0.7 1.6% Major Collector $177,000 $0 $0 $177,000 na na $177,000 2 1st Street from E Lake to Park *0.1 0.3% Minor Collector $518,205 $55,600 $91,069 $664,874 $166,219 $207,773 $1,038,866 0.8 1.9%$695,205 $55,600 $91,069 $841,874 $166,219 $207,773 $1,220,000 202331 E Deinhard Ln 0.5 1.3% Major Collector $764,250 $0 $99,283 $863,533 $215,883 $269,854 $1,349,270 0.5 1.3%$764,250 $0 $99,283 $863,533 $215,883 $269,854 $1,350,000 2024na Stormwater Facilities *na na DT Core Project $0 $461,050 $0 $461,050 $115,263 $144,078 $720,391 0.0 0.0%$0 $461,050 $0 $461,050 $115,263 $144,078 $730,000 202560 Park St, Thompson Ave to Davis *0.4 0.9% Minor Collector $175,230 $48,650 $60,764 $284,644 $71,161 $88,951 $444,756 0.4 0.9%$175,230 $48,650 $60,764 $284,644 $71,161 $88,951 $450,000 202673b Wooley Ave, Davis to Spring Mnt. Blvd *0.6 1.5% Major Collector $332,825 $127,610 $271,507 $731,942 $182,985 $228,732 $1,143,659 0.6 1.5%$332,825 $127,610 $271,507 $731,942 $182,985 $228,732 $1,150,000 3.8 8.6%$5,165,186 $1,153,975 $951,360 $7,270,521 $1,533,668 $2,182,277 $11,030,000 Denotes use of 10% Contingency due to the completion of Preliminary Design and a Preliminary Project Estimate. YEAR * Denotes project not included in previous capital improvement plan years 2016 to 2022 + Denotes federally funded project. Construction year is undetermined. City cost is 7.43% match of project cost. 2023 TOTALS ===> 2024 TOTALS ===> 2025 TOTALS ===> 2026 TOTALS ===> 10-Year Totals ===> ** Commerce Street reconstruction project awarded. Notice to proceed issued July 12, 2017 and to be completed October 201720202020 TOTALS ===> 2021 TOTALS ===>20222022 TOTALS ===> 2019 TOTALS ===> McCALL 10-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - 2017 TO 2026 Accelerated DT Core Strategy 2017 TOTALS ===> 2018 TOTALS ===>2019October 2017 PRIORITY LEVEL GROUP NO. DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP) TOTAL LENGTH (MILES) % OF NETWORK FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION COMMUNITY VALUE (Scale from 0-10) AADT (veh. per day) PAVEMENT TREATMENT AND IMPROVEMENTS PRELIMINARY PROJECT COST (2017 cost) High na E Lake St from 1st to Mission St 0.2 0.6%Arterial 9 6,760 Full Reconstruct, Urban Stormdrain, Sidewalk $1,000,000 High 29a Davis Ave from Wanda to Spruce St.0.5 1.2% Major Collector 9 2,270 Mill & Inlay (4"), Widen Shoulders $720,000 High 67, 68b Spring Mountain Blvd from Aspen Ridge Ln to E Deinhard Ln 1.2 2.9% Major Collector 9 1,640 Mill & Inlay (4"), Widen Shoulders $1,840,000 High 58b Mission St from Mather to E Lake St 0.3 0.7% Major Collector 8 ~ 2,000 Full Reconstruct, Urban Stormdrain, Bike Lanes $800,000 High 33 E Lake St from Pine to Hemlock 0.2 0.5% Minor Collector 7 ~ 2,000 Mill & Inlay (3"), Urban Stormdrain, Sidewalk $1,240,000 Medium 43 Hemlock St 0.3 0.7% Minor Collector 6 ~ 1,500 Mill & Inlay (3"), Urban Stormdrain, Sidewalk $880,000 Medium 28 Cross Rd, State St 0.2 0.6% Minor Collector 7 570 Mill & Inlay (3"), Urban Stormdrain, Sidewalk $530,000 Medium 1 1st St Park to Colorado 0.2 0.5% Minor Collector 6 ~ 750 Full Reconstruct, Urban Stormdrain, Sidewalk $1,000,000 Medium 25 Colorado St from 3rd St to Samson Trail 0.2 0.5% Minor Collector 5 ~ 500 Full Reconstruct, Ditch Grading $440,000 Medium 54a Mather Rd, E Lake St to Burns 0.5 1.1% Minor Collector 5 ~ 500 Full Reconstruct, Ditch Grading, Seperated Pathway $940,000 Low 38 Forest St from Mission to Mather 0.7 1.6% Minor Collector 5 ~ 750 Mill & Inlay (3"), Ditch Grading, Bike Lanes $1,160,000 Low 56 Mill Rd from Hemlock to Fir 0.1 0.3% Minor Collector 5 ~ 500 Full Reconstruct, Urban Stormdrain, Sidewalk $510,000 Low 26 Colorado St from 3rd St to 1st St 0.2 0.4% Minor Collector 4 ~ 500 Full Reconstruct, Urban Stormdrain, Sidewalk $600,000 Low 54b Mather Rd, from Burns to Brundage 0.3 0.8% Minor Collector 3 ~ 500 Mill & Inlay (3"), Ditch Grading $370,000 Low 72 Washington St, Railroad Ave (from 3rd St to end of pavement)0.3 0.6%Residential 2 230 Mill & Inlay (3"), Ditch Grading $310,000 Low 17a Bridle Path Way, Saddlehorn Ln 0.3 0.6%Residential 2 ~150 Full Reconstruct due to frost heave $450,000 5.8 13.6%$12,790,000 ~ Denotes Estimated AADT. Pavement Treatments to be verified and are dependent on project construction year. McCall Preliminary Development Project List Future Projects to be Funded for Construction NOTES: Totals ===> October 2017 Figure 19. Capital Improvement Plan Table and Project List 53McCall Area Transportation Plan | Beyond the scope of the CIP and MIP, the following projects have been identified for future study and programming into the City’s CIP. While the projects in the current CIP are largely focused on improving the condition of the roadways, these projects mostly aim to increase capacity, reduce delay, reduce crashes, and otherwise enhance the function of the transportation system. These projects are shown in Figure 18 and described below. 3rd Street/Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street and 3rd Street/Park Street Intersections Traffic signals are recommended for both of these intersections of 3rd Street. These signals will reduce delay for side-street traffic and help mitigate conflicts between pedestrians and motor vehicles. The Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street intersection is the highest priority of the two locations. Implementing these projects will require coordination with ITD, which owns 3rd Street (SH 55) and further engineering study. This project may not be competitive under ITD’s current funding structure without a financial partnership from the City. The City is actively investigating hiring crossing guards for this intersection. The effectiveness of this strategy should be evaluated before deciding whether to move forward with pursuing a signal at this intersection. Sight distance has been recently improved but could be further evaluated to determine if further adjustments are warranted. Boydstun Street/Lake Street Intersection Either a roundabout or traffic signal is recommended in the long-term at this intersection. Further study will be required to evaluate the feasibility and trade- offs between these two options. This project would also need to be coordinated with ITD, which owns Lake Street (SH 55), and any efforts to designate Deinhard Lane-Boydstun Street as a bypass route. SH 55 Bypass Incrementally implement Deinhard Lane-Boydstun Street between 3rd Street and Lake Street as a bypass to State Highway (SH) 55. This would involve starting with officially designating this route as an alternate freight route through signage and communication with the freight community. Turning movement radii for freight vehicles will need to be evaluated at SH 55 intersections before this could happen. Prior to implementing this project, the City will also need to confirm that restrictions on using this route as a freight bypass have been lifted. 3rd Street/Lake Street Intersection Implement urban design treatments at this intersection and investigate and implement treatments to further enforce the existing right-out only movement from Lake Street onto SH 55 at this intersection. Pine Street/Roosevelt Street Intersection Investigate whether all-way stop-control is the most appropriate treatment for the Pine Street/ Roosevelt Street intersection. City staff have received complaints about people sliding through the westbound approach at this intersection in the wintertime. Future engineering study will be required and should consider sight distance, traffic volumes, and potential impacts to people walking and bicycling. 3.4 ROADWAY ENHANCEMENT PROJECTS FOR FUTURE STUDY AND PROGRAMMING 54 | MCCALL IN MOTION Additional East-West Connections from Central McCall to Spring Mountain Boulevard To provide additional travel options between the central part of McCall and the Spring Mountain Boulevard area, either: • Extend Floyde Street to intersect with Spring Mountain Boulevard across from Woodlands Drive; or • Extend Samson Trail to intersect with Spring Mountain Boulevard across from Woodlands Drive, which would also require improving and re- opening existing portions of the road To enhance connectivity on the west side of 3rd Street, the City will consider extending 1st Street from its current terminus at Colorado Street south to Stibnite Street. This extension (via Thula Street) would provide another option for people to travel from Deinhard Lane to Lake Street and downtown McCall without using 3rd Street. This extension would require obtaining privately owned right-of- way, so potentially affected landowners would need to be engaged in further discussions of this possible extension. More information on each project, including technical analyses, can be found in Section 3 of Appendix “C.” Priorities from Public Feedback • Traffic signal at 3rd Street/Railroad Avenue • Freight bypass of downtown McCall • Streetscape/crossing improvements at 3rd Street/Lake Street 3.5 OTHER PROJECTS In addition to the specific infrastructure projects described previously, the following additional projects have been identified in response to interviews with City staff: • Update City code (Titles 2, 3, and 9) and engineering standard drawings to reflect current City policies, Comprehensive Plan, and industry practices • Work with the McCall Renewal Agency (MRA) to define future transportation projects in their boundary • Complete a public works facilities capacity and needs analysis to assess and identify the City’s physical and fiscal needs related to equipment, maintenance facilities, and staffing, along with an implementation schedule for ensuring the City is able to maintain its infrastructure in a sustainable manner • Conduct an analysis of the feasibility of different streetscape and multimodal infrastructure improvements along 3rd Street between Colorado Street and Deinhard Lane. 55McCall Area Transportation Plan | Figure 20. Proposed Roadway Projects èéëìíèéëìí !P 89:w Valley View Ln McCall Ave1stStCarico RdReedy LnMeadows RdStibnite St Ponderosa StSmittyAveFir St Knowles RdRowlandStHayes St Gamble RdHemlock StHelmich Scott St Idaho St A ll enAveC h a d D r Thula StState St2ndStRiverRanchRdDawson AveMill RdKaren St Club Rd Chris Ln L e n o ra S tVeritaRdShelia LnCoy RdELakeStW Fore s t S t HelmichStAlpine StColorado St Cece Way May RdGabi L n WhitetailDr E Forest St E Park StBurnsRd EagleDrConifer Ln Flynn Ln Boydst unLnCa r m e n D r Hewitt St Commerce StMarywoodDrDivotLnM c Gi n nis St Ern e s t o D r Krahn Ln SvcRd Fairway Dr R id g e R d ValleyRimRdMorganDr Lakeside Ave Wanda Ave Floyde StMatherRdRio Vista Blvd NSa msonTrl NMissionStMission StLick C r e e k R d Davis AveN 3rd StSpringMountainBlvdE Lake St S Samson TrlBoydstunStS 3rd StWisdom RdWarrenWagonRdWooleyAve E Deinhard Ln W Lake St Elo RdS Mission StWDeinhard Ln ÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan August 2017 ¯ Proposed Roadway Projects McCall, Idaho H:\19\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Proposed RoadwayProjects_No#.mxd - jmarkosian - 8:39 AM 10/11/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA SH 55 Bypass Potential Road Extensions; 1st Street Extension 89:w Crossing Enhancements !P Roundabout/Signal èéëìí Signal Further Study City Limits 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Figure 20 56 | MCCALL IN MOTION Figure 21. Planned Bikeway Network PilgrimCoveRdMoonridgeDrBrookDrClubHillBlvdValley View Ln McCallAve1stStReedy LnMeadows RdStibnite St ShadyLn LupineLnIdaho St ChadDr Knights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdBitterr o o t D r C h r i s L n ClubRd LichenLnCoyRdMoon Dr W Forest S t Stockton Dr C o l o r a d o S t WhitetailDr OspreyViewDrS undanceDrJohnAldenErn e s t o D r AspenRidgeLnShelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln Svc Rd N S a ms onTrlStateParkRdChipmunk Ln F a irway Dr Ridge R dBearBasinRd ValleyRim R dCrowleyLn NisulaRdMigratoryRidgeWayRawhideLoopF a w nlullyDr MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStWL a k e S t Mission StSpringMountainBlvdWarrenWagonRdDavis AveN3rdStLick Creek Rd E Lake St BoydstunStS 3rd St Wooley Ave E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionStS Samson TrlWDeinhar d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan August 2017 ¯ Planned Bikeway Network McCall, Idaho H:\19\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Proposed Pathway Network_No#.mxd - jmarkosian - 8:35 AM 10/11/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Desired Bike Lanes Desired Pathway Existing Bike Lane Existing Pathway Parks City Boundary 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles E Park St N 3rd StRailroad AveE Lake St Wanda Ave N Samson T r lKasper StColorado StSmitty AveWard St2nd St1st StThula StWashington St Lenora St Pl acid S t Idaho St Timm StELakeSt AnnStAlpine StE Forest St E Park St M c G i n n i s StStibnite St Payette Lake Downtown McCall Figure 21 57McCall Area Transportation Plan | This plan includes projects related to expanding the City’s existing network of pathways, sidewalks, bike lanes, and bike routes, as well as maintaining them and other urban streetscape features. 3.6.1 EXPANDING THE PATHWAYS NETWORK The plan for improving the walking and bicycling networks in McCall is largely based on the McCall Area Pathways Master Plan. Recommendations from that plan have been updated for this Transportation Master Plan to reflect projects that have been built and other plans that have been developed since it was adopted and public input received during this project. Additionally, as the City continues to expand the walking and bicycling infrastructure in McCall, it is important to consider how future maintenance of the system should be handled. The planned walking and bicycling networks are shown in Figure 21 and Figure 22. More information on these projects can be found in Appendix “C” and the McCall Area Pathways Master Plan. Interim Treatment Options In certain instances, interim treatments may help provide a better walking and/or bicycling experience until the ultimate planned improvement can be built. For these locations, consideration should be given to providing some type of physical buffer that allows for drainage to function as exists, such as extruded curbing or plastic posts, to create a more comfortable walking and/or bicycling environment. These treatments could be put in as permanent or temporary (i.e., removed before snow falls). If curbing is put in on a permanent basis, the City may want to consider installing snow markers in them during the winter. Potential locations where such treatments may be considered include: • 3rd Street, Colorado Street – Deinhard Lane • Lake Street, Bear Basin Connector Trail (west of Boydstun Street) – 1st Street 3.6.2 DOWNTOWN SNOW REMOVAL AND LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE In addition to these infrastructure projects, the City will also investigate assuming responsibility for urban infrastructure, including landscaping and snow removal in order to provide for more consistent maintenance of these items. As noted later in this plan, the City is planning a significant investment in enhancing its downtown multimodal infrastructure. It will be important that these items are regularly maintained to ensure that their benefit is fully realized. Taking on this additional responsibility would alleviate adjacent property owners and businesses of this increased responsibility, but it would also have a fiscal impact to the City so the City should work with downtown landowners and business owners to evaluate financial models for how this would work. Appendix “C” Section 3.3 contains more information on what this may entail. 3.6 OUR PATHWAYS Priorities from Public Feedback • 3rd Street, Colorado Street – Deinhard Lane • L ake Street, Bear Basin Connector Trail (west of Boydstun Street) – 1st Street • Davis Avenue, Ponderosa State Park – Thompson Avenue • Wooley Avenue, Davis Avenue – Spring Mountain Boulevard 58 | MCCALL IN MOTION Figure 22. Planned Walkway Network Pilgrim Cove RdMoonridgeDrBrook DrClubHillBlvdValley View Ln McCallAve1stStReedy LnMeadows RdStibnite St ShadyLn PottsDrIdaho St ChadDr Knights RdLichenLnThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdBitterro o t D r C h r i s L n ClubRd CoyRdMoon Dr W Forest S t Stockton Dr C o l o r a d o S t WhitetailDr S undanceDrJohnAldenErn e s t o D r AspenRidgeLnShelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Flynn Ln SvcRd N S a ms onTrlChipmunk Ln F airway Dr Ridge R dBearBasinRd ValleyRim R dCrowleyLn NisulaRdRawhideLoopFawnlullyDrMatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStWL a k e S t Mission StSpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdSt LickCreekRdE Lake St BoydstunStS 3rd St Wooley AveWarrenWagon R d E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionSt S Samson TrlWDeinha r d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan August 2017 ¯ Planned Walkway Network McCall, Idaho H:\19\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX ProposedWalking Network_No#.mxd - jmarkosian - 2:14 PM 8/14/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Pathways Desired Pathway Desired Sidewalk Existing Pathway Existing Sidewalk Parks City Boundary 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles Pine St 4th S t2nd St Kasper St1st StSyringaDrE Forest St Washington St E Park St Idaho St Lenora St E LakeStAnnStRailroad AveWanda Ave N S a ms onTr l E Park St N 3rd StPine St Thompson AveE Lake St RailroadAvePayette Lake Downtown McCall Figure 22 59McCall Area Transportation Plan | This page is left intentionally blank 60 | MCCALL IN MOTION 61McCall Area Transportation Plan | The projects described in Chapter 3 have been categorized by project type and prioritized for implementation. The following sections describe the prioritization criteria and summarize the projects by type. 4. Coast (IMPLEMENTATION) 62 | MCCALL IN MOTION Coast 4.1.1 PRIORITIZATION CRITERIA The different types of projects contained in this plan (i.e., policies, plans, infrastructure improvements) have generally been prioritized into the following categories: • Near-term – These are projects that should be initiated within 0 to 5 years of adoption of this plan • Mid-term – These are projects that are likely to be initiated within 6 to 15 years of adoption of this plan • Long-term – These are projects that are likely to be initiated 15 years or later after this plan is adopted • Recurring - These are projects that will take place regularly at a defined time interval (e.g., every three years). Projects were generally categorized according to the following criteria: • Demand/need fulfillment – This is based on technical analysis and public involvement (i.e., how often was this project noted as a priority by the public) • Implementation – A qualitative review of factors, such as: −Expected cost −Property impacts −Expected City funding levels and currently programmed projects −Ability to construct with other projects (e.g., roadway reconstruction with pathway addition) The resulting prioritization categories are meant to serve as general guidelines for when the projects may be funded by the City and a general prioritization of how the City should order improvement as funding becomes available. Prioritization levels may change based on changing funding levels and/ or sources (e.g., grant funding that has to be used for a certain type of project) and private development projects (particularly in the case of projects where additional right-of-way may be required). Reconstruction projects in the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) were prioritized through a separate process, described in Chapter 3 and Appendix “D.” 4.1 PRIORITIZED PROJECTS 63McCall Area Transportation Plan | Monthly Change in Daily Traffic Volumes on SH 55 summarizes the projects discussed in Chapter 3 and organizes them by type (i.e., policy, plan, infrastructure) and priority level. The programmed funding year is shown for CIP projects. Table 3. Comprehensive Project Summary PROJECT #LOCATION DESCRIPTION PRIORITY Policies (PO) PO – 1 City-wide Adopt updated functional classification map Near-term (with plan adoption)1 PO – 2 City-wide Adopt revised typical cross-sections Near-term (with plan adoption) PO – 3 Downtown core Establish policy that assigns ownership, maintenance and funding responsibilities for urban streetscape infrastructure including: sidewalks, landscaping, lighting, stormwater, and snow removal Near-term PO – 4 City-wide Adopt updated CIP Near-term (with plan adoption) PO – 5 City-wide Adopt updated MPI Near-term (with plan adoption) PO – 6 City-wide Update City code and engineering standard drawings to reflect current City policies, Comprehensive Plan, and industry practices Near-term Plans (PL) PL – 1 Downtown Develop a parking management plan Near-term PL – 2 City-wide Work with Mountain Community Transit to develop a plan for enhanced transit service Near-term PL – 3 McCall Renewal Agency (MRA) area Work with MRA to define future projects in its boundary Mid-term PL – 4 City-wide Update pavement management inventory every three-years and revise CIP and MIP project lists and implementation schedules annually Recurring PL – 5 City-wide Complete a public works facilities capacity and needs analysis Near-term PL – 6 City-wide Revise/Rewrite Transportation Master Plan Mid-term PL – 7 3rd Street (Colorado St – Deinhard Ln) 3rd Street Corridor Streetscape Feasibility Analysis Near-term PL – 8 City-wide Maintenance and Depreciation Funding Strategy Near-term 4.2 PROJECT SUMMARY 64 | MCCALL IN MOTION PROJECT #LOCATION DESCRIPTION PRIORITY Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) CIP – 1 Commerce Street (Jacob St – Deinhard Ln) Reconstruct roadway, install ditches, improve access 2017 CIP – 2 Downtown Core (2nd St, Lenora St, Veteran’s Alley, Park St, 1st St parking lot) Reconstruct roadways, enhance sidewalks and street lighting, modify parking 2018 – 2020 CIP – 3 Idaho Street (Mission St – 1st St & Brown Court) Reconstruct roadway, improve drainage, add separated pathway 2018 CIP - 4 Mather Road (Brundage Dr – Mission St) Reconstruct roadway, improve drainage 2021 CIP – 5 Mission Street (Smokejumper Base – Deinhard Ln) Reconstruct roadway, add separated pathway/ bike lanes 2022 - 2033 CIP – 6 Deinhard Ln (3rd St – Spring Mountain Blvd) Reconstruct roadway, improve pathway, improve access 2023 CIP – 7 Park Street/Thompson Avenue (3rd St – Davis Ave) Reconstruct roadway, add bicycling/walking facilities, improve drainage 2025 CIP – 8 Wooley Avenue (Davis Ave – Spring Mountain Blvd) Reconstruct roadway, improve drainage, add separated pathway 2026 CIP – 9 Lake Street (Mather Rd – 1st St) Reconstruct roadway, add walking and bicycling facilities 20271 CIP – 10 Davis Avenue (Wanda Ave – Spruce St) Reconstruct roadway, improved bicycling and walking facilities 2027 CIP – 11 Mather Rd (Burns Rd – Lake St) Reconstruct roadway, upgrade drainage, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, if necessary Long-term CIP – 12 Forest St (Mather Rd – Mission St) Reconstruct roadway, upgrade drainage, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, if necessary Long-term CIP – 13 State Street (Mather Rd – Lake St) Reconstruct roadway, upgrade drainage, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, if necessary Long-term CIP – 14 Mission Street (Idaho St – Lake St) Reconstruct roadway, add bike lanes, upgrade drainage, if necessary Long-term CIP – 15 1st Street (Colorado St – Park St) Reconstruct roadway, upgrade drainage, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, if necessary Long-term CIP – 16 Washington Street (1st St – 3rd St) Reconstruct roadway, upgrade drainage, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, if necessary Long-term 65McCall Area Transportation Plan | PROJECT #LOCATION DESCRIPTION PRIORITY CIP – 17 Colorado Street (1st St – Samson Tr) Reconstruct roadway, upgrade drainage, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, if necessary Long-term CIP – 18 Lake Street (Pine St – Hemlock St) Reconstruct roadway, upgrade drainage, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, if necessary Long-term CIP – 19 Mill Road (Fir St – Hemlock St) Reconstruct roadway, upgrade drainage, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, if necessary Long-term CIP – 20 Hemlock Street (Lake St – Davis Ave) Reconstruct roadway, add sidewalk, upgrade drainage facilities, if necessary Long-term CIP – 21 Spring Mountain Boulevard (Deinhard Ln – Bitterroot Dr) Reconstruct roadway, upgrade drainage, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, if necessary Long-term MIP Various Streets Apply maintenance treatment as noted in MIP (Figure 18) 2017-2026 Roadway Enhancement Projects for Further Investigation/Programming R – 1 3rd Street/Railroad Avenue – Lenora Street Install a traffic signal Near-term1 R – 2 3rd Street/Park Street Install a traffic signal Mid-term1 R – 3 Deinhard Lane/ Boydstun Street (Lake St – 3rd St) Implement Freight Bypass Near-term1 R – 4 Boydstun Street/Lake Street Install a roundabout or traffic signal Long-term1 R – 5 Lake Street/3rd Street Urban design treatment Mid-term1 R – 6 Lake Street/3rd Street Treatments to enforce right-out only movement Mid-term1 R – 7 Pine Street/Roosevelt Street Investigate traffic control needs Mid-term R – 8 Floyde Street/Samson Trail (Samson Tr – Spring Mountain Blvd) Extend either Floyde Street or Samson Trail to Spring Mountain Boulevard Long-term R-9 1st Street (Colorado St – Stibnite St) Investigate feasibility and desirability of extending 1st Street to Stibnite Street Long-term (likely dependent on development) Pathways (PMP) PMP – 1 Bear-Basin Connector Extension (Current northwest terminus to Bear Basin Trailhead) Extend existing pathway to the Bear Basin trailhead Mid-term 66 | MCCALL IN MOTION PROJECT #LOCATION DESCRIPTION PRIORITY PMP – 2 SH 55 (Lardo Bridge – Bear Basin Rd) Bike Lanes Long-term1 PMP – 3 Lake St (Bear Basin Connector – Warren Wagon Rd) Shared-use Path Long-term1 PMP – 4 Payette Lake Loop Shared-use Path Long-term2 PMP – 5 Lake St (Mather Rd – 1st St) Sidewalks With CIP – 9 PMP – 6 Lake St (Warren Wagon Rd – Mather Rd) Sidewalks Mid-term PMP – 7 Forest St (Mather Rd – Mission St) Bike Lanes With CIP – 12 PMP – 8 Alley between Lake St & Hemlock St (Brundage Bungalows – State St) Shared-use Path Long-term PMP – 9 Mission Street (Deinhard Ln – Lake St) Bike Lanes Long-term (part with CIP -14) PMP – 10 Park Street (Mission St – 1st St) Sidewalk Long-term PMP – 11 Downtown Sidewalks and shared road bikeways See CIP – 2 PMP – 12 Idaho Street (Mission St – 1st St) Shared-use Path With CIP – 3 PMP – 13 Railroad Avenue (1st St – 3rd Street) Sidewalk Long-term PMP – 14 Lake Street (SH 55 – Fir St) Sidewalk (east side)Long-term PMP – 15 Lake Street (Fir Street) Sidewalk With CIP – 18 PMP – 16 Fir Street (Lake St – Mill Rd) Sidewalk Long-term PMP – 17 Hemlock Street (Lake St – Davis Ave) Sidewalk With CIP – 20 PMP – 18 Roosevelt Avenue (Pine St – Hemlock St) Sidewalk Long-term 67McCall Area Transportation Plan | PROJECT #LOCATION DESCRIPTION PRIORITY PMP - 19 Davis Avenue area pathways Shared-use path Long-term PMP – 20 Davis Avenue (Wanda Ave – Agate St) Various treatments With CIP - 10 PMP – 21 Lick Creek Road (Davis Ave – Spring Mountain Blvd) Shared-use Path Mid-term PMP – 22 Miles Standish Road (Shady Ln – Plymouth Rd) Shared-use Path Long-term PMP – 23 Graham Dr to Swanie Way Shared-use Path Mid-term PMP – 24 Spruce Ave to Clements Rd Shared-use Path Long-term PMP – 25 Fir Street (Roosevelt Ave – Davis Ave) Shared-use Path Mid-term PMP – 26 Wooley Avenue (Davis Ave – Spring Mountain Blvd) Shared-use Path With CIP – 8 PMP – 27 Park Street/Thompson Avenue (Samson Tr – Davis Ave) Various Treatments With CIP – 7 PMP – 28 Samson Trail (Wanda Ave – Existing trail) Shared-use Path Long-term PMP – 29 Wanda Avenue to Samson Trail Shared-use Path Long-term PMP – 30 Samson Trail to Deinhard Lane Shared-use Path Long-term PMP – 31 Floyde Street to Spring Mountain Boulevard Shared-use Path With R-8 PMP – 32 Mather Road to Rio Vista Boulevard Shared-use Path/Bridge Long-term PMP – 33 Colorado Street – Stibnite Street Shared-use Path Long-term PMP – 34 Stibnite Street (Existing path – 3rd St) Shared-use Path/Sidewalk Long-term 68 | MCCALL IN MOTION PROJECT #LOCATION DESCRIPTION PRIORITY PMP – 35 Nature Area South of Stibnite St Shared-use Paths Long-term PMP – 36 3rd Street (Colorado St – Deinhard Ln) Sidewalk, street trees, illumination, bike lanes and on-street parking Mid-term1 PMP - 37 Deinhard Ln (Existing Path – 3rd St) Shared-use Path Mid-term PMP – 38 Sunny Way – Deinhard Lane Shared-use Path Long-term PMP – 39 Water Treatment Path – Payette River Shared-use Path Long-term PMP – 40 Morgan Drive - Valley View Lane Shared-use Path Long-term PMP – 41 Valley View Lane – West Mountain Road Shared-use Path Long-term PMP – 42 Crowley Lane Shared-use Path Long-term PMP – 43 3rd Street, Existing path – Krahn Lane Shared-use Path Long-term1 PMP – 44 Krahn Lane (3rd Street – Samson Trail) Shared-use Path Long-term PMP – 45 Mission Street (Smokejumper Base – Deinhard Ln) Shared-use Path With CIP – 5 PMP – 46 Elo Road Shared-use path Long-term PMP – 46 Samson Trail (Deinhard Ln – Elo Rd) Shared-use Path Long-term PMP – 47 Deinhard Lane to Fox Ridge Lane Shared-use Path Long-term PMP – 48 Davis Avenue (Spruce St – Agate St) Bike Lanes Long-term Other O – 1 2nd Street/Park Street Transportation hub Near-term 1Coordination with ITD required 2Certain parts of the project are already under planning 69McCall Area Transportation Plan | The projects in this plan are expected to be funded through a number of sources, including: • City funds (i.e., general fund and local option tax dollars) • External sources (i.e., grants) • Private development The following sections describe each source further. 4.3.1 STREETS DEPARTMENT BUDGET ANALYSIS The Streets Department works year round to maintain roadways. Each season requires different maintenance activities and brings unique challenges to the City. Figure 23 summarizes the average spending of the Streets Department using the department General Fund. A more detailed list of department expenditures can be found in Appendix “D.” In November 2015, the residents of McCall voted to pass a local option tax (LOT) to provide a financial solution to repair the crumbling streets and to improve streets with needed storm drain systems and pedestrian and bike-friendly facilities. The Streets LOT started generating revenue January of 2016. Based on the funding received from January through December of 2016, the Public Works department anticipates using $1,000,000 of Streets LOT revenue per year on CIP projects and $265,000 of Streets LOT revenue per year for MIP projects. The Streets Department will include $85,000 from the General Fund towards MIP projects for a total budget of $350,000 per year. This budget analysis and the previously described review of pavement conditions resulted in the development of the CIP and MIP described in the following sections. CIP/MIP Execution Analysis Figure 20 summarizes the estimated average paved network RSL with respect to several different improvement funding amounts. The red line signifies the average network RSL if the Streets Department were to cease all maintenance efforts. The health of the network would degrade at a high rate over the 4.3 PROJECT FUNDING Figure 23. CIP & MIP Spending Summary A paved network is economically efficient when a minimal amount of budget is spent on pavement treatments that do not improve the condition of the street. *The Streets Budget Capital Projects are for projects not included in the CIP. 70 | MCCALL IN MOTION next 10 years. The purple line represents the anticipated health of the network if the Streets Department did not receive the $1,350,000 budgeted for improvement projects. At this funding level, the health of the network would gradually worsen over the next 10 years and the expense to create an economically efficient network would grow. A paved network is economically efficient when a minimal amount of budget is spent on pavement treatments that do not improve the condition of the street. Crack sealing and pothole patching are examples of treatments that prevent further damage of a paved street, but do not improve the RSL of pavement. The green line represents the results of the proposed CIP and MIP spending on streets improvement projects. If the city invests the anticipated Streets LOT revenue of $1,265,000 plus the $85,000 from the Streets General Fund into improvement projects, the overall health of the network is expected to recover gradually over the next 10 years. Despite the additional improvements to the city’s roadway infrastructure, the analysis shows that within the next 10 years the overall condition of the roadway network will remain below the RSL range that constitutes it as economically efficient. Future pavement inventories will provide data to check the accuracy of the presented forecast. The June 2016 pavement inventory identified a large percentage of the paved network that falls in the preventative and routine maintenance spectrum. The goal of the proposed MIP is to prevent good-conditioned streets to degrade to a condition that would constitute a more expensive treatment. Initial planning utilized the concept of a 5-year cycle. One 5-year cycle consists of three heavy routine and preventative maintenance years and two rehabilitative maintenance years on streets where improvements have not been identified. Rehabilitative measures, as part of the MIP, are completed on pavement that have reached the end of their useful life. Additionally, the MIP incorporates routine and preventative treatments for streets that are planned for reconstruction. The goal is to apply a preventative measure to newly constructed streets within two to three years of completion to protect the City’s investment in improved street facilities. Likewise, many streets will receive multiple maintenance treatments. For example, roadways that receive a rehabilitative treatment as identified in the CIP or MIP, depending on size, will typically receive a preventative chip seal several years after the initial treatment. The 10-year MIP is presented in Figure 18. Full details of the MIP can be found in Appendix H. The presented MIP proposes 38.9 centerline miles of routine, preventative, and rehabilitation maintenance treatments. Proposed spending on MIP projects is approximately $350,000 per year. Additional Streets L.O.T. revenue that is allocated for maintenance projects may be used for additional routine maintenance on streets that have received preventative treatments. Figure 24 outlines the proposed CIP and MIP spending on streets improvements for the 10-year study period, as well the estimated annual revenue and one-time revenue sources. The Streets LOT revenue is the primary revenue source of the proposed CIP and MIP projects. To execute the streets improvement program proposed in this document over the long term continued implementation of the Streets LOT is required unless another funding source is identified. A funding shortfall may occur in years 2022, 2023, and 2024 based on 2016 project estimates. To compensate for the shortfall each year, monetary support from outside funding sources may be needed. State and Federal funding sources are described in the following section. It is important to recognize that the proposed CIP and MIP The Streets Department works year-round to maintain drivable and safe roadways. Each season requires different maintenance activities and brings unique challenges to the department. Typical maintenance activities per season are outlined below. Summer Maintenance Activities: • asphalt repair/maintenance – cracks and potholes • blading & dust abatement for gravel roads • street sweeping & catch basin cleanout • stormwater maintenance (ditch cleaning & culvert replacement) • signing, striping & illumination • city parking lot maintenance • hanging banners and light pole flags Winter Maintenance Activities: • snow plowing & removal • ice melt • preparation for Winter Carnival • pothole repair • tree removal Department Administration: • department facilities & supplies • city administration employees • city engineering and improvement project management • staff management and crew supervision 71McCall Area Transportation Plan | Figure 24. CIP & MIP Implementation Results Figure 25. CIP & MIP Spending Summary implementation schedules are intended to be dynamic. The Streets Department will continue to assess the condition of the city streets by conducting a pavement inventory every three years. Accordingly, the CIP and MIP will be updated based on future inventories. The City of McCall has published a website that outlines the proposed CIP and MIP projects using an interactive map. Citizens may continually check the interactive map to keep informed of the timeline of planned projects by navigating to the “Maps/GIS” tab at www.mccall.id.us. 72 | MCCALL IN MOTION 4.3.2 EXTERNAL SOURCES In addition to City funds, local transportation projects in McCall may be funded by Federal or State sources. A variety of external funding sources were pre-screened to determine which funding vehicles would be applicable to the City of McCall. The Local Highway Technical Assistance Council (LHTAC) provides information on, and administers several programs related to, local transportation funding. Table 4 below summarizes the pre-screened options for programming assistance that are available to Idaho communities through LHTAC and non-LHTAC associations and entities such as, but not limited to, the Transportation Alternative Program (TAP), Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP), and the ITD Safety Grant (Reference 4). Table 4. External Sources for Project Programming FUNDING PROGRAM TYPES OF PROJECTS ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS Local Rural Highway Investment Program (LRHIP) Transportation Plans/Updates Road Construction Signs (Warning, Regulatory) Federal-aid Match Emergency Preservation Must be a Local Highway Jurisdiction, Section 40-113 (3), Idaho Code, with jurisdiction over roadways outside Census Bureau designation of urbanized areas. Local Highway Safety Improvement Program (LHSIP) Safety projects – stop signs, stop bars, signals, guardrail, shoulder widening, RSA, reflective back-plates, signal timing All jurisdictions Eligible projects identified based on the total number of fatal and serious type A injury crashes per jurisdiction using five years of crash data Surface Transportation Program (STP) – Rural Road construction, reconstruction or rehabilitation, transportation planning, corridor studies Rural areas of the state including counties, highway districts, and cities with populations below 5,000 Road must be functionally classified with FHWA as Collector or higher Federal-aid Bridge Program Bridge replacement/rehabilitation All jurisdictions Bridge must be 20 ft. long Below 50 sufficiency rating for replacement Below 75 sufficiency rating for rehabilitation Structurally deficient and functionally obsolete Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) Infrastructure and Non-Infrastructure projects including: Road and trail design and construction, sidewalks, pedestrian/bicycle infrastructure, asset management, stormwater management, education - safe routes to school, walk/bike safety programs, walk/ bike to school programs Local governments, regional transportation authorities, transit agencies, natural resource or public land agencies, school districts/ local education agencies, tribal governments, nonprofit entities responsible for local transportation safety programs Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) Transportation Planning, Transportation Improvement Plans (TIP)All Jurisdictions with control of transportation facilities that provide access to, are adjacent to, or are located within Federal lands ITD Highway Safety Grant Safety projects – Distracted driving education/enforcement, occupant protection (seatbelts education/enforcement), child passenger safety, pedestrian/bicycle safety, motorcycle safety/ enforcement Government agencies, school districts, fire departments, public emergency services providers Americans with Disability Act (ADA) Curb Ramp Program Construction of new or rehabilitation/alteration of curb ramps on the state highway system Local agencies/communities Recreational Trails Program (RTP) Maintenance and restoration of existing recreational trails, development and rehabilitation of trailside and trailhead facilities, construction of new trails Local agencies in control of, adjacent to recreational trails Road and Bridge Fund Develop, construct, maintain , and repair roads, bridges, and parking areas within and leading to parks and recreation areas of the state Local agencies in control of, adjacent to parks and recreational facilities 73McCall Area Transportation Plan | 1. City of McCall, Idaho. Multimodal Transit Center Location Analysis. January, 2013. 2. DESMAN Associates. City of McCall Downtown Parking Study & Needs Assessment. November 2009. 3. Idaho Transportation Department, Traffic Safety. Reported Crashes 2010 – 2014. 4. Local Highway Technical Assistance Council – Idaho. Local Highway Transportation Funding Options - http://lhtac.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Idaho-Highway-District-Transportation- Funding-Options-2017.pdf. May, 2016. 4.4 REFERENCES 4.3.3 CONCLUSION This TMP provides McCall with a roadmap to achieving the vision laid out by the community for its transportation system. Implementing this plan will result in a multimodal transportation system that provides residents and visitors options for how to move around town and is managed in a fiscally responsible manner. The TMP provides realistic implementation schedules for maintenance and capital projects over the next 10 years. Recognizing that circumstances frequently change, this plan is also flexible and includes provisions for regular updates, as well as performance assessments (e.g., triennial pavement condition assessments) so that the City can adapt as necessary to continue to strive toward the community’s vision of itself. A public website is available for more information about projects, plans, and the ongoing implementation of the TMP. It can be found by navigating to the “Maps/GIS” tab at www.mccall.id.us. All images: courtesy of McCall In Motion Project Team or the City of McCall, unless otherwise noted. 74 | MCCALL IN MOTION k A OUTREACH SUMMARY I PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT OUTREACH SUMMARY REPORT INTRODUCTION Thraughaut the 18-manth McCall in Matian pracess McCall residents, business awners and cammunity leaders pravided camments an issues related to transpartatian investment and impravements. The pracess prrvided an appartunity far stakehalders, residents, elected afficials, and business awners to vaice their values, describe pressing needs, and priaritize appartunities, A range of events were held to engage all types of respandents: kids, teenagers, and families; Iacals, secand hameawners, and visitars were given an appartunity to vaice their ideas. Representatian was well balanced due to the number rf taals used, resulting in a Plan built an canversatians abaut values and desires far a shared future. Key highlights of the autreach are described an the fallawing pages. With the gaal of reaching as many peaple as passible, and specifically to reach segments of the cammunity that generally da nat participate, an interactive and fun autreach pracess was designed, Activities included attendance at cammunity events; presentatians to lacal baard and cammittee members and schaals; and persanal interviews with the cammunity. The McCall in Malian engagement was fun - participants were encauraged to be playful and apen-minded. Giveaways such as frisbees, cazies, temparary tattaas, and brachures, all featuring the praject laga andiar website, were distributed at cammunity events. This inspired aptimism and a freedam to unveil new and innavative ideas that may nat have atherwise been suggested. By the end of autreach pracess aver 1,000 peaple had participated in autreach activities and hundreds of camments were received. These camments represent a braad range of ideas, cancerns, and interests. This autreach Summary Repart attempts to arganize these camments inta a manageable farmatthataccurately represents the thaughts of these wha participated. Special thank you to all those who took time to participate in these meetings. MCCALL IN MOTION MOST FREQUENTLY HEARD THEMES These themes related to the Transportation Master Plan were consistently heard more frequently and more passionately than others, surfacing at nearly ev- ery meeting and workshop. IMPRGVED PEDESTRIAN CCe.NNECTIQNS Improved pedestrian connections are necessary to encourage multi -modal transportation, tourism, and livability in the city. Sidewalk improvements were one of the most frequently mentioned concerns by partic- ipants. Participants would like to see comprehensive sidewalks improvements throughout the City, but especially in the downtown core. Similar to sidewalks, pathway connections and improvements were also mentioned frequently in nearly every public meeting. McCall residents value an interconnected pathway network and the ability to use pathways at any time of the year. Participants also described the importance of amenities, such as tree -lined streets, lighting, and benches that make sidewalks and pathways more invit- ing. A cam PLETE TRAN SPQ RTATICe. N SYSTEM Transportation facilities should serve the needs of the entire community. Increase mobility by exploring com- plete streets, roundabouts, stoplights, low -stress bike lanes and crosswalks in appropriate locations. Traffic congestion on peak summer and winter weekends was identified as a challenge facing the City, although many pointed out that infrastructure should not be built to address only a few weekends of the year and that creative solutions, such as crossing guards would be appropriate. PARKING MANAGEMENT Two major challenges were highlighted regarding the City's current parking conditions by participants: the shortage of parking in the downtown area and difficul- ty in locating surface lots. Participants felt that im- proved parking management is key to accomplishing the goals of the Transportation Master Plan. Parking strategies are essential to the vitality of McCall's busi- nesses, and for a multi -modal, walkable, and compact downtown. TRANSIT SERVICE Participants recognize the need for public transporta- tion will intensify in the future and the challenges to meet this need will deepen. There was consensus that transit service needs to be improved, expanded, better coordinated, and made more accessible. Giving prior- ity for transit service expansion along key corridors is important to improving the community and quality of life in McCall. Core elements such as frequency, brand- ing, and direct routing are highly valued by McCall residents, as well as creative transit such as bike share services. INFRASTRUCTURE IMPRQ.VEMENTS Although participants would like to see many street improvements, they felt strongly about prioritizing ex- isting infrastructure first. Existing street infrastructure should be maintained and repaired before investing in new streets and improving unpaved roads. MCCALL IN MOTION OUTREACH PHASE l: VISION IN MOTION STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS During Spring of 2016, staff and the consultant team interviewed more than 55 stakeholders, representing a cross section of the City to gain a broad understand- ing of how people view the transportation system in McCall. Those interviewed represented various groups, including: • City Staff and Department Heads • Elected Officials • Business and Commercial Property Owners • Library Director • Airport Director • Community Members and Thought Leaders • Historic Preservation Commission • School District and University Representatives • Health Department • Social Service Providers Below is a summary of their input related to Trans- portation. Preliminary vision statements were crafted based on their input. What areyour top three priorities for Transportation in McCall? Score Overall Rank Improving the condition of existing roads 1 Improving bicycling conditions (e.g., more pathways, bike lanes) 2 Improving walking conditions (e.g., more sidewalks, road crossings, pathways) I 3 Diverting truck traffic around downtown 4 Reducing traffic congestion 5 Improving the look of downtown streets (e.g., adding sidewalks, lighting, and/or street trees) 6 Providing additional public parking in downtown 19 7 Expanding transit service 15 8 Other 11 9 Finding new locations for snow storage 6 10 Reducing crashes 2 11 Total Respondents 56 Score is a weighted calculation. Items ranked first are valued higher than the following ranks, the score is the sum of all weighted rank counts. 68 77 68 24 24 20 The question "please list 1 — 3 hey opportunities for enhancing McCall's Transportation System" was asked. Below are the comments copied as they were received: • Divert traffic passing thru traffic fram dawntawn aptians to driving and knaw haw to use them. • Cannected pathway system 2. Enhancing streets • Night Transpartatian/Haliday/Event Transpartatian dawntawn 3. Plawed pathways in winter • Increased marketing of those services to residents • Add ar imprave/extend sidewalks and bike lanes an: - and visitars 3rd Street -West Lake Street • Advocating far State funding far Public Transparta- • Beautificatian, maintenance of current raads, mare tian. Wark clasely with lacal legislatars to shaw the walking paths. benefits of multi madal aptians. • Better/mare bike paths, mare side walks • Plaw schedules warked alright when snawing, but • Bike paths. Make walking, biking, easier in winter, when slush arrived...I saw na plaws in our area. samehaw. Public parking aptians are critical...it battlenecks • Central transpartatian hub Transpartatian to Baise business. I believe a truck stap samewhere near the Valley Weather Friendly Waiting Statians tap of Baydstun wauld further incentivize trucks • Divert dawntawn traffic to bypass the care of tawn while alsa bringing the • Just use the existing bus and add a cauple of mare inevitable business inta City Limits that is caming staps to the route, as Gaase Creek and HWY 55 became easier far 53' • Mare public parking area, trucks to travel an. • Narth sauth read an the east side of hwy 55. • Pave mare raads up the speed limit to 35 again can- • Public Transpartatian talfram the meadaws valley. centrate bicycle paths aff highway 55. • Sidewalks & Bike pathways • Develap pathway an Pine-Waaley cannectar to • Sidewalks! Bike Paths cannecting narth to sauth in Spring Mt. Blvd. 2. Develap ability to walk safely tawn, avaiding traffic in summer alang entire Hwy. 55 inside the city limits. 3. Finish • Traffic light at warren wagan read pathway alang WWgn Rd fram Hwy. 55 to Narth • Gpen up sauthern access far auta traffic in/aut of Beach Ria Vista neighbarhaad via SE side of water treat- • Efficient use of transpartatian funding. Training of ment pands. Cauld alsa include bike lane at same decisian makers to apply praper criteria to salutians paint far easier access to bike trail an east side of • Imprave by expanding dawntawn care parking; in Payette River, our peak seasans there is nat enaugh parking far • Anather bridge aver Payette River between the lake those wishing to da business in the care and those street bridge and the bridge an Deinhard. Wauld wishing to access the recreatianal activities. Main- allaw lacals to get in and aut of tawn Ma the need tain bike and pedestrian travel mutes just aff the to travel the "main drag" during busy times. state highway routes sa the interface of the mades • Reduce speed limit an 155 / Lake to 20mph thraugh of travel remain safe and separate dawntawn and encaurage traffic to use Deinhard Designated bike routes were set years aga and naw bypass. 2 Expand and enhance bus system routes there is a voice wanting 10M access here ever they and haurs and charge fare. 3 Encaurage biking and want and it has a safety and ecanamic impact an walking dawntawn and past safety guards during business in the care and can be safely pravided just high traffic dates. aff the main carridar. • Sidewalks and mare extensive walking/biking paths. • Canstruct a sidewalk ar bike trail all alang Davis inta There's really na need to drive araund in tawn, better the state park - that is a high traffic street & lats of access paths that cannect the neighbarhaads wauld peaple walk/bike there as well...Safety issue be great! • Fix the raads carrectly. I see the city put hat mix • Mare evening & halidayspecial even transparta- in pat hales and it all falls apart during the winter. tian services - taxi services are impassible if you are Davis street needs a walking/bike path. then you can trying to "drink respansibly" and nat drive hame up the speed limit to 30mph . We need better advertised and mare availability • Transit wauld be great far visitars to travel to Mc - far public transpartatian during peak taurist times Call. Many years aga the train braught passengers taa. Peaple need to [maw that they have alternative to McCall. I da think same wark can be dine an MCCALL IN MOTION designation of arterial streets vs collectors and residen- tial street. • Provide mini -bus service to New Meadows, Cascade, Riggins, Cauncil? McCall - Donnelly HS has co-ops with all of these schools for athletics; but, the school districts are restricting students to self -transport. Some students do not have private transportation resources. • Bike/walking paths throughout town with LIGHTS!!!! It's too dark to walk home and the paths do not con- nect leaving people on the main roads with no paths. • Better roads sustainable through diverse temperatures and seasons. More space on the sides for walkability and bike riding options. Better lighting on the streets and future sidewalks. • Bike/walking paths throughout town with LIGHTS!!!! It's too dark to walk home and the paths do not con- nect leaving people on the main roads with no paths. • Better roads sustainable through diverse temperatures and seasons. More space on the sides for walkability and bike riding options. Better lighting on the streets and future sidewalks. • Improve parking downtown, continue to make it easy for people to walk from parking areas to downtown business, make it easier for both visitors and regulars to use public transit (info on schedule, locations), longer hours - bus should run until 1lpm so people can go out to dinner and have a few drinks and get home safely — would cut down on dangerous drunk driving issues • more buses, more stops - the bus should be more con- venient to use and the route needs expanded to serve more of the McCall area 3. bus drivers need to be more aware when people are at the bus stops - my family has been driven by countless times after waiting for 5-10 minutes at the bus stops • Making walking and cycling safer with better infrastruc- ture e.g. paths, will help ease congestion and will result in less car/road use • Signals at turn off to Ponderosa Park to help break up the traffic from the South. Signal at Ice Rink to break up traffic from North. This would allow pedestrians and crass/turning traffic to pass. Signage for RVs to parking so they can stop and support business. • Sidewalk or other walking path to connect downtown area to Ridley's/Rite aid Mall area 2 - Sidewalk extension west of Downtown to Paul's/Albertson's, perhaps fur- ther 3 - Clear signage at north and south ends of town informing drivers of Deinhard-Boydston bypass • Divert snow to the lake where it will melt eventually (that's where the trash will end up anyway and an ero- sion run off net fence would collect debris) instead of piling snow around driveways which limits visibility. Fix full roads at a time instead of patch jabs, they wear out quickly because they're done quickly. Diverting large trucks and through traffic will not reduce commerce downtown, those travelers don't want to be in town anyway so they speed through, this will mare it safer for pedestrians and reduce the wear and tear of our sad in -town roads • I'm not sure if this falls under "transportation system" but linking bike trails and sidewalks in town. For exam- ple, you can't get from Spring Mtn Blvd bike/walk path to downtown without traveling on a narrow road that can be dangerous while pushing a stroller! A bike lane around the lake is also needed to keep both cars and pedestrians safe. APPENDIX A: OUTREACH SUMMARY war/ wowlmel•drou VISION IN MOTION The visianing pracess began with cammunity input sessians. The fallawing questians were asked: What da you lave abaut McCall? What wauld you change? What are yaur big ideas far the future? The respanses were campiled to create to a cammunity- supparted visian. A diverse variety of residents, businesses, public agencies, nan-prafits, cammunity graups, and visitars were engaged. While many of the values identified in the 2007 plan were reaffirmed, same new ideas emerged. The result of this phase included identificatian of key values and develaping a cammunity-based visian. In tandem with each event ar warkshap there were supparting anline surveys and questiannaires, which cantributed a respanse rates nearing 1,000 participants and caunting. The pracess pravided an appartunity far the cammunity and visitars to vaice their values, describe pressing needs, and priaritize appartunities. A range of events were held to engage all types of respandents: kids, teenagers, families, lacals, secand hameawners, and visitars were given an appartunity to participate. Representatian of different graups was balanced due to the number of taals used. 411 UBLIC LI°� cLALLGOMPPIAWAGLOrl #�CCaIIinMotion WHAT MOVES YOU MCCA! L ? JSQ�yG RN'AV�r, q, Mi c-• �n e�d�,r�9 dY • . title ie! . n� W' at) Y+� S (l� Activities included attendance at numeraus cammunity events; presentatians to schaals, cammunity graups, and cammittees; and persanal interviews. The purpase of the Uision In Motion engagement was to be fun sa participants were encauraged to be playful and apen-minded. Giveaways such as frisbees, drink cazies, temparary tattaas, and brachures, all featuring the praject laga and/ar website, were distributed at cammunity events. This inspired aptimism and a freedam to unveil new and innavative ideas that may nat have atherwise been suggested. The result was a series of statements that, when cambined with McCall's values, helped create the faundatian far the Visian. Events attended are shawn an a timeline an the fallawing page. MCCALL IN MOTION VISION IN MOTION EVENTS Celebratory Kickoff Event The McCall Area Camprehensive Plan Update and Transpartatian Master Plan pracesses were launched at the Winter Carnival parade with the main purpase of raising awareness and excitement of the planning effart. Lacatian: Citywide Intended audience: General Public, Visitars TAGLINE Ya UTH CriNTEST High Schaal students participated in a cantest to brand the plan and develap a tagline, Lacatian; McCall -Dannelly HS Intended audience: High Schaal Students Community Listening Sessions Giver three days, the cammunity had the appartunity to sign up far a ane-an-ane 30 minutes interview with the planning team. The intent was far the project team to get to knaw the cammunity and identify camman themes and preliminary values. Lacatian: The HUB, Public Library, Bistra 45 Intended audience: Cammunity Graups, Public Agencies, Decision Makers, Business Cewners, Realtars, General Public Rise and Share Committee Appreciation Breakfast Members of city advisary graups, McCall Area Planning and Zaning, McCall Redevelopment Agency, City Cauncil, and Caunty Cammissian attended an appreciation breakfast facused an visianing and appartunities far McCall. Participants had the appartunity to share what they lave abaut McCall and what they value far the future. Lacatian: City Hall Intended audience: City Cammittee and Gaverning Baards .uk ` i, CAC / L- i i; t. %44.5 i ez.- :1J A r.. I-to�^;�e�` its.?IPirotp,A x4r,,ett" ' "»j_ i, 'may/{ } o(c., Chalk It Up, McCall - What Moves you About McCall? Chalkbaards were placed thraughaut McCall, The Chalkbaards asked residents, "What maves yau?" abaut McCall. The Chalk It Up autreach was intended to be fun, but alsa to reach peaple wha may nat atherwise participate in a canversatians with a planning team member, Lacatian: Citywide Intended audience: General Public APPENDIX A: OUTREACH SUMMARY Creating a Uision Open House Cammunity members visited with the project team at the McCall Public Library at twa public apen hause events to refine the visian far McCall. Participants were asked what the lave abaut McCall, reviewed draft vision statements, and shared their thaughts an preliminary big ideas and appartunities. Lacatian: Public Library Intended audience: General Public Pr - Community Resource Fair The project team set up at the Cammunity Resaurce Fairta present preliminary visian themes and to canfirm that each visian theme encampassed the cammunity's values. Lacatian: Alpine Village Intended audience: Kids and Families INFQRMATIQNAL PRESENTATIQNS As a way to engage specific stakeholder gaups, the project team gave presentatians explaining the visianing pracess and camprehensive plan pracess. Guests had the appartunity to camplete the Cammunity Chaices survey tailared to their areas of expertise. Lacatian: City Hall Intended audience: Baards and Cammissians, Starmwater Training attendees, Rotary Club, Payette Rarest Caalitian, McCall Area Chamber of Cammerce `Business After Haurs', Airpart Advisary Cammittee, and McCall Redevelapment Agency 4th of July, Chalk It Up The McCann Motion Chalh It Up event, held in canjunctian with the 4th of July McCall Lakeside Liberty Fest, provided attendees the appartunity to get creative with chalk art and related activities while cantinuing to invite residents and visitars to engage in the visianing pracess. Lacatian: Lakeside Liberty Festival Intended audience: General Public, Visitars RQSEBERRY MUSIC FESTIVAL The project team set up a tent at Raseberry Music Festival to present Draft Visian and to canfirm that each visian theme encampassed the cammunity's values. Lacatian; Raseberry Intended audience: General Public MCCALL IN MOTION INPUT RECEIVED Belaw is a summary of respanses received related to the Transportation Maser Plan: Do the draft Transportation Master Plan Uision Themes match your vision for the future of McCall? Our Modes: McCall will be a community ofsafe walkable places, diverse transportation modes, and efficienttransitcho ices. Our Mobility: McCall will supportan efficient circulation system thatwill allow traffic flow on major streets with minor congestion. Our Types of Roadways: McCall will provide a variety of well -maintained streettypes thatwill ensure safe operation of City roads. Our Roadway Character: McCall will focus on a variety of creative road types that acknowledge the variety of users and surrounding land use. Our Alternatives to the Car: McCall will provide accessible, connected, and safe pedestrian and bicycle routes as viable options for residents and visitors. Education: McCall will educate residents and visitors of the im pact the ir travel choices have on the environmentand transportation. All Seasons: McCall will emphasize comfort, safety and ease of travel in winter, spring, summer and fall for drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians. What is missing? Add your vision theme! Comments were copied as they were received. Yes No 66 84.6 68 89.5% 64 87.7% 60 82.2% 69 90.8 57 81.4% 68 90.7% 12 15.4% 8 10.5 10 13.7% 15 20.5 7 9.2% 13 18.6 7 9.3% a d pedestrian efficient Sothe d;a<e� c\c�lr 0 Pe° Plemoney a r T I 1 evCra t 0 W nbusinesstraffic APPENDIX A: OUTREACH SUMMARY " D a e s " d i v e r s e t r a n s p a r t a t i a n m a d e s " r e f e r t o b i c y c l e l a n e s / p a t h s a n d s i d e w a l k s f a r w a l k i n g ? I f s r , t h a t i s w h a t i t s h a u l d s a y . C L A R I T Y I S T H E G Q A L . W e ' r e t a a s m a l l t o s u p p a r t a b u s s y s t e m s a i t s h a u l d n ' t b e i n c l u d e d . " E a s y r o u t e s a r o u n d t a w n . E n c a u r a g e l a r g e t r u c k s t o u s e t h e B a y d s t u n b y p a s s ; u s e b y p a s s s i g n a g e . T h e s e " g o i n g t h r o u g h t a w n d a s a b y c h o i c e . " G r e a t e r e m p h a s i s a n c a n n e c t e d n e s s o f c y c l i n g p a t h s . W e h a v e s e v e r a l b i k e p a t h s w h i c h g a t o n a w h e r e . I t i s n a t u s e r f r i e n d l y a r s a f e . B i k e l a n e s a r e i n t e r m i t t e n t a n d s h a r t . N a b i k e p a t h a r o u n d t h e l a k e w h i c h l a c k s t r e m e n d a u s i n s i g h t a n d p a t e n t i a l f a r h e a l t h f a r t h e c a m m u n i t y a n d a d r a w f a r t a u r i s t s . " M c C a l l s h a u l d a l l a w g a l f c a r t s a n t h e r a a d s , j u s t a s t h e y d a i n e t h e r r e s a r t a r e a s s u c h a s P a l m S p r i n g s . " C a r t s a r e s a f e r , q u i t e , c l e a n e r , a n d d a n a t g e n e r a t e t r a f f i c j a m s l i k e c a r s . T h e y a r e a l s o ' i n f i n i t e l y m a r e " p r a c t i c a l f a r s h a p p i n g t h a n b i c y c l e s , e s p e c i a l l y f a r " t h e l i v i n g a n s t e e p h i l l a r l i v i n g f a r t h e r f r a m t a w n ( s u c h a s p a s t t h e A c t i v i t y B a r n , a u t w e s t m a u n t a i n r a a d , a u t t a w a r d s j u g , e t c . ) L e t g a I f c a r t s s h a r e t o b i k e p a t h s A N D t h e r a a d s . " M c C a l l w i l l b e a r e g i a n a l s e r v i c e h u b p r a v i d i n g e n - h a n c e d t r a n s p a r t a t i a n ( c a m m e r c i a l a i r ) a n d h e a l t h - c a r e s e r v i c e s a n d b u s i n e s s a p p a r t u n i t i e s t h a t w i l l " a t t r a c t r e s i d e n t s o f 7 5 m i l e r a d i u s t o c a m e t o M c C a l l " a n d n o t t h e T r e a s u r e V a l l e y . M c C a l l w i l l b e m a r e i n v i t i n g t o b u s i n e s s e s l a c a t i n g h e r e a n d h e l p i n g e x - i s t i n g b u s i n e s s e s t o g r a w h e r e s a t h a t o u r e c a n a m y c a n b e m a r e v i b r a n t w h i c h p r o d u c e s h i g h e r i n c a m e s f a r o u r w a r k e r s a n d m a r e a p p a r t u n i t i e s f a r v i s i t a r s t o d a . " M c C a l l w i l l c r e a t e a p e d e s t r i a n M a l l a n 3 r d a n d r e - r a u t e 3 r d t o a l a c a t i a n f u r t h e r S o u t h . " M c C a l l w i l l c a n s i d e r t h e n e e d s o f p e d e s t r i a n s , b i c y - c l e s , a n d c h i l d r e n w h e n d e s i g n i n g r a a d s a n d p a t h s . " M c C a l l w i l l e n c a u r a g e a n d r e w a r d e f f i c i e n t u s e o f a l t e r n a t i v e w a y s t o g e t a r o u n d t a w n . . . b i k e s , w a l k i n g , b u s i n g , s k i i n g , s n a w s h a e i n g ! " M a b i l i t y i s a n i m p a r t a n t t h e m e . T h e a n e t h i n g t h a t a l w a y s s h a c k s m e i s t o s e e v i s i t a r s w a l k i n g i m m e d i - a t e l y a d j a c e n t t o h i g h w a y t r a f f i c a n t h e s a u t h a n d w e s t e n d o f t a w n . M a r l e y i s s p e n t a n l i t t l e p l a z a s a r s m a l l s t r e e t s c a p e s , a r a r t . A n d t h e n w e h a v e p e a p l e s t r u g g l i n g t h r o u g h s n a w , m u d a n d S u m m e r t r a f f i c a n o u r m a i n t h a r a u g h f a r e s . I f a n e t h i n g s a y s " Y a u a r e n a t w e l c a m e . " , t h a t i s i t . " G n e a f m y c a n c e r n s w i t h n e w f u n d i n g i s t h e w i s e u s e o f t h e m a n e y a n t w a f r a n t s . F i r s t , r e s i s t t h e i m p u l s e t o a d d s t a f f a n d e q u i p m e n t t o M c C a l l P u b l i c W a r k s . I h a v e b e e n i n v a l v e d i n s e v e r a l p r o c e s s e s " " " " " t h a t c l a s e l y e x a m i n e t h i s i s s u e . I b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e a r e m a n y t a s k s m a s t e f f i c i e n t l y d a n e b y t h e c i t y w a r k f a r c e a n d a t h e r c a r e f u n c t i a n s m a r e e f f i c i e n t l y c a m p l e t e d b y t h e p r i v a t e s e c t a r . S e c a n d l y , t h e w a r k B a n e h a s t o f a l l a w c l e a r l y a r t i c u l a t e d s p e c i f i c a t i a n s a n d a l w a y s b e i n s p e c t e d . B a t h P u b l i c a n d P r i v a t e P a r k i n g ! D a w n t a w n m e r c h a n t s n e e d t o e d u c a t e e m p l o y e e s a s t o w h e r e t h e p u b l i c p a r k i n g i s , s a o u r t a u r i s t s h a v e p l a c e s t o p a r k w h i l e e n j o y i n g a n d h a p e f u l l y s p e n d i n g m a n e y d a w n t a w n . P e d e s t r i a n a n d b i k e p a t h s a r e v e r y i m p a r t a n t t o l a c a l s a n d t a u r i s t s a l i k e . P e d e s t r i a n t r a f f i c d a w n t a w n n e e d s t o b e a d d r e s s e d . P l e a s e c a n s i d e r t h e n e e d f a r l a r g e t r u c k s t h a t t r a v e l t h r o u g h M c C a l l a s w e l l a s t h e n e e d f a r t h e s e w h a d a b u s i n e s s i n M c C a l l . T r u c k i n g c a m p a n i e s n e e d t o b e a b l e t o e f f i c i e n t l y a n d s a f e l y d e l i v e r p a d s . Q u i e t e r t r a n s i t s h a u l d b e e n c a u r a g e d . S A F E Q P E R A T I Q N Q N R Q A D W A Y S ? ? ? H A V E Y Q L I D R I V E N W a G L E Y A N D D A V I S L A T E L Y ? ? ? ? a p e d e s t r i a n / b i c y c l e f r i e n d l y t a w n , i t l a c k s l i k e m e x - i c a i n t a w n , m i c r a g r e e n b e l t s , d i s c a n n e c t e d p a t h - w a y s , n a p a t h w a y s a r e v e n a s h a u l d e r . I t i s a n e t h i n g t o s a y t h e t h e m e s , i t ' s a n o t h e r t h i n g t o a c t u a l l y d a t h e s e t h e m e s a r e a v e r d u e . A n e f f i c i e n t b u s s y s t e m . e f f i c i e n t v e h i c u l a r t r a f f i c i s s l a w e d a n d c a m p l i c a t e d t o t h e u n m a n i t a r e d a n d ! D a n c e d u s e b y b i k e t r a f f i c d e c i d i n g r e g u l a t i a n s d a n ' t m e a n t h e m . T h e y c r a s s a n d w e a v e t h r o u g h t r a f f i c a t w i l l a n d t h e n p a i n t t o t h e v e h i c l e a s t h e c u l p r i t . m a r e b u s r o u t e s a n d ! a n g e r t r a n s i t a p e r a t i n g h a u r s w i l l h e l p c u t d a w n t h e d a n g e r s o f p e a p l e d r i v i n g w h i l e i n t a x i c a t e d a n d m a k e t h e c a m m u n i t y s a f e r f a r c h i l d r e n a n d a d u l t s M C C A L L I N M O T I O N Rate the Transportation Master Plan Big Ideas we've beard so far on a scale of 1 - 5 stars, with 5 being the best. Big Idea Reroute and enhance HWY55 **** Count: 73 NotApplicable: 0 Enhance transitservice **** Count: 72 NotApplicable: 0 Improve ridership and utilization oftransitsystem **** Count: 72 NotApplicable: 0 Co nstructa pathway o n Pine -Woo ley connector to Spring Mountain Boulevard **** Count: 73 NotApplicable: 0 Add traffic signals *** Count:68 NotApplicable: 0 Add roundabouts *** Count:68 NotApplicable: 0 Improve Downtown public parking lots with surfacing, sidewalks, stormwater, lighting and **** landscaping Count:70 NotApplicable: 0 Enhance Downtown streets with urban design amenities *** Count:68 NotApplicable: 0 Provide transportation options that honorthe small town feel that is McCall ***fir Count: 72 NotApplicable: 0 Invest in streetlights on roads and pedestrian lights on pathways ***fir Count: 72 NotApplicable: 0 APPENDIX A: OUTREACH SUMMARY Divert truck traffic around Downtown Co nnect pathways and bike routes throughout McCall Co nstruct a pathway aro und Payette Lake Co nstructa pathway o n Pine -Woo ley connector to Spring Mountain Boulevard Improve the overall condition of existing roads in McCall Improve walking conditions and bicycle infrastructure in McCall l,Uhat Big Ideas are missing? • Get pedestrian traffic under cantral an busy week- ends. • I think yau've lone a gaad jab an these. • Improve East-West cannectivity -- currently anly twa real aptians Deinhard and Pine-Waaley. Sampsan Trail cannects taa far sauth- why nat align wI Waad- lands anther cannect to Flayde? • Impraving bike paths means there needs to be bike parking. • McCall needs parking Iats far taurists. • Raundabaut by Hate! McCall wauld wark well! • Start fixing our roads! Big Idea ***** Co unt: 77 NotApplicable: 0 ***** Count: 76 NotApplicable: 0 **** Count: 73 NotApplicable: 0 **** Co unt: 73 NotApplicable: 0 **** Co unt: 77 NotApplicable: 0 ***** Co unt: 73 NotApplicable: 0 MCCALL IN MOTION APPENDIX A: OUTREACH SUMMARY OUTREACH PHASE 2: COMMUNITY CHOICES As part of the cammunity autreach pracess far McCall In Matian a series of twa cammunity warhshaps were held an September 13 and 14, 2016. Appraximately 65 participants attended the in-persan warkshaps, Participants included residents, emplayees, business awners, cammunity leaders, yauth, and ather stakehalders. Participants were alsa invited to participate anline thraugh an interactive survey. This summary daes nat include camments ar results fram the anline survey, NOTICE The warkshaps were naticed an www. McCaIlCampPlan2016.cam, the City's web page, sacial media pages, in Star News, McCall In Matian email lists, pasters and pastcards placed thraugh the City and given to cammunity graups, and thraugh ward of mauth fram active cammunity graups. OBJECTIVES The purpase of these warkshaps was to give interested members of the public an appartunity to review publicly generated big ideas far McCall, priaritize these big ideas, and answer hey carrespanding questians with each idea. FORMAT At the warhshaps a presentatian was given as an averview of the McCall In Matian pracess, the cammunity visian, and fifteen big ideas. Fallawing the presentatian, participants discussed with their table what three big ideas resanated with them mast and were asked to expand an these ideas. A big ideas Baaklet and Mrhbaak were pravided to illustrate key questians and pravide visual examples of the big ideas. Fallawing the table discussians, a representative fram each of the table graups shared the results of the graup's wark with audience at large. ARE YOU READY TO MAKE BIG CHOICES? TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13th 5:30 PM- 7:00 PM McCall -Donnelly High School 401 N. Mission St. The Commons or SEPTEMBER 14th 10:00 AM - 11:30 AM Payette National Forest 500 N. Mission St. Forest Service Room conversation starters Where should workforce housing be located? What pathway connections are priorities? Where should telecommunication towers go? Does the community support 1 percent for the arts? Should the city regulate summer traffic using stop lights or roundabouts? 111111111111100p,,r _ z VOW W A !1` n! 9t��51 !0SE i ,�. t iil PROVIDE ,i UR-FEEDBACK ONLII4E! Visit the CotnniUnity Choices Suyey or gattti http:ihvwwsurveygizmo.comis31300392 om'mukty-choices 1 i � o u l ` future togeth e MCCALL IN MOTION WORKSHOP SUMMARY The fallowing summary cantains big ideas and camments related to the Transpartatian Master Plan. Although many graups cauld nat limit the big ideas to anly three, ar they cambined big ideas tagether, participants demanstrated agreement an ideas that resanated with them. Many graups saw averlap of Maving in Camfart, Green Cannectians, and Rethinking our Streets and cansalidated them inta a general them of "Maving Araund McCall." The fallawing is a cansalidated summary of feedback fram the warkshaps: Moving Dif- ferently Park It! Improving on what We Have Moving In Comfort Big Idea Summar Feedback Develap a transpartatian hub that wauld include a lacatian far transit, shuttles, bikes, and ather mades to mave lacally and regianally. Lacate the hub Dawntawn with gaad cannectian to dawntawn care and lakefrant amenities to encaurage peaple to walk, take public transit, ar bike. Suppart bike to work programs, bike share rental pragrams, business incentives far walkers and bikers, and access shared ride services, electric bikes, and a regianal bus system. Identify lacatians far increased ar madified parking, and use parking way finding, and technology, such as apps to shaw parking areas. Enfarce parking limits. Identify which areas may ane day turn inta mixed -use parking decks. Fix existing street infrastructure befare investing in new streets and impraving gravel raads. Priaritize snaw remaval an pathways, and sidewalks; explare urban design elements to imprave safety (averhangs, encraachments). Invest in lighting, benches, art, interpretive signage, and ather pedestrian amenities alang pathways. Develap law stress bikeways, crossings, and sidewalks Canstruct sidewalks and pathways where there are gaps in cammercial and public areas, and cannect carridars to our parks and apen spaces. Connect and canstruct new pathways per the McCall Area Pathways Master Plan. Identify additianal pathway cannectians and enhance walkability within and to existing neighbarhaads. tither resart cammunities, you dan't have to be in a car to get fram yaur hatel to activities and dining. If you want to bike, you dan't feel like you are right next to traffic. Bus system — shauld add park and ride lacatians an west and sauth sides of City. Need recreational vehicle parking near dawntawn sa taurists can park and walk. Alsa need clear signage to that parking far those caming in fram narth and sauth. Need to fix whales and read surface prablems. Pedestrian crossings shauld be marked better. Shauld there be an additianal tax to fix raads? Safe sidewalks — ance we cannect them, make sure they are maintained and plawed. Shauld be renamed "Maving in Camfart and Safety." Finish cannecting our cammunity with pathways. We need to take advantage of the existing street Raw. It is ridiculaus that peaple have to drive because there is na sidewalk ar pathways suddenly end. Waaley, Davis, and Third Street are the high priarities far bike paths and sidewalks. 500,000 visitars ga to Panderasa Park per year, sa the amount of traffic an Davis is unsafe far walkers ar bikers. Additianally, you must ga an Waaley to connect fram Spring Mountain to Dawntawn, which is unsafe. Need pathways an Warren Wagan Raad, alang the Galf Caurse, and Lake Street. Alsa a cannectian to the Bear Basin Bike Bicycle parking shauld be pravided dawntawn. Additianally, schaals shauld be accessible by pathway. Develapers shauld cantribute to cannecting ar building pathways. Idea: Pravide backwaysllacal raads thraugh tawn during busy seasons. Passibly reapen Samson Trail (current pedestrian cannectian) as a street. APPENDIX A: OUTREACH SUMMARY Rethinking Our Streets Imprave transpartatian facilities to serve the needs of the entire cammunity. Allaw far increased mability by explaring camplete streets, raundabauts, and staplights in specific lacatians. Cansider diverting truck traffic araund Dawntawn. Facus an better traffic patterns. Suppartive of truck raute bypass. Discussed that something needs to happen at the intersectian at the Faglifter cafe, but graup was divided an the use of roundabouts, staplights, etc. Idea: Alternative to a raundabaut at Faglifter Cafe is to hire a prafessianal traffic directar to wark the intersectian an busy days. Turn aff to sign to Panderasa Park shauld be maved back a black sa that big RV's aren't right in the center of tawn. MCCALL IN MOTION ONLINE SURVEY SUMMARY The fallawing is a cansalidated summary of feedback related to the Transpartatian Master Plan fram the anline Survey: MQVING DIFFERENTLY 1. Are the current bus routes and stop locations adequate 2. Should we encourage shared car services, bike share and to serve the local and visitor population? other options, such as a bike to work programs or van - pools, to provide better access for visitors and residents? ■ Yes No ■ Yes No 29% 27% 3. Should we maintain free local public transit passes? If Comments: you don't use transit, what would need to happen for you to use transit? (e.g., changes in routes, frequency of buses) • Anything to encourage public transpartatian and use would be great far our cammunity. • I lave the free Kcal bus. I don't use it alat as I am biking in the summer, walking in the winter but it is a great backup system. I don't knaw abaut visitar use of this. • Make alternate transpartatian safe and easy. • The walking and biking is essentially facused an the summer and fall seasans. We have ice and snaw which create dangeraus canditians far peaple to walk at- ride bikes in the winter and spring manths. That's nat gaing to change and changing the dynam is especially taking away mare dawntawn parking is nat gaad far business- es and anly serves ane graup of the populatian wha are mare mabile. Take, fa r example, a family ping to the lake far the day. They park, pack all of their picnic supplies, water tays and the whale graup daes walk to the nearest beach. Take away the parking and make them park farther affsite and have to depend upan a bus to take themback to their car is just nat ping to be a practice they will likely use. • Trucks use "truck mute" araund tawn. Na thing else • We need mare bike friendly paths etc. Mare sidewalks far walkers. REALLY! • The current bus system is largely subsidized and we need to turn that to a sustainable pra gram funded by users. ■ Yes No APPENDIX A: OUTREACH SUMMARY PARK IT 1. Should the City create a parking management plan to include time management parking, meters, etc.? Which management tools are appropriate? ■ Yes No 79 % 21% 2. Should we identify a principle location for a parking expansion and/or new parking facilities in the long term? ■ Yes No 17% 83% 3. Should we invest in centralized public parking Down- Comments: town to decrease the frequency of short trips (park and• A proactive approach to provide parking in the dawn walk)? tawn is needed that is funded by the entire cammunity. It is what will keep a vibrant dawntawn and nat push ■ Yes No to a sprawl, We build city staffs to a near peak dem and level and we need to approach parking areas the same way. • I dan't usually have a problem with parking, generally. Parking is limited by the library. There is definitely a 25% need during the busier times in town. • Improve parking aptians • Mixed use parking decks saunds like a gaad idea. Are there incentives to make this happen? Alsa, that large - parking Eat behind Palice/City Hall seems like a large waste of space--cauld that be re-canfigured? 111 75% • The parking by the marina might wark far Bauble deck parking. The parking area next to Albertsans wauld be fine far additianal parking, but is definitely needed far snaw starage in the winter. There are same vacant lots far sale alang 3rd St that the city cauld purchase far parking, especially to encaurage RV & trailer parking away far the dawntawn care. It is VERY impartant to keep at least all of the parking that is naw available an 2nd Street far in and aut and lang term parking there. Due to the heavy use with children being dropped aff far hockey and skate programs all year, but especially in the fall through spring seasans. Ever watch a kid pack in all the heavy & bulky gear to each practice? MCCALL IN MOTION IMPRQVING rN WHAT WE HAVE 1. What infrastructure improvements are priorities and to what level should they be improved? + Can we call Deinhard a bypass with signage alang the highways befare entering tawn an Hwy 55? + Cantinue the additian and expansian of the sidewalks alang Lake and 3rd Streets. Repair and impravement of existing side streets and neighbarhaad traffic areas is becaming mare and ma re in need. Paving, adding same bike lanes where passible. Pedestrian and bike paths Raads, curbs, sidewalks need to be repaired fra m winter damage. A definite priarity. Features to imprave the pedestrian experience wauld be a great investment in our cammunity. + Streets in the dawntawn care and sidewalk impravement ents an 3rd + Thase streets at the tap of the list should be rebuilt first, including water/sewer lines + water, sewer and drainage with the updated streets all need to be 1st priarity. + water, sewer and raads an main arterials 3. Should the City more stringently enforce the sidewalk snow removal policy requiring private responsibility or develop a funding source for public responsibility? ■ Yes No 10% 90% 2. Are there additional street connections that are needed? If so, where? Paving a f Samsan Trail Extensian + Pravide anather cannectian between 1st and Deinhard Spring Mtn, to Flayd. 2. Are there additional street connections that are needed? If so, where? If you are going to invest in art let it be a separate budget item and make it the kind of art that peaple want to take their phatas to remember McCall. Pravide places far the art and let the art be fabulaus and funded autside of the street budget. Please keep to the basics and get the streets in shape and infrastructure madernized. Lighting needs to be adequate to allaw a persan walking an the street to see well at night and alsa be seen sa they aren't hidden in shadaws. Imprave what we already have Sidewalk snaw removal should nat be just shapawners' responsibility as it creates a hardship far same. Fix what is anly in budget Deal with infrastructure shartcamings first, when thase are carrected you can lank at adding pathways, benches and art. Mare bike pathways, especially alang Waaley road far east west access, sidewalks narth sauth fram Ridleys to Albertsans. APPENDIX A: OUTREACH SUMMARY MQVING IN CaMFaRT 1. Identify priority sidewalks to be built or repaired. 2. Who should maintain sidewalks? How do we pay for it? 3rd st to the light Along Lake Street and Third Street. Connections to and from BRMES and PLMS. Intersection n at the stoplight at Deinhard. Da not wipe out parking to make more sidewalks. Pathways along Hwy 55 through town would be really nice and improve the safety of residents and visitors. Pathways along Lick Creek Road. Paths on both sides of Dienhard fro m the stoplight to the elementary/middle school would make it safer for kids riding and walking to school. The balance along Hwy 55 south to Deinhard Wooley!!! all ok now 3. Are there key pedestrian crossings that should be en- hanced? Alpine Village area Pancacke House At least one stoplight downtown preferably at Thompson and 3rd St. Crossing near the Hotel McCall intersection. Pedestrians can hold up traffic for quite a while in summer. Maybe use of electronic crosswalks would be helpful. Deinhard stoplight has crossings, but there teh sidewalk ends... Downtown McCall needs a better system for pedestrians crossing Hwy 55. It's a total mess. Hwy 55/Park, Hwy 55, Lenore The one in front of Shore Lodge is a big problem. Suggest 15 MPH limit there. 5. Should bicycle lanes be provided with future roadway improvements where parallel pathways don't already exist? ■ Yes No 15% r r City should maintain using tax funds. 'City- use exciting personnel Taxes The City a f McCall. Use money already in the budget. Put more a f the budget into physical projects instead of excessive costs for city staff & wages for office type positions. The City. Part of the LGT funds There are some areas that should be done as a regular part of business by the City, but if we ever have them in local neighborhoods, then the property owner should be required to keep them free o f sno w. Valley counties responsibility to maintain sidewalks Why sidewalks? ... Why not just paved and marked. It get maintained with the roads. city budget as it is infrastructure. private responsibility 4. Where do we need to bridge connections from our exist- ing pathways? Crosswalk in between Riverfront Park and the bike path leading into town past the runway. Lick Creek, Davis, along hwy 55 from downtown toward Shore Lodge. Riverpark to airport/ along Davis to Ponderosa park Wooley and Davis 6. Should the City provide bicycle parking? 29% ■ Yes No RETHINKING GUR STREETS 1. Should we reduce drive lane widths to allow for econom- 2. Should heavy truck traffic through the City on Highway ical solutions to add more accommodation of bicycle and 55 be directed toward Deinheard-Boydstun instead of pedestrians? Highway 55 (3 rd and Lake Street)to allow for more flexi- bility in redesigning 3 rd and Lake Street, and to move heavy truck traffic out of Downtown? ■ Yes No ■ Yes No 8% 3. Should street improvement projects be focused toward supporting specific criteria such as, less traffic congestion during peak months, safety, economic development, bicycle and pedestrian connections, and freight? If so, which are the top priorities? ■ Yes No Calarada St and prabably several other side street need better access to left turning anti the Hwy far much of the year, nat just halidays and summer weekends. This is becaming mare and mare a year araund issue. Less traffic congestion, safety, bike/pedestrian pathways Street improvement projects should focus on repairing/ rebuilding streets falling apart making them safer to drive an. Bike and pedestrian connections Economic development first - keep the parking the businesses need. Pathway connections are important. Focused toward supporting current budget items This will have to be balanced, you can't do it all on every street. divert some of the bike and pedestrian traffic to lower volume streets to access the main core APPENDIX A: OUTREACH SUMMARY OUTREACH PHASE 3: STRATEGIES/PROJECTS The Strategies and Projects autreach cansisted of twa raunds of autreach, ane in February and ane in April/May of 2017. STRATEGIES OUTREACH McCall in Matian's cammunity autreach pracess Included a series of cammunity facus graups intended to help refine preliminary pals and palicies. Appraximately 60 residents, emplayees, business awners, cammunity leaders, yauth, and ather stakehalders attended the March 1 - 3, 2017 facus graups. Participants campleted an interactive warkbaak, which autlined each gaal and palicy and gave the aptian to keep, drap, ar refine. The warkbaaks were then used in canjunctian with ather autreach and public camment to derive the gaals and palicies. NOTICE The warkshaps were naticed an www. McCallCampPlan2016.cam, the City's web page, sacial media pages, in Star News, McCall In Matian email lists, pasters and pastcards placed thraugh the City and given to cammunity graups, and thraugh ward of mauth fram active cammunity graups. OBJECTIVES The purpase of these meetings was to give interested members of the public an appartunity to review gaals and palices far McCall and assist in refining them. FORMAT At the week was arganized with a series of facus graups per plan tapic as well as a cammunity apen hause. A presentatian was given as an averview of the McCall In Matian pracess, the cammunity visian, and fifteen big ideas. Fallawing the presentatian, participants discussed with their table what three big ideas resanated with them mast and were asked to expand an thase ideas. A big ideas Baaklet and Warkbaak were pravided to illustrate key questians and pravide visual examples of the big ideas. Fallawing the table discussians, a representative fram each of the table graups shared the results of the graup's wark with audience at large. SUMMARY OF FEEDBACK RECEIVED The goals and palices were madified based an the input received fram the cammunity during these warksessians. Key camments and discussian in the facus graups included: Suppart the bypass, if it is passible. ITD needs to repaint lanes mare aften. Seasanal demand shauld nat be used as the basis far raadway and infrastructure impravements. Allacate far snaw remaval and cammit to maintenance. Laak at different aptians and mare service of transit during peak periads. • Cansider in-tawn and between tawn rautes. • Is an -demand service replacing transit? • Need cantinued manitaring of parking. Workbook Spread MCCALL IN MOTION PROJECTS OUTREACH McCall in Motion's community outreach process included a series of community meetings intended to help prioritize projects for the Comprehensive Plan, Approximately 100 residents, employees, business owners, community leaders, youth, and other stakeholders attended the April 24 - 26, 2017 events, Participants reviewed projects on presentation boards and placed stickers on their priority projects, NOTICE The workshops were noticed on www. McCallCompPlan2016.com, the City's web page, social media pages, in Star News, McCall In Motion email lists, posters and postcards placed through the City and given to community groups, and through word of mouth from active community groups. OBJECTIVES The purpose of these meetings was to prioritize Comprehensive Plan and Transportation Plan projects. FORMAT The main event was called Wine -Down Wednesday at The Bistro and was held from noon - 7:30 p.m. and gave the public an option to stop by anytime during the advertised hours. Additionally, mobile hubs were set up at the public library, Ridley's Market, and the elementary school. APPENDIX A: OUTREACH SUMMARY PROJECTS RANKING The matrix belaw includes in -person responses and online responses. Project Stickers Making it easier to find public parking 8 Implementing paid parking to encourage turnover in highest demand areas 4 Managing boat and snowmobile trailer parking 10 Provide more options forgetting to downtown and the lakefront (e.g., pathways, transitseruice) 9 Providing for electric vehicle charging stations I Fully develop existing public lots and on -street parking r Co -locating public parking (lots or structures) with private development (e.g., Timbercrest ga- rage) 5 14 Provide parking outside downtown core that is either within walking distance of downtown or 17 can be served by a shuttle service during peak periods Better publicize transit schedules 5 9 Increase how often the bus runs, starting with the summertime 5 Evaluate a summertime bus loop that is more compact (e.g., focused on downtown and the lake- 5 front) and therefore able to run more frequently Coordinate Red Line service within McCall with the Green Line route to Cascade 13 Explore bike share service 12 Consider whether all the stop signs are necessary at the Pine Street/Roosevelt Street intersection 3 Install a traffic signal at the 3rd Street/Railroad Avenue -Lenora Street intersection 15 Construct a roundabout or traffic signal at the BoydstunStreet/Lake Street intersection 3 Evaluate making Deinhard Lane-Boydstun Street between 3rd Street and Lake Street a bypass to 23 State Highway (SH) 55 for all vehicles Implement streetscape and pedestrian crossing treatments at the Lake Street/3rd Street inter- 18 section Far mare specific public input received in regards to the Transportatian Master Plan, see Appendix D. MCCALL IN MOTION kA ITN ; MCCALL IN MOTION TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN FILENAME: H:\19\19638 - MCCALL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN\MEMOS\TM#1- EXISTING&FUTURECOND\19638_TM1_EXISTINGFUTURETRANSPOCONDITIONS_FINAL.DOCX TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM #1 McCall Transportation Master Plan Existing and Future Conditions Assessment Updated 8/22/17 to provide formatting changes and include bicycle/pedestrian counts Date: January 30, 2017 Project #: 19638.0 To: Nathan Stewart, City of McCall From: Nick Foster, AICP; Jamie Markosian, EIT; and John Ringert, PE cc: Bruce Meighen, Logan Simpson Table of Contents 1.0 Roadway Assessment .............................................................................................................................................. 2 1.1 Functional Classification ........................................................................................................................................................ 2 1.2 Existing Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 1.3 Existing Traffic Operations ................................................................................................................................................... 10 1.4 Future Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................................................................................ 14 1.5 Future Traffic Operations .................................................................................................................................................... 17 2.0 Crash Data ............................................................................................................................................................. 21 2.1 City-wide Trends .................................................................................................................................................................. 21 2.2 Crash Locations.................................................................................................................................................................... 25 3.0 Parking ................................................................................................................................................................... 29 3.1 Existing Conditions .............................................................................................................................................................. 29 3.2 Future Conditions ................................................................................................................................................................ 31 3.3 Comparison to 2009 Study .................................................................................................................................................. 34 4.0 Transit Service ....................................................................................................................................................... 35 5.0 Bicycle Network ..................................................................................................................................................... 35 5.1 Bicycle Counts ..................................................................................................................................................................... 38 6.0 Walking Network ................................................................................................................................................... 38 6.1 Pedestrian Counts ............................................................................................................................................................... 40 7.0 Summary ............................................................................................................................................................... 40 8.0 References ............................................................................................................................................................. 41 Attachment A – Standard Roadway Cross-Sections Atttachment B – Daily Traffic Volumes McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 2 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Attachment C – Turning Movement Count Worksheets Attachment D – Signal Warrant Analysis Worksheets Attachment E – Daily Parking Occupancies Attachment F – Bicycle and Pedestrian Counts Introduction As a part of the City of McCall’s Comprehensive Plan update, the City is preparing a Transportation Master Plan. The Transportation Master Plan will build upon previous planning efforts in McCall and identify the projects necessary to implement the City’s vision for its transportation system, identified through the Comprehensive Plan update. This memorandum describes the existing multimodal surface transportation system, including an inventory of existing infrastructure, an analysis of existing traffic operations, recent crash history, and parking utilization in the downtown. It also includes an analysis of projected traffic operations and parking demand in future years. A pavement management assessment is being completed as part of a separate process by Horrocks Engineers. This memorandum sets the stage for the next step in the Transportation Master Plan, which involves identifying and evaluating potential projects to be included in the final plan. 1.0 ROADWAY ASSESSMENT The following section describes the types of roadways in the City of McCall, including the functional classifications and roadway standards set forth by the City. 1.1 Functional Classification Functional classification is based on the type of service that a roadway is intended to provide within the context of the transportation system. The functional classification of a roadway determines a number of its characteristics, including how access is provided to surrounding land uses, the desirable amount of right-of-way, and the width and design of the road. Functional classification is also a component of how state and federal funding is allocated. Within McCall, roadways may be classified as Principal Arterials, Major or Minor Collectors, and Local streets, as shown in Figure 1. These classifications are described further below: Arterial streets typically carry the highest traffic volumes in a city. One of their primary functions is moving people and goods across longer distances. Consequently, access from adjacent properties is limited by the City’s Access Management Policy (Reference 1). PilgrimCoveRdMoonridgeDrBrookDrClubHillBlvdValley View Ln McCallAve1stStPayetteDrReedy LnMeadows RdStibnite St LupineLnIdaho St ChadDr Knights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdBitter r o o t D rC h r i s L n ClubRd LichenLnCoyRdMoon Dr W Forest St Stockton Dr C o lo r a d o S t WhitetailDr OspreyViewDrSundanceDrJohnAldenStateParkRdErne s t o D r AspenRidgeLnShelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln SvcRd NSa m s o nTrlChipmunk Ln F a i r way Dr RidgeR dBearBasinRd ValleyRimRdCrowleyLnNisulaRdMigratoryRidgeWayRawhideLoopFa w nlullyDr MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStWL a k e S t Mission StSpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdSt E Lake St BoydstunStLick Creek Rd S 3rd St Wooley AveWarrenWagonRd E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionSt S Samson TrlWDeinha r d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure 1Roadway Functional Classifications McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Functional Roadway Classifications.mxd - jmarkosian - 11:30 AM 1/30/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Roadway Classification Principal Arterial Major Collector Minor Collector Local City Limits 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 4 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Collector streets complement the arterial system and facilitate local circulation and access. Major collectors augment the atrial system to provide access within areas of the City. Minor collectors generally provide access to the local street system within residential and commercial areas. Access to Major Collectors is governed by the City’s Access Management Policy. Local streets provide access to individual land-uses and provide the highest level of access since they typically serve individual homes and businesses. They generally have the lowest traffic volumes and speeds in a city. 1.1.1 Road Cross-Sections The existing McCall Area Comprehensive Plan (MACP) has several recommended roadway cross sections for different roadways, as well as functional classifications (Reference 2). Included in these diagrams are different options for sections of State Highway (SH) 55 (i.e., 3rd Street and Lake Street), downtown core and central business district (CBD) streets, and rural arterial and collector streets. These cross-sections are included in Attachment “A.” Not all streets match their recommended cross-section; however, the City is actively working to upgrade several streets in the core to better match the recommended configuration. Since the completion of the current comprehensive plan, some street classifications have changed. Therefore, the City may consider revisiting its recommended cross-sections in the next phase of the Transportation Master Plan. 1.2 Existing Traffic Volumes Traffic volumes were collected on various segments throughout McCall by the ITD, the City, and Valley County. Counts were taken via roadway tube counters and manual turning movement counts. Due to McCall’s attractiveness as a seasonal tourist destination, traffic volumes can fluctuate widely from one time of the year to another. For instance, Figure 2 illustrates the monthly change in daily traffic volumes on SH 55, as reported by the automatic traffic recorder (ATR) located in Donnelly. In order to understand both high demand and more typical demand conditions, traffic counts were conducted during peak (i.e., from the 4th of July weekend to late August) and off-peak (i.e., April, May, early June, September, and October) times of the year. McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 5 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Roadway tube counts were generally collected by the City over a period of about five continuous days, usually from Thursday to Monday. Some locations include count data from Tuesday and Wednesday, too (e.g., ITD counts typically include a full Wednesday). This timing ensured that typical weekday, as well as Friday and weekend traffic conditions were observed. For completeness, only data from full 24-hour time periods were used in this analysis. Average annual daily traffic (AADT) traffic volumes were estimated for the road segments where counts were obtained during at least one period. This was accomplished by multiplying the off-peak weekday counts, where available, by a seasonal factor obtained from ITD. For locations where only a peak period count was available, the off-peak period count was estimated using nearby locations where peak and off-period counts were both available. Figure 3 shows the estimated AADT volumes and Figure 4 shows the percentage of these counts that are heavy vehicles. Attachment “B” includes maps showing the daily counts obtained at all locations during the peak and off-peak periods. 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 December November October September August July June May April March February January Monthly Average Daily Traffic Figure 2 Monthly Average Daily Traffic Volumes in 2015 (ATR #43, Donnelly, Idaho) Mo`sWay Valley View Ln McCall AveCarico RdReedy Ln MeadowsRd PilgrimCoveRdSmittyAveRowlandStMajesticViewDrPottsDrEvergre e n D rIdaho St Ch a d D r BradyDrKnights RdThulaStRiver Ranch RdMill RdLouisa AveKaren St Bitterroot DrBirdieDr VeritaRdCoy Rd WForestSt HelmichStS tocktonDrAlpine StF ir S t Cece Way Koski Dr F ox Ridg e LnEagleDrBo y d s t unLnEllisRdCedarLnMarywoodDr DivotLnM c G i n n i s St Violet Way Erne s t o D r Shelia Ln Krahn Ln W o o d lands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln F ir e w e e d D r SvcRd Conifer LnChipmunk Ln Fairway Dr RidgeR d ValleyRimRdMoonridge Dr MorganDr RawhideLo o p Floyde St MatherRd Rio Vista Bl vd N S am s o n T r l NMissionStMission StL i c k C r e e k R d SpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdStBoydstun StS 3rd StWarrenWagonRdW Lake St Elo RdS Mission StS Samson TrlW Dein h a r d L n ÉÈ55 Payette Lake 6502,240 7,810 1,3102,18057010,72010,630 190 60 10,640190 6,060 230 3,920 1, 7 8 0 1,6501,480 940 6,760 2,2406,630 11,5307802,6703,430670202,2901,650 1,340 1,6202,2801,1404,9201,670460 8 7 0 740 1,5704,1002,610 03501,8202,890 McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure 3AADT Volumes McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Daily Volumes_AADT.mxd - jmarkosian - 3:10 PM 1/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, ITD, Valley County, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Segment AADT 20 - 1,000 1,001 - 3,000 3,001 - 6,000 6,001 - 9,000 9,001 - 12,000 Water Parks City Limits Mo`sWay Valley View Ln McCall Ave1st StCarico RdReedy Ln Jacob St MeadowsRd PilgrimCoveRdStibnite St SmittyAveRowlandStMajesticViewDrRoosevelt AveHayes St PottsDrEvergre e n D rIdaho St Ch a d D r BradyDrKnights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdLouisa AveKaren St Bitterroot DrBirdieDr VeritaRdCoy Rd W Forest St HelmichStS tocktonDrAlpine StColorado St F ir S t Cece Way Koski Dr WhitetailDr F ox Ridg e LnBo y d s t unLnHewitt St EllisRdCedarLnMarywoodDr DivotLnM c G i n n i s St Violet Way Erne s t o D r Shelia Ln Krahn Ln W o o d lands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln F ir e w e e d D r SvcRd Conifer LnChipmunk Ln Fairway Dr RidgeR d ValleyRimRdMoonridge Dr MorganDr RawhideLo o p Floyde St MatherRd Rio Vista Bl vd N S am s o n T r l NMissionStMission StL i c k C r e e k R d SpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdStBoydstunStS 3rd StWarrenWagonRdWooleyAveW Lake St Elo RdS Mission StS Samson TrlW Dein h a r d L n ÉÈ55 Payette Lake 2%4%4%4%2%15%3%4%4%4%7%4%11%4%2%5% 7%4%7%3%4%2% 29%6%3%3%3%3 %2%7%14%14%5%9% McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure 4Existing Heavy Vehicle Percentages McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Heavy Vehicles.mxd - jmarkosian - 3:12 PM 1/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, ITD, Valley County, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Heavy Vehicle Percentage 2% - 3% 4% - 7% 8% - 15% 16% - 29% Water Parks City Limits McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 8 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho 1.2.1 Seasonal Influence on Volumes As previously noted, McCall sees a significant increase in visitors in the summertime, which influences traffic volumes in the city. Figure 5 compares observed traffic volumes during the peak summertime period and the off-peak spring and fall periods. This figure compares the average daily volume observed at locations that were counted during both periods (i.e. Spring Mountain Boulevard, Deinhard Lane, Davis Avenue, Lake Street, Lick Creek Road, Wooley Avenue, Mission Street, Warren Wagon Road, and Boydstun Street) and is meant to provide a representative sample of trends that occur in McCall. It does not represent the overall average daily volume on all streets in the city. Certain roads may also experience differing levels of seasonality (e.g., traffic counts entering the Ponderosa State Park area have a greater difference between peak and off-peak periods than most roadways). Figure 5 Seasonal Trends in Daily Traffic Volumes The observed peak summertime traffic volumes in McCall are about 65% to 115% greater than the observed off-peak volumes, depending on the day of the week. The seasonal effect is greatest on the weekend, where traffic volumes were recorded to be about twice as high during the summer. 1.2.2 Volumes by Day of Week Figure 5 also shows the daily trend in volumes in the City. During the off-peak period, daily volumes are generally highest on Thursday and Friday. However, during the summertime, Saturday volumes are similar to these days, too. 1.2.3 Volumes by Time of Day on SH 55 Figure 6 shows the variation of traffic on SH 55 south of Park Street during a weekday in early June 2016. The traffic profile does not match a typical commuter daily profile with two peaks during the 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Average Daily Traffic Volume Off-Peak Period Peak Period McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 9 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Instead, traffic volumes increase sharply in the morning and plateau through the afternoon into the early evening before they decrease again. As a result the peak hour of traffic on SH 55 does not represent as significant of a portion of the daily volume as it would under a commuter profile. This is also indicates that peak hour conditions may be approximately experienced for multiple hours on a weekday. Figure 6 Hourly Traffic Volumes on SH 55 south of Park Street 1.2.4 Intersection Turning Movement Volumes The City of McCall performed intersection turning movement traffic counts at five intersections along SH 55 on a weekday during the p.m. peak period (i.e., 4:00 to 6:00 p.m.) during the peak and off-peak periods: Boydstun Street/E Lake Street (SH 55) 2nd Street/E Lake Street (SH 55) 3rd Street (SH 55)/Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street1 3rd Street (SH 55)/Park Street 3rd Street (SH 55)/Colorado Street 1 Peak hour count based on estimate from a 2-hour count 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 12:00 AM 3:00 AM 6:00 AM 9:00 AM 12:00 PM 3:00 PM 6:00 PM 9:00 PM 12:00 AMVolume (veh/hr) Time McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 10 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Figure 7 and Figure 8 show the weekday p.m. peak hour traffic volumes at these intersections during the off-peak and peak periods, respectively. 1.3 Existing Traffic Operations Existing year 2016 traffic conditions were analyzed at the five intersections for which turning movements were provided and along Principal Arterial road segments. 1.3.1 Intersection Operations Intersection operations analyses were performed using the turning movement volumes shown in Figure 7 and Figure 8. All level-of-service (LOS) analyses described in this report were performed in accordance with the procedures outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual 2010 (Reference 3) using Synchro 9 as the software implementation tool. Figure 7 and Figure 8 show the results of the weekday p.m. peak hour traffic operations analyses during the off-peak and peak periods, respectively. Attachment “C” contains the turning movement counts. During the off-peak season, the critical movement at each intersection currently operates at LOS “C” or better and with adequate capacity during the weekday p.m. peak hour. However, during peak summertime conditions minor street left-turns operate at LOS “F” at the 3rd Street/Railroad Avenue- Lenora Street and 3rd Street/Park Street intersections during the weekday p.m. peak hour. The eastbound approach on Lenora Street at its intersection of 3rd Street is also at capacity. This increase in delay is due to additional demand for both motor vehicle turning movements and pedestrian crossings. Friday and Saturday Conditions Friday and Saturday conditions were not analyzed for this plan; however, as shown in Figure 8, traffic volumes are greater in McCall on these days. Pedestrian crossings are also likely highest during these days. Therefore, traffic operations likely worsen at these intersections during Friday or Saturday conditions. Public and agency outreach efforts have identified concerns with the Park Street and Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street intersections of 3rd Street, both in terms of the ability of motor vehicles to turn onto 3rd Street from the side streets as well as for the safety of people walking across these intersections. McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 13 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho 1.3.2 Signal Warrant Analysis Due to the results of the intersection operations analysis and the public feedback received to date, planning-level signal warrant analyses were performed for the intersections of 3rd Street/Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street and 3rd Street/Park Street. The signal warrant analysis worksheets for both intersections can be found in Attachment “D.” 3rd Street/Park Street Warrants The analysis at the 3rd Street/Park Street intersection used hourly traffic volumes collected by ITD over the course of Wednesday, June 1, 2016 on all four intersection approaches. The counts are not separated by direction, so a directional split of 55% in the peak direction (i.e., northbound) was assumed for the 3rd Street volumes. This directional split is based on the turning movement counts conducted by the City. The following vehicular volume signal warrants are met as a result of this analysis: Eight-hour vehicular volume; Four-hour vehicular volume; and, Peak hour. 3rd Street/Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street Warrants Daily traffic volumes were not available for the 3rd Street/Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street intersection, so the weekday p.m. peak hour turning movements collected by the City were used to estimate hourly approach volumes. Therefore, this analysis is considered planning-level. The results of this signal warrant analysis are summarized below: All three vehicular volume signal warrants noted above for the 3rd Street/Park Street intersection are met during the summertime peak season; and, None of the vehicular volume signal warrants are met during the off-peak season. 1.3.3. Roadway Segment Operations A planning-level segment analysis was completed using the look-up tables provided in the Florida Department of Transportation’s (FDOT’s) Quality/Level of Service Handbook (Reference 4) and the tables used by the Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho (COMPASS, Reference 5). These tables are based on the Highway Capacity Manual’s methods and provide planning-level daily traffic volume level-of-service thresholds for different roadway types in a variety of areas (i.e., rural, transitioning, and urban). This analysis is completed for SH 55 and the Deinhard Lane-Boydstun Street loop on the west side of SH 55. These segments were selected because they have the highest volumes and serve regional, as well as local, traffic. McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 14 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho The FDOT values for a rural city were used along Boydstun Street and Deinhard Lane. However, the FDOT values for a rural city did not seem appropriate for McCall’s central business district (CBD), which has on-street parking and high demand for pedestrian crossings. Therefore, the COMPASS values were used for SH 55 through McCall. The LOS threshold values are shown in Table 1. Table 1 Level of Service ADT Volume Thresholds Roadway LOS C LOS D LOS E State Highway 551 11,300 12,700 14,100 Deinhard/Boydstun2 16,400 23,100 31,500 1 ADT volume thresholds used from Reference 5 2 ADT volume thresholds used from Reference 4 There are two primary challenges with using daily LOS values in McCall, which should be kept in mind when reviewing the results of this analysis: The published thresholds are based on a typical commuter pattern relationship between weekday p.m. peak hour and the average daily traffic, which, as shown in Figure 6, is not the pattern in McCall The SH 55 corridor does not neatly fit into the typical roadway and community size categories. Figure 9 shows the roadway level-of-service by segment along the Principal Arterials in McCall (i.e., SH 55, Deinhard Lane, and Boydstun Street) using the AADT volumes from Figure 3 and the thresholds in Table 1. According to this analysis, the existing roadways all operate at LOS “C” or better during the off-peak period. Operations may be worse along certain roadway segments during peak conditions as illustrated in Figure 10, which uses summertime peak period daily volumes. Summertime counts were not conducted on SH 55, so the volumes on 3rd Street and Lake Street are estimated using the growth seen from the off-peak period to the peak period in the turning movement counts on SH 55. During the summertime peak period, 3rd Street operates in the LOS “E”- “F” range. 1.4 Future Traffic Volumes Year 2040 future traffic volumes were projected based on population growth estimates provided by Logan Simpson staff and recent growth trends on SH 55 provided by ITD staff. Based on this data, a 3 percent annual growth rate was applied to the 2016 volumes to estimate year 2040 traffic volumes. The determination of 3 percent per year came from population projections from Logan Simpson and a ‘stock’ growth rate of 3 percent per year provided by ITD from historical counts. Figure 11 shows the projected future year 2040 AADT volumes along roadway segments in McCall and Figure 12 and Figure 13 show the projected year 2040 turning movements at the study intersections during the off- peak and peak periods, respectively. PilgrimCoveRdMoonridgeDrBrookDrClubHillBlvdValley View Ln McCallAve1stStPayetteDrReedy LnMeadows RdStibnite St LupineLnIdaho St ChadDr Knights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdBitter r o o t D rC h r i s L n ClubRd LichenLnCoyRdMoon Dr W Forest St Stockton Dr C o lo r a d o S t WhitetailDr OspreyViewDrSundanceDrJohnAldenStateParkRdErne s t o D r AspenRidgeLnShelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln SvcRd NSa m s o nTrlChipmunk Ln F a i r way Dr RidgeR dBearBasinRd ValleyRimRdCrowleyLnNisulaRdMigratoryRidgeWayRawhideLoopFa w nlullyDr MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStWL a k e S t Mission StSpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdSt E Lake St BoydstunStLick Creek Rd S 3rd St Wooley AveWarrenWagonRd E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionSt S Samson TrlWDeinha r d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure 9 Existing Roadway Segment Operations AADT Volumes McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Segment LOS_AADT.mxd - jmarkosian - 3:13 PM 1/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Segment Level of Service (LOS) A-B C-D E-F City Limits Parks Water 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles PilgrimCoveRdMoonridgeDrBrookDrClubHillBlvdValley View Ln McCallAve1stStPayetteDrReedy LnMeadows RdStibnite St LupineLnIdaho St ChadDr Knights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdBitter r o o t D rC h r i s L n ClubRd LichenLnCoyRdMoon Dr W Forest St Stockton Dr C o lo r a d o S t WhitetailDr OspreyViewDrSundanceDrJohnAldenStateParkRdErne s t o D r AspenRidgeLnShelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln SvcRd NSa m s o nTrlChipmunk Ln F a i r way Dr RidgeR dBearBasinRd ValleyRimRdCrowleyLnNisulaRdMigratoryRidgeWayRawhideLoopFa w nlullyDr MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStWL a k e S t Mission StSpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdSt E Lake St BoydstunStLick Creek Rd S 3rd St Wooley AveWarrenWagonRd E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionSt S Samson TrlWDeinha r d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure 10 Existing Roadway Segment Operations Peak Season Volumes McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Segment LOS_Peak Season.mxd - jmarkosian - 3:15 PM 1/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Segment Level of Service (LOS) A-B C-D E-F City Limits Parks Water 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 17 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho 1.5 Future Traffic Operations Traffic operations analyses were performed on the projected year 2040 volumes for the study intersections and roadway segments. These analyses provide a planning level examination of expected traffic operations if no changes are made to existing intersection or roadway configurations. 1.5.1 Intersection Operations Intersection operations analyses were performed using the turning movement volumes shown in Figure 12 and Figure 13. The results of these analyses are shown in the same figures. Based on these projected volumes, the critical movement at most intersections is projected at operate at LOS “D” or better and with adequate capacity during the weekday p.m. peak hour during both off-peak and peak periods. The following are exceptions: 2nd Street/Lake Street o Peak Season – Northbound approach is projected to operate at LOS “E,” but with available capacity 3rd Street/Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street o Off-peak Season - Westbound left-turn/through movement is projected to operate at LOS “F” and without available capacity o Peak Season – Both eastbound and westbound left-turn/through movements are projected to operate at LOS “F” and without available capacity 3rd Street/Park Street o Off-peak Season - Westbound approach is projected to operate at LOS “E,” but with available capacity o Peak Season – Both eastbound and westbound left-turn/through movements are projected to operate at LOS “F.” Adequate capacity is projected to be available for the eastbound movement, but not the westbound movement 3rd Street/Colorado Street o Peak Season – The westbound approach is projected to operate at LOS “F,” but with adequate capacity Lake Street/Boydstun Street o Peak Season – The northbound approach is projected to operate at LOS “E”, but with adequate capacity. o Signal Warrants were run at this intersection and warrants were met for the peak season, but not the off-peak season. Mo`sWay Valley View Ln McCall AveCarico RdReedy Ln Jacob St MeadowsRd PilgrimCoveRdSmittyAveRowlandStMajesticViewDrEvergre e n D rI daho St Ch a d D r BradyDrKnights RdThulaStRiver Ranch RdMill RdLouisa AveKaren St Bitterroot DrBirdieDr VeritaRdCoy Rd WForestSt HelmichStS tocktonDrAlpine StF ir S t Cece Way Koski Dr F ox Ridg e LnEagleDrBo y d s t unLnHewitt St EllisRdCedarLnMarywoodDr DivotLnM c G i n n i s St Violet Way Erne s t o D r Shelia Ln Krahn Ln W o o d lands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln F ir e w e e d D r SvcRd Conifer LnChipmunk Ln Fairway Dr RidgeR d ValleyRimRdMoonridge Dr MorganDr RawhideLo o p Floyde St MatherRd Rio Vista Bl vd N S am s o n T r l NMissionStMission StLick Creek Rd SpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdStW Lake S t Boydstun StWarrenWagonRdElo RdS Mission StS Samson TrlW Dein h a r d L n ÉÈ55 Payette Lake 1,1203,850 13,4303,75018,280 330 100 18,300330 10,420 400 6,740 3, 0 6 0 2,8402,550 1,620 11,630 3,85011,400 19,8301,3404,5905,9001,150303,9402,840 2,300 2,7903,9201,9608,4602,870790 1 , 5 0 0 1,270 2,7007,0504,490 06003,1304,970 McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure 11Projected Year 2040 AADT Volumes McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Daily Volumes_AADT_Future.mxd - jmarkosian - 3:15 PM 1/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, ITD, Valley County, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Segment AADT 0 - 2,000 2,001 - 6,000 6,001 - 12,000 12,001 - 16,000 16,001 - 20,000 Water Parks City Limits McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 21 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho 1.5.2 Roadway Segment Operations A planning-level segment analysis was completed using the projected year 2040 AADT and peak- period daily volumes. Figure 15 shows the projected year 2040 roadway level-of-service by segment along the Principal Arterials in McCall using the same thresholds as the existing conditions analysis. Based on the results of this analysis, most of the roadways are expected to experience LOS “D” or better using the projected AADT, with the exception of 3rd Street between Lake Street and Deinhard Lane. In the peak traffic section of 3rd Street, the AADT is projected to approach nearly 20,000 which would normally equate to approximately 2,000 vehicles in the average peak hour. But due to the lower and longer peaks experienced in McCall, the projected 2040 two-way peak hourly volumes are approximately 1,100 and 1,500 for the weekday off-peak season and weekday peak-season, respectively. Therefore, while the AADT analysis indicates poor operation, the actual operation will be better due the lack of a focused peak hour that normally occurs in most cities with a majority of the traffic coming from employment centers. Figure 16 shows the estimated peak season LOS based on factoring the AADT volumes shown in Figure 9 to represent summer peak weekday conditions. As shown in Figure 16, SH-55 (3rd Street/Lake Street) in McCall is expected to operate at LOS “E-F” during the peak season in the year 2040. 2.0 CRASH DATA The Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) provided crash data for the most recent five year period (2010-14) for the entire city. During this period there were 299 reported crashes. This section describes trends in this data. 2.1 City-wide Trends The crash data was reviewed to identify general city-wide trends with respect to the severity of crashes and possible contributing factors. McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 22 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho 2.1.1 Severity Figure 14 summarizes crashes by severity (i.e., resulting in a fatality, injury, or property damage only). Figure 14 Reported Severity of Crashes in McCall (2010-14) Approximately 73% of all crashes in McCall were reported to have resulted in property damage only, while about 26% resulted in an injury to at least one person and around 1% resulted in a fatality. These proportions are roughly equivalent to those reported for other like-sized cities in Idaho (i.e., population of 2,000 – 4,999 people) during the period 2012 – 2014 (Reference 6). 0 100 200 300 Number of Crashes Property Damage Only Crashes Injury Crashes Fatal Crashes PilgrimCoveRdMoonridgeDrBrookDrClubHillBlvdValley View Ln McCallAve1stStPayetteDrReedy LnMeadows RdStibnite St LupineLnIdaho St ChadDr Knights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdBitter r o o t D rC h r i s L n ClubRd LichenLnCoyRdMoon Dr W Forest St Stockton Dr C o lo r a d o S t WhitetailDr OspreyViewDrSundanceDrJohnAldenStateParkRdErne s t o D r AspenRidgeLnShelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln SvcRd NSa m s o nTrlChipmunk Ln F a i r way Dr RidgeR dBearBasinRd ValleyRimRdCrowleyLnNisulaRdMigratoryRidgeWayRawhideLoopFa w nlullyDr MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStWL a k e S t Mission StSpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdSt E Lake St BoydstunStLick Creek Rd S 3rd St Wooley AveWarrenWagonRd E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionSt S Samson TrlWDeinha r d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure 15 Projected Year 2040 Roadway Segment Operations Projected AADT Volumes McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Segment LOS_Future AADT.mxd - jmarkosian - 3:17 PM 1/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Segment Level of Service (LOS) A-B C-D E-F City Limits Parks Water 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles PilgrimCoveRdMoonridgeDrBrookDrClubHillBlvdValley View Ln McCallAve1stStPayetteDrReedy LnMeadows RdStibnite St LupineLnIdaho St ChadDr Knights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdBitter r o o t D rC h r i s L n ClubRd LichenLnCoyRdMoon Dr W Forest St Stockton Dr C o lo r a d o S t WhitetailDr OspreyViewDrSundanceDrJohnAldenStateParkRdErne s t o D r AspenRidgeLnShelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln SvcRd NSa m s o nTrlChipmunk Ln F a i r way Dr RidgeR dBearBasinRd ValleyRimRdCrowleyLnNisulaRdMigratoryRidgeWayRawhideLoopFa w nlullyDr MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStWL a k e S t Mission StSpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdSt E Lake St BoydstunStLick Creek Rd S 3rd St Wooley AveWarrenWagonRd E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionSt S Samson TrlWDeinha r d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure 16 Projected Year 2040 Roadway Segment Operations Projected Peak Season Volumes McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Segment LOS_Future Peak Season.mxd - jmarkosian - 3:18 PM 1/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Segment Level of Service (LOS) A-B C-D E-F City Limits Parks Water 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 25 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho 2.1.2 Crash Type Figure 17 summarizes crashes by type. Figure 17 Reported Crash Types in McCall (2010-14) Fixed object and other run-off-the-road crashes are the most common crash type, with nearly one- third of all reported crashes falling into this category. Most of the other crash types, except the bicycle and other categories, represent between 10% and 14% of reported crashes. There were two reported crashes involving a person bicycling and no reported crashes involving a person walking during the study time period. 2.2 Crash Locations Figure 18 shows the location of all reported crashes in the McCall area from 2010 to 2014. Generally, crashes tend to be concentrated on roads with higher volumes, including the SH 55 corridor and Deinhard Lane. The crash data was further analyzed with respect to crash rates at select intersections and roadway segments. 2.2.1 Intersection Crashes Table 2 summarizes the observed crash rates at intersections for which traffic counts are available for all approaches. This analysis only includes crashes related to the intersection (e.g., it excludes crashes related to nearby driveways and nearby run-off-the-road crashes). 0 20 40 60 80 100 Other Angle/Turning Rear-end Animal Fixed Object/Other Off-road Head-on/Sideswipe Overturn Bicycle Number of Crashes McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 26 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Table 2 Intersection Crash Rates Intersection Number of Crashes Crash Rate1 2nd Street/Lake Street 0 0.00 3rd Street/Colorado Street 3 0.16 3rd Street/Deinhard Lane 3 0.13 3rd Street/McBride Street 0 0.00 3rd Street/Park Street 4 0.20 3rd Street/Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street 4 0.22 3rd Street/Stibnite Street 0 0.00 3rd Street/Washington Street 0 0.00 Boydstun Street/Lake Street 3 0.36 Mission Street/Deinhard Lane 2 0.21 Spring Mountain Blvd/Deinhard Lane 1 0.20 Mather Street/Lake Street 0 0.00 Mission Street/Lake Street 0 0.00 Warren Wagon Road/Lake Street 0 0.00 1Crash rate is crashes per million entering vehicles The Park Street and Railroad Avenue intersections of 3rd Street (SH 55) had the highest number of reported crashes, while the Boydstun Street/Lake Street intersection had the highest crash rate. No intersection is reported to have had more than one crash per year. Given the number of reported crashes at each intersection, it is difficult to identify any patterns at a specific location. PilgrimCoveRdMoonridgeDrBrookDrClubHillBlvdMcCallAve1stStR e e d y LnMeadows RdLupineLnChadDr Knights RdPayette DrThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdB itterrootDrC h r i s L n ClubRd LichenLnCoyRdMoon Dr W Forest St Stockton Dr C o lo r a d o S t WhitetailDr OspreyViewDrSundanceDrJohnAldenErne s t o D r AspenRidgeLnShelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Strawberry Ln Firew e e d Dr Flynn Ln NSa m s o nTrlStateParkRdChipmunk Ln F a i rway Dr RidgeR dBearBasinRd ValleyRimRdCrowleyLnNisulaRdMigratoryRidgeWayRawhideLoopF a w n lullyDr Floyde St MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStWarrenWagonRdWL a k e S t Mission StSpringMountainB lv dDavis AveN 3rd StE Lake St BoydstunStS 3rd St Wooley Ave Lick Creek Rd E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionSt S Samson TrlWDeinhar d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure 18 Reported Crash Locations 2010 - 2014 McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Crashes.mxd - jmarkosian - 3:19 PM 1/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, ITD, Valley County, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles Crash Severity Fatal Crash Injury Crash Property Damage Only Crash Water Parks City Limits McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 28 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho 2.2.2 Road Segment Crashes Table 3 summarizes the observed crash rates on select roadway segments in McCall. These segments include all collector-level and above roadways for which volume data was available. Table 3 Roadway Segment Crash Rates Roadway From To Number of Crashes Crash Rate1 3rd Street Krahn Lane Deinhard Lane 0 0.00 3rd Street Deinhard Lane Colorado Street 12 1.14 3rd Street Colorado Street Pine Street 9 0.93 Lake Street Pine Street Mission Street 5 1.00 Lake Street Mission Street Boydstun Street 5 0.39 Lake Street Boydstun Street City Limits 14 1.05 Deinhard Lane Spring Mountain Blvd 3rd Street 3 0.79 Deinhard Lane 3rd Street Mission Street 5 1.39 Deinhard Lane Mission Street Boydstun Street 7 1.19 Boydstun Street Deinhard Lane Lake Street 1 0.29 Davis Avenue Wooley Avenue Lick Creek Road 0 0.00 Lick Creek Road Spring Mountain Blvd Davis Avenue 1 0.51 Mission Street Deinhard Lane Lake Street 0 0.00 Railroad Avenue 3rd Street Roosevelt Avenue 0 0.00 Railroad Avenue Roosevelt Avenue Davis Avenue 1 0.96 Spring Mountain Blvd Deinhard Lane Wooley Avenue 3 1.01 Spring Mountain Blvd Wooley Avenue Lick Creek Road 0 0.00 Wooley Avenue Spring Mountain Blvd Davis Avenue 1 0.65 Warren Wagon Road Lake Street Meadows Road 2 0.90 1Crash rate is crashes per million vehicle miles traveled (MVMT) As previously noted, the highest numbers of crashes are reported to have occurred on the 3rd Street (SH 55) corridor and Deinhard Lane. These streets also generally have the highest crash rates; though there are segments of Spring Mountain Boulevard and Railroad Avenue that have rates near 1.0 crashes/MVMT. However, the number of crashes on these two segments is lower than on SH 55 or Deinhard Lane. The most common crash type on 3rd Street is rear-end (8 crashes), followed by angle and turning related crashes (6 crashes), and single vehicle crashes with objects (5 crashes). The first two crash types involve multiple vehicles and are typically related to accesses (public streets and private driveways) along the highway. This pattern generally continues on Lake Street to 1st Street. As Lake Street leaves the core, single vehicle crashes become more common (19 crashes), including animal crashes (9 crashes). Single-vehicle crashes are also the most common crash type on Deinhard Lane west of 3rd Street (7 out of 12 crashes). McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 29 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho 3.0 PARKING Parking in McCall consists of public on-street parking, a parking structure, public surface parking lots, and private surface parking lots. There are currently two hour time limits on all street spaces to encourage turnover. There are currently no fees associated with parking within any of the surveyed lots or street spaces. A parking demand analysis was completed based on observations of current conditions during the peak and off-peak periods, as well as for forecasted future conditions. 3.1 Existing Conditions Parking data for the summertime peak season was collected on a Wednesday and Saturday in July 2016. Off-peak season parking data was collected on a Wednesday and Saturday in October 2016. Parking occupancy counts were made three times on each of these days at 10:00 a.m., 1:00 p.m., and 4:00 p.m. by City staff and volunteers. A total of 1,772 parking spaces were surveyed for this effort. Approximately 82% of the surveyed parking spaces are off-street, either in private surface lots, public surface lots, or the parking structure. The remaining 18% of spaces are on-street. The parking survey was broken into four zones, similar to the 2009 parking study prepared for the City (Reference 7), as shown in Figure 19. Table 4 summarizes the observed parking occupancies during the off-peak and peak seasons. Maps showing the occupancy by lot are included in Attachment “E.” Table 4 Peak Period Zonal Parking Occupancies Zone Total Spaces Wednesday Occupancy Saturday Occupancy 10:00 AM 1:00 PM 4:00 PM 10:00 AM 1:00 PM 4:00 PM Off-Peak Season Observations Zone 1 848 20% 31% 31% 23% 24% 29% Zone 2 386 13% 22% 19% 20% 34% 48% Zone 3 294 26% 34% 32% 23% 42% 30% Zone 4 244 19% 23% 18% 15% 23% 16% Total/Average 1,772 19% 27% 25% 20% 31% 31% Peak Season Observations Zone 1 848 35% 51% 41% 33% 54% 48% Zone 2 386 48% 75% 70% 88% 93% 92% Zone 3 294 28% 54% 45% 38% 69% 57% Zone 4 244 20% 27% 22% 18% 20% 14% Total/Average 1,772 32% 51% 44% 43% 58% 51% Italicized text indicates occupancy greater than 74%, underlined text indicate occupancy greater than 85% W oole y A v e Thompson Ave Wanda Ave 1st StIdaho St Fir St Greyston e D r Roosevelt AveHemlock St 4thStE Park StN3r dSt Ward St2ndSt Pine StMill RdWashington St McCallAveN S a m son Trl M c G i n n is StLenora StAlpine StColorado St E Forest St E Lake St Railroad AveDwyZONE 1 ZONE 2 ZONE 3 ZONE 4 McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure 19Parking Analysis Zones McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Parking Map.mxd - jmarkosian - 3:21 PM 1/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 31 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Parking demand is generally higher during the peak period. This difference is particularly marked in Zone 2, where the majority of public parking for recreational uses exists. Zone 2 reaches occupancies of above 85% (a commonly cited maximum threshold for parking analyses) during all three times observed during the peak period Saturday. Zone 3 and Zone 1 reach higher occupancies than Zone 4 but are below the existing parking capacity. The high parking demand in Zone 2 is likely because of the proximity to the CBD and recreational attractions. Table 5 summarizes the parking occupancies by parking space type. Attachment “E” contains maps showing the locations of public and private parking. Table 5 Peak Period Parking Occupancy by Space Type Type Total Spaces Wednesday Occupancy Saturday Occupancy 10:00 AM 1:00 PM 4:00 PM 10:00 AM 1:00 PM 4:00 PM Off-Peak Season Observations Public 706 19% 30% 27% 23% 31% 29% Private 1,031 19% 27% 27% 20% 28% 24% On-Street 304 21% 35% 38% 28% 43% 32% Off-Street 1,433 19% 27% 25% 20% 26% 25% Peak Season Observations Public 703 38% 61% 53% 54% 74% 63% Private 1,051 32% 46% 40% 34% 49% 46% On-Street 304 41% 74% 73% 65% 92% 84% Off-Street 1,450 33% 48% 39% 38% 52% 46% Italicized text indicates occupancy greater than 74%, underlined text indicate occupancy greater than 85% As shown in Table 5, occupancy of all parking space types is less than 50% during the off-peak season. On-street parking spaces have the highest level of occupancy, with demand approaching and exceeding 85% during Saturday afternoon during the peak season. 3.2 Future Conditions Future parking conditions were analyzed by applying the same annual average growth rate of 3% per year that was applied to the traffic volumes. This growth rate was applied to the existing observations of parking demand for 10 and 20 year future periods. Table 6 and Table 7 show the 10 and 20 year projected parking occupancies by zone, respectively, based on this simple growth estimate. Table 8 and Table 9 provide the same information by parking type. Note that all results are based on simple growth assumptions and do not account for spill over across zones or parking types when demand exceeds the ideal 85% utilization threshold. McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 32 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Table 6 Peak Period Zonal Parking Occupancies – Projected Year 2026 Conditions Zone Total Spaces Wednesday Occupancy Saturday Occupancy 10:00 AM 1:00 PM 4:00 PM 10:00 AM 1:00 PM 4:00 PM Off-Peak Season Observations Zone 1 848 26% 41% 41% 29% 31% 37% Zone 2 386 17% 28% 25% 26% 45% 62% Zone 3 294 34% 44% 41% 31% 55% 39% Zone 4 244 25% 30% 23% 20% 30% 21% Total/Average 1,772 20% 29% 32% 34% 32% 32% Peak Season Observations Zone 1 848 45% 66% 54% 43% 70% 62% Zone 2 386 59% 93% 87% 108% 115% 114% Zone 3 294 37% 70% 58% 49% 90% 74% Zone 4 244 27% 35% 28% 23% 26% 18% Total/Average 1,772 42% 66% 57% 56% 75% 67% Italicized text indicates occupancy greater than 74%, underlined text indicate occupancy greater than 85% Table 7 Peak Period Zonal Parking Occupancies – Projected Year 2036 Conditions Zone Total Spaces Wednesday Occupancy Saturday Occupancy 10:00 AM 1:00 PM 4:00 PM 10:00 AM 1:00 PM 4:00 PM Off-Peak Season Observations Zone 1 848 32% 50% 50% 36% 38% 46% Zone 2 386 20% 35% 31% 32% 55% 77% Zone 3 294 41% 54% 51% 38% 67% 48% Zone 4 244 31% 37% 28% 24% 37% 26% Total/Average 1,772 25% 35% 40% 42% 39% 39% Peak Season Observations Zone 1 848 56% 81% 66% 53% 86% 76% Zone 2 386 73% 114% 107% 133% 141% 140% Zone 3 294 45% 86% 72% 60% 111% 91% Zone 4 244 33% 43% 35% 28% 32% 22% Total/Average 1,772 52% 81% 70% 69% 93% 82% Italicized text indicates occupancy greater than 74%, underlined text indicate occupancy greater than 85% McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 33 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Table 8 Peak Period Parking Occupancy by Space Type – Projected Year 2026 Conditions Type Total Spaces Wednesday Occupancy Saturday Occupancy 10:00 AM 1:00 PM 4:00 PM 10:00 AM 1:00 PM 4:00 PM Off-Peak Season Observations Public 706 24% 39% 35% 30% 40% 38% Private 1031 25% 36% 35% 26% 37% 31% On-Street 304 27% 45% 50% 37% 56% 42% Off-Street 1433 24% 36% 32% 26% 34% 32% Peak Season Observations Public 703 49% 79% 69% 70% 96% 82% Private 1051 41% 60% 52% 45% 64% 60% On-Street 304 54% 97% 95% 84% 120% 109% Off-Street 1450 42% 62% 51% 49% 67% 60% Italicized text indicates occupancy greater than 74%, underlined text indicate occupancy greater than 85% Table 9 Peak Period Parking Occupancy by Space Type – Projected Year 2036 Conditions Type Total Spaces Wednesday Occupancy Saturday Occupancy 10:00 AM 1:00 PM 4:00 PM 10:00 AM 1:00 PM 4:00 PM Off-Peak Season Observations Public 706 30% 48% 44% 37% 49% 47% Private 1031 31% 44% 43% 32% 45% 38% On-Street 304 34% 55% 62% 45% 68% 52% Off-Street 1433 30% 44% 40% 31% 42% 40% Peak Season Observations Public 703 61% 98% 85% 87% 118% 101% Private 1051 51% 74% 63% 55% 78% 74% On-Street 304 66% 119% 116% 104% 148% 135% Off-Street 1450 52% 76% 63% 60% 83% 74% Italicized text indicates occupancy greater than 74%, underlined text indicate occupancy greater than 85% The results from the ten-year projection (year 2026) parking analysis are summarized below: During the peak summertime season, demand for parking in Zone 2 is forecast to exceed the number of spaces by the year 2026 in most time periods. o An additional 136 parking spaces would need to be provided in Zone 2 to achieve 85% occupancy in the year 2026 during the most heavily used time period on Saturday afternoon. Without additional spaces, the excess demand will likely spill over into the other zones. The overall demand is projected to be a maximum of 75% during a peak season Saturday, indicating there is adequate overall parking supply in the study area. McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 34 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho o However, as shown in Table 8, the demand for public parking is projected to near capacity during the peak Saturday afternoon in the year 2026. An additional 90 public spaces would be needed under this scenario to reduce parking utilization to 85% of the public parking supply during this one time period. The results from the 20-year projection (year 2036) parking analysis are summarized below: By the year 2036, peak season demand for parking is expected to exceed 85% in Zone 2 during all observed periods on Saturday and also on Wednesday afternoon, as well as in Zone 3 during Saturday afternoon and midday on Wednesday. o An additional 254 spaces would need to be provided in Zone 2 and an additional 90 spaces in Zone 3 to achieve 85% occupancy in 2036 during the most heavily used time periods. Without additional supply in these zones, excess demand will likely spill over into the adjacent zones. During the Saturday afternoon in the summertime peak season, an additional 170 spaces are forecast to be needed to bring total parking utilization to 85%. During the summertime peak, demand for public parking is also projected to exceed capacity. o An additional 272 public parking spaces would need to be provided to reduce public parking utilization to 85%. Parking utilization is not forecast to exceed 85% during the off-peak period in any of the zones or any of the parking space types. This finding remains even if the First Street parking lot, which is used for snow storage in the winter, is removed from consideration. 3.3 Comparison to 2009 Study The 2009 Downtown Parking Study (Reference 6) was used as a comparison for this parking study. Generally, similar data collection and analysis methods were used for both studies. However, one notable difference is that the 2009 study’s peak season data sample was over Labor Day weekend, while this study was in July. Therefore, we would expect the peak demand for this study to be higher than was seen in the 2009 study, due to the higher traffic activity that occurs in July versus the Labor Day weekend after most schools have been in session. The observed parking occupancies for this study are about 20% greater in the peak period than the results of the 2009 study over Labor Day weekend. The largest differences are in Zone 2, where this study observed occupancies nearly 40% higher. Off-peak observations for this study are generally below the 2009 Labor Day occupancies. The 2009 study used land use projections for housing and retail to determine the parking demand in the 10- and 20-year future windows. Based on these projections, the 2009 study estimated that there would be sufficient supply for the 10-year period, but that there would be shortage of approximately McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 35 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho 114 to 240 spaces, depending on the type of development in downtown, by the end of the 20-year period. This finding is consistent with the results of this updated study, which showed that approximately 170 parking spaces would need to be added to the total system to maintain a utilization of 85% or less during the summertime peak. 4.0 TRANSIT SERVICE Public transit services in McCall are offered by Treasure Valley Transit (TVT). Services include local circulation, via the Red Line, and city-to-city service between McCall and Cascade, via the Green Line. The Red Line service throughout the City is free to use and operates with a deviated fixed-route system (riders may flag the bus for pick-up anywhere it is safe to do so) from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., seven days a week. The Red Line operates on approximately one-hour headways and allows for route deviation within ¾ mile from the Published route. Figure 20 shows the existing Red Line route map and published bus stops. Based on the most recent data available, there are over 31,000 riders of the Red Line annually. The fee schedule for the Green Line (McCall to Cascade) includes single ride, daily, 10-day, and monthly passes for youth, adult and senior/disabled users. Just over 20,000 riders use the Green Line each year. Additional city-to-city services are supported by St. Luke’s, which has partnered with Salmon River Transit and Connecting U-McCall to provide free weekly bus service between Riggins and McCall. Several private organizations also run local shuttle services between their place of business and other destinations. 5.0 BICYCLE NETWORK Enhancing the existing bicycle network has been a priority for the City, as evidenced by the McCall Area Pathways Master Plan, adopted in 2012 (Reference 8). The existing bicycle network in McCall consists of shared-use pathways, bike lanes, shoulders, and low-volume roadways, as shown in Figure 21. This figure also includes the recommended bicycle network improvements from the McCall Area Pathways Master Plan. When the network is built out as shown in Figure 21, it will cover much of the City, including most major roadways. Notably, the SH 55 corridor outside of the CBD will still be missing dedicated bicycling facilities. The pathways plan does note that a cross-section for 3rd Street that includes bike lanes has been approved by ITD. However, some areas are constrained and may require trade-offs to add bike lanes. Similarly, much of Lake Street is constrained by existing development and the provision of bike lanes would require reallocating the existing parking or center turn lane space. "U "U "U "U "U "U"U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U "U PilgrimCoveRdMoonridgeDrBrookDrClubHillBlvdValley View Ln McCallAve1stStPayetteDrReedy LnMeadows RdStibnite St LupineLnIdaho St ChadDr Knights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdBitter r o o t D rC h r i s L n ClubRd LichenLnCoyRdMoon Dr W Forest St Stockton Dr C o lo r a d o S t WhitetailDr OspreyViewDrSundanceDrJohnAldenStateParkRdErne s t o D r AspenRidgeLnShelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln SvcRd NSa m s o nTrlChipmunk Ln F a i r way Dr RidgeR dBearBasinRd ValleyRimRdCrowleyLnNisulaRdMigratoryRidgeWayRawhideLoopFa w nlullyDr MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStWL a k e S t Mission StSpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdSt E Lake St BoydstunStLick Creek Rd S 3rd St Wooley AveWarrenWagonRd E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionSt S Samson TrlWDeinha r d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure 20Transit Service Routes and Stops McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Transit System.mxd - jmarkosian - 3:22 PM 1/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Bus Routes Seasonal Route "U Bus Stop Locations City Limits 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles PilgrimCoveRdMoonridgeDrBrook DrClubHillBlvdValley View Ln McCallAve1stStPayetteDrReedy LnMeadows RdStibnite St LupineLnIdaho St ChadDr Knights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdBitter r o o t D rC h r i s L n ClubRd LichenLnCoyRdMoon Dr W Forest St Stockton Dr C o lo r a d o S t WhitetailDr OspreyViewDrSundanceDrJohnAldenStateParkRdErne s t o D r AspenRidgeLnShelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln SvcRd NSa m s o nTrlChipmunk Ln F a i r way Dr RidgeR dBearBasinRd ValleyRimRdCrowleyLnNisulaRdMigratoryRidgeWayRawhideLoopFa w nlullyDr MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStWL a k e S t Mission StSpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdSt E Lake St BoydstunStS 3rd St Lick Creek Rd Wooley AveWarrenWagonRd E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionStS Samson TrlWDeinha r d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure 21 Existing and Planned Future Bicycle Network McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Pathway Network.mxd - jmarkosian - 3:38 PM 1/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Bike Lane Natural Surface Path Separated Path Share the Road Desired Bike Lanes Desired Natural Surface Path Desired Separate Paved Path Desired Share the Road Parks City Boundary 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles E Park St N 3rd StN Mission StRailroad AveE Lake St Wanda Ave Mather Rd N Sam son T r lKasper StColorado StSmitty AveWard St2nd S t 1st StThula StWashington St A l l e n A v eLenora StPl a c i d S t Idaho St Timm StELakeSt AnnStAlpine StE Forest StE Park St M c G i n n i s StStibnite St PayetteLake Downtown McCall McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 38 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho 5.1 Bicycle Counts The City began collecting bicycle and pedestrian counts in 2013. Since then, the City has annually conducted the counts at 13-18 locations over a 2-hour period on each of a summer weekday and summer weekend day. The most recent counts, conducted in summer 2016, showed the highest bicycle volumes at the following locations: Legacy Park/Pine Street E Lake Street/Hemlock Street Stibnite Street/North Valley Rail Trail W Lake Street/Rotary Park 1st Street/North Valley Rail Trail These locations are generally near popular destinations (i.e., downtown McCall, lakefront parks) and two are along a separated multi-use path along an old rail line. More information on the counts can be found in Attachment “F.” 6.0 WALKING NETWORK Improving walking conditions in McCall, particularly in the CBD is also a core priority for the City. The existing walking network consists of sidewalks and shared-use paths, as shown in Figure 22. The McCall Area Pathways Master Plan also includes future walking projects, which are also shown in the figure. A focus of the pathways plan is on providing sidewalks in the CBD and along the SH 55 corridor from Deinhard Lane to the Lardo Bridge on Lake Street. The plan also includes separated pathways on roadways further from the downtown core. Notable gaps that will remain after the planned projects on Figure 22 are built include: Davis Avenue from Wanda Avenue to Lick Creek Road Park Street-Thompson Avenue from Samson Trail to Wooley Avenue Colorado Street from 1st Street to Samson Trail Mission Street from Idaho Street to Lake Street Lake Street from the Lardo Bridge to the Bear Basin Connector Trail Additionally, an important part of the walking network is crossings of major roads. As noted previously in this memorandum, some concern has been expressed about conflicts between people driving and people walking at the Park Street and Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street intersections of 3rd Street. PilgrimCoveRdMoonridgeDrBrook DrClubHillBlvdValley View Ln McCallAve1stStPayetteDrReedy LnMeadows RdStibnite St LupineLnIdaho St ChadDr Knights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdBitter r o o t D rC h r i s L n ClubRd LichenLnCoyRdMoon Dr W Forest St Stockton Dr C o lo r a d o S t WhitetailDr OspreyViewDrSundanceDrJohnAldenStateParkRdErne s t o D r AspenRidgeLnShelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln SvcRd NSa m s o nTrlChipmunk Ln F a i r way Dr RidgeR dBearBasinRd ValleyRimRdCrowleyLnNisulaRdMigratoryRidgeWayRawhideLoopFa w nlullyDr MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStWL a k e S t Mission StSpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdSt E Lake St BoydstunStS 3rd St Lick Creek Rd Wooley AveWarrenWagonRd E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionSt S Samson TrlWDeinha r d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure 22Existing Walking Network McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Walking Network.mxd - jmarkosian - 3:34 PM 1/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Natural Surface Path Separated Path Sidewalk Desired Natural Surface Path Desired Separate Paved Path Desired Sidewalk Additional Walking Network Gaps Parks City Boundary 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles Pine St Colorado St Ward St2nd S t 1st StE For e s t S t Washington St E Park St Idaho St Lenora StELakeStAnnStAlpine StRailroad AveSyringaDrWanda Ave NSa m s o n Tr l E Park St N 3rd StPine St Thompson AveE Lake St RailroadAvePayetteLake Downtown McCall McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 40 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho 6.1 Pedestrian Counts The City began collecting pedestrian and bicycle counts in 2013. Since then, the City has annually conducted the counts at 13-18 locations over a 2-hour period on each of a summer weekday and summer weekend day. The most recent counts, conducted in summer 2016, showed the highest pedestrian volumes at the following locations: E Lake Street/2nd Street-Art Roberts Park Legacy Park/Pine Street E Lake Street/Hemlock Street W Lake Street/Rotary Park Davis Avenue/Wooley Avenue The top four locations are near parks along the lakefront in and around downtown McCall. The fifth location has limited pedestrian facilities and speaks to the previously identified need to provide them along Davis Avenue and Wooley Avenue. More information on the counts can be found in Attachment “F.” 7.0 SUMMARY The following are key issues that should be considered for further examination in the development of the transportations master plan: Improving traffic operations and pedestrian crossings at the following intersections: o 3rd Street/Park Street o 3rd Street/Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street Managing travel demand on SH 55 (e.g., promoting use of alternate routes, enhanced multimodal transportation options) to reduce summertime congestion Examining options for reducing single-vehicle crashes Reviewing and incorporating recommendations from the 2009 parking study Incorporating the recommended walking and biking networks from the McCall Area Pathways Master Plan o Considering whether additional walking and biking projects should be added beyond those identified in the Pathways plan These issues are in addition to any other desired improvements that may result from public involvement efforts, as well as the ongoing asset management plan being prepared for the City by Horrocks Engineers. McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 January 30, 2017 Page 41 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho 8.0 REFERENCES 1. City of McCall, Idaho. Access Management Policy. 2. City of McCall, Idaho. McCall Area Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 10 – Transportation. September, 2012. 3. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies. Highway Capacity Manual 2010. 2010. 4. Florida Department of Transportation. FDOT Quality/Level of Service Handbook, Table 3. 2012. 5. Community Planning Association of Southwest Idaho (COMPASS). 2002 Travel Demand Forecast Model Calibration Report for Ada and Canyon Counties. Adopted June 22, 2006. 6. Idaho Transportation Department, Traffic Safety. Reported Crashes 2010 – 2014. 7. DESMAN Associates. City of McCall Downtown Parking Study & Needs Assessment. November 2009. 8. Harmony Design & Engineering. McCall Area Pathways Master Plan. Adopted May 2012. Attachment A Standard Roadway Cross-Sections City of McCall 104 Figure 34 - Third Street with On-Street Parking Figure 33 - Third Street with No On-Street Parking 105McCall Area Comprehensive Plan Figure 35 - West Lake Street Figure 36 - Core CBD Typical Street Section A City of McCall 106 Figure 37 - Core Typical Street Section B Figure 38 - CBD Core Typical Street Section C 107McCall Area Comprehensive Plan 80’ 0” Right of Way Varies Shoulder ** 8' 0" Travel Lane 11' 0" - 12' 0" Multi-use Path 10' 0" Minimum Where Required Travel Lane 11' 0" - 12' 0" Ditch 1' 0" Clear Zone 14' 0" - 16' 0"* Varies Shoulder ** 8' 0"6' 0" RURAL ARTERIAL *≤ 40 MPH > 6000 ADT ** Check with City of McCall – bike lanes and/or bicycle route signs and sidewalks and/or paths may be required on some rural roadways. 4:1 Typ 2:1 Max6:1 Figure 39 - Rural Arterial Figure 40 - Rural Collector *≤ 40 MPH > 6000 ADT ** Check with City of McCall – bike lanes and/or bicycle route signs and sidewalks and/or paths may be required on some rural roadways. Varies Multi-use Path 10' 0" Minimum Where Required Clear Zone 14' 0" - 16' 0"* h 80’ 0” Right of Way Shoulder ** 6' 0" Travel Lane 11' 0" - 12' 0" Travel Lane 11' 0" - 12' 0" Shoulder ** 6' 0" Varies Ditch 1' 0" 4' 0" RURAL COLLECTOR 4:1 Typ 2:1 Max 4:1 Attachment B Daily Traffic Volumes Mo`sWay Valley View Ln McCall AveCarico RdReedy Ln Jacob St MeadowsRd PilgrimCoveRdSmittyAveRowlandStMajesticViewDrEvergre e n D rIdaho St Ch a d D r BradyDrKnights RdThulaStRiver Ranch RdLouisa AveKaren St Bitterroot Dr ClubRd Bi rdieDrVeritaRdCoy RdE Lake StWForestSt HelmichStS tocktonDrAlpine StF ir S t Cece Way Koski Dr E Park St F ox Ridg e LnEagleDrBo y d s t unLnEllisRdCedarLn DivotLnM c G i n n i s St Violet Way Erne s t o D r Shelia Ln Krahn Ln W o o d lands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln F ir e w e e d D r SvcRd Conifer LnChipmunk Ln Fairway D r RidgeR d ValleyRimRdMoon ridge Dr MorganDr RawhideLo o p Lakeside Ave Floyde St MatherRd Rio Vista Bl vd N S am s o n T r l NMissionStMission StLick Creek Rd SpringMountainBlvdDavisAveBoydstunStS 3rd StWarrenWagonRdW Lake St Elo RdS Mission StS Samson TrlW Dein h a r d L n ÉÈ55 Payette Lake 2,660 8,260 11,24010,94011,180260 12,0408602,28076080 250 7,040 2, 3 1 0 1,7201,600 1,000 7,940 2,8507,730 7802,7903,580202,9001,500 1,400 2,0905,140 1,740480 1 , 0 2 0 4,280 3701,9003,020 McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure B1 Weekday Off-Peak Season Daily Traffic Volumes McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Daily Volumes_WOP.mxd - jmarkosian - 4:02 PM 1/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, ITD, Valley County, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Weekday Daily Traffic 20-1,000 1,000-3,000 3,000-6,000 6,000-9,000 9,000-12,000 Water Parks City Limits Mo`sWay Valley View Ln McCall Ave1st StCarico RdReedy Ln Jacob St MeadowsRd PilgrimCoveRdStibnite St SmittyAveRowlandStMajesticViewDrRoosevelt AveHayes St Evergre e n D rIdaho St Ch a d D r BradyDrKnights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdLouisa AveKaren St Bitterroot Dr ClubRd Bi rdieDrVeritaRdCoy Rd W Forest St HelmichStS tocktonDrAlpine StColorado St F ir S t Cece Way Koski Dr WhitetailDr F ox Ridg e LnEagleDrBo y d s t unLnHewitt St EllisRdCedarLn DivotLnM c G i n n i s St Violet Way Erne s t o D r Shelia Ln Krahn Ln W o o d lands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln F ir e w e e d D r SvcRd Conifer LnChipmunk Ln Fairway Dr RidgeR d ValleyRimRdMoon ridge Dr MorganDr RawhideLo o p Floyde St MatherRd Rio Vista Bl vd N S a ms o n T rl NMissionStMission StLick Creek Rd SpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdStE L a keStBoydstunStS 3rd StWarrenWagonRdE Deinhard Ln W Lake S t Elo RdS Mission StS Samson TrlW Dein h a r d L n ÉÈ55 Payette Lake 1,1801,8203,3504,380 7,160 2,6602,000 3,530 8902,0502,220 3,300 6,1901,5106,2804,5301 , 3 5 0 2,1805,7004,010 2,3403,720 McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure B2 Weekday Peak Season Daily Traffic Volumes McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Daily Volumes_WP.mxd - jmarkosian - 4:03 PM 1/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, ITD, Valley County, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Weekday Daily Traffic Th_PK 20 - 1,000 1,001 - 3,000 3,001 - 6,000 6,001 - 9,000 9,001 - 12,000 Water Parks City Limits Mo`sWay Valley View Ln McCall Ave1st StCarico RdReedy Ln Jacob St MeadowsRd PilgrimCoveRdStibnite St SmittyAveRowlandStMajesticViewDrHayes St PottsDrEvergre e n D rIdaho St Ch a d D r BradyDrKnights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdLouisa AveKaren St Bitterroot Dr ClubRd Bi rdieDrVeritaRdCoy Rd W Forest St HelmichStS tocktonDrAlpine StColorado St F ir S t Cece Way Koski Dr WhitetailDr E Park St F ox Ridg e LnEagleDrBo y d s t unLnHewitt St EllisRdCedarLn DivotLnM c G i n n i s St Violet Way Erne s t o D r Shelia Ln Krahn Ln W o o d lands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln F ir e w e e d D r SvcRd Conifer LnChipmunk Ln Fairway D r RidgeR d ValleyRimRdMoon ridge Dr MorganDr RawhideLo o p Floyde St MatherRd Rio Vista Bl vd N S a ms o n T rl NMissionStMission StL i c k C r e e k R d SpringMountainBlvdDavisAveN3rdStE Lake St BoydstunStS 3rd StWarrenWagonRdE Deinhard Ln W Lake S t Elo RdS Mission StS Samson TrlW Dein h a r d L n ÉÈ55 Payette Lake 2,4101,8201,6001,610 1,020 8502,6803,680401,790 1,600 5,3302,030510 9 5 0 4,270 3801,7303,040 McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure B3 Friday Off-Peak Season Daily Traffic Volumes McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Daily Volumes_FOP.mxd - jmarkosian - 4:04 PM 1/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, ITD, Valley County, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Friday Daily Traffic 20 - 1,000 1,001 - 3,000 3,001 - 6,000 6,001 - 9,000 9,001 - 12,000 Water Parks City Limits Mo`sWay Valley View Ln McCall Ave1st StCarico RdReedy Ln Jacob St MeadowsRd PilgrimCoveRdStibnite St SmittyAveRowlandStMajesticViewDrRoosevelt AveHayes St Evergre e n D rIdaho St Ch a d D r BradyDrKnights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdLouisa AveKaren St Bitterroot Dr ClubRd Bi rdieDrVeritaRdCoy Rd W Forest St HelmichStS tocktonDrAlpine StColorado St F ir S t Cece Way Koski Dr WhitetailDr F ox Ridg e LnEagleDrBo y d s t unLnHewitt St EllisRdCedarLn DivotLnM c G i n n i s St Violet Way Erne s t o D r Shelia Ln Krahn Ln W o o d lands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln F ir e w e e d D r SvcRd Conifer LnChipmunk Ln Fairway Dr RidgeR d ValleyRimRdMoon ridge Dr MorganDr RawhideLo o p Floyde St MatherRd Rio Vista Bl vd N S a ms o n T rl NMissionStMission StLick Creek Rd SpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdStE L a keStBoydstunStS 3rd StWarrenWagonRdE Deinhard Ln W Lake S t Elo RdS Mission StS Samson TrlW Dein h a r d L n ÉÈ55 Payette Lake 1,2501,9503,5905,120 7,680 2,9001,840 4,030 4802,0102,620 3,840 6,7301,7806,6704,9901 , 4 0 0 2,2306,3204,110 2,3704,110 McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure B4 Friday Peak Season Daily Traffic Volumes McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Daily Volumes_FP.mxd - jmarkosian - 4:05 PM 1/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, ITD, Valley County, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Friday Daily Traffic 20 - 1000 1000 - 3000 3000 - 6000 6000 - 9000 9000 - 12000 Water Parks City Limits Mo`sWay Valley View Ln McCall Ave1st StCarico RdReedy Ln Jacob St MeadowsRd PilgrimCoveRdStibnite St SmittyAveRowlandStMajesticViewDrHayes St PottsDrEvergre e n D rIdaho St Ch a d D r BradyDrKnights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdLouisa AveKaren St Bitterroot Dr ClubRd Bi rdieDrVeritaRdCoy Rd W Forest St HelmichStS tocktonDrAlpine StColorado St F ir S t Cece Way Koski Dr WhitetailDr E Park St F ox Ridg e LnEagleDrBo y d s t unLnHewitt St EllisRdCedarLn DivotLnM c G i n n i s St Violet Way Erne s t o D r Shelia Ln Krahn Ln W o o d lands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln F ir e w e e d D r SvcRd Conifer LnChipmunk Ln Fairway D r RidgeR d ValleyRimRdMoon ridge Dr MorganDr RawhideLo o p Floyde St MatherRd Rio Vista Bl vd N S a ms o n T rl NMissionStMission StL i c k C r e e k R d SpringMountainBlvdDavisAveN3rdStE Lake St BoydstunStS 3rd StWarrenWagonRdE Deinhard Ln W Lake S t Elo RdS Mission StS Samson TrlW Dein h a r d L n ÉÈ55 Payette Lake 1,5701,6201,3201,290 590 9401,6903,880201,770 1,580 3,3001,960510 7 7 0 2,750 3601,1901,970 McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure B5 Saturday Off-Peak Season Daily Traffic Volumes McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Daily Volumes_SaOP.mxd - jmarkosian - 4:06 PM 1/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, ITD, Valley County, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Saturday Daily Traffic 20 - 1000 1000 - 3000 3000 - 6000 6000 - 9000 9000 - 12000 Water Parks City Limits Mo`sWay Valley View Ln McCall Ave1st StCarico RdReedy Ln Jacob St MeadowsRd PilgrimCoveRdStibnite St SmittyAveRowlandStMajesticViewDrRoosevelt AveHayes St Evergre e n D rIdaho St Ch a d D r BradyDrKnights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdLouisa AveKaren St Bitterroot Dr ClubRd Bi rdieDrVeritaRdCoy Rd W Forest St HelmichStS tocktonDrAlpine StColorado St F ir S t Cece Way Koski Dr WhitetailDr F ox Ridg e LnEagleDrBo y d s t unLnHewitt St EllisRdCedarLn DivotLnM c G i n n i s St Violet Way Erne s t o D r Shelia Ln Krahn Ln W o o d lands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln F ir e w e e d D r SvcRd Conifer LnChipmunk Ln Fairway Dr RidgeR d ValleyRimRdMoon ridge Dr MorganDr RawhideLo o p Floyde St MatherRd Rio Vista Bl vd N S a ms o n T rl NMissionStMission StLick Creek Rd SpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdStE L a keStBoydstunStS 3rd StWarrenWagonRdE Deinhard Ln W Lake S t Elo RdS Mission StS Samson TrlW Dein h a r d L n ÉÈ55 Payette Lake 1,0901,7503,1405,620 6,650 2,4901,630 3,000 3302,4002,540 4,100 6,8001,3604,7804,9901 , 1 7 0 1,6904,8303,310 2,0803,130 McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 ¯ Figure B6 Saturday Peak Season Daily Traffic Volumes McCall, Idaho H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Daily Volumes_SaP.mxd - jmarkosian - 4:06 PM 1/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, ITD, Valley County, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Saturday Daily Traffic 20 - 1000 1000 - 3000 3000 - 6000 6000 - 9000 9000 - 12000 Water Parks City Limits Attachment C Turning Movement Count Worksheets Attachment D Signal Warrant Analysis Worksheets KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Analysis Traffic Volumes 1K1101 South Capitol Blvd, Suite 301 Hour Major Street Boise, Idaho 83702 Begin End NB (208)338-26834:30 PM5:30 PM279 Fax:(208)338-2685 2nd Highest Hour 267 Minor Street SB EB WB 289 96 84 277 92 80 3rd Highest Hour 255 264 88 77 Project#: 19638 4th Highest Hour 243 252 84 73 Project Name: McCall Transportation Master Plan 5th Highest Hour 231 239 80 70 Analyst: 1GM 6th Highest Hour 219 227 75 66 Date: 12/8/2016 7th Highest Hour 207 215 71 62 File: „.�,a;fi,e\,96Pg N1 .owmPe ensi.ePlan, ,Peiu�gPaiwa.aaao96� iwr_Parke3b Peak Season Peak HourxisiwarO- P8th Highest Hour 195 202 67 59 e.k�w 9th Highest Hour 179 185 61 54 Intersection: N 3rd Street (SH-55)/Park Street 10th Highest Hour 153 159 53 46 Scenario: 2016 Off -Peak Season p.m. Peak Hour Volumes llth Highest Hour 126 130 43 38 12th Highest Hour 120 124 41 36 13th Highest Hour 109 113 37 33 14th Highest Hour 100 104 35 30 Warrant Summary 15th Highest Hour 100 104 35 30 Warrant Name Analyzed? Met? 16th Highest Hour 98 101 34 29 #1 Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume Yes No 17th Highest Hour 56 58 19 17 #2 Four -Hour Vehicular volume Yes No 18th Highest Hour 31 32 11 9 #3 Peak Hour Yes No 19th Highest Hour 28 29 10 8 #4 Pedestrian Volume No 20th Highest Hour 11 12 4 3 #5 School Crossing No - 21st Highest Hour 8 9 3 3 #6 Coordinated Signal System No - 22nd Highest Hour 8 9 3 3 #7 Crash Experience No - 23rd Highest Hour 6 6 2 2 #8 Roadway Network No - 24th Highest Hour 6 6 2 2 Input Parameters Volume Adjustment Factor = North -South Approach = East-West Approach = Major Street Thru Lanes = Minor Street Thru Lanes = Speed > 40 mph? Population < 10,000? Warrant Factor Peak Hour or Daily Count? Major Street: 4th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour Major Street: 8th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour Minor Street: 4th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour Minor Street: 8th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour 1.0 Major Minor 1 1 No Yes 70% Peak Hour 87% 70% 87% 70% Warrant #1- Eight Hour Warrant Major Street Minor Street Hours That Condition for Signal Warrant Factor Condition Warrant Factor Requirement Requirement Condition Is Met Met? Met? 100% 80% 70% A 500 150 0 No B 750 75 0 No A 400 120 0 No B 600 60 0 No A 350 105 0 No B 525 53 2 No No No No Higher Minor Street 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Warrant #2 - Four -Hour 100% Warrant Factor - 2 Major/2 Minor �2 Major / 1 Minor - 1 Major / 2 Minor - 1 Major / 1 Minor x Traffic Volumes 3rx Ag 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Combined Major Street 1600 _m x Warrant #3 - Peak Hour 100% Warrant Factor 500 1000 Combined Major Street - 2 Major / 2 Minor �2 Major / 1 Minor - 1 Major / 2 Minor - 1 Major / 1 Minor x Traffic Volumes 1500 2000 Traffic Volumes Calculations Hour Major Street Minor Street Combined Higher Minor Is Threshold Begin End NB SB ES WB Major Street Street Threshold Met? 4:30 PM 5:30 PM 279 289 96 84 568 96 187 No 2nd Highest Hour 267 277 92 80 544 92 197 No 3rd Highest Hour 255 264 88 77 519 88 208 No 4th Highest Hour 243 252 84 73 495 84 219 No 5th Highest Hour 231 239 80 70 471 80 230 No 6th Highest Hour 219 227 75 66 446 75 242 No 7th Highest Hour 207 215 71 62 422 71 254 No 8th Highest Hour 195 202 67 59 398 67 266 No 9th Highest Hour 179 185 61 54 364 61 284 No 10th Highest Hour 153 159 53 46 312 53 313 No llth Highest Hour 126 130 43 38 256 43 347 No 12th Highest Hour 120 124 41 36 244 41 354 No 13th Highest Hour 109 113 37 33 222 37 369 No 14th Highest Hour 100 104 35 30 204 35 380 No 15th Highest Hour 100 104 35 30 204 35 380 No 16th Highest Hour 98 101 34 29 199 34 384 No 17th Highest Hour 56 58 19 17 114 19 443 No 18th Highest Hour 31 32 11 9 62 11 481 No 19th Highest Hour 28 29 10 8 57 10 485 No 20th Highest Hour 11 12 4 3 23 4 511 No 21st Highest Hour 8 9 3 3 17 3 516 No 22nd Highest Hour 8 9 3 3 17 3 516 No 23rd Highest Hour 6 6 2 2 11 2 520 No 24th Highest Hour 6 6 2 2 11 2 520 No Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Major Street) 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Minor Street) 1 Warrant Factor 70% Row Index for VLOOKUP 5 Lookup Table Index Major Street Minor Street Break Point alt 1 1 1460 0.00021 0.74072 734.125 100 2 2 or more 1 1760 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 100 3 2 or more 2 or more 1690 0.00023 0.93419 1081.658 150 4 1 2 or more 1450 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 150 5 1 1 1040 0.00035 0.80083 529.197 75 6 2 or more 1 1160 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 75 7 2 or more 2 or more 1130 0.00033 0.95887 762.050 100 8 1 2 or more 1020 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 100 Is Warrant #3 met based on the applicable warrant factor? Condition A Criteria No Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle On Minor Approach (sec) Number Of Lanes On Minor Street Approach Vehicle -Hours Of Stopped Delay On Minor Approach 0.30 0.31 No No EB WB 11.3 1 13.2 1 Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour Total Entering Volume On All Approaches During Same Hour Number of Approaches to Intersection 96 84 No No 748 4 No Is Warrant #3 met based on Condition A criteria? No 70% Factor 100% Factor 0 War #3 - Peak HR KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Analysis Traffic Volumes 1K1101 South Capitol Blvd, Suite 301 Hour Major Street Boise, Idaho 83702 Begin End NB (208)338-26834:30 PM5:30 PM462 Fax:(208)338-2685 2nd Highest Hour 442 Minor Street SB EB WB 349 101 104 334 97 100 3rd Highest Hour 422 319 92 95 Project it: 19638 4th Highest Hour 403 304 88 91 Project Name: McCall Transportation Master Plan 5th Highest Hour 383 289 84 86 Analyst: 1GM 6th Highest Hour 363 274 79 82 Date: 12/8/2016 7th Highest Hour 343 259 75 77 File: X.spa,010.�• N1.iiwmp,e.$je.P„me,�eiu�aaai WaraMV196�sieaai Waraa,Anal„„a.apark.es]ware3. Peak 8th Highest Hour 323 244 71 73 HP 9th Highest Hour 296 223 65 67 Intersection: N 3rd Street (SH-55)/Park Street 10th Highest Hour 254 192 56 57 Scenario: 2016 Peak Season p.m. Peak Hour Volumes llth Highest Hour 208 157 45 47 12th Highest Hour 199 150 43 45 13th Highest Hour 180 136 39 41 14th Highest Hour 166 126 36 37 Warrant Summary 15th Highest Hour 166 126 36 37 Warrant Name Analyzed? Met? 16th Highest Hour 162 122 35 36 #1 Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume Yes Yes 17th Highest Hour 92 70 20 21 #2 Four -Hour Vehicular volume Yes Yes 18th Highest Hour 51 38 11 11 #3 Peak Hour Yes No 19th Highest Hour 46 35 10 10 #4 Pedestrian Volume No 20th Highest Hour 18 14 4 4 #5 School Crossing No - 21st Highest Hour 14 10 3 3 #6 Coordinated Signal System No - 22nd Highest Hour 14 10 3 3 #7 Crash Experience No - 23rd Highest Hour 9 7 2 2 #8 Roadway Network No - 24th Highest Hour 9 7 2 2 Input Parameters Volume Adjustment Factor = North -South Approach = East-West Approach = Major Street Thru Lanes = Minor Street Thru Lanes = Speed > 40 mph? Population < 10,000? Warrant Factor Peak Hour or Daily Count? Major Street: 4th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour Major Street: 8th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour Minor Street: 4th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour Minor Street: 8th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour 1.0 Major Minor 1 1 No Yes 70% Peak Hour 87% 70% 87% 70% Warrant #1- Eight Hour Warrant Major Street Minor Street Hours That Condition for Signal Warrant Factor Condition Warrant Factor Requirement Requirement Condition Is Met Met? Met? 100% 80% 70% A 500 150 0 No B 750 75 2 No A 400 120 0 No B 600 60 7 No A 350 105 0 No B 525 53 8 Yes No No Yes Higher Minor Street 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Warrant #2 - Four -Hour 100% Warrant Factor - 2 Major/2 Minor �2 Major / 1 Minor - 1 Major / 2 Minor - 1 Major / 1 Minor x Traffic Volumes xog sr 9K 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Combined Major Street 1600 _m x Warrant #3 - Peak Hour 100% Warrant Factor 500 1000 Combined Major Street - 2 Major / 2 Minor �2 Major / 1 Minor - 1 Major / 2 Minor - 1 Major / 1 Minor x Traffic Volumes 1500 2000 Traffic Volumes Calculations Hour Major Street Minor Street Combined Higher Minor Is Threshold Begin End NB SB ES WB Major Street Street Threshold Met? 4:30 PM 5:30 PM 462 349 101 104 811 104 110 No 2nd Highest Hour 442 334 97 100 776 100 118 No 3rd Highest Hour 422 319 92 95 741 95 128 No 4th Highest Hour 403 304 88 91 707 91 138 No 5th Highest Hour 383 289 84 86 672 86 149 No 6th Highest Hour 363 274 79 82 637 82 161 No 7th Highest Hour 343 259 75 77 602 77 174 No 8th Highest Hour 323 244 71 73 568 73 187 No 9th Highest Hour 296 223 65 67 519 67 208 No loth Highest Hour 254 192 56 57 446 57 242 No llth Highest Hour 208 157 45 47 365 47 284 No 12th Highest Hour 199 150 43 45 349 45 292 No 13th Highest Hour 180 136 39 41 316 41 311 No 14th Highest Hour 166 126 36 37 292 37 325 No 151-11 Highest Hour 166 126 36 37 292 37 325 No 16th Highest Hour 162 122 35 36 284 36 330 No 17th Highest Hour 92 70 20 21 162 21 409 No 18th Highest Hour 51 38 11 11 89 11 461 No 19th Highest Hour 46 35 10 10 81 10 467 No 20th Highest Hour 18 14 4 4 32 4 504 No 21st Highest Hour 14 10 3 3 24 3 510 No 22nd Highest Hour 14 10 3 3 24 3 510 No 23rd Highest Hour 9 7 2 2 16 2 516 No 24th Highest Hour 9 7 2 2 16 2 516 No Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Major Street) 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Minor Street) 1 Warrant Factor 70% Row Index for VLOOKUP 5 Lookup Table Index Major Street Minor Street Break Point alt 1 1 1460 0.00021 0.74072 734.125 100 2 2 or more 1 1760 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 100 3 2 or more 2 or more 1690 0.00023 0.93419 1081.658 150 4 1 2 or more 1450 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 150 5 1 1 1040 0.00035 0.80083 529.197 75 6 2 or more 1 1160 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 75 7 2 or more 2 or more 1130 0.00033 0.95887 762.050 100 8 1 2 or more 1020 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 100 Is Warrant #3 met based on the applicable warrant factor? Condition A Criteria No Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle On Minor Approach (sec) Number Of Lanes On Minor Street Approach Vehicle -Hours Of Stopped Delay On Minor Approach 0.47 0.64 No No EB WB 16.9 1 22.2 1 Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour Total Entering Volume On All Approaches During Same Hour Number of Approaches to Intersection 101 Yes 1016 4 Yes 104 Yes Is Warrant #3 met based on Condition A criteria? No 70% Factor 100% Factor 0 War #3 - Peak HR KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Analysis Traffic Volumes 1K1101 South Capitol Blvd, Suite 301 Hour Major Street Boise, Idaho 83702 Begin End NB (208)338-26834:30 PM5:30 PM279 Fax:(208)338-2685 2nd Highest Hour 267 Minor Street SB EB WB 289 96 84 277 92 80 3rd Highest Hour 255 264 88 77 Project#: 19638 4th Highest Hour 243 252 84 73 Project Name: McCall Transportation Master Plan 5th Highest Hour 231 239 80 70 Analyst: 1GM 6th Highest Hour 219 227 75 66 Date: 12/8/2016 7th Highest Hour 207 215 71 62 File: „.�,a;fi,e\,96Pg • MKaowmPe ensi.ePlan, ,Peiu�gPaiwa.aaao96� iwr_Parke3b Peak Season Peak Hou.aisiwarO- P8th Highest Hour 195 202 67 59 eak�w 9th Highest Hour 179 185 61 54 Intersection: N 3rd Street (SH-55)/Park Street 10th Highest Hour 153 159 53 46 Scenario: 2016 Off -Peak Season p.m. Peak Hour Volumes llth Highest Hour 126 130 43 38 12th Highest Hour 120 124 41 36 13th Highest Hour 109 113 37 33 14th Highest Hour 100 104 35 30 Warrant Summary 15th Highest Hour 100 104 35 30 Warrant Name Analyzed? Met? 16th Highest Hour 98 101 34 29 #1 Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume Yes No 17th Highest Hour 56 58 19 17 #2 Four -Hour Vehicular volume Yes No 18th Highest Hour 31 32 11 9 #3 Peak Hour Yes No 19th Highest Hour 28 29 10 8 #4 Pedestrian Volume No 20th Highest Hour 11 12 4 3 #5 School Crossing No - 21st Highest Hour 8 9 3 3 #6 Coordinated Signal System No - 22nd Highest Hour 8 9 3 3 #7 Crash Experience No - 23rd Highest Hour 6 6 2 2 #8 Roadway Network No - 24th Highest Hour 6 6 2 2 Input Parameters Volume Adjustment Factor = North -South Approach = East-West Approach = Major Street Thru Lanes = Minor Street Thru Lanes = Speed > 40 mph? Population < 10,000? Warrant Factor Peak Hour or Daily Count? Major Street: 4th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour Major Street: 8th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour Minor Street: 4th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour Minor Street: 8th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour 1.0 Major Minor 1 1 No Yes 70% Peak Hour 87% 70% 87% 70% Warrant #1- Eight Hour Warrant Major Street Minor Street Hours That Condition for Signal Warrant Factor Condition Warrant Factor Requirement Requirement Condition Is Met Met? Met? 100% 80% 70% A 500 150 0 No B 750 75 0 No A 400 120 0 No B 600 60 0 No A 350 105 0 No B 525 53 2 No No No No Higher Minor Street 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Warrant #2 - Four -Hour 100% Warrant Factor - 2 Major/2 Minor �2 Major / 1 Minor - 1 Major / 2 Minor - 1 Major / 1 Minor x Traffic Volumes 3rx Ag 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Combined Major Street 1600 _m x Warrant #3 - Peak Hour 100% Warrant Factor 500 1000 Combined Major Street - 2 Major / 2 Minor �2 Major / 1 Minor - 1 Major / 2 Minor - 1 Major / 1 Minor x Traffic Volumes 1500 2000 Traffic Volumes Calculations Hour Major Street Minor Street Combined Higher Minor Is Threshold Begin End NB SB ES WB Major Street Street Threshold Met? 4:30 PM 5:30 PM 279 289 96 84 568 96 187 No 2nd Highest Hour 267 277 92 80 544 92 197 No 3rd Highest Hour 255 264 88 77 519 88 208 No 4th Highest Hour 243 252 84 73 495 84 219 No 5th Highest Hour 231 239 80 70 471 80 230 No 6th Highest Hour 219 227 75 66 446 75 242 No 7th Highest Hour 207 215 71 62 422 71 254 No 8th Highest Hour 195 202 67 59 398 67 266 No 9th Highest Hour 179 185 61 54 364 61 284 No 10th Highest Hour 153 159 53 46 312 53 313 No llth Highest Hour 126 130 43 38 256 43 347 No 12th Highest Hour 120 124 41 36 244 41 354 No 13th Highest Hour 109 113 37 33 222 37 369 No 14th Highest Hour 100 104 35 30 204 35 380 No 15th Highest Hour 100 104 35 30 204 35 380 No 16th Highest Hour 98 101 34 29 199 34 384 No 17th Highest Hour 56 58 19 17 114 19 443 No 18th Highest Hour 31 32 11 9 62 11 481 No 19th Highest Hour 28 29 10 8 57 10 485 No 20th Highest Hour 11 12 4 3 23 4 511 No 21st Highest Hour 8 9 3 3 17 3 516 No 22nd Highest Hour 8 9 3 3 17 3 516 No 23rd Highest Hour 6 6 2 2 11 2 520 No 24th Highest Hour 6 6 2 2 11 2 520 No Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Major Street) 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Minor Street) 1 Warrant Factor 70% Row Index for VLOOKUP 5 Lookup Table Index Major Street Minor Street Break Point alt 1 1 1460 0.00021 0.74072 734.125 100 2 2 or more 1 1760 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 100 3 2 or more 2 or more 1690 0.00023 0.93419 1081.658 150 4 1 2 or more 1450 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 150 5 1 1 1040 0.00035 0.80083 529.197 75 6 2 or more 1 1160 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 75 7 2 or more 2 or more 1130 0.00033 0.95887 762.050 100 8 1 2 or more 1020 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 100 Is Warrant #3 met based on the applicable warrant factor? Condition A Criteria No Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle On Minor Approach (sec) Number Of Lanes On Minor Street Approach Vehicle -Hours Of Stopped Delay On Minor Approach 0.30 0.31 No No EB WB 11.3 1 13.2 1 Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour Total Entering Volume On All Approaches During Same Hour Number of Approaches to Intersection 96 84 No No 748 4 No Is Warrant #3 met based on Condition A criteria? No 70% Factor 100% Factor 0 War #3 - Peak HR KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Analysis Traffic Volumes 1K1101 South Capitol Blvd, Suite 301 Hour Major Street Boise, Idaho 83702 Begin End NB (208)338-26834:00 PM5:00 PM271 Fax:(208)338-2685 2nd Highest Hour 259 Minor Street SB EB WB 258 71 102 247 68 98 3rd Highest Hour 248 236 65 93 Project#: 19638 4th Highest Hour 236 225 62 89 Project Name: McCall Transportation Master Plan 5th Highest Hour 225 214 59 85 Analyst: 1GM 6th Highest Hour 213 203 56 80 Date: 12/8/2016 7th Highest Hour 201 192 53 76 File: x:ma,mea96Pa •MKao Comprehensive Pian,exeiu�gnai wa.aaao96� swaauaaa®3b Peak Season Peak Hour .xisiwa,un• 8th Highest Hour 190 181 50 71 Peakxw 9th Highest Hour 173 165 45 65 Intersection: N 3rd Street (SH-55)/Railroad Avenue 10th Highest Hour 149 142 39 56 Scenario: 2016 Off -Peak Season p.m. Peak Hour Volumes llth Highest Hour 122 116 32 46 12th Highest Hour 117 111 31 44 13th Highest Hour 106 101 28 40 14th Highest Hour 98 93 26 37 Warrant Summary 15th Highest Hour 98 93 26 37 Warrant Name Analyzed? Met? 16th Highest Hour 95 90 25 36 #1 Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume Yes No 17th Highest Hour 54 52 14 20 #2 Four -Hour Vehicular volume Yes No 18th Highest Hour 30 28 8 11 #3 Peak Hour Yes No 19th Highest Hour 27 26 7 10 #4 Pedestrian Volume No 20th Highest Hour 11 10 3 4 #5 School Crossing No - 21st Highest Hour 8 8 2 3 #6 Coordinated Signal System No - 22nd Highest Hour 8 8 2 3 #7 Crash Experience No - 23rd Highest Hour 5 5 1 2 #8 Roadway Network No - 24th Highest Hour 5 5 1 2 Input Parameters Volume Adjustment Factor = North -South Approach = East-West Approach = Major Street Thru Lanes = Minor Street Thru Lanes = Speed > 40 mph? Population < 10,000? Warrant Factor Peak Hour or Daily Count? Major Street: 4th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour Major Street: 8th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour Minor Street: 4th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour Minor Street: 8th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour 1.0 Major Minor 1 1 No Yes 70% Peak Hour 87% 70% 87% 70% Warrant #1- Eight Hour Warrant Major Street Minor Street Hours That Condition for Signal Warrant Condition Warrant Factor Factor Requirement Requirement Condition Is Met Met? Met? 100% 80% 70% A 500 150 0 No B 750 75 0 No A 400 120 0 No B 600 60 0 No A 350 105 0 No B 525 53 1 No No No No Higher Minor Street 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Warrant #2 - Four -Hour 100% Warrant Factor - 2 Major/2 Minor �2 Major / 1 Minor - 1 Major / 2 Minor - 1 Major / 1 Minor x Traffic Volumes IX* 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Combined Major Street 1600 _m x Warrant #3 - Peak Hour 100% Warrant Factor 500 1000 Combined Major Street - 2 Major / 2 Minor �2 Major / 1 Minor - 1 Major / 2 Minor - 1 Major / 1 Minor x Traffic Volumes 1500 2000 Traffic Volumes Calculations Hour Major Street Minor Street Combined Higher Minor Is Threshold Begin End NB SB ES WB Major Street Street Threshold Met? 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 271 258 71 102 529 102 204 No 2nd Highest Hour 259 247 68 98 506 98 213 No 3rd Highest Hour 248 236 65 93 484 93 224 No 4th Highest Hour 236 225 62 89 461 89 234 No 5th Highest Hour 225 214 59 85 438 85 245 No 6th Highest Hour 213 203 56 80 416 80 257 No 7th Highest Hour 201 192 53 76 393 76 269 No 8th Highest Hour 190 181 50 71 370 71 281 No 9th Highest Hour 173 165 45 65 339 65 298 No 10th Highest Hour 149 142 39 56 291 56 326 No llth Highest Hour 122 116 32 46 238 46 358 No 12th Highest Hour 117 111 31 44 227 44 365 No 13th Highest Hour 106 101 28 40 206 40 379 No 14th Highest Hour 98 93 26 37 190 37 389 No 15th Highest Hour 98 93 26 37 190 37 389 No 16th Highest Hour 95 90 25 36 185 36 393 No 17th Highest Hour 54 52 14 20 106 20 448 No 18th Highest Hour 30 28 8 11 58 11 484 No 19th Highest Hour 27 26 7 10 53 10 488 No 20th Highest Hour 11 10 3 4 21 4 512 No 21st Highest Hour 8 8 2 3 16 3 517 No 22nd Highest Hour 8 8 2 3 16 3 517 No 23rd Highest Hour 5 5 1 2 11 2 521 No 24th Highest Hour 5 5 2 11 2 521 No Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Major Street) 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Minor Street) 1 Warrant Factor 70% Row Index for VLOOKUP 5 Lookup Table Index Major Street Minor Street Break Point alt 1 1 1460 0.00021 0.74072 734.125 100 2 2 or more 1 1760 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 100 3 2 or more 2 or more 1690 0.00023 0.93419 1081.658 150 4 1 2 or more 1450 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 150 5 1 1 1040 0.00035 0.80083 529.197 75 6 2 or more 1 1160 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 75 7 2 or more 2 or more 1130 0.00033 0.95887 762.050 100 8 1 2 or more 1020 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 100 Is Warrant #3 met based on the applicable warrant factor? Condition A Criteria No EB WB Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle On Minor Approach (sec) 10.7 13.2 Number Of Lanes On Minor Street Approach 1 1 Vehicle -Hours Of Stopped Delay On Minor Approach 0.21 0.37 No No Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 71 102 No Yes Total Entering Volume On All Approaches During Same Hour 702 Number of Approaches to Intersection 4 No Is Warrant #3 met based on Condition A criteria? No 70% Factor 100% Factor 0 War #3 - Peak HR KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Analysis Traffic Volumes 1K1101 South Capitol Blvd, Suite 301 Hour Major Street Boise, Idaho 83702 Begin End NB (208)338-26834:00 PM5:00 PM423 Fax:(208)338-2685 2nd Highest Hour 405 Minor Street SB EB WB 398 208 142 381 199 136 3rd Highest Hour 387 364 190 130 Project#: 19638 4th Highest Hour 369 347 181 124 Project Name: McCall Transportation Master Plan 5th Highest Hour 350 330 172 118 Analyst: 1GM 6th Highest Hour 332 313 163 112 Date: 12/8/2016 7th Highest Hour 314 296 155 105 File: „:ma*la,.Pa • McCaowmPe ensi.ePiame,PeiuiaPaiwa.aaua196� siePalWaraa,Anal,a„3,1 a,�1, .I,�w,,.3- 8th Highest Hour 296 279 146 99 Peak HP 9th Highest Hour 271 255 133 91 Intersection: N 3rd Street (SH-55)/Railroad Avenue 10th Highest Hour 233 219 114 78 Scenario: 2016 Peak Season p.m. Peak Hour Volumes llth Highest Hour 190 179 94 64 12th Highest Hour 182 171 89 61 13th Highest Hour 165 155 81 55 14th Highest Hour 152 143 75 51 Warrant Summary 15th Highest Hour 152 143 75 51 Warrant Name Analyzed? Met? 16th Highest Hour 148 139 73 50 #1 Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume Yes Yes 17th Highest Hour 85 80 42 28 #2 Four -Hour Vehicular volume Yes Yes 18th Highest Hour 47 44 23 16 #3 Peak Hour Yes Yes* 19th Highest Hour 42 40 21 14 #4 Pedestrian Volume No 20th Highest Hour 17 16 8 6 #5 School Crossing No - 21st Highest Hour 13 12 6 4 #6 Coordinated Signal System No 22nd Highest Hour 13 12 6 4 #7 Crash Experience No - 23rd Highest Hour 8 8 4 3 #8 Roadway Network No - 24th Highest Hour 8 8 4 3 Input Parameters Volume Adjustment Factor = North -South Approach = East-West Approach = Major Street Thru Lanes = Minor Street Thru Lanes = Speed > 40 mph? Population < 10,000? Warrant Factor Peak Hour or Daily Count? Major Street: 4th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour Major Street: 8th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour Minor Street: 4th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour Minor Street: 8th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour 1.0 Major Minor 1 1 No Yes 70% Peak Hour 87% 70% 87% 70% Warrant #1- Eight Hour Warrant Major Street Minor Street Hours That Condition for Signal Warrant Factor Condition Warrant Factor Requirement Requirement Condition Is Met Met? Met? 100% 80% 70% A 500 150 7 No B 750 75 3 No A 400 120 9 Yes B 600 60 7 No A 350 105 10 Yes B 525 53 9 Yes No Yes Yes Higher Minor Street 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Warrant #2 - Four -Hour 100% Warrant Factor - 2 Major/2 Minor �2 Major / 1 Minor - 1 Major / 2 Minor - 1 Major / 1 Minor x Traffic Volumes X 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Combined Major Street 1600 `o c_ _m x 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 Warrant #3 - Peak Hour 100% Warrant Factor 500 1000 Combined Major Street - 2 Major / 2 Minor �2 Major / 1 Minor - 1 Major / 2 Minor - 1 Major / 1 Minor x Traffic Volumes 1500 2000 Traffic Volumes Calculations Hour Major Street Minor Street Combined Higher Minor Is Threshold Begin End NB SB ES WB Major Street Street Threshold Met? 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 423 398 208 142 821 208 108 Yes 2nd Highest Hour 405 381 199 136 786 199 116 Yes 3rd Highest Hour 387 364 190 130 751 190 125 Yes 4th Highest Hour 369 347 181 124 715 181 135 Yes 5th Highest Hour 350 330 172 118 680 172 146 Yes 6th Highest Hour 332 313 163 112 645 163 158 Yes 7th Highest Hour 314 296 155 105 610 155 171 No 8th Highest Hour 296 279 146 99 575 146 185 No 9th Highest Hour 271 255 133 91 525 133 205 No 10th Highest Hour 233 219 114 78 452 114 239 No llth Highest Hour 190 179 94 64 369 94 281 No 12th Highest Hour 182 171 89 61 353 89 290 No 13th Highest Hour 165 155 81 55 320 81 309 No 14th Highest Hour 152 143 75 51 296 75 323 No 15th Highest Hour 152 143 75 51 296 75 323 No 16th Highest Hour 148 139 73 50 287 73 328 No 17th Highest Hour 85 80 42 28 164 42 407 No 18th Highest Hour 47 44 23 16 90 23 460 No 19th Highest Hour 42 40 21 14 82 21 466 No 20th Highest Hour 17 16 8 6 33 8 503 No 21st Highest Hour 13 12 6 4 25 6 510 No 22nd Highest Hour 13 12 6 4 25 6 510 No 23rd Highest Hour 8 8 4 3 16 4 516 No 24th Highest Hour 8 8 4 16 4 516 No Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Major Street) 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Minor Street) 1 Warrant Factor 70% Row Index for VLOOKUP 5 Lookup Table Index Major Street Minor Street Break Point alt 1 1 1460 0.00021 0.74072 734.125 100 2 2 or more 1 1760 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 100 3 2 or more 2 or more 1690 0.00023 0.93419 1081.658 150 4 1 2 or more 1450 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 150 5 1 1 1040 0.00035 0.80083 529.197 75 6 2 or more 1 1160 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 75 7 2 or more 2 or more 1130 0.00033 0.95887 762.050 100 8 1 2 or more 1020 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 100 Is Warrant #3 met based on the applicable warrant factor? Condition A Criteria Yes Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle On Minor Approach (sec) Number Of Lanes On Minor Street Approach Vehicle -Hours Of Stopped Delay On Minor Approach 6.85 0.75 Yes No EB WB 118.6 19.1 1 1 Volume on Minor Street Approach During Some Hour Total Entering Volume On All Approaches During Same Hour Number of Approaches to Intersection 208 142 Yes Yes 1171 4 Yes Is Warrant #3 met based on Condition A criteria? Yes 70% Factor 100% Factor 6 War #3 - Peak HR KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Analysis Traffic Volumes K101South Capitol Blvd, Suite 301 Hour Major Street Boise, Idaho 83702 Begin End EB (208) 338-26834:00 PM5:00 PM386 Fax: (208) 338-2685 2nd Highest Hour 359 Minor Street WB NB SB 291 349 0 270 330 0 3rd Highest Hour 354 267 323 0 Project#: 19638 4th Highest Hour 338 255 332 0 Project Name: McCall Transportation Master Plan 5th Highest Hour 345 260 313 0 Analyst: 1GM 6th Highest Hour 335 253 319 0 Date: 2/10/2017 7th Highest Hour 349 263 206 0 File: „:m,ojm.u963a.MKauwm»,.hen..e»,m.xceiu�enaiw.,a�,�i.9630swAaaa3.aox.pe.kforoaFsoroSTEDxm:w., 8th Highest Hour 275 207 277 0 p3 PeI. 9th Highest Hour 247 186 223 0 Intersection: Boydstun Street/W Lake Street 10th Highest Hour 212 160 192 0 Scenario: 2040 Peak Future Volumes w BYPASS llth Highest Hour 174 131 157 0 12th Highest Hour 166 125 150 0 13th Highest Hour 151 113 136 0 14th Highest Hour 139 105 126 0 Warrant Summary 15th Highest Hour 139 105 126 0 Warrant Name Analyzed? Met? 16th Highest Hour 135 102 122 0 #1 Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume Yes Yes 17th Highest Hour 77 58 70 0 #2 Four -Hour Vehicular volume Yes Yes 18th Highest Hour 42 32 38 0 #3 Peak Hour Yes Yes* 19th Highest Hour 39 29 35 0 #4 Pedestrian Volume No 20th Highest Hour 15 12 14 0 #5 School Crossing No - 21st Highest Hour 12 9 10 0 #6 Coordinated Signal System No 22nd Highest Hour 12 9 10 0 #7 Crash Experience No - 23rd Highest Hour 8 6 7 0 #8 Roadway Network No - 24th Highest Hour 8 6 7 0 Input Parameters Volume Adjustment Factor = North -South Approach = East-West Approach = Major Street Thru Lanes = Minor Street Thru Lanes = Speed > 40 mph? Population < 10,000? Warrant Factor Peak Hour or Daily Count? Major Street: 4th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour Major Street: 8th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour Minor Street: 4th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour Minor Street: 8th-Highest Hour/ Peak Hour 1.0 Minor Major 1 1 No Yes 70% Peak Hour 87% 71% 95 % 79% Warrant #1- Eight Hour Warrant Major Street Minor Street Hours That Condition for Signal Warrant Condition Warrant Factor Factor Requirement Requirement Condition Is Met Met? Met? 100% 80% 70% A 500 150 7 No B 750 75 0 No A 400 120 9 Yes B 600 60 5 No A 350 105 10 Yes B 525 53 7 No No Yes Yes Higher Minor Street 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Warrant #2 - Four -Hour 100% Warrant Factor - 2 Major/2 Minor �2 Major / 1 Minor - 1 Major / 2 Minor - 1 Major / 1 Minor x Traffic Volumes W. W W X 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Combined Major Street 1600 `o 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Warrant #3 - Peak Hour 100% Warrant Factor - 2 Major / 2 Minor �2 Major / 1 Minor - 1 Major / 2 Minor - 1 Major / 1 Minor x Traffic Volumes _1u� �`-_ `� 0 500 1000 Combined Major Street 1500 2000 Traffic Volumes Calculations Hour Major Street Minor Street Combined Higher Minor Is Threshold Begin End EB WB NB SB Major Street Street Threshold Met? 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 386 291 349 0 677 349 147 Yes 2nd Highest Hour 359 270 330 0 629 330 164 Yes 3rd Highest Hour 354 267 323 0 620 323 167 Yes 4th Highest Hour 338 255 332 0 592 332 178 Yes 5th Highest Hour 345 260 313 0 605 313 173 Yes 6th Highest Hour 335 253 319 0 588 319 179 Yes 7th Highest Hour 349 263 206 0 611 206 170 Yes 8th Highest Hour 275 207 277 0 482 277 224 Yes 9th Highest Hour 247 186 223 0 433 223 248 No loth Highest Hour 212 160 192 372 192 280 No llth Highest Hour 174 131 157 305 157 318 No 12th Highest Hour 166 125 f50 291 150 326 No 13th Highest Hour 151 113 136 264 136 342 No 14th Highest Hour 139 105 126 244 126 355 No 15th Highest Hour 139 105 126 244 126 355 No 16th Highest Hour 135 102 122 237 122 359 No 17th Highest Hour 77 58 70 135 70 427 No 18th Highest Hour 42 32 38 74 38 472 No 19th Highest Hour 39 29 35 68 35 477 No 20th Highest Hour 15 12 14 27 14 508 No 21st Highest Hour 12 9 10 20 10 513 No 22nd Highest Hour 12 9 10 20 10 513 No 23rd Highest Hour 8 6 7 14 7 518 No 24th Highest Hour 8 6 7 14 7 518 No Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Major Street) 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Minor Street) 1 Warrant Factor 70% Row Index for VLOOKUP 5 Lookup Table Index Major Street Minor Street Break Point olt 1 1 1460 0.00021 0.74072 734.125 100 2 2 or more 1 1760 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 100 3 2 or more 2 or more 1690 0.00023 0.93419 1081.658 150 4 1 2 or more 1450 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 150 5 1 1 1040 0.00035 0.80083 529.197 75 6 2 or more 1 1160 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 75 7 2 or more 2 or more 1130 0.00033 0.95887 762.050 100 8 1 2 or more 1020 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 100 Is Warrant #3 met based on the applicable warrant factor? Condition A Criteria Yes Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle On Minor Approach (sec) Number Of Lanes On Minor Street Approach Vehicle -Hours Of Stopped Delay On Minor Approach 3.98 0.00 No No NB 58 41.1 1 0.0 1 Volume on Minor Street Approach During Some Hour 349 0 Yes No Total Entering Volume On All Approaches During Same Hour Number of Approaches to Intersection 1026 4 Yes Is Warrant #3 met based on Condition A criteria? No 70% Factor 100% Factor War #3 - Peak HR Attachment E Daily Parking Occupancies r re , r. n• i is r i McCall Transportation Master Plan IC 0% - 49% 50%-74% - 75% - 84% - 85% - 100% KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING/PLANNING January 2017 Wednesday Off -Peak Season 10:00 a.m. Parking Occupancy McCall, Idaho Coordinate System: NAD 1983 State Plane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall r re , r. n• McCall Transportation Master Plan IC 0% - 49% 50%-74% - 75% - 84% - 85% - 100% KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING/PLANNING January 2017 Wednesday Off -Peak Season 1:00 p.m. Parking Occupancy McCall, Idaho Coordinate System: NAD 1983 State Plane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall r re , r. n• McCall Transportation Master Plan IC 0% - 49% 50%-74% - 75% - 84% - 85% - 100% KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING/PLANNING January 2017 Wednesday Off -Peak Season 4:00 p.m. Parking Occupancy McCall, Idaho Coordinate System: NAD 1983 State Plane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 z a. 3, Parking Occupancy 0% - 49% 50% - 74% El 75% - 84% 1. 85% - 100% Wednesday Peak Season 10:00 a.m. Parking Occupancy McCall, Idaho Figure E4 IC KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING/PLANNING Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 Parking Occupancy 0% - 49% 50%-74% - 75% - 84% - 85% - 100% Wednesday Peak Season 1:00 p.m. Parking Occupancy McCall, Idaho Figure E5 IC KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING/PLANNING Coordinate System: NAD 1983 State Plane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 0% - 49% 50%-74% - 75% - 84% - 85% - 100% Wednesday Peak Season 4:00 p.m. Parking Occupancy McCall, Idaho Figure E6 IC KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING/PLANNING Coordinate System: NAD 1983 State Plane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 U 0% - 49% 50%-74% - 75% - 84% - 85% - 100% Saturday Off -Peak Season 10:00 a.m. Parking Occupancy McCall, Idaho Figure E7 IC KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING/PLANNING Coordinate System: NAD 1983 State Plane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall r Ve • r. . • r i McCall Transportation Master Plan IC 0% - 49% 50%-74% - 75% - 84% - 85% - 100% KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING/PLANNING January 2017 Saturday Off -Peak Season 1:00 p.m. Parking Occupancy McCall, Idaho Coordinate System: NAD 1983 State Plane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 U 0% - 49% 50%-74% - 75% - 84% - 85% - 100% Saturday Off -Peak Season 4:00 p.m. Parking Occupancy McCall, Idaho Figure E9 IC KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING/PLANNING Coordinate System: NAD 1983 State Plane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall r Ve , r. McCall Transportation Master Plan IC 0% - 49% 50%-74% - 75% - 84% - 85% - 100% KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING/PLANNING January 2017 Saturday Peak Season 10:00 a.m. Parking Occupancy McCall, Idaho Coordinate System: NAD 1983 State Plane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall . *. : I McCall Transportation Master Plan IC 0 % - 49 % 50 % - 74 % . 1 75 % - 84 % 1 1 85 % - 100 % KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING/PLANNING January 2017 Saturday Peak Season 1:00 p.m. Parking Occupancy McCall, Idaho Coordinate System: NAD 1983 State Plane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall . • I • - McCall Transportation Master Plan IC 0 'Yo - 49 'Yo 50 % - 74 % . 1 75 °A, - 84 °/0 1. 85°/0 - 100 'Yo KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING/PLANNING January 2017 Saturday Peak Season 4:00 p.m. Parking Occupancy McCall, Idaho Coordinate System: NAD 1983 State Plane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall McCall Transportation Master Plan January 2017 n U z g Parking Lot Ownership McCall, Idaho Figure E13 IC KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING/PLANNING Coordinate System: NAD 1983 State Plane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall Attachment F Bicycle and Pedestrian Counts Transportation Master Plan iCount: Bike and Pedestrian Counts Background/Methodology In 2013, the City of McCall, with the assistance of Idaho Smart Growth, started annually collecting data on bike and pedestrian activity within the city limits. The program was launched as part of larger initiative called iCount, but has become a localized data collection effort. The program has included 13- 18 locations depending on the year and the need. Two days of data collection are performed to capture counts during a typical summer weekday and weekend. The counts are performed with city staff and volunteers that count the number and the turning movements of bicyclist and pedestrian over a 2 hour period. In 2017, the time of the day was changed to from the afternoon to the morning. Also, four of the school locations will be performed in September when school is in session to better understand the number and directions of those traveling to school by bike or foot. The number of locations was also reduced to 10 locations since there were location were high usage was occurring and the infrastructure has been constructed. Trends Based on the data collected in 2013-2016, the total number of bicyclist and pedestrians has increased significantly. On average the following location have the top 5 most bike and pedestrian usage: 1. E. Lake Street and Art Roberts Park 2. Legacy Park 3. Davis Avenue and Lick Creek Road 4. Hemlock and McCall Avenue 5. W. Lake Street and Rotary Bike and Pedestrian Count Locations W Lake St, Rotary Park, Mather W Lake and Warren Wagon !Count Locations Total 0 0-28 O 29-50 0 51 - 92 O 93 - 262 O 263 - 531 Gab\ Ln Mission and Lake Mission and Forest Mission and Idaho St Deinhard and Bike Path Smokejumper Base and Riverfront Park E Lake, end, and Art Roberts E Park St Forest St Idaho St E. Lake and Hemlock Stibnite and Bike Path 3rd and Deinhard Mission and Scott J �J I Miles 0.125 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Davis and Lick Creek m OC' 7. Legacy Park and Pine St ist St and Bike Path Deinhard and Commerce a) Q 0 C McGinnis St Timm St U Deinh@rd Ln Davis and Wooley �tvo 0 a Krahn Ln dop E Deinhard, Samson, School 0 c CO General Trends Total Bikes and Pedestrians General Trends Total Pedestrians 2013 Baseline Weekend 2013 Baseline 17 18 22 24 17 11 11 Deinhard and Bike Path Stibnite and Bike Path 2013 Weekend 1st St and Bike Path Davis and Lick Creek, Weekend 34 36 18 22 11 2 12 6 11 Deinhard and Bike Path 1st St an General Trends Total Bikes 2013 Weekend 2013 Baseline Weekend 2013 Baseline 2014 Weekend 400.00 % 350.00% 300.00% 250.00 % 200.00 % 150.00 % 100.00 % 50.00% 0.00 /o Increase Since Base Count Bike 335.62% 2013 2014 2015 500.00% 450.00% 400.00% 350.00% 300.00% 250.00% 200.00% 150.00% 100.00% 50.00% 0.00% Increase Since Base Count Pedestrian 171.17% 2013 466.22 % 424.32% 2016 Top 5 Pedestrian Locations E Lake, 2nd, & Art Roberts 452 Legacy Park & Pine St 305 E. Lake & Hemlock W Lake St & Rotary Park Davis & Wooley 36 34 2016 Top 5 Pedestrian Locations Legacy Park & Pine St E. Lake & Hemlock 31 226 62 Stibnite & Bike Path 48 W Lake St & Rotary Park 47 1st St & Bike Path 47 Average Top 5 Locations 1. E. Lake & Art Roberts Park - 496 2. Legacy Park - 349 3. Davis & Lick Creek — 233 4. Hemlock & McCall Ave — 89 5. W. Lake & Rotary - 82 FILENAME: H:\19\19638 - MCCALL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN\MEMOS\TM#2 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS\19638_ALTERNATIVESANALYSISMEMO_REVISED_120517.DOCX TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM #2 McCall Transportation Master Plan Project Alternatives Analysis Date: August 29, 2017 (Revised December 5, 2017) Project #: 19638.0 To: Nathan Stewart, PE; City of McCall From: Nick Foster, AICP; Jamie Markosian, EIT; and John Ringert, PE cc: Bruce Meighen, Megan Moore, Krissy Gilmore; Logan Simpson Table of Contents 1.0 Project Summary ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 2.0 Functional Classification .......................................................................................................................................... 4 3.0 Roadway Cross-Sections .......................................................................................................................................... 7 3.1 Typical Street Sections ........................................................................................................................................................... 7 3.2 Street-Specific Sections ......................................................................................................................................................... 7 4.0 Roadway Projects .................................................................................................................................................. 11 4.1 3rd Street Intersections ........................................................................................................................................................ 12 4.2 3rd Street/Lake Street Intersection ...................................................................................................................................... 16 4.3 Boydstun Street/Lake Street Intersection ........................................................................................................................... 16 4.4 SH 55 Bypass ........................................................................................................................................................................ 17 4.5 Pine Street/Roosevelt Street Intersection ........................................................................................................................... 21 4.6 Southeast McCall Connections ............................................................................................................................................ 22 4.7 Southeast McCall Connections ............................................................................................................................................ 22 4.8 Roadway Project Summary.................................................................................................................................................. 22 5.0 Parking Strategies .................................................................................................................................................. 25 5.1 Parking Management Strategies ......................................................................................................................................... 25 5.2 Parking Capacity Expansion ................................................................................................................................................. 26 6.0 Pathways, Sidewalks, and Bike Lanes .................................................................................................................... 27 6.1 Downtown Snow Removal and Landscaping Maintenance ................................................................................................. 30 7.0 City Maintenance Capacity and Facility Needs ..................................................................................................... 31 8.0 Transit.................................................................................................................................................................... 33 9.0 Next Steps ............................................................................................................................................................. 35 10.0 References ........................................................................................................................................................... 35 McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 2 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Attachment A – Functional Classification Information Table Atttachment B – Street Sections Attachment C – Preliminary Traffic Operations Worksheets Attachment D – Signal Operations and Warrant Worksheets Attachment E – Parking Management Strategies Introduction This memorandum describes and analyzes potential project alternatives and policies to be included in the City of McCall’s Transportation Master Plan. These projects and policies cover a range of topics, including: Roadway functional classification and cross-sections Roadway projects Parking strategies Pathways, sidewalks, and bike lanes Transit Once reviewed and confirmed with City staff, the recommendations from this memorandum will be carried into the draft Transportation Master Plan for presentation to the general public. 1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY The following is a summary of the proposed projects described in this memorandum. These projects are the result of a combination of previous plans, public input gathered as part of this project, and technical analysis completed for this project. Policies Adopt an updated functional classification map Adopt revised typical cross-sections Establish policy that assigns ownership, maintenance and funding responsibilities for urban streetscape infrastructure including: sidewalks, landscaping, lighting, stormwater, and snow removal Adopt an updated capital improvements plan (CIP) and maintenance improvement plan (MIP) – documented under a separate memo prepared by Horrocks Engineers Update City code and engineering standard drawings to reflect current City policies, Comprehensive Plan, and industry practices McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 3 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Plans Develop a parking management plan focused on improving efficiency of existing parking supply, managing demand, and opportunistically providing long-term capacity Work with Mountain Community Transit to evaluate and develop a plan for enhanced transit service, including options for increased summertime service in key areas Work with the McCall Renewal Agency (MRA) to define future transportation projects in their boundary Update pavement management inventory every three years and revise CIP and MIP project lists and implementation schedules annually Complete a public works facilities capacity and needs analysis to assess and identify the City's physical and fiscal needs related to equipment, maintenance facilities, and staffing, along with an implementation schedule for ensuring the City is able to maintain its infrastructure in a sustainable manner Conduct an analysis of the feasibility of different streetscape and multimodal infrastructure improvements along 3rd Street between Colorado Street and Deinhard Lane Infrastructure Projects to Investigate Further Install a traffic signal at the 3rd Street/Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street intersection Install a traffic signal at the 3rd Street/Park Street intersection Construct a roundabout or traffic signal at the Boydstun Street/Lake Street intersection Incrementally implement Deinhard Lane-Boydstun Street between 3rd Street and Lake Street as a bypass to State Highway (SH) 55 Implement urban design treatments at the Lake Street/3rd Street intersection o Also investigate treatments to further enforce the existing right-out only movement from Lake Street onto SH 55 at this intersection Investigate whether all-way stop-control is the most appropriate treatment for the Pine Street/Roosevelt Street intersection Providing an additional connection from the central part of McCall to Spring Mountain Boulevard via either: o Extending Floyde Street to intersect with Spring Mountain Boulevard across from Woodlands Drive o Extending Samson Trail to intersect with Spring Mountain Boulevard across from Woodlands Drive, which would also require improving and re-opening existing portions of the road McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 4 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Build-out the McCall Area Pathways Master Plan with the following changes: o Changes to the downtown core streets per the McCall Downtown Master Plan o Add pedestrian facilities along Park Street-Thompson Avenue from Samson Trail to Davis Avenue. o Add a pathway from SH 55 to the Bear Basin Trailhead. o Look for opportunities to add shared-use paths, instead of bike lanes, in the following locations if right-of-way and utility constraints can be overcome or consider providing curb-protected walkways instead of bike lanes: Lake Street: from the Lardo Bridge to the Bear Basin Connector Trail Davis Avenue: from Wanda Avenue to Ponderosa State Park Mission Street: from Idaho Street to Lake Street o Consider interim pedestrian improvements on 3rd Street south of Colorado Street o Connect Rio Vista Boulevard to Mather Road via a non-motorized bridge over the Payette River Develop the transportation hub planned for the southwest corner of the 2nd Street/Park Street intersection 2.0 FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION As noted in Technical Memorandum #1, roads in McCall are divided into four functional classifications: Principal Arterial, Major Collector, Minor Collector, and Local. Functional classification is based on the role and the character of service for a particular roadway in moving traffic through the network. After reviewing existing functional classifications with City staff, the following changes are proposed to how individual roads are classified, including the addition of the Minor Arterial classification: Downgrades from Minor Collector to Local – These streets do not currently function as collector streets (e.g., they are short connections, serve a limited number of parcels, or are unimproved narrow roads) and are not likely to in the future, based on current plans. o Forest Street, Mission Street - 1st Street o Mill Road, Hemlock Street – Pine Street Upgrades from Local to Minor Collector – These streets either function as a collector today or will in the future based on potential development o Park Street/Thompson Avenue, Samson Trail – Davis Avenue This roadway segment provides an important connection to 3rd Street (State Highway (SH) 55) from neighborhoods east of the highway. Traffic McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 5 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho volumes are likely to increase on this road as congestion worsens on 3rd Street north of Park Street. o Reedy Lane, Davis Avenue – Fairway Drive This roadway segment serves several local streets and a major commercial use. There is also the potential for future development in the surrounding area. o Rowland Street, Lakeside Avenue – Pinedale Street/Rio Vista Boulevard This roadway segment provides a primary connection for traffic from Rio Vista Boulevard (a Minor Collector) to travel eastbound (i.e., into the city) on Lake Street (SH 55). There is also the potential for future development in the surrounding area. o Davis Avenue, end of City ownership (approximately Agate Street) – Lick Creek Road This roadway segment provides primary access to Ponderosa State Park, one of McCall’s top summertime destinations. Average daily volume exceeds 2,000 vehicles during the summertime and it is also an important route for people walking and biking. o Park Street, Mission Street – 1st Street This roadway replaces the section of Forest Street described previously and proposed for downgrading to a local road. Upgrades from Major Collector to Minor Arterial o Deinhard Lane/Boydstun Street, Lake Street – 3rd Street These roadways serve as an alternate route for regional through traffic wishing to bypass downtown McCall and there is desire to increase its use in the future, as discussed later in this memorandum. The proposed functional classification map with these changes is shown in Figure 1. Coordination with the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) will be required to implement these changes to the Federal Functional Classification designations, which are part of determining how funding is allocated to the City and to specific projects. PilgrimCoveRdMoonridgeDrBrookDrClubHillBlvdValley View Ln McCallAve1stStPayetteDrReedy LnMeadows RdStibnite St LupineLnIdaho St ChadDr Knights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdBitter r o o t D rC h r i s L n ClubRd LichenLnCoyRdMoon Dr W Forest St Stockton Dr C o lo r a d o S t WhitetailDr OspreyViewDrSundanceDrJohnAldenStateParkRdErnesto Dr AspenRidgeLnShelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln SvcRd NSa m s o nTrlChipmunk Ln F a i r way Dr RidgeR dBearBasinRd ValleyRimRdCrowleyLnNisulaRdMigratoryRidgeWayRawhideLoopFa w nlullyDr MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStW Lake St Mission StSpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdSt E L a k e S t BoydstunStL i c k C r e e k R d S 3r d St Wooley AveWarrenWagonRd E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionSt S Samson TrlWDeinha r d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan August 2017 ¯ Figure1Proposed RoadwayFunctional ClassificationsMcCall, Idaho H:\19\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Proposed Functional Roadway Classifications.mxd - jmarkosian - 8:55 AM 8/23/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Functional Class ifications Princip al Arterial Min or Arterial Ma jo r Collector Mino r Collector Loca l City Limits 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 7 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Table 1 summarizes the mileage of City owned roadways by functional classification. A detailed listing of each Minor Collector and above roadway, along with existing and projected volumes, can be found in Attachment “A.” Table 1 City Roadway Mileage by Functional Classification Functional Classification Mileage % of Roadway Network Principal Arterial N/A1 N/A1 Minor Arterial 2.5 1.5% Major Collector 7.4 4.4% Minor Collector 5.7 3.3% 1SH 55 is the only Principal Arterial and is owned by ITD, not the City 3.0 ROADWAY CROSS-SECTIONS As a part of the Transportation Master Plan update, the City is updating several street sections, including its typical sections contained in the current comprehensive plan, and planned cross -sections for several specific streets. 3.1 Typical Street Sections The typical roadway cross-sections based on functional classification contained in the current Comprehensive Plan have been reviewed. Updates are proposed to them based on the values identified in the public outreach effort for this plan, the City’s Complete Streets policy, and plans that have been adopted since the current Comprehensive Plan was adopted. They have been designed to be flexible so that they can be adapted, as necessary, to the surrounding land-use context and physical constraints, but also provide the required components (e.g., drive lanes, sidewalks, shoulders) that can be used to guide future development and land use application requirements throughout McCall. These cross-sections are shown in Figure 2, Figure 3, and Figure 4. 3.2 Street-Specific Sections The City has developed planned cross-sections for several streets as part of focused planning efforts with detailed public involvement including adjacent property and business owners. These streets include: Mission Street: Deinhard Lane – Smokejumper Base Lake Street: Mather Road – 1st Street Idaho Street: Mission Street – 1st Street Davis Avenue: Wanda Avenue – Lick Creek Road Wooley Avenue: Davis Avenue – Spring Mountain Boulevard McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 8 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Figure 2 Proposed Arterial Cross-Sections McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 9 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Figure 3 Proposed Collector Cross-Sections McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 10 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Figure 4 Proposed Local Street Cross-Sections McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 11 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Downtown core streets (i.e., 3rd Street, Lake Street, 2nd Street, Lenora Street, Park Street, and 1st Street) Roads within the McCall Business Park (i.e., Krahn Lane, Samson Trail) These sections are included as Attachment “B.” The attachment also includes a write-up describing the public involvement process used to develop the first five sections listed above. The Downtown street sections are taken from the McCall Downtown Master Plan (Reference 1) and the McCall Business Park sections are taken from a plan developed for that area (Reference 2). 4.0 ROADWAY PROJECTS Potential roadway projects have been identified from the following sources: Adopted plans (e.g., McCall Downtown Master Plan, current Comprehensive Plan) o Projects from the McCall Downtown Master Plan have recently been analyzed and vetted with the public; therefore, they will be carried over into the draft Transportation Master Plan. Public input Analysis completed for Technical Memorandum #1: Existing and Future Conditions Assessment Based on feedback from the public and the analysis completed in the previous technical memorandum, projects to address the following issues have been evaluated: Seasonal congestion at the intersections of Park Street/3rd Street and Railroad Avenue- Lenora Street/3rd Street Potential future congestion at the Lake Street/Boydstun Street intersection Rerouting truck and through traffic out of downtown McCall Necessity of the all-way stop control at the Railroad Avenue/Roosevelt Street intersection Improving pedestrian crossings and improving compliance with turning movement restrictions at the Lake Street/3rd Street intersection Improving connectivity in southeast McCall McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 12 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho 4.1 3rd Street Intersections Public feedback and traffic operations analyses performed at the Park Street and Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street intersections (Figure 5) have identified the following concerns: Delay for side street (i.e., Park Street and Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street) left-turn and through movements during the summertime peak tourism season. o The existing side street approaches operate at LOS “F” during the weekday p.m. peak period in the summertime. o Eight-hour, four-hour, and peak-hour signal warrants are met at the 3rd Street/Park Street intersection based on a count performed by ITD on Wednesday, June 1, 2016. o Similar warrants are met at the 3rd Street/Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street intersection based on a count performed by ITD on Thursday, May 14, 2015. Mitigating conflicts for the high number of pedestrians that cross 3rd Street at both intersections. While pedestrian traffic counts have not been conducted, observations identified two key issues: o Conflicts between left-turning vehicles and pedestrians create the potential for collisions. o The additional delay for turning vehicles due to the number of pedestrians crossing during the peak periods and the lack of platooning of theses crossings Alternatives Evaluated In response to the above concerns, the following potential solutions have been identified and evaluated: Signalization of one or both intersections Installation of a pedestrian hybrid beacon (PHB, aka HAWK) at one or both intersections across 3rd Street Roundabout at one or both intersections Table 2 provides an initial assessment of these options. Figure 5 3rd Street Intersections McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 13 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho As described in Table 2, the signalization and roundabout alternatives are the only options that serve both the pedestrians and the side street traffic movements. While the PHB alternatives provide improvement for pedestrians crossing 3rd Street and may reduce the delay for northbound and southbound traffic compared to a signal, they will not improve the level of service for the side street left-turning movements at the intersection. Table 2 3rd Street Intersections Alternatives Assessment Signal at Both Intersections1 PHBs at Both Intersections PHBs at One Intersection Roundabouts at Both Intersections2 Advantages Serves all pedestrian movements Serves pedestrians crossing 3rd Street at both intersections Serves pedestrians crossing 3rd Street at one intersection Serves all pedestrian movements Serves all side-street movements and left-turns from 3rd Street May open up gaps for certain side-street movements and left- turns from 3rd Street at both intersections May open up gaps for certain side-street movements and left- turns from 3rd Street at one intersection Serves all side-street movements and left-turns from 3rd Street Can use signal timing progression to minimize delay to through traffic on 3rd Street Potential for less delay for through traffic on 3rd Street than traffic signals, depending on the number of pedestrian crossings Less delay for through traffic on 3rd Street than traffic signals, depending on the number of pedestrian crossings Limited delay incurred to 3rd Street through traffic during off- peak season Disadvantages Delay to through traffic on 3rd Street Difficult to coordinate operations, so may result in more delay to 3rd Street traffic than signals during some peak time periods Does not serve all side-street movements or left-turns from 3rd Street Potential property impacts Not warranted most of the year Does not serve all side-street movements or left-turns from 3rd Street Does not serve all pedestrian movements Single-lane roundabouts may not provide long-term capacity Moderate cost and ongoing maintenance Does not serve all pedestrian movements Does not serve both intersections High cost 1The assessment of a single signal is similar, except it primarily benefits only one intersection and there is the potential for queues from the signalized intersection to back up through the intersection that is not signalized. 2The assessment of a single roundabout is similar, except it primarily benefits and impacts only one intersection. Table 3 provides a summary of the preliminary traffic operations analysis completed for the signalization and roundabout options for a typical weekday in the summertime. Synchro and Highway Capacity Software (HCS) reports may be found in Attachment “C.” Table 3 3rd Street Intersection Alternatives Operations Evaluation Alternative Timeframe LOS1 Signalization Existing Summertime Conditions B/(B) Projected Year 2040 Summertime Conditions C/(B) Roundabout Existing Summertime Conditions B/(A) Projected Year 2040 Summertime Conditions E/(D) 1Operations are reported for each intersection as Railroad-Lenora/(Park) Additional key findings from the preliminary analysis include: McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 14 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Signalization alternative: o Signal timing will need to be evaluated to minimize possibility of queue spillback between the two intersections. Roundabout alternative: o All approaches are projected to be under capacity under existing peak summertime conditions at both intersections. o The northbound approach at the Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street intersection is projected to reach capacity under year 2040 peak summertime conditions Other Alternatives Other alternatives that were considered include restricting Railroad Avenue to one-way traffic eastbound (i.e., forming a couplet with Lake Street), restricting left-turns from Railroad Avenue and Lenora Street onto 3rd Street, and creating an alternate connection between Railroad Avenue and Park Street. These options have not been evaluated further due to the limited roadway network options and their potential impacts to local businesses and property. Short-term Alternatives The alternatives described previously are potential long-term solutions. Possible options for improving conditions at either intersection in the short-term include: Improving intersection sight distance for side-street vehicles turning onto 3rd Street by restricting parking on 3rd Street adjacent to the intersection(s), which may reduce the potential for collisions and decrease the anxiety drivers feel when turning onto 3rd Street. Hiring one or more individuals to manually control traffic, similar to a flagger or traffic cop, during peak periods, which: o Can be implemented for as needed and not impact off-peak period traffic conditions; o Potentially has a lower near-term cost; and o May be less efficient and result in more traffic congestion than a signal during peak periods. o Installing a temporary traffic signal, which could be a low-cost method to evaluate the effectiveness of signalization, but may not be able to adequately serve pedestrians without a semi-permanent installation Each of these short term alternatives should be further evaluated before implementation and reviewed after implementation. McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 15 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho ITD Coordination ITD has jurisdiction of 3rd Street (SH 55) and therefore, implementing any project at these two intersections will require ITD approval. Kittelson & Associates, Inc. (KAI) and City staff met with ITD staff on February 6, 2017 to discuss the alternatives analysis at these intersections described above. Key takeaways from this meeting include: Providing signals at both Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street and Park Street would not meet the recommended signal spacing of 0.5 miles, as described in IDAPA 39.03.42. o Any follow-up study of a two-signals option would need to examine the potential additional delay added by the second signal and the potential for queues to stack between the two signals. Improvements at either intersection may not be competitive under ITD’s current funding structure without a financial partnership from the City. Recommendations Based on the information summarized in the previous sections, we recommend that traffic signals at both intersections be advanced into the Transportation Master Plan. Key reasons behind this recommendation include: PHBs will not address the issue of side street traffic being able to turn out onto 3rd Street . Additionally, people may not congregate at the PHB controlled crossing instead of crossing at the most convenient location; Roundabouts will have property impacts and a higher cost than signals; and Signalization of these intersections is consistent with the current Comprehensive Plan Further, in the event that only one signal is approved and/or only one can be funded, we recommend that the Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street/3rd Street intersection be the priority location for signal installation. This is because there is higher demand from the side streets and for left-turns from 3rd Street at this location and it is located closer to downtown destinations than Park Street. An engineering study will be required before a signal could be approved by ITD. This study should further evaluate the feasibility and potential impacts of a signal at one or both locations, including potential pole and cabinet locations. It may also include daily directional counts at all approaches, if the estimated splits used here are determined to not be adequate. McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 16 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho 4.2 3rd Street/Lake Street Intersection The 3rd Street/Lake Street intersection is important to how people access the lakefront and the downtown, as well as providing one of the key aesthetics in the City. Public input received during this project has expressed a desire for a more pedestrian-focused environment at this intersection. Potential solutions could include colored/texture pavement, a raised intersection, and enhanced streetscape features. A conceptual rendering of possible improvements is shown in Figure 6. 3rd Street and Lake Street are SH 55, so the City will need to work with ITD to implement any improvements at this intersection. 4.3 Boydstun Street/Lake Street Intersection The Boydstun Street/Lake Street intersection (Figure 7) is forecast to experience increased congestion and meet signal warrants by the year 2040 during the summertime peak period. This is more likely to be the case if SH 55 bypass strategies are implemented as described in the following section. Both a roundabout and a traffic signal were evaluated for this intersection. The results of this analysis are shown in Table 4 below. Table 4 Boydstun Street/Lake Street Alternatives Operations Evaluation Alternative Timeframe LOS Signalization Projected Year 2040 Off-Peak Conditions B Projected Year 2040 Summertime Conditions B Roundabout Projected Year 2040 Off-Peak Conditions A Projected Year 2040 Summertime Conditions A Both options are expected to result in acceptable operations. The traffic signal will result in extra delay for vehicles on Lake Street (SH 55) during most of the year, since the signal is forecast to be Figure 6 3rd Street/Lake Street Conceptual Rendering (image: Logan-Simpson Design) Figure 7 Boydstun Street/Lake Street Intersection McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 17 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho warranted only in the summertime peak period. Further, a roundabout at this intersection could provide a gateway treatment into the City and help slow traffic as it enters from the north. Unlike at the 3rd Street intersections described above, there do not appear to be built environment constraints or significant grade issues; though further study will be required to determine this. Therefore, it is recommended that the City and ITD plan for a roundabout at this intersection. While this is not as high of a priority as addressing the 3rd Street intersections, early work could be done to develop and evaluate concepts so that right-of-way can be obtained, if necessary, as development occurs in the area. The ultimate timing of the roundabout should be based on funding availability an d coordinated with the bypass treatments described below. 4.4 SH 55 Bypass Public input has expressed a desire to reroute heavy truck traffic away from downtown McCall. Further, diverting traffic traveling through McCall on SH 55 away from downtown could help manage seasonal congestion. The Deinhard Lane- Boydstun Street connection, shown in Figure 8, provides a potential bypass route of downtown McCall. Designating the Deinhard Lane-Boydstun Street connection as a bypass would reduce some traffic demand and the number of trucks on 3rd Street and Lake Street. Because a majority of the traffic in McCall is not through traffic, 3rd Street and Lake Street would remain the primary routes for local traffic. Given that the route exists today, this evaluation focuses on strategies to enhance its use as a bypass of downtown McCall. Potential options to accomplish this objective include, in order of complexity and likely fiscal implications: Lowest Cost and Complexity: Signing the route as an alternate freight and/or through route: o City staff has expressed concern about the City’s capability to provide an adequate level of snow removal during the winter on the bypass route, so it may not be desirable to designate the route as the primary freight or through route. o City staff has also noted that the curb radii in the southwest corner of the 3rd Street/Deinhard Lane intersection may need to be modified to better accommodate trucks turning right from Deinhard lane onto southbound SH 55. Figure 8 Potential SH 55 Bypass Route McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 18 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho o Increased traffic on this route will accelerate the need for improvements to the Boydstun Street/Lake Street intersection (see analysis later in this section). Moderate Cost and Complexity: Designating the route as SH 55: o The City and ITD would likely need to enter into an agreement to turn control and maintenance over to ITD. o ITD may require the City to take over the current SH 55 alignment from Deinhard Lane to Boydstun Street. Highest Cost and Complexity: Modifying the intersections at 3rd Street/Deinhard Lane and Boydstun Street/Lake Street so that the natural through movement is to continue on the bypass route and not on the existing SH 55 alignment: o This option would likely only be implemented if the bypass route were to become the designed alignment of SH 55. o These modifications would include: Realigning the approaches at the 3rd Street/Deinhard Lane intersection or installing a roundabout. Either changing stop control at the Boydstun Street/Lake Street intersection so that the eastern Lake Street approach is the only stop- controlled approach or installing a roundabout or traffic signal at the intersection. The options above would have varying levels of effectiveness at rerouting traffic away from downtown and are listed in their likely order of effectiveness (i.e., signing would not have as much impact as intersection modifications), as well as the probable level of effort required to implement them. Traffic Operations Analysis ITD has previously considered constructing a bypass of McCall. The Environmental Assessment (EA, Reference 3) completed for the potential bypass estimated that approximately 25% of all traffic on SH 55 south of McCall would use the bypass. This estimate was made before Deinhard Lane was extended to Boydstun Street, so it is likely that a portion of the traffic that was estimated to use the bypass is now using the Deinhard Lane-Boydstun Street connection. This existing connection is not signed as a bypass, nor is it built as a high-way level connection, so there is likely opportunity for more through traffic to use the connection. Therefore, in order to estimate the potential effectiveness of the above options it is assumed that up to 20% of through traffic on SH 55 at Colorado Street (the southernmost location for which turning movement counts are available) could still be diverted around downtown if the most intensive option above were implemented (i.e., designation of the route as SH 55 and intersection modifications at McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 19 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho both ends of the bypass at Deinhard Lane and Boydstun Street). The potential re-routed daily volumes during the existing summertime peak season and the projected yea r 2040 off-peak and peak seasons are shown in Figure 9. Traffic operations were analyzed at key intersections (i.e., those discussed in the preceding sections) during each of these time periods in order to estimate the effect the bypass might have on traf fic operations in downtown McCall. The results of these analyses are compared to the no -build condition examined in Technical Memorandum #1 in Table 5 below. Signal warrant worksheets and Synchro reports are included in Attachment “D.” Table 5 SH 55 Bypass Traffic Operations Analysis Results Intersection No-Build With Bypass Treatments LOS1 V/C1 Signal Warrant Met?2 LOS1 V/C1 Signal Warrant Met? Existing Summertime Park St/3rd St F 0.61 Yes3 E 0.45 No Railroad Ave-Lenora St/3rd St F >1.0 Yes3 F >1.0 Yes Lake St/Boydstun St B 0.19 N/A4 B 0.29 N/A4 Year 2040 Off-Peak Park St/3rd St E 0.66 Yes5 C 0.42 No Railroad Ave-Lenora St/3rd St F >1.0 Yes5 F >1.0 Yes6 Lake St/Boydstun St B 0.26 N/A4 B 0.42 N/A4 Year 2040 Summertime Park St/3rd St F >1.0 Yes F >1.0 Yes5 Railroad Ave-Lenora St/3rd St F >1.0 Yes F >1.0 Yes5 Lake St/Boydstun St D 0.57 Yes5 E 0.84 Yes5 1LOS is reported for the worst minor-street approach. V/C ratio is reported for the critical movement. 2Eight-hour, four-hour, and peak-hour warrants, unless otherwise indicated. 3Based on 24-hour counts taken by ITD on weekdays on June 1, 2016 (Park) and May 14, 2015 (Railroad-Lenora) 4Signal warrants only reviewed when the minor street approach is LOS “D” or worse. 5Based on extrapolating peak hour turning volumes to daily counts using volume profiles from ITD daily counts. 6Eight-hour and four-hour warrants are met. The results of this analysis show that under the most aggressive measures to encourage use of the bypass for all through traffic that: The short-term need for a traffic signal at the Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street/3rd Street intersection will persist; though it may be temporarily alleviated at the Park Street/3rd Street intersection. A signal may be warranted at the Lake Street/Boydstun Street intersection in the future during both the peak and off-peak seasons. These findings are dependent on 20% of traffic on SH 55 south of Colorado Street rerouting onto the bypass. An origin-destination study and detailed analysis should be completed to better estimate the McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 21 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho potential for additional traffic to be routed onto the bypass before any complex measures are implemented. Recommendations Given these findings and the desire to manage demand through downtown McCall, particularly heavy truck traffic, we recommend the following incremental approach: Work with ITD to sign the Deinhard Lane-Boydstun Street connection as an alternate freight route during the summer. o Prior to implementing this, evaluate the curb radii at the southwest corner of the 3rd Street/Deinhard Lane intersection to determine if modifications may be warranted. o Engage the freight community to make them aware of the impending change. o Evaluate the effectiveness of the signed alternate route through before and after counts using either City or ITD counting equipment and interviews with the freight community. Depending on the results of the first step and an origin-destination study, evaluate options for enhancing the use of the bypass through: o Intersection improvements and signing at 3rd Street/Deinhard Lane and Boydstun Sreet/Lake Street. o Designating the bypass as SH 55 and taking over 3rd Street and Lake Street from Deinhard Lane to Boydstun Street. 4.5 Pine Street/Roosevelt Street Intersection City staff noted they have received complaints about the all-way stop-control present at the Pine Street/Roosevelt Street intersection (Figure 10). The primary concern has been that the westbound approach (i.e., on Railroad Avenue heading toward downtown) can become slick in the winter, making it difficult to stop for the stop sign. The project team has reviewed the information available for this plan at this Figure 10 Pine Street/Roosevelt Street Intersection McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 22 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho intersection. This includes off-peak volumes collected by the City and aerial imagery. Based on this review, further study should be undertaken before a decision is made regarding removing stop signs from Railroad Avenue. A future engineering study of this intersection should include: Reviewing sight distance on all approaches. The intersection sight distance for vehicles turning from Roosevelt Street onto Pine Street may be limited by vertical and horizontal curves to the east, as well as trees and other vegetation. Reviewing summertime peak volumes against the warrants contained in Section 2B.07 in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD, Reference 4). Consideration of potential impacts to people walking and biking across the intersection. 4.6 Southeast McCall Connections There is currently a gap in connections from the 3rd Street area to the Spring Mountain Boulevard area between Wooley Avenue and Deinhard Lane. City staff has identified the following as possible connections: Extending Floyde Street to intersect with Spring Mountain Boulevard across from Woodlands Drive (identified in the current comprehensive plan) Extending Samson Trail to intersect with Spring Mountain Boulevard across from Woodlands Drive, which would also require improving and re-opening existing portions of the road 4.7 Southeast McCall Connections 1st Street currently has a southern terminus at Colorado Street. Feedback received from the public requested the City consider extending 1st Street from Colorado Street to Stibnite Street. This extension (via Thula Street) would provide another option for people to travel from Deinhard Lane to Lake Street and downtown McCall without using 3rd Street. This extension would require obtaining privately owned right-of way, so potentially affected landowners would need to be engaged in further discussions of this possible extension. 4.8 Roadway Project Summary In conclusion, the following roadway projects are recommended, as described above and shown in Figure 11: Install traffic signals at 3rd Street/Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street and 3rd Street/Park Street o An engineering study will be required before the signals are approved by ITD o The Railroad Avenue-Lenora Street is the highest priority McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 23 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Work with ITD to implement improved pedestrian crossings and streetscape enhancements at the 3rd Street/Lake Street intersection o Also investigate treatments to further enforce the existing right-out only movement form Lake Street onto SH 55 at this intersection Plan for a roundabout at the Boydstun Street/Lake Street intersection o A traffic signal may be an alternative option if a roundabout is not feasible or desirable Incrementally enhance the Deinhard Lane-Boydstun Street connection as a bypass to SH 55 through McCall o Evaluate the effectiveness of treatments at each step before moving forward with the next one Evaluate whether the stop signs on Pine Street at Roosevelt Street are warranted or desirable through further engineering study of sight distance, summertime volumes, and pedestrian/bicycle impacts Provide an additional connection from the central part of McCall to Spring Mountain Boulevard via either: o Extending Floyde Street to intersect with Spring Mountain Boulevard across from Woodlands Drive (identified in the current comprehensive plan) o Extending Samson Trail to intersect with Spring Mountain Boulevard across from Woodlands Drive, which would also require improving and re-opening existing portions of the road Explore extending 1st Street from Colorado Street to Stibnite Street. èéëìíèéëìí !P 89:w Valley View Ln McCall Ave1stStCarico RdReedy Ln M eadowsRd Stibnite St Virginia BlvdPonderosa StSmittyAveKnowlesRdRowlandStHemlockSt RooseveltAveHayes St Gamble RdHelmichAlle n AveScott St Idaho St Louisa Ave4thStChad Dr Thula StState StDawson Ave2ndSt RiverRanchRdMill RdKaren St S t ockton Dr C hrisLn C lub Rd Industrial LoopVeritaRd Shelia LnCo y Rd W Forest St HelmichStAlpine StC o lor ado St Lakeridge Dr Cece Way ELakeStGab i L nWhitetailDr E Forest StE Park StBurnsRd EagleDrConifer Ln Flynn Ln SyringaDrBo y d s t u n LnBrundage Dr Carmen Dr Hewitt St Commerce StMarywoodDrDivotLnM c Gi nnis St P i n e Terra c e Dr Elderberry LoopErnesto Dr U n i v ers ityLnKrahn Ln SvcRd Fairway Dr RidgeRdValleyRimRdMorganDr Lakeside Ave Wa nda Ave Floyde StMatherRdRioVistaBlvdNS a m sonTrl NMissionStMission StL i c k C r e e k R d Davis AveN 3rd StSpringMountainBlvdE L a k e S t S Samson TrlBoydstunStS 3r d StWisdom RdWarrenWagonRdWooleyAve E Deinhard Ln W Lake St Elo RdS Mission StWDeinhardLn ÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan August 2017 ¯ Proposed Roadway ProjectsMcCall, Idaho H:\19\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Proposed RoadwayProjects.mxd - jmarkosian - 1:47 PM 12/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA SH 5 5 Bypass Potential Ro ad Extensio ns; 1st Street Extension 89:w Cro ssing E nh ancements !P Rou nda bo ut/Signal èéëìí Signal Furthe r Study City Limits 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Figure11 McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 25 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho 5.0 PARKING STRATEGIES Similar to traffic volumes, parking demand fluctuates seasonally in McCall. City staff observed parking demand during the off-peak and summertime peak seasons, as document in Technical Memorandum #1. The following are key findings from an analysis of these observations, including demand projections through the year 2036: Off-peak season: o There is expected to be adequate parking capacity in downtown McCall through the year 2036 in downtown McCall, including in all zones and parking space types (i.e., public, private, on-street, and off-street). Summertime peak season: o Parking demand is projected to be below the overall supply through the year 2036, but will exceed the desirable capacity target of 85% utilization during the highest times of demand (i.e., 93% on midday Saturday). Additionally, some parking areas near the waterfront already reach capacity under existing conditions. Approximately 170 additional parking spaces would be needed in downtown McCall by the year 2036 to maintain a utilization of 85% or less during times of peak demand, which is consistent with the 2009 Downtown Parking Study (Reference 5), which estimated about 114-240 spaces would be needed in 20 years. o Demand is forecast to exceed capacity in certain areas (e.g., near Legacy Park, along and east of 3rd Street) by the year 2026. Given these findings, it is recommended that the City: 1) manage demand to ensure efficient use of the existing parking supply; and 2) look for opportunities to increase parking supply in and/or near downtown. The highest priority should be given to managing demand to ensure existing supply is efficiently used, since it is projected to provide adequate overall capacity for most time periods. Further, focusing on management strategies should help avoid overbuilding parking capacity that will only be used for a limited time throughout the year and allow downtown land to be used more productively. 5.1 Parking Management Strategies The following are general strategies the City should consider as it looks to manage the use of its parking supply. These strategies are taken from the 2009 Downtown Parking Master Plan, a review of strategies in other resort towns, and our own experience with parking management. More detailed information on these strategies and a list of accomplishments since the 2009 plan are included in Attachment “E.” They should be further evaluated and prioritized as part of a holistic parking management plan. McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 26 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Code changes to reduce private parking requirements in exchange for fees to be used for parking management/supply Implementing paid parking to encourage turnover o Some resort jurisdictions exempt year-round residents Increasing wayfinding signage for existing public parking lots Clarifying public parking within the Timbercrest garage Identify areas for snow storage or other snow removal strategies to minimize wintertime parking supply impacts Manage boat and snowmobile trailer parking Provide more options for traveling to and within downtown including: o Expanding the existing downtown sidewalk network o Providing additional bikeways and walkways to downtown o Providing adequate bicycle parking throughout downtown o Enhancing transit service to and within downtown (also see the Transit section of this memo) Enforcement strategies to ensure compliance with turnover goals Using technology to improve the efficient of use of existing parking supply Monitoring use of parking supply and adapting strategies, as necessary Working with downtown businesses to encourage employee parking in less utilized locations Providing for electric vehicle charging stations, including potential public locations and potential requirements for private development to provide them 5.2 Parking Capacity Expansion The City has reduced private parking requirements in downtown McCall in order to enhance development opportunities. Walkability in downtown is also a key priority. Given these priorities, options the City could consider for increasing parking capacity include: Fully develop existing public lots and on-street parking Look for opportunities to provide structured parking to reduce the amount of land that parking occupies Co-locating public parking (lots or structures) with private development may be a cost- effective approach that is also compatible with surrounding land-uses McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 27 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Provide parking outside the downtown core that is either within walking distance of downtown or can be served by a shuttle service during peak periods Identify shared parking opportunities with businesses that have open parking during weekend or evening peak periods 6.0 PATHWAYS, SIDEWALKS, AND BIKE LANES The McCall Area Pathways Master Plan (Reference 6) outlines a vision for future pathways, sidewalks, and bike lanes within the City. Since the plan was adopted, the following projects have been completed: Bike lanes were striped on 3rd Street and Lake Street from Colorado Street to west of 1st Street. The Bear Basin Trail Connection created a shared-use path paralleling SH 55 from Zachary Road to approximately 100 feet south of Bear Basin Road. Shared lane markings were added to Lake Street between Fir Street and McCall Avenue. In addition, the McCall Downtown Master Plan refined recommendations in the downtown core, including replacing the desired bike lanes on Lenora Street with shared lane markings and adding shared lane markings to Park Street and 2nd Street. Based on the additional analysis as part of this project, the following are recommended: Pedestrian facilities along Park Street-Thompson Avenue from Samson Trail to Davis Avenue. This is consistent with the upgrade of this road to a Minor Collector. A pathway from SH 55 to the Bear Basin Trailhead. Look for opportunities to add shared-use paths, instead of bike lanes in the following locations if right-of-way and utility constraints can be overcome: o Lake Street: from the Lardo Bridge to the Bear Basin Connector Trail o Davis Avenue: from Wanda Avenue to Ponderosa State Park o Mission Street: from Idaho Street to Lake Street Connect Rio Vista Boulevard to Mather Road via a non-motorized bridge over the Payette River The updated planned network is shown in Figure 12 and Figure 13. PilgrimCoveRdMoonridge DrBrookDrClubHillBlvdValley View Ln McCallAve1st StR e e d y L nMeadows RdStibnite StColora d o S t ShadyLnLupineLnIdaho St ChadDr Knights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdCrescent Rim Dr Mill RdB itterrootDrC h r i s L nLichenLn CoyRdMoon Dr W Forest St Stockton Dr WhitetailDr Majestic View DrOspreyViewDrFox Ridge Ln SundanceDrJohnAldenErnesto Dr Shelia Ln Woodlands Dr Krahn Ln Whitefield Ln Svc RdFirew e e d Dr Flynn LnStrawberry Ln Dragonfly LoopN S a ms o n Tr lLakeridgeDr StateParkRdChipmunk Ln F a i rway Dr WilliamsCreekLoopRidgeR dBearBasinRd ValleyRimRdCrowleyLnNisulaRdMigratoryRidgeWayMorga nDrRawhideLoopFa w n lullyDr MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStW Lake St Mission StSpringMountainBlvdWarrenWagonRdDavis AveN3rdSt Lick C reekRdE L a k e S t BoydstunStS 3r d St Wooley Ave E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionStS Samson TrlWDeinhar d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan August 2017 ¯ Planned Bikeway NetworkMcCall, Idaho H:\19\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Proposed Pathway Network.mxd - jmarkosian - 1:51 PM 12/5/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Desired Bike Lanes Desired Pathway Existing Bike Lane Existing Pathway Parks City Boundary 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles E P a rk S tN 3rd StRailroad AveE L a k e S t Wanda AveN Sams on TrlKasper StColorado StSmitty AveWard St2nd St 1st StThula StWashin gton St Lenora StPl a c i d St Idaho St Ti m m S tELakeSt AnnStAlpine StE Forest St E Park St M c G i n n i s S tStibnite St Payette Lake Downtown McCall Figure12 Pilgrim Cove RdMoonridgeDrBrook DrClubHillBlvdValley View Ln McCallAve1stStReedy LnMeadows RdStibnite St ShadyLnPottsDrIdaho St ChadDr Knights RdLichenLnThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdBitter r o o t D rC h r i s L n ClubRd CoyRdMoon Dr W Forest St Stockton Dr C o lo r a d o S t WhitetailDr SundanceDrJohnAldenErnesto Dr AspenRidgeLnShelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Flynn Ln SvcRd NSa m s o nTrlChipmunk Ln F a i r way Dr RidgeR dBearBasinRd ValleyRimRdCrowleyLnNisulaRdRawhideLoopFawnlullyDrMatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStW Lake St Mission StSpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdSt LickCreekRdE L a k e S t BoydstunStS 3r d St Wooley AveWarrenWa g o n R d E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionSt S Samson TrlWDeinha r d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan August 2017 ¯ Figure13Planned Walkway NetworkMcCall, Idaho H:\19\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX ProposedWalking Network.mxd - jmarkosian - 9:02 AM 8/23/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Pathways Desired Pathway Desired Sidewalk Existing Pathway Existing Sidewalk Parks City Boundary 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles Pine St 4t h St2nd St Kasper St1st StSyringaDrE F or es t St Washington St E P a r k S tIdaho St Lenora StELakeStAnnStRailroad AveWand a Av e N S a m s o n T rlE Park StN 3rd StP i n e S t Thompson AveE L a k e S t RailroadAvePayetteLake Downtown McCall McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 30 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho If the shared-use paths listed above are determined to not be feasible, but a bike lane or shoulder could be provided, then consideration should be given to providing some type of physical buffer that allows for drainage to function as exists, such as extruded curbing or plastics posts or bollards, to create a more comfortable walking environment. These treatments could be put in as permanent or temporary (i.e., removed before snow falls). If curbing, or another low-height treatment, is installed on a permanent basis, the City may want to consider installing snow markers on them during the winter. Providing such a walkway could also be an interim solution for 3rd Street, south of Colorado Street, until sidewalks or a pathway are built. Coordination with ITD would be required prior to installing any barrier type along 3rd Street. To this end, a study should be completed of this section of 3rd Street that further evaluates what treatments may be feasible to enhance the walking, biking, and streetscape environments. 6.1 Downtown Snow Removal and Landscaping Maintenance Current City code requires that adjacent property owners clear snow from sidewalks and maintain landscaping planted in the buffer space between the sidewalk and the ro adway. Some concern about these requirements in downtown has been expressed by City staff and downtown landowners and business owners, including: Timing for when sidewalks are cleared and streets are cleared Snow removed from sidewalks is often placed into the roadway which creates a problem when the streets have already been plowed Maintaining infrastructure to monitor landscaping irrigation water usage for each downtown parcel Consistent maintenance of landscaping, streetscape amenities, and supporting infrastructure (e.g., power outlets) One possible solution to these issues is for the City to assume responsibility for maintaining downtown sidewalks and landscaping. This would provide for consistent maintenance practices and simplify enforcement efforts. Taking on this additional responsibility would have a fiscal impact, so Extruded curb and flexpost separated walkway sections on Hill Road (Boise, ID) Images Source: Google Streetview McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 31 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho the City should work with downtown landowners and business owners to evaluate financial models for how this would work. Another option to explore would include having a downtown business association assume responsibility for the maintenance. Examples from Other Cities Examples of alternative approaches from other winter cities include: Having a business association or business improvement district (BID) take responsibility for snow removal. o This model is used in Bend, Oregon; Anchorage, Alaska; and Boston, Massachusetts. The Downtown Bend Business Association (DBBA), also loans out snow shovels to downtown businesses, which are responsible for shoveling out their storefronts and curb accesses (the DBBA focuses on clearing the main walkway section of the sidewalk) A public agency takes responsibility for snow removal o Jackson, Wyoming hires a contractor for downtown sidewalk snow removal The Cities of Sandpoint and Ketchum, Idaho both require adjacent property owners to clear their sidewalks, similar to McCall. 7.0 CITY MAINTENANCE CAPACITY AND FACILITY NEEDS As McCall adapts to its growing tourist-based economy, the City’s Streets Department faces new challenges for maintaining the City’s transportation infrastructure. Over the past 15 years, the City’s roadway lane miles have grown with new residential developments and new multimodal features have been constructed along existing roadways. In addition to this growth in the system, a number of other factors contribute to increasing maintenance needs: 1. Substandard Construction and Deferred Maintenance: Many of the City’s original roads were built with unsuitable local materials or simply built in place without importing proper aggregates and pavement required for McCall’s harsh climate and increasing traffic loads. On many streets, proper subgrade and sub-base materials do not exist. Compounding this issue, the majority of the City’s paved roadways have not received the necessary routine, preventative and restorative maintenance needed to keep them in an efficient state of repair. Years of deferred maintenance has resulted in a large number of lane miles, including many of the City’s high use roads, that are now in need of complete reconstruction. 2. Lack of Stormwater Management: Many of the City’s roads were originally constructed with roadside swales and driveway culverts. Over time, encroachment by property owners and lack of maintenance (both private and public) has led to swales being filled in and culverts being buried. The result is insufficient drainage, which leads to ponding and saturation of road McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 32 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho structural sections. This leads to premature roadway degradation, but also can cause more serious problems. Localized flooding (especially during spring snow melt) can cause significant property damage and create challenges for emergency services when roads become impassible. 3. Urban multimodal facilities: To address the community’s desire for high quality pedestrian and bicycle facilities, new sidewalks, pathways, street lights, and landscaping projects have been implemented and are planned in the near future. These facilities require maintenance to ensure storm drains are cleaned, snow is cleared, street trees grow, and street lights stay on. For example, in the downtown core, all snow is hauled to select storage areas, which requires manpower and equipment. Consistent snow removal also increases wear and tear on these facilities. Pavement surfaces and curb and gutters can be damaged by private and public snow plows. Structures within the sidewalks (tree grates, light poles, ADA ramps, etc.) can be impacted when they are buried in snow and difficult to locate. 4. Snow gate technology: In 2014, the City, in response to citizen complaints regarding driveway snow berms, implemented snow gate technology on select equipment. Snow gates allow plow operators to briefly hold back snow within the plow to minimize driveway berms. According to City staff, their use does require that operators reduce operating speeds by more than 50% over traditional plows. Not all of the City’s equipment has snow gates, so only select areas of the City do receive this treatment. 5. Limited Maintenance Seasons: McCall’s climate limits the number of days in which the Streets Department can conduct roadway maintenance. Typically, new asphalt can only be installed between June 1 and October 1 due to lack of availability (from local asphalt plants) and required warm temperatures needed for proper placement. During the shoulder seasons (March-May and October-November) staff must balance between preparing equipment and streets for snow plowing vs. continuing with construction season maintenance projects. One major step forward in addressing funding and maintenance needs has been the City’s adoption of the Streets Local Option Tax (Streets LOT), which will increase the City’s investment in its streets by more than 300%, according to City staff. Increased funding will allow for the implementation of the MIP and CIP, described in Technical Memorandum #3 prepared by Horrocks Engineers, which list significant improvement projects that will be funded and completed by hired contractors. However, according to City staff, the Streets Department’s workload has also increased threefold. In- house summer and winter maintenance responsibilities will continue to grow as the City strategizes on how to efficiently and cost effectively implement maintenance to meet management goals (i.e., average roadway remaining service life (RSL) of 12-15 years). It is understood that current labor and equipment resources are not at levels necessary to ensure all required maintenance is completed on all roadways throughout the network. Ultimately, enhanced staff and resources (equipment and facilities) will be required to increase maintenance productivity to the levels the City’s transportation infrastructure will require over the next 10 to 20 years. McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 33 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho Identifying appropriate staffing levels, equipment and support facilities will occur through thorough analysis and fiscal planning. The City has allocated funding in the fiscal year (FY) 2018 budget to complete a Streets Department and Facility Needs Assessment. The goals of this assessment include determining the appropriate physical and fiscal needs for: Heavy Equipment: identifying necessary maintenance and snow removal equipment to complete required activities, specifically additional equipment needed to face current challenges (i.e., stormwater drainage and snow removal) Maintenance Facilities: evaluation of the City’s current facilities (offices, equipment storage, mechanics, materials stockyards, dust abatement equipment, snow storage areas) to determine future needs Funding Depreciation: identifying annual funding investment needed for sustaining equipment leasing and/or replacement over time. Street Crew Staff Levels: determining the appropriate staff levels required to complete the workload requirements so that proper maintenance can be implemented in a timely manner. Administrative Staff Levels: assessing necessary administrative, project management and support staff necessary to oversee and inspect CIP and MIP projects. Implementation Schedule: developing a facilities and staff implementation schedule will guide the Department and the City Council on allocating necessary funding levels over time as part of the City annual budget development. 8.0 TRANSIT Public transportation in McCall provides mobility for year-round residents and helps manage travel demand during the summertime and other peak periods. Opportunities to enhance public transportation in McCall have been developed based on a review of previous plans (i.e., the current McCall Comprehensive Plan, the 2013 Multimodal Transit Center Location Analysis (Reference 7)), input received from the public, a review of transit service strategies in other resort towns (e.g., Ketchum, Sandpoint, and Victor/Driggs, Idaho; Mammoth and Truckee, CA; Sisters, OR; Park City, UT; and Whitefish, MT), and our own experience with transit planning. These opportunities include: Develop the transportation hub planned for the southwest corner of the 2 nd Street/Park Street intersection Better publicize transit schedules o Examples of how this could be accomplished include posting schedules at more stops, partnering with businesses to advertise the service, and using a bus tracker app Increase route frequency McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 34 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho o Reducing current hour headways to 30 minutes could make the service more attractive to potential riders o For cost-efficiency purposes, the increased service could be limited to the summertime and other peak periods (several of the reviewed cities provide additional frequency, routes, and/or service hours during their peak seasons) Evaluate providing transit service along Spring Mountain Boulevard instead of looping back on Strawberry Lane o This could possibly be a summertime only change Evaluate a summertime loop that is more compact (e.g., focuses on the 3rd Street-Lake Street corridor between Deinhard Lane and Rotary Park and adjacent areas) and therefore able to provide greater frequencies for circulation in and around downtown o This should be coordinated with the parking management plan o The current extra service provided for Winter Carnival could be a starting point for a model of how extra summer service may look Coordinate Red Line service within McCall with the Green Line route to Cascade to better help residents who need to access the County offices or other services along the route, as well as to help inbound visitors reach their ultimate destination within McCall Bike share is emerging as a popular form of public transportation. To date, its deployment is primarily in larger cities; though Hailey and Ketchum, Idaho do have a bike share system. Further investigation would be needed to determine the economic feasibility of such a program (partnerships with businesses would be important to its success) o Social Bicycles and Zagster both provide bike share systems that do not rely on docking stations and are therefore more flexible with how they are implemented o This would also need to be coordinated with a parking management plan Idaho does not have a dedicated source of public transportation funding. Some potential creative ways to cost effectively implement the above improvements could include: Partnering with businesses for funding service (e.g., through voluntary donations, advertising, fees paid in lieu of parking) Partnering with other transportation providers to share equipment (e.g., private organizations with buses or vans that are not always in use, the McCall-Donnelly School District) McCall Transportation Master Plan Project #: 19638.0 August 29, 2017 Page 35 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Boise, Idaho 9.0 NEXT STEPS This memorandum has been reviewed with the City staff and with the public in April 2017. It has been revised based on feedback received from staff and the public. The recommendations from this memo will be incorporated into the Transportation Master Plan. 10.0 REFERENCES 1. City of McCall. McCall Downtown Master Plan. Adopted December 2013. 2. Harmony Design & Engineering. Business Park Planning & Design Charrette: Conclusions, Recommendations and Framework Plan. February 2010. 3. Idaho Transportation Department. McCall Alternate Route, Environmental Assessment. September 2006. 4. US Department of Transportation. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 2009 Edition. May 2012. 5. DESMAN Associates. City of McCall Downtown Parking Study & Needs Assessment. November 2009. 6. Harmony Design & Engineering. McCall Area Pathways Master Plan. Adopted May 2012. 7. City of McCall. Multimodal Transit Center Location Analysis. January 2013. Attachment A Functional Classification Information Table Road Name From To Mileage % City Road Network Existing Year 2016 AADT (veh) Projected Year 2040 AADT (veh) Projected Over Capacity? 3rd Street, Lake Street, HWY 55 Krahn Street Club Hill Boulevard 4.6 2.71%3,920 - 11,530 14,120 - 19,830 Yes* W Deinhard Lane 3rd Street Boydstun Street 1.6 0.94%2,610 - 4,100 4,490 - 7,050 No Boydstun St W Deinhard Street W Lake Street 0.9 0.53%2,180 - 2,610 3,750 - 4,490 No Davis Avenue Wooley Avenue Lick Creek Road 0.7 0.41%1,670 - 2,280 2,870 - 3,920 No E Deinhard Lane 3rd Street Samson Trail 0.5 0.29%2,670 - 4,920 4,590 - 8,460 No Lick Creek Road Davis Avenue Pilgrim Cove Road 0.9 0.53%1,340 2,300 No N Mission Street Lake Street Deinhard Lane 0.8 0.47%1,310 - 1,570 2,250 - 2,700 No S Mission Street Deinhard Lane Riverfront Park 0.6 0.35%1,820 3,130 No Pine Street Railroad Avenue Louisa Street 0.1 0.06%n/a n/a No Railroad Avenue 3rd Street Pine Street 0.2 0.12%3,430 5,900 No N Samson Trail Deinhard Lane Woodlands Drive 0.2 0.12%1,650 2,840 No Spring Mountain Boulevard Woodlands Drive Lick Creek Road 2.2 1.29%870 1,500 No Warren Wagon Road Lake Street Quaker Hill Conference Center 0.6 0.35%1,620 - 1,780 2,790 - 3,060 No Wooley Avenue Louisa Street Spring Mountain Boulevard 0.6 0.35%1,650 2,840 No 1st Street Lake Street Colorado Street 0.3 0.18%650 1,120 No 2nd Street Lake Street Park Street 0.1 0.06%1,060 1,820 No Colorado Street 1st Street N Samson Trail 0.4 0.24%n/a n/a No Davis Avenue Wanda Avenue Wooley Avenue 0.3 0.18%n/a n/a No E Lake Street 3rd Street Fir Street 0.2 0.12%n/a n/a No Floyde Street 3rd Street Smitty Avenue 0.3 0.18%n/a n/a No W Forrest Street Mather Road Mission Street 0.7 0.41%940 1,620 No Hemlock Street Lake Street Davis Avenue 0.3 0.18%n/a n/a No Lakeside Avenue Boydstun Street Lake Street 0.3 0.18%n/a n/a No Lenora Street 1st Street 3rd Street 0.1 0.06%n/a n/a No Mather Road Lake Street Mission Street 1.1 0.65%n/a n/a No Park Street Mission Street Thompson Avenue 0.6 0.35%1,760 3,850 No Pine Street Lake Street Railroad Avenue 0.06 0.04%n/a n/a No Reedy Lane Davis Avenue McCall Golf Club 0.3 0.18%n/a n/a No Rio Vista Boulevard Boydstun Street Pinedale Street 2.1 1.24%n/a n/a No Roosevelet Avenue Hemlock Street Pine Street 0.2 0.12%780 1,340 No Rowland Street Lake Street Pinedale Street 0.2 0.12%n/a n/a No N Samson Trail Colorado Street Park Street 0.3 0.18%n/a n/a No Stibnite Street Mission Street 3rd Street 0.4 0.24%740 1,270 No Thompson Avenue Park Street Davis Avenue 0.2 0.12%1,480 2,250 No Wanda Avenue Samson Trail Davis Avenue 0.2 0.12%n/a n/a No Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Major Collector Minor Collector City of McCall Transportation Master Plan Roadway Functional Classifications *N 3rd Street and E Lake Street are projected to experience LOS E-F during the peak season (summertime) and only N 3rd Street is projected to experience LOS E-F during off-peak season (non- summertime) Attachment B Street Sections Street Sections for Mission, Wooley, Davis, Idaho, and Lake (Provided by Horrocks Engineers) Street Sections Public Meetings The City of McCall hosted public meetings with residents and stakeholders to brainstorm possible design options for five regionally significant streets that have been identified for re-construction in the next 10 years. The purpose of these meetings was to allow the community an opportunity to provide input on the future street section, and identify areas of concern, so that these design considerations can be planned for in the future roadway reconstruction projects for these corridors. The recommended street sections will also serve to guide the right-of-way requirements and pathways planning as future development occurs along these corridors. The five street sections that were discussed at public open houses held on April 19, 2017 and April 20, 2017 were: Mission Street between Deinhard Lane and the smokejumper base Lake Street between Mather Road and 1st Street Idaho Street between Mission Street and 1st Street Davis Avenue between Wooley Avenue and Agate Street Wooley Avenue between Davis Avenue and Spring Mountain Ranch Boulevard Participants identified general themes, locations of significance, street priorities, and design preferences for each street. The documentation and summaries of the public input received at these meetings can be viewed later in this attachment. Recommended Street Sections Each of the streets discussed during the public meetings, held April 19 and 20, 2017, has its own design challenges and individual character. Meeting attendees expressed their ideas and important design priorities of each street, which are summarized below in order of frequency. As a result of the meeting, the consultant team and City staff developed the following recommended street sections. These sections take into consideration various design constraints, such as the existing topography and right-of- way, while still providing accommodations for the many pedestrians and bicyclists that travel these roadways. These recommended street sections should be carried forward for planning purposes. However, these sections may be modified in the future based on topographical, right-of-way, funding or other design constraints that will be evaluated during the design phase of each individual project. The complete findings from each meeting can be viewed later in this attachment. Mission Street Approximately 8 people participated in the Mission Street public meeting on April 19, 2017, and provided input on how the street should be designed for the future. It was determined that Mission Street from Deinhard Lane to the smokejumper base has the opportunity for two different roadway sections. It is recommended that the section from Deinhard Lane to Helmich Street include bike lanes. A separated pathway is recommended from Helmich Street to the smokejumper base to connect the existing pathway that ties into Mission Street south of Helmich Street to the existing pathway that was recently constructed south of the smokejumper base. Below are the recommended street sections: Mission Street Design Priorities: bike lanes, crosswalks/crossings, multi-use pathway, stormwater/drainage, signage, visibility, snow removal/storage, driveway access Lake Street Approximately 7 people participated in the Lake Street public meeting on April 19, 2017, and provided input on how the street should be designed for the future. Lake Street is under the jurisdiction of the Idaho Transportation Department, therefore all future design efforts will need to be coordinated between the City and ITD. Lake Street/SH-55 has a narrow 50’ existing right-of-way with significant development on both the north and south side of the roadway which presents design constraints that were taken into consideration when developing the proposed roadway sections. These design constraints are the reason for the differing sections from Mission Street to 1st Street and Mission Street to Mather Road as shown. Below are the recommended street sections based on these existing constraints as well as the input received at the public meeting: (sidewalk on the north side where possible and separated pathway on the south side where possible) W. Lake Street and E. Lake Street Design Priorities: bike lanes, sidewalks, multi-use pathway, crosswalk/crossings, stormwater/drainage, snow removal/storage, private property Idaho Street Approximately 10 people participated in the Idaho Street public meeting on April 19, 2017, and provided input on how the street should be designed for the future. Based on this input it was determined that the preference was for parking on the south side with curb and gutter from Mission Street to Kasper Street on the north side of the roadway. Below was the recommended street section based on this public input: Idaho Street Design Priorities: stormwater/drainage, multi-use pathway, parking, snow removal/storage, driveway access/private property, landscaping, better road surface, slower vehicle speeds Idaho Street is programmed for construction in 2018, therefore an additional public meeting was held on August 21 to present design alternatives for the project. Three alternatives were presented: Alternative 1, parking on the north side, �� A l t e r n a t i v e 2 , p a r k i n g o n s o u t h s i d e w i t h a d j a c e n t p a t h w a y , a n d �� A l t e r n a t i v e 3 , p a r k i n g o n s o u t h s i d e w i t h s e p a r a t e d p a t h w a y . B a s e d o n t h e i n p u t r e c e i v e d a t t h e p u b l i c m e e t i n g , a n d t h r o u g h t h e o n - l i n e s u r v e y , A l t e r n a t i v e 3 w a s c h o s e n a s t h e p r e f e r r e d a l t e r n a t i v e t h a t w o u l d b e c a r r i e d f o r w a r d t o d e s i g n : D a v i s A v e n u e A p p r o x i m a t e l y 1 0 p e o p l e p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h e D a v i s A v e n u e p u b l i c m e e t i n g o n A p r i l 2 0 , 2 0 1 7 , a n d p r o v i d e d i n p u t o n h o w t h e s t r e e t s h o u l d b e d e s i g n e d f o r t h e f u t u r e . T h e r e w e r e t h r e e s u b s e c t i o n s o f D a v i s i d e n t i f i e d b a s e d o n t h e v a r y i n g r o a d w a y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w i t h i n t h i s c o r r i d o r : o S O U T H ( W o o l e y A v e . t o W a n d a A v e . ) r e t a i n l o w - v o l u m e n e i g h b o r h o o d c h a r a c t e r w i t h n o m a j o r c h a n g e s t o r o a d w a y d e s i g n o M I D D L E ( W o o l e y A v e . t o L i c k C r e e k R d . ) b e t t e r a c c o m m o d a t e m i x o f r o a d w a y s u s e r s a n d b e t t e r s e p a r a t e p e d e s t r i a n s a n d l e s s e x p e r i e n c e d b i k e r s f r o m v e h i c l e t r a f f i c o N O R T H ( L i c k C r e e k R d . t o A g a t e S t . ) p r e f e r p a t h w a y t o t r a n s i t i o n t o p a r k a n d o p e n s p a c e B a s e d o n t h e p u b l i c i n p u t i t w a s d e t e r m i n e d t h a t D a v i s A v e n u e , s o u t h o f W o o l e y A v e n u e s h o u l d m a i n t a i n t h e c u r r e n t r o a d w a y s e c t i o n w i t h s h a r e d t r a v e l l a n e s a n d n o b i k e l a n e s . D a v i s A v e n u e f r o m W o o l e y A v e n u e t o F a i r w a y D r i v e , a s w e l l a s D a v i s A v e n u e f r o m L i c k C r e e k R o a d t o A g a t e S t r e e t , s h o u l d p r o v i d e f o r b i k e l a n e s . A p a t h w a y w a s c o n s i d e r e d f r o m L i c k C r e e k R o a d t o A g a t e S t r e e t b a s e d o n p u b l i c input, however the limited right-of-way will make this difficult. Davis Avenue from Fairway Drive to Lick Creek Road could potentially allow for a separated pathway along the golf course, therefore the preferred roadway section shows a pathway on the east side of the roadway. The preferred roadway sections are shown below: Davis Avenue Design Priorities: multi-use pathway, snow removal/storage, signage, crosswalk/crossings, bike lanes, safer bus stops, stormwater/drainage, better road surface, wider shoulders, lighting Wooley Avenue Approximately 12 people participated in the Wooley Avenue public meeting on April 20, 2017, and provided input on how the street should be designed for the future. Highlights from the meeting discussions as well as a review of written feedback shows support and preferences for the following design elements and approaches on Wooley Avenue: Participants agreed that Wooley Avenue is a critical bike/ped connection that is heavily used, and better accommodations for these uses should be made. Participants were enthusiastic about the idea of a separated pathway wherever possible along Wooley. A “boardwalk style,” separated path was particularly appealing. Where a separated pathway is not possible, participants generally liked at least some separation from the vehicle lanes (e.g., valley gutter, bollards, temporary curb, etc.) Based on the public input, preferred roadway sections were developed for two segments of Wooley Avenue: one segment being from Davis Avenue to Divot Lane and one being Divot Lane to Spring Mountain Ranch Boulevard. The Davis Avenue to Divot Lane segment has limited opportunities for a separated pathway due to the existing development adjacent to the roadway. Therefore, an attached multi-use pathway is shown in this area. However, a separated pathway could potentially be constructed in the wetlands area on the south side of Wooley Avenue between Divot Lane and Spring Mountain Ranch Boulevard. The recommended roadway sections are shown below: (separated pathway on the south side where possible) Wooley Avenue Design Priorities: multi-use pathway, stormwater/drainage, bike lanes, crosswalks/crossings, snow removal/storage, sidewalks, slower vehicles, better road surfaces, slower vehicles, driveway access, signage, natural areas, visibility, private property McCall Downtown Master Plan Street Sections 30 11' TURN LANE 11' TRAVEL LANE 11' TRAVEL LANE 2' CURB & GUTTER 5' BIKE LANE 5' BIKE LANE 7' PARKING LANE 2' CURB & GUTTER 11' SIDEWALK (EXISTING) 14' SIDEWALK 1' BUFFER 80' RIGHT OF WAY BUILDING BUILDING 3RD STREET (TYPICAL CROSS SECTION) (LOOKING NORTH) 11' TRAVEL LANE 11' TRAVEL LANE 5' BIKE LANE 5' BIKE LANE 2' CURB & GUTTER 10.5' SIDEWALK 80' RIGHT OF WAY BUILDING BUILDING EAST LAKE STREET (TYPICAL CROSS SECTION) (LOOKING WEST) 7' PARKING LANE 1' BUFFER TURN LANE VARIES FROM 0' TO 11' 11' TRAVEL LANE 11' TRAVEL LANE 2' CURB & GUTTER 4' BIKE LANE 5' BIKE LANE 2' CURB & GUTTER 10.5' SIDEWALK MAXIMUM 15.5' SIDEWALK (VARIES WITH TURN LANE TRANSITION) 80' RIGHT OF WAY BUILDING BUILDING EAST LAKE STREET (CROSS SECTION AT TURN LANE) (LOOKING WEST) 7' PARKING LANE 1' BUFFER 2' CURB & GUTTER 7' PARKING LANE MAXIMUM 17.5 SIDEWALK (VARIES WITH TURN LANE TRANSITION) 2ND STREET (TYPICAL CROSS SECTION) 1' BUFFER 3rd St. and E. Lake St. (Hwy 55) cross section 33 Second Street cross section 11' TRAVEL LANE 11' TRAVEL LANE 5' BIKE LANE 5' BIKE LANE 2' CURB & GUTTER 10.5' SIDEWALK 80' RIGHT OF WAY BUILDING BUILDING EAST LAKE STREET (TYPICAL CROSS SECTION) (LOOKING WEST) 7' PARKING LANE 1' BUFFER TURN LANE VARIES FROM 0' TO 11' 11' TRAVEL LANE 11' TRAVEL LANE 2' CURB & GUTTER 4' BIKE LANE 5' BIKE LANE 2' CURB & GUTTER 10.5' SIDEWALK MAXIMUM 15.5' SIDEWALK (VARIES WITH TURN LANE TRANSITION) 80' RIGHT OF WAY BUILDING BUILDING EAST LAKE STREET (CROSS SECTION AT TURN LANE) (LOOKING WEST) 7' PARKING LANE 1' BUFFER 2' CURB & GUTTER 7' PARKING LANE MAXIMUM 17.5 SIDEWALK (VARIES WITH TURN LANE TRANSITION) 80' RIGHT OF WAY BUILDING BUILDING 2ND STREET (TYPICAL CROSS SECTION) BUILDING BUILDING LENORA, PARK, & 1ST STREET (TYPICAL CROSS SECTION) 10' TRAVEL LANE 2' CURB & GUTTER 15' SIDEWALK 7' PARKING LANE 7' PARKING LANE 10' TRAVEL LANE 6' LANDSCAPE 6' LANDSCAPE 15' SIDEWALK 2' CURB & GUTTER 1' BUFFER 35 TURN LANE VARIES FROM 0' TO 11' 11' TRAVEL LANE 11' TRAVEL LANE 2' CURB & GUTTER 4' BIKE LANE 5' BIKE LANE 2' CURB & GUTTER 10.5' SIDEWALK MAXIMUM 15.5' SIDEWALK (VARIES WITH TURN LANE TRANSITION) 80' RIGHT OF WAY BUILDING BUILDING EAST LAKE STREET (CROSS SECTION AT TURN LANE) (LOOKING WEST) 7' PARKING LANE 1' BUFFER 80' RIGHT OF WAY BUILDING BUILDING 2ND STREET (TYPICAL CROSS SECTION) 10' TRAVEL LANE 60' RIGHT OF WAY BUILDING BUILDING LENORA, PARK, & 1ST STREET (TYPICAL CROSS SECTION) 7' PARKING LANE 7' PARKING LANE 10' TRAVEL LANE 2' CURB & GUTTER 2' CURB & GUTTER 11' SIDEWALK W/ LANDSCAPE 11' SIDEWALK W/ LANDSCAPE 10' TRAVEL LANE 2' CURB & GUTTER 15' SIDEWALK 7' PARKING LANE 7' PARKING LANE 10' TRAVEL LANE 6' LANDSCAPE 6' LANDSCAPE 15' SIDEWALK 2' CURB & GUTTER Park Street, Lenora Street and First Street concept plan Park Street, Lenora Street and First Street cross section McCall Business Park Street Sections 44 Figure 20: Typical Interior Street Cross Section Figure 21: Samson Trail Cross Section Figure 22: Krahn Lane Cross Section Mission, Wooley, Davis, Idaho, and Lake Public Involvement Summaries (Provided by Horrocks Engineers) 1 WOOLEY STREET APRIL 20, 2017 Public Meeting Summary Approximately 12 people participated in the Wooley Street public meeting on April 20, 2017, and provided input on how the street should be designed for the future. Below is a summary of this input, which is reflective of the input from meeting participants. Scans of the original feedback materials are attached, for reference. In addition to raising awareness with the public around design options and limitations, the public meeting provided useful initial input for street planning, engineering and design. Initial public reaction to possible street designs can be used to: Refine options for further testing with the public as each street nears the design stage, and Planning at longer-term and/or larger scales (e.g., pathways planning, ROW or easement acquisition, etc.) Feedback from this meeting is grouped into four sections: 1. General themes 2. Locations of significance (see map) 3. Street priorities (see table) 4. Design preferences (see annotated sections) General Themes Highlights from the meeting discussion as well as review of written feedback shows support and preferences for the following design elements and approaches on Wooley Avenue: Participants agreed that Wooley Avenue is a critical bike/ped connection that is heavily used, and better accommodations for these uses should be made. Participants were enthusiastic about the idea of a separated pathway wherever possible along Wooley. A “boardwalk style,” separated path was particularly appealing. Where a separated pathway is not possible, participants generally liked at least some separation from the vehicle lanes (e.g., valley gutter, bollards, temporary curb, etc.) Participants agreed that snow storage should be accommodated on Wooley, and were also hoping swales could be cleaned out more regularly. 2 Locations of Significance GENERAL – BIKE/PED: Not good experience for walk/bike traffic – especially high in summer. Any path must work for bikes and strollers. Used frequently for fun runs and events. Gets narrow in winter (snow burms) Good crossing at Spring Mountain Blvd. to existing pathway. No shoulder Possible snow storage? Fewer driveways on south Good to keep path on south Busy 4- way stop Lots of water runoff Good example of guerilla pathway Option for “boardwalk” section Poor visibility Lots of crossing at Ponderosa North side ditches not maintained GENERAL - VEHICLES: Important road connection for drivers. It is less congested than the highway (alt route especially with boats). Access to/from east side of the lake. 3 Street Priorities Priorities Comments VERY IMPORTANT Multi-use pathways – 7 Stormwater/drainage – 5 Bike lanes – 5 Crosswalks/crossings – 5 Snow removal/storage – 4 Sidewalks – 3 Slower vehicles – 2 Road surfaces – 2 Slower vehicles – 2 Driveway access Signage Natural areas Visibility Private property Like the idea of multi-use pathway on boardwalk “I’m happy to give up part of my driveway to achieve a safe pathway situation.” “It costs more to move snow out.” (should accommodate snow storage at/near Wooley.) SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT Snow removal/storage– 3 Signage – 3 Stormwater/drainage– 2 Landscaping – 2 Slower vehicles – 2 Driveway access – 2 Road surfaces Natural areas Visibility Access to golf course Views “Slowing vehicles may be less important with improved pathways.” UNIMPORTANT Parking – 3 Sidewalks Landscaping Turn lanes Slower vehicles Views Curb and gutter 4 Design Preferences Great Bike/walk lane Easy to maintain (water/snow) Love bridge-walkway Good pedestrian situation Requires more space Extra swale means extra maintenance (water/culvert) Lifecycle cost of boardwalk material is important to consider Attachments – Original Meeting Notes and Materials " j ' \ �� S T R E E T P R I O R I T I E S f o r : W O G L r f : � l ( i n s e r t s t r e e t n a m e ) P r o v i d e i n p u t a b o u t w h a t t h e h i g h , m e d i u m a n d l o w p r i o r i t i e s s h o u l d b e f o r t h i s s t r e e t . P l e a s e w r i t e u p t o t h r e e p r i o r i t i e s i n e a c h b o x . T h e l i s t b e l o w i s i n t e n d e d a s a g u i d e - p l e a s e f e e l f r e e t o r e w o r d o r a d d y o u r o w n p r i o r i t i e s i f t h e y a r e n o t l i s t e d . p ��y e r e s E v . W l - l k / u u s s i n g ��n g �� S i l o w r e m o v a l / s t o r a g e �� l ��i g ��s ��s s a e e e s s t o : r l � - u n + v & . 3 * g �� b n t t t l I c a . l u u f a c e i f f i w e i ' i r e l �� t ! l f : 1 3 ] 8 ' S e � S g o o < i v i s t b H r t y P J . ; i m t k p i d p e r t : y o t h e r : - - - O T H E R C O M M E N T S v o u R N A M E : N t c ? w ��e f \ J S O M E W H A T I M P O R T A N T U N I M P O R T A N T 1 MISSION STREET APRIL 19, 2017 Public Meeting Summary Approximately 8 people participated in the Mission Street public meeting on April 19, 2017, and provided input on how the street should be designed for the future. Below is a summary of this input, which is reflective of the input from meeting participants. Scans of the original feedback materials are attached, for reference. In addition to raising awareness with the public around design options and limitations, the public meeting provided useful initial input for street planning, engineering and design. Initial public reaction to possible street designs can be used to: Refine options for further testing with the public as each street nears the design stage, and Planning at longer-term and/or larger scales (e.g., pathways planning, ROW or easement acquisition, etc.) Feedback from this meeting is grouped into four sections: 1. General themes 2. Locations of significance (see map) 3. Street priorities (see table) 4. Design preferences (see annotated sections) General Themes Highlights from the meeting discussion as well as review of written feedback shows support and preferences for the following design elements and approaches on Lake Street: Generally, participants seemed slightly in favor of linking the current pathway along Mission with a clearly-marked crossing and connecting to the existing two-way path south of the smokejumper base. There was some interest in also having bike lanes to connect the park entrance to Deinhart. Being mindful of the depth of the swales to allow truck traffic access to private parcels is also important. “I think in this area of town – beauty is less important than practicality.” 2 Locations of Significance Street Priorities Priorities Comments VERY IMPORTANT Bike lanes – 2 Sidewalks Multi-use pathways – 3 Crosswalks/crossings – 3 Signage – 2 Visibility – 2 Stormwater/drainage – 3 Snow removal/storage Bike lanes – 3 Driveway access Crossing on Mission at pathway entrance is a critical design element for users. “A relatively blind junction, it would need both visual and safety measures to be effective.” “24x7 lights blinking would not be good for the night sky.” SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT Snow removal/storage Signage Road surface Crosswalks/crossings UNIMPORTANT Views Landscaping Turn lanes GENERAL: Biking – many people use this route Important connection – completing pathway could increased use? Adequate drainage is important Access to properties is important – trucks, trailers concerned about ditch shoulders 2-way stop Flashing lights? Crossing is “blind” Prevailing route in winter 2-way starts Probably more people at park if path improved Lots of runners 3 Design Preferences No direct access to pathway (Mission NB) Dead end paths Traditional bike path design Increased bike traffic impinges on foot traffic Southbound peds have to cross Mission to get to path; blind entrance from existing path Similar to current pathway (south of area) Wider path is easier to navigate for less experienced road bikers/peds Attachments – Original Meeting Notes and Materials 1 LAKE STREET APRIL 19, 2017 Public Meeting Summary Approximately 7 people participated in the Lake Street public meeting on April 19, 2017, and provided input on how the street should be designed for the future. Below is a summary of this input, which is reflective of the input from meeting participants. Scans of the original feedback materials are attached, for reference. In addition to raising awareness with the public around design options and limitations, the public meeting provided useful initial input for street planning, engineering and design. Initial public reaction to possible street designs can be used to: Refine options for further testing with the public as each street nears the design stage, and Planning at longer-term and/or larger scales (e.g., pathways planning, ROW or easement acquisition, etc.) Feedback from this meeting is grouped into four sections: 1. General themes 2. Locations of significance (see map) 3. Street priorities (see table) 4. Design preferences (see annotated sections) General Themes Highlights from the meeting discussion as well as review of written feedback shows support and preferences for the following design elements and approaches on Lake Street: Participants agreed that improving pedestrian and bike access on Lake St. is important. Participants also saw views of the lake and walking lakeside as an important community asset. They also understood the difficulties of the right-of-way and private property constraints. There seemed to be general interest and support for: o Including bike lanes on Lake Street o Creating a continuous sidewalk/pathway on the south side of Lake o Considering options to create a sidewalk or path on the north side of Lake Street, at least to Mission o Routing trucks to Deinhard and allowing Lake Street to become more of a local road, connecting visitors and residents from downtown to Warren Wagon, Bear Basin, etc. by walking, biking and driving. Participants voiced the importance of private property rights in roadway planning. “We are a tourist community. Need to allow tourists and locals safe route from Shore Lodge to town. If we are going to spend money on streetscapes, this is the place to do our best.” 2 Locations of Significance GENERAL: Locals happy to use alley or Forest Street Would be nice to be able to bike from town west to Bear Basin etc. (Warren Wagon) What’s best for visitors? – Lake and 3rd are streets for tourists – “we want them to be happy.” Do we need turn lane? Should get ped/bike count on Lake. Too hard to get easements/row on north Interest in formal truck route on Deinhard – maybe even becomes Hwy 55 Cost to maintain sidewalk and snow removal is important ocnsideratiion. Walking in roadway during winter Cross walk Good cross walk Ideally sidewalks both sides to Mission LAKE: People want to be by the lake How do homeowners along lake feel? How do you please everybody? 3 Street Priorities Priorities Comments VERY IMPORTANT Bike lanes – 6 Sidewalks – 5 Multi-use pathways – 4 Crosswalk/crossings – 3 Stormwater/drainage Snow removal/storage Private property -Sidewalks on at least one side of the street -Need safest option on both sides of the road -Keep trucks off Lake St. SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT Turn lanes – 3 Stormwater/drainage – 2 Bike lanes Snow removal/storage Driveway access Crosswalk/crossings Sidewalks -Bike lanes on both sides of Lake St. -Turn lanes at hospital UNIMPORTANT Natural areas Driveway access Landscaping Turn lanes Parking 4 Design Preferences Yes, along the FS and city property Definitely both sides if possible Yes, as MUCH as possible – people WILL walk on the north side of the street Bike lane No bike lane Multi-use path (could go on either side) No sidewalk this side Minimum need a sidewalk Want it all the way to WW Rd. Attachments – Original Meeting Notes and Materials 0 IDAHO STREET APRIL 19, 2017 Public Meeting Summary 1 IDAHO STREET Approximately 10 people participated in the Idaho Street public meeting on April 19, 2017, and provided input on how the street should be designed for the future. Below is a summary of this input, which is reflective of the input from meeting participants. Scans of the original feedback materials are attached, for reference. In addition to raising awareness with the public around design options and limitations, the public meeting provided useful initial input for street planning, engineering and design. Initial public reaction to possible street designs can be used to: Refine options for further testing with the public as each street nears the design stage, and Planning at longer-term and/or larger scales (e.g., pathways planning, ROW or easement acquisition, etc.) Feedback from this meeting is grouped into four sections: 1. General themes 2. Locations of significance (see map) 3. Street priorities (see table) 4. Design preferences (see annotated sections) General Themes Highlights from the meeting discussion as well as review of written feedback shows support and preferences for the following design elements and approaches on Idaho Street: Participants agreed that the road needs to be resurfaced/rebuilt. Addressing stormwater/drainage needs and maintaining good accommodations for snow storage and related melt is the number one priority for the design of this road. Drainage should not flood residents’ properties. This road has a significant amount of walking and biking traffic, including school-aged kids, people with dogs and with strollers. Street design should accommodate and give preference to these uses, including a clearly marked pedestrian crossing to Kasper and tying in with the pathway along Mission (south), and Forest (north). Traffic turning into the school should be alerted about bikes and pedestrians. Participants were in favor of the following design elements: o Separated multi-use pathway o Accommodations for parking (especially for public use of school ballfields) – mixed feelings and inconclusive discussion about where this parking should go, how much is needed, and if it should be allowed on-street (“people will park there no matter what”) or directed toward large, existing lots. o Option for curb and gutter on north side of the street (should not prevent driveway access) o Connectivity to school, ballfields from street Participants were interested in landscaping and natural areas. Participants were not supportive of: o Sidewalk o Swales adjacent to existing driveways that are deep/filled with water 2 Locations of Significance Street Priorities Priorities Comments VERY IMPORTANT Stormwater/drainage – 5 Multi-use pathway – 4 Parking – 4 Snow removal/storage – 2 Driveway access/Private property – 2 Better road surface Landscaping Slower vehicle speeds No barrier curb Crosswalk at Kasper SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT Snow removal/storage – 2 Signage Visibility Natural areas Slower vehicles Better road surface UNIMPORTANT Sidewalk – 2 Parking Bike lane Turn lane Natural areas Landscaping not necessary – have ballparks GENERAL: Lots of walking and biking, dogs on Idaho Lots of activities related to the fields, schools PARKING Need for at least some on-street parking Available lots for parking aren’t well-used School administration enjoys current parking location Lots of turning traffic Lots of ped crossing at Kasper Tie into pathway, Forest Street Drainage a big issue 3 Design Preferences Don’t like ditches (“terrified” of them) Concerned about height/elevation of street causing too much drainage into yards Shouldn’t include parking – use parking lots instead and reduce need for easement Pathway – “yes!” At least 10 feet wide. On south side, where most people want to walk (with good crossing to Kasper) Many people like the idea of curb/gutter, no sidewalk (“wasted space”) Allow for parking on at least one side (north and/or south) Attachments – Original Meeting Notes and Materials 1 DAVIS AVENUE Approximately 10 people participated in the Davis Avenue public meeting on April 20, 2017, and provided input on how the street should be designed for the future. Below is a summary of this input, which is reflective of the input from meeting participants. Scans of the original feedback materials are attached, for reference. In addition to raising awareness with the public around design options and limitations, the public meeting provided useful initial input for street planning, engineering and design. Initial public reaction to possible street designs can be used to: Refine options for further testing with the public as each street nears the design stage, and Planning at longer-term and/or larger scales (e.g., pathways planning, ROW or easement acquisition, etc.) Feedback from this meeting is grouped into four sections: 1. General themes 2. Locations of significance (see map) 3. Street priorities (see table) 4. Design preferences (see annotated sections) General Themes Highlights from the meeting discussion as well as review of written feedback shows support and preferences for the following design elements and approaches on Davis Avenue: There were three subsections of Davis identified: o SOUTH (Wooley Ave. to Wanda Ave.) – retain low-volume neighborhood character with no major changes to roadway design o MIDDLE (Lick Creek Rd. to Wooley Ave.) – better accommodate mix of roadways users and better separate pedestrians and less experienced bikers from vehicle traffic o NORTH (Ponderosa State Park to Lick Creek Rd.) – prefer pathway to transition to park and open space Participants agreed that pedestrian and biking accommodations should be improved on Davis, and acknowledged that private property and ROW constraints make simple solutions difficult. Discussion seemed to support the idea of identifying both short-term (bike lanes and/or path in existing ROW) and longer-term solutions (acquiring easements or widening ROW). This road has a significant amount of walking and biking traffic, including children, dogs, people with strollers in both summer and winter seasons. Street design should work to better accommodate these uses, and also create clearer opportunities (e.g., clear signage, crossings) to move bike/ped traffic off of Davis toward lower-volume streets such as McCall Ave. and Roosevelt Ave. Participants were in favor of the following design elements: o Separated multi-use pathway, wherever possible o Space between peds/bikes and vehicles (e.g., wider traffic lanes w/bike lanes or 2-way path) o More/improved bus stop areas Seemed to be a preference for snow storage on Davis. APRIL 20, 2017 Public Meeting Summary 2 Locations of Significance Street Priorities Priorities Comments VERY IMPORTANT Multi-use pathways – 4 Snow removal/storage – 3 Signage – 2 Crosswalks/crossings – 2 Bike lanes – 2 Safer bus stops – 2 Stormwater/drainage Road surfaces Wider shoulders Lighting Reduce traffic from Davis/Wooley junction South to Wanda Street Pathway linking Ponderosa Park to intersection of Lick Creek and Davis SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT Visibility – 2 Stormwater/drainage Turn lanes Natural areas UNIMPORTANT Turn lanes Curb and gutter “we like swales better” MIDDLE SECTION (Lick Creek to Wooley) Lots of walking, biking and vehicle traffic Unlikely that this traffic can be diverted entirely – too many destinations, residences along Davis Acknowledge that the ROW is severely constrained Make road and trail connections more obvious – remove illegal “no trespassing” signs that defer bike/ped traffic accessing McCall Ave. and Downtown Congestion at 3rd and Pine – particularly in summer – is driving vehicle traffic to Thompson (and Wanda) “Blind hill” and poor line of sight at Hemlock – “feels dangerous” Lots of summer bike traffic on Lick Creek (consider bike lanes) SOUTH SECTION (Wooley to Wanda) Direct traffic to turn on Wooley (for Downtown, Hwy 55) with signs, map apps (Sign at Fir St. helps, but not enough) Character of this section should remain narrower, neighborhood street Don’t need bike or ped facilities in this section No safe place to wait for the bus on east side of street. School bus stops should be improved/widened. NORTH SECTION (Ponderosa SP to Lick Creek) Strongly favor a pathway in this area (and further south, if feasible) Character of this section should be a gateway/transition to park areas and open spaces 3 Design Preferences Lanes too close to traffic/lanes should be much wider in section from Lick Creek to Pine Street Not much room for pedestrians (unless bike lanes widened) Bike lanes (Park Street example) Accommodates traffic on both sides (can accommodate pedestrians in bike lanes) PROS CONS Cost more to implement? (larger footprint/requires easements) …not ideal if imminent domain is used to acquire Safer for trail users Most space between people and traffic This is ideal for entire road, but… Counter-flow traffic on path is “tricky” Bikes and people will still use both sides of street (lots of crossings, etc.) Allows more space between people and traffic This would be good if driving lanes were wider for more serious bikers Attachments – Original Meeting Notes and Materials Attachment C Preliminary Traffic Operations Worksheets Queues Existing PM Peak Hour - Peak Season 201: 3rd Street & Lenora St/Railroad Ave 1/30/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Existing PM Peak Hour - Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 1 Lane Group EBT WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 220 45 108 43 412 155 273 v/c Ratio 0.69 0.12 0.32 0.07 0.39 0.29 0.23 Control Delay 23.0 16.9 6.9 5.8 6.3 7.8 6.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 23.0 16.9 6.9 5.8 6.6 7.8 6.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 35 12 0 4 43 19 31 Queue Length 95th (ft) 93 31 30 19 120 63 83 Internal Link Dist (ft) 314 411 262 210 Turn Bay Length (ft) 55 150 150 Base Capacity (vph) 448 572 471 606 1068 530 1177 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 232 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.49 0.08 0.23 0.07 0.49 0.29 0.23 Intersection Summary Queues Existing PM Peak Hour - Peak Season 202: 3rd Street & Park St 1/30/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Existing PM Peak Hour - Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 2 Lane Group EBT EBR WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 10 101 53 62 56 452 49 334 v/c Ratio 0.04 0.38 0.31 0.26 0.08 0.34 0.08 0.25 Control Delay 17.7 9.5 23.9 9.2 3.8 4.5 3.8 4.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 17.7 9.5 23.9 9.2 3.8 4.5 3.8 4.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 3 0 14 0 4 42 4 29 Queue Length 95th (ft) 12 31 39 24 16 96 14 68 Internal Link Dist (ft) 329 477 421 262 Turn Bay Length (ft) 40 90 135 135 Base Capacity (vph) 607 492 399 466 674 1320 612 1359 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.02 0.21 0.13 0.13 0.08 0.34 0.08 0.25 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing PM Peak Hour - Peak Season 201: 3rd Street & Lenora St/Railroad Ave 1/30/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Existing PM Peak Hour - Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 84 14 107 4 38 100 40 254 129 144 248 6 Future Volume (veh/h) 84 14 107 4 38 100 40 254 129 144 248 6 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.84 0.79 0.87 0.79 0.94 0.89 0.97 0.89 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1863 1900 1900 1863 1863 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 90 15 115 4 41 108 43 273 139 155 267 6 Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 202 54 187 82 515 365 622 621 316 510 1008 23 Arrive On Green 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 Sat Flow, veh/h 402 185 643 54 1772 1256 1040 1115 567 938 1809 41 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 220 0 0 45 0 108 43 0 412 155 0 273 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1230 0 0 1825 0 1256 1040 0 1682 938 0 1850 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.9 1.3 0.0 8.5 6.9 0.0 4.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.7 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 3.9 5.9 0.0 8.5 15.4 0.0 4.5 Prop In Lane 0.41 0.52 0.09 1.00 1.00 0.34 1.00 0.02 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 443 0 0 597 0 365 622 0 938 510 0 1031 V/C Ratio(X) 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.30 0.07 0.00 0.44 0.30 0.00 0.26 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 459 0 0 620 0 382 622 0 938 510 0 1031 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 17.8 0.0 0.0 15.3 0.0 16.3 8.3 0.0 7.7 12.2 0.0 6.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.2 0.0 1.5 1.5 0.0 0.6 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 1.4 0.4 0.0 4.3 2.0 0.0 2.5 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 18.7 0.0 0.0 15.3 0.0 16.7 8.5 0.0 9.2 13.7 0.0 7.4 LnGrp LOS B B B A A B A Approach Vol, veh/h 220 153 455 428 Approach Delay, s/veh 18.7 16.3 9.1 9.7 Approach LOS B B A A Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 37.5 21.7 37.5 21.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 33.0 18.0 33.0 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.5 10.7 17.4 5.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.8 1.4 5.0 1.9 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 11.9 HCM 2010 LOS B HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Existing PM Peak Hour - Peak Season 202: 3rd Street & Park St 1/30/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Existing PM Peak Hour - Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1 8 92 41 7 56 51 365 46 45 296 8 Future Volume (veh/h) 1 8 92 41 7 56 51 365 46 45 296 8 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.82 0.79 0.82 0.79 0.95 0.89 0.97 0.89 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 1 9 101 45 8 62 56 401 51 49 325 9 Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 86 493 350 375 58 350 589 902 115 503 1016 28 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 Sat Flow, veh/h 63 1754 1245 930 206 1245 993 1596 203 906 1797 50 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 10 0 101 53 0 62 56 0 452 49 0 334 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1817 0 1245 1136 0 1245 993 0 1799 906 0 1847 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 3.7 1.5 0.0 2.2 1.9 0.0 8.5 1.9 0.0 5.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 0.0 3.7 1.8 0.0 2.2 7.5 0.0 8.5 10.5 0.0 5.6 Prop In Lane 0.10 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.03 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 578 0 350 433 0 350 589 0 1016 503 0 1044 V/C Ratio(X) 0.02 0.00 0.29 0.12 0.00 0.18 0.10 0.00 0.44 0.10 0.00 0.32 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 626 0 384 464 0 384 589 0 1016 503 0 1044 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 15.2 0.0 16.4 15.7 0.0 15.9 8.7 0.0 7.4 10.4 0.0 6.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.0 1.4 0.4 0.0 0.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 1.3 0.6 0.0 0.8 0.6 0.0 4.5 0.5 0.0 3.0 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 15.2 0.0 16.9 15.8 0.0 16.1 9.0 0.0 8.8 10.8 0.0 7.6 LnGrp LOS B B B B A A B A Approach Vol, veh/h 111 115 508 383 Approach Delay, s/veh 16.7 16.0 8.8 8.0 Approach LOS B B A A Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 37.5 20.9 37.5 20.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 33.0 18.0 33.0 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.5 5.7 12.5 4.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.9 0.8 5.7 0.9 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 10.1 HCM 2010 LOS B Queues Future PM Peak Hour - Peak Season 201: 3rd Street & Lenora St/Railroad Ave 1/30/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Future PM Peak Hour - Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 1 Lane Group EBT WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 375 76 183 72 699 264 464 v/c Ratio 0.97 0.15 0.39 0.17 0.71 0.97 0.43 Control Delay 62.1 18.7 6.2 7.6 13.8 67.0 9.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 62.1 18.7 6.2 7.6 18.3 67.0 9.0 Queue Length 50th (ft) 117 23 0 12 158 89 90 Queue Length 95th (ft) #281 52 42 30 281 #238 148 Internal Link Dist (ft) 314 411 262 210 Turn Bay Length (ft) 55 150 150 Base Capacity (vph) 385 496 470 423 978 272 1077 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 206 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.97 0.15 0.39 0.17 0.91 0.97 0.43 Intersection Summary # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Queues Future PM Peak Hour - Peak Season 202: Park St & 3rd Street 1/30/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Future PM Peak Hour - Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 2 Lane Group EBT EBR WBT WBR NBL NBT SBL SBT Lane Group Flow (vph) 17 168 89 102 94 752 82 556 v/c Ratio 0.06 0.47 0.44 0.34 0.19 0.59 0.22 0.43 Control Delay 17.1 8.6 25.7 8.1 5.7 8.3 6.5 6.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 Total Delay 17.1 8.6 25.7 8.1 5.7 8.3 6.5 6.5 Queue Length 50th (ft) 4 0 24 0 9 105 8 66 Queue Length 95th (ft) 17 39 58 30 32 256 32 154 Internal Link Dist (ft) 329 477 421 262 Turn Bay Length (ft) 40 90 135 135 Base Capacity (vph) 606 538 399 495 507 1269 376 1305 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 312 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.03 0.31 0.22 0.21 0.19 0.59 0.22 0.56 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Future PM Peak Hour - Peak Season 201: 3rd Street & Lenora St/Railroad Ave 1/30/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Future PM Peak Hour - Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 144 24 184 7 65 172 68 436 221 248 426 10 Future Volume (veh/h) 144 24 184 7 65 172 68 436 221 248 426 10 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.86 0.78 1.00 0.78 0.97 0.90 1.00 0.90 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1863 1900 1900 1863 1863 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 153 26 196 7 69 183 72 464 235 264 453 11 Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 193 36 165 77 493 346 510 653 331 325 1053 26 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 Sat Flow, veh/h 412 130 593 60 1772 1242 900 1119 567 744 1805 44 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 375 0 0 76 0 183 72 0 699 264 0 464 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1135 0 0 1832 0 1242 900 0 1686 744 0 1849 Q Serve(g_s), s 16.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.1 3.1 0.0 19.2 18.7 0.0 9.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 18.1 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 8.1 12.2 0.0 19.2 37.9 0.0 9.1 Prop In Lane 0.41 0.52 0.09 1.00 1.00 0.34 1.00 0.02 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 394 0 0 571 0 346 510 0 983 325 0 1078 V/C Ratio(X) 0.95 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.53 0.14 0.00 0.71 0.81 0.00 0.43 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 394 0 0 571 0 346 510 0 983 325 0 1078 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 24.8 0.0 0.0 17.6 0.0 19.8 10.9 0.0 9.6 24.9 0.0 7.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 33.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 1.5 0.6 0.0 4.4 19.5 0.0 1.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 10.3 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 2.9 0.9 0.0 9.9 6.5 0.0 4.9 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 57.9 0.0 0.0 17.7 0.0 21.4 11.5 0.0 14.0 44.4 0.0 8.8 LnGrp LOS E B C B B D A Approach Vol, veh/h 375 259 771 728 Approach Delay, s/veh 57.9 20.3 13.8 21.7 Approach LOS E C B C Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 42.4 22.6 42.4 22.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 37.9 18.1 37.9 18.1 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 21.2 20.1 39.9 10.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 9.8 0.0 0.0 2.7 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 25.0 HCM 2010 LOS C HCM 2010 Signalized Intersection Summary Future PM Peak Hour - Peak Season 202: Park St & 3rd Street 1/30/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Future PM Peak Hour - Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2 14 158 71 12 96 88 628 79 77 509 14 Future Volume (veh/h) 2 14 158 71 12 96 88 628 79 77 509 14 Number 7 4 14 3 8 18 5 2 12 1 6 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.84 0.79 0.84 0.79 0.98 0.89 1.00 0.89 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 1863 1863 1900 1863 1863 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2 15 168 76 13 102 94 668 84 82 541 15 Adj No. of Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 93 492 359 371 55 359 431 895 113 295 1007 28 Arrive On Green 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 Sat Flow, veh/h 85 1715 1252 898 191 1252 833 1598 201 708 1797 50 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 17 0 168 89 0 102 94 0 752 82 0 556 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1800 0 1252 1090 0 1252 833 0 1799 708 0 1847 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 6.5 3.2 0.0 3.7 4.7 0.0 18.6 5.8 0.0 11.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.4 0.0 6.5 3.6 0.0 3.7 15.9 0.0 18.6 24.4 0.0 11.2 Prop In Lane 0.12 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.03 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 585 0 359 426 0 359 431 0 1008 295 0 1035 V/C Ratio(X) 0.03 0.00 0.47 0.21 0.00 0.28 0.22 0.00 0.75 0.28 0.00 0.54 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 617 0 383 446 0 383 431 0 1008 295 0 1035 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 15.1 0.0 17.3 16.2 0.0 16.3 13.1 0.0 9.8 19.0 0.0 8.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.2 0.0 0.4 1.2 0.0 5.0 2.3 0.0 2.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 0.0 2.3 1.1 0.0 1.3 1.2 0.0 10.4 1.3 0.0 6.1 LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 15.1 0.0 18.2 16.4 0.0 16.7 14.3 0.0 14.8 21.3 0.0 10.1 LnGrp LOS B B B B B B C B Approach Vol, veh/h 185 191 846 638 Approach Delay, s/veh 18.0 16.6 14.8 11.6 Approach LOS B B B B Timer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 37.5 21.4 37.5 21.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 33.0 18.0 33.0 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 20.6 8.5 26.4 5.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 7.8 1.3 4.7 1.5 Intersection Summary HCM 2010 Ctrl Delay 14.2 HCM 2010 LOS B HCS 2010 Roundabouts Report General Information Site Information Analyst JGM Intersection 3rd Street/Park Street Agency or Co.City of McCall E/W Street Name Park Street Date Performed 1/19/2017 N/S Street Name 3rd Street Analysis Year 2017 Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Time Period PM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.91 Project Description Existing Peak Season Jurisdiction ITD Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics Approach EB WB NB SB Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Number of Lanes (N)0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Lane Assignment LTR LTR LTR LTR Volume (V), veh/h 0 1 8 92 0 41 7 56 0 51 365 46 0 45 296 8 Percent Heavy Vehicles, %3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Flow Rate (vPCE), pc/h 0 1 9 104 0 46 8 63 0 58 413 52 0 51 335 9 Right-Turn Bypass None None None None Conflicting Lanes 1 1 1 1 Pedestrians Crossing, p/h 120 120 120 120 Critical and Follow-Up Headway Adjustment Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Critical Headway (s)5.1929 5.1929 5.1929 5.1929 Follow-Up Headway (s)3.1858 3.1858 3.1858 3.1858 Flow Computations, Capacity and v/c Ratios Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Entry Flow (ve), pc/h 114 117 523 395 Entry Volume veh/h 111 114 508 383 Circulating Flow (vc), pc/h 432 472 61 112 Exiting Flow (vex), pc/h 112 75 477 485 Capacity (cpce), pc/h 734 705 1063 1010 Capacity (c), veh/h 683 656 990 941 v/c Ratio (x)0.16 0.17 0.51 0.41 Delay and Level of Service Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Lane Control Delay (d), s/veh 7.1 7.5 10.0 8.5 Lane LOS A A A A 95% Queue, veh 0.6 0.6 3.0 2.0 Approach Delay, s/veh 7.1 7.5 10.0 8.5 Approach LOS A A A A Intersection Delay, s/veh | LOS 8.9 A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Roundabouts Version 6.90 3/16/2017 1:37:15 PM 3rd-PARK_existing peak.xro HCS 2010 Roundabouts Report General Information Site Information Analyst JGM Intersection 3rd Street/Railroad Avenue Agency or Co.City of McCall E/W Street Name Railroad Avenue Date Performed 1/19/2017 N/S Street Name 3rd Street Analysis Year 2017 Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Time Period PM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.93 Project Description Existing Peak Season Jurisdiction ITD Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics Approach EB WB NB SB Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Number of Lanes (N)0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Lane Assignment LTR LTR LTR LTR Volume (V), veh/h 0 84 14 107 0 4 38 100 0 40 254 129 0 144 248 6 Percent Heavy Vehicles, %3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Flow Rate (vPCE), pc/h 0 93 16 119 0 4 42 111 0 44 281 143 0 159 275 7 Right-Turn Bypass None None None None Conflicting Lanes 1 1 1 1 Pedestrians Crossing, p/h 120 120 120 120 Critical and Follow-Up Headway Adjustment Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Critical Headway (s)5.1929 5.1929 5.1929 5.1929 Follow-Up Headway (s)3.1858 3.1858 3.1858 3.1858 Flow Computations, Capacity and v/c Ratios Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Entry Flow (ve), pc/h 228 157 468 441 Entry Volume veh/h 221 152 454 428 Circulating Flow (vc), pc/h 438 418 268 90 Exiting Flow (vex), pc/h 318 93 485 398 Capacity (cpce), pc/h 729 744 864 1033 Capacity (c), veh/h 679 693 805 962 v/c Ratio (x)0.33 0.22 0.56 0.45 Delay and Level of Service Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Lane Control Delay (d), s/veh 9.5 7.8 12.9 8.9 Lane LOS A A B A 95% Queue, veh 1.4 0.8 3.6 2.3 Approach Delay, s/veh 9.5 7.8 12.9 8.9 Approach LOS A A B A Intersection Delay, s/veh | LOS 10.3 B Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Roundabouts Version 6.90 3/16/2017 1:38:14 PM 3rd-RR_existing peak.xro HCS 2010 Roundabouts Report General Information Site Information Analyst JGM Intersection 3rd Street/Park Street Agency or Co.City of McCall E/W Street Name Park Street Date Performed 1/19/2017 N/S Street Name 3rd Street Analysis Year 2017 Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Time Period PM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.91 Project Description Future Peak Season Jurisdiction ITD Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics Approach EB WB NB SB Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Number of Lanes (N)0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Lane Assignment LTR LTR LTR LTR Volume (V), veh/h 0 2 14 158 0 71 12 96 0 88 628 79 0 77 509 14 Percent Heavy Vehicles, %3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Flow Rate (vPCE), pc/h 0 2 16 179 0 80 14 109 0 100 711 89 0 87 576 16 Right-Turn Bypass None None None None Conflicting Lanes 1 1 1 1 Pedestrians Crossing, p/h 120 120 120 120 Critical and Follow-Up Headway Adjustment Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Critical Headway (s)5.1929 5.1929 5.1929 5.1929 Follow-Up Headway (s)3.1858 3.1858 3.1858 3.1858 Flow Computations, Capacity and v/c Ratios Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Entry Flow (ve), pc/h 197 203 900 679 Entry Volume veh/h 191 197 874 659 Circulating Flow (vc), pc/h 743 813 105 194 Exiting Flow (vex), pc/h 192 130 822 835 Capacity (cpce), pc/h 538 501 1017 931 Capacity (c), veh/h 500 467 947 867 v/c Ratio (x)0.38 0.42 0.92 0.76 Delay and Level of Service Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Lane Control Delay (d), s/veh 13.5 15.3 34.3 19.8 Lane LOS B C D C 95% Queue, veh 1.8 2.1 14.1 7.4 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.5 15.3 34.3 19.8 Approach LOS B C D C Intersection Delay, s/veh | LOS 25.3 D Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Roundabouts Version 6.90 3/16/2017 1:39:07 PM 3rd-PARK_future peak.xro HCS 2010 Roundabouts Report General Information Site Information Analyst JGM Intersection 3rd Street/Railroad Avenue Agency or Co.City of McCall E/W Street Name Railroad Avenue Date Performed 1/19/2017 N/S Street Name 3rd Street Analysis Year 2017 Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Time Period PM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.97 Project Description Future Peak Season Jurisdiction ITD Volume Adjustments and Site Characteristics Approach EB WB NB SB Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Number of Lanes (N)0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Lane Assignment LTR LTR LTR LTR Volume (V), veh/h 0 144 24 184 0 7 65 172 0 68 436 221 0 248 426 10 Percent Heavy Vehicles, %3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Flow Rate (vPCE), pc/h 0 153 25 195 0 7 69 183 0 72 463 235 0 263 452 11 Right-Turn Bypass None None None None Conflicting Lanes 1 1 1 1 Pedestrians Crossing, p/h 120 120 120 120 Critical and Follow-Up Headway Adjustment Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Critical Headway (s)5.1929 5.1929 5.1929 5.1929 Follow-Up Headway (s)3.1858 3.1858 3.1858 3.1858 Flow Computations, Capacity and v/c Ratios Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Entry Flow (ve), pc/h 373 259 770 726 Entry Volume veh/h 362 251 748 705 Circulating Flow (vc), pc/h 722 688 441 148 Exiting Flow (vex), pc/h 523 152 799 654 Capacity (cpce), pc/h 549 568 727 975 Capacity (c), veh/h 511 529 677 908 v/c Ratio (x)0.71 0.48 1.10 0.78 Delay and Level of Service Approach EB WB NB SB Lane Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Left Right Bypass Lane Control Delay (d), s/veh 25.9 15.2 90.3 20.1 Lane LOS D C F C 95% Queue, veh 5.6 2.5 21.7 7.9 Approach Delay, s/veh 25.9 15.2 90.3 20.1 Approach LOS D C F C Intersection Delay, s/veh | LOS 45.9 E Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Roundabouts Version 6.90 3/16/2017 1:39:39 PM 3rd-RR_future peak.xro Attachment D Signal Operations and Warrant Worksheets HCM 2010 TWSC Existing PM Peak Hour - Peak Season 101: Boydstun St & Lake St 2/21/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Existing PM Peak Hour - Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.7 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 158 66 78 164 72 58 Future Vol, veh/h 158 66 78 164 72 58 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 160 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 174 73 86 180 79 64 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 246 0 562 210 Stage 1 - - - - 210 - Stage 2 - - - - 352 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 6.4 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1332 - 492 835 Stage 1 - - - - 830 - Stage 2 - - - - 716 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1332 - 457 835 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 457 - Stage 1 - - - - 830 - Stage 2 - - - - 664 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 2.5 12.4 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 457 835 - - 1332 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.173 0.076 - - 0.064 - HCM Control Delay (s) 14.5 9.7 - - 7.9 0 HCM Lane LOS B A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.6 0.2 - - 0.2 - HCM 2010 TWSC Existing PM Peak Hour - Peak Season 102: 2nd St & Lake St 2/21/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Existing PM Peak Hour - Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 380 20 69 420 22 25 Future Vol, veh/h 380 20 69 420 22 25 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 60 - 40 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 400 21 73 442 23 26 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 421 0 998 411 Stage 1 - - - - 411 - Stage 2 - - - - 587 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 6.4 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1149 - 273 645 Stage 1 - - - - 674 - Stage 2 - - - - 560 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1149 - 256 645 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 256 - Stage 1 - - - - 674 - Stage 2 - - - - 524 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.2 15.3 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 256 645 - - 1149 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.09 0.041 - - 0.063 - HCM Control Delay (s) 20.5 10.8 - - 8.3 - HCM Lane LOS C B - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0.1 - - 0.2 - HCM 2010 TWSC Existing PM Peak Hour - Peak Season 103: 3rd St/SH-55 & Railroad Ave 2/21/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Existing PM Peak Hour - Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 119.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 84 14 107 4 38 100 40 254 129 147 252 6 Future Vol, veh/h 84 14 107 4 38 100 40 254 129 147 252 6 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 120 0 120 120 0 120 120 0 120 120 0 120 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - 55 135 - - 135 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 90 15 115 4 41 108 43 273 139 158 271 6 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1279 1328 514 1323 1262 582 397 0 0 532 0 0 Stage 1 710 710 - 548 548 - - - - - - - Stage 2 569 618 - 775 714 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 144 157 564 135 171 517 1173 - - 1046 - - Stage 1 428 440 - 524 520 - - - - - - - Stage 2 511 484 - 394 438 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 50 98 442 58 107 406 1039 - - 926 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ~ 50 98 - 58 107 - - - - - - - Stage 1 363 323 - 445 442 - - - - - - - Stage 2 289 411 - 204 322 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s $ 652.9 32.3 0.8 3.5 HCM LOS F D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1039 - - 99 99 406 926 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.041 - - 2.227 0.456 0.265 0.171 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.6 - -$ 652.9 68.8 17 9.7 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - F F C A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 19.4 2 1.1 0.6 - - Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon HCM 2010 TWSC Existing PM Peak Hour - Peak Season 104: 3rd St/SH-55 & Park St 2/21/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Existing PM Peak Hour - Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 4 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 8.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 8 92 41 7 56 51 365 46 45 296 8 Future Vol, veh/h 1 8 92 41 7 56 51 365 46 45 296 8 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 120 0 120 120 0 120 120 0 120 120 0 120 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - 40 - - 90 135 - - 135 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 1 9 101 45 8 62 56 401 51 49 325 9 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1211 1233 570 1211 1211 666 454 0 0 572 0 0 Stage 1 549 549 - 658 658 - - - - - - - Stage 2 662 684 - 553 553 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 161 178 525 161 184 463 1117 - - 1011 - - Stage 1 524 520 - 457 464 - - - - - - - Stage 2 454 452 - 521 518 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 92 125 412 83 129 363 989 - - 895 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 92 125 - 83 129 - - - - - - - Stage 1 438 435 - 382 388 - - - - - - - Stage 2 309 378 - 323 434 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 18.5 52.6 1 1.2 HCM LOS C F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 989 - - 120 412 88 363 895 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.057 - - 0.082 0.245 0.599 0.17 0.055 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.9 - - 37.7 16.6 94.2 16.9 9.3 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - E C F C A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0.3 1 2.8 0.6 0.2 - - HCM 2010 TWSC Existing PM Peak Hour - Peak Season 105: 3rd St/SH-55 & Colorado St 2/21/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Existing PM Peak Hour - Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 5 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 3 26 18 2 7 10 362 20 13 403 3 Future Vol, veh/h 0 3 26 18 2 7 10 362 20 13 403 3 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - 135 - - 135 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 0 3 28 20 2 8 11 393 22 14 438 3 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 899 905 440 910 896 404 441 0 0 415 0 0 Stage 1 468 468 - 426 426 - - - - - - - Stage 2 431 437 - 484 470 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 262 278 621 258 282 651 1130 - - 1155 - - Stage 1 579 565 - 610 589 - - - - - - - Stage 2 607 583 - 568 563 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 253 272 621 240 276 651 1130 - - 1155 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 253 272 - 240 276 - - - - - - - Stage 1 573 558 - 604 583 - - - - - - - Stage 2 592 577 - 532 556 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 12 18.8 0.2 0.3 HCM LOS B C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1130 - - 548 290 1155 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.01 - - 0.058 0.101 0.012 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.2 - - 12 18.8 8.2 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - B C A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.2 0.3 0 - - HCM 2010 TWSC Existing PM Peak Hour Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass 101: Boydstun St & Lake St 2/27/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Existing PM Peak Hour Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 5.4 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 77 147 78 92 144 58 Future Vol, veh/h 77 147 78 92 144 58 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 160 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 85 162 86 101 158 64 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 246 0 438 165 Stage 1 - - - - 165 - Stage 2 - - - - 273 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 6.4 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1332 - 580 885 Stage 1 - - - - 869 - Stage 2 - - - - 778 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1332 - 541 885 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 541 - Stage 1 - - - - 869 - Stage 2 - - - - 725 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 3.6 13 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 541 885 - - 1332 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.292 0.072 - - 0.064 - HCM Control Delay (s) 14.4 9.4 - - 7.9 0 HCM Lane LOS B A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.2 0.2 - - 0.2 - HCM 2010 TWSC Existing PM Peak Hour Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass 102: 2nd St & Lake St 2/27/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Existing PM Peak Hour Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.6 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 292 20 69 344 22 25 Future Vol, veh/h 292 20 69 344 22 25 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 60 - 40 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 307 21 73 362 23 26 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 328 0 825 318 Stage 1 - - - - 318 - Stage 2 - - - - 507 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 7.1 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 6.1 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 6.1 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1243 - 294 727 Stage 1 - - - - 698 - Stage 2 - - - - 552 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1243 - 281 727 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 281 - Stage 1 - - - - 698 - Stage 2 - - - - 520 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.3 14.3 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 281 727 - - 1243 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.082 0.036 - - 0.058 - HCM Control Delay (s) 19 10.1 - - 8.1 - HCM Lane LOS C B - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0.1 - - 0.2 - HCM 2010 TWSC Existing PM Peak Hour Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass 103: 3rd St/SH-55 & Railroad Ave 2/27/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Existing PM Peak Hour Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 42.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 84 14 107 4 38 100 33 127 107 115 167 5 Future Vol, veh/h 84 14 107 4 38 100 33 127 107 115 167 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 120 0 120 120 0 120 120 0 120 120 0 120 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - 55 135 - - 135 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 90 15 115 4 41 108 35 137 115 124 180 5 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 955 993 422 1000 937 434 305 0 0 372 0 0 Stage 1 550 550 - 385 385 - - - - - - - Stage 2 405 443 - 615 552 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 240 247 636 224 267 626 1267 - - 1198 - - Stage 1 523 519 - 642 614 - - - - - - - Stage 2 626 579 - 482 518 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 108 166 499 112 179 491 1122 - - 1061 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 108 166 - 112 179 - - - - - - - Stage 1 449 406 - 551 527 - - - - - - - Stage 2 387 497 - 279 405 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 165.8 20.2 1 3.5 HCM LOS F C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1122 - - 190 169 491 1061 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.032 - - 1.16 0.267 0.219 0.117 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.3 - - 165.8 33.9 14.4 8.8 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - F D B A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 11.2 1 0.8 0.4 - - HCM 2010 TWSC Existing PM Peak Hour Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass 104: 3rd St/SH-55 & Park St 2/27/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Existing PM Peak Hour Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 4 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 7.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 8 92 41 7 56 51 293 46 45 215 8 Future Vol, veh/h 1 8 92 41 7 56 51 293 46 45 215 8 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 120 0 120 120 0 120 120 0 120 120 0 120 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - 40 - - 90 135 - - 135 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 91 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 1 9 101 45 8 62 56 322 51 49 236 9 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1043 1065 481 1043 1043 587 365 0 0 493 0 0 Stage 1 460 460 - 579 579 - - - - - - - Stage 2 583 605 - 464 464 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 209 224 589 209 231 513 1205 - - 1081 - - Stage 1 585 569 - 504 504 - - - - - - - Stage 2 502 491 - 582 567 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 124 158 462 113 163 402 1067 - - 957 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 124 158 - 113 163 - - - - - - - Stage 1 491 478 - 423 423 - - - - - - - Stage 2 350 412 - 375 476 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 16.3 35.2 1.1 1.5 HCM LOS C E Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1067 - - 153 462 118 402 957 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.053 - - 0.065 0.219 0.447 0.153 0.052 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.6 - - 30.1 15 58.1 15.6 9 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - D C F C A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 0.2 0.8 2 0.5 0.2 - - HCM 2010 TWSC Existing PM Peak Hour Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass 105: 3rd St/SH-55 & Colorado St 2/27/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Existing PM Peak Hour Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 5 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 3 26 18 2 7 10 290 20 13 322 3 Future Vol, veh/h 0 3 26 18 2 7 10 290 20 13 322 3 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - 135 - - 135 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 0 3 28 20 2 8 11 315 22 14 350 3 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 733 739 352 744 730 326 353 0 0 337 0 0 Stage 1 380 380 - 348 348 - - - - - - - Stage 2 353 359 - 396 382 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 339 347 696 333 352 720 1217 - - 1234 - - Stage 1 646 617 - 672 638 - - - - - - - Stage 2 668 631 - 633 616 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 329 340 696 312 345 720 1217 - - 1234 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 329 340 - 312 345 - - - - - - - Stage 1 640 610 - 666 632 - - - - - - - Stage 2 653 625 - 597 609 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 11 15.6 0.2 0.3 HCM LOS B C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1217 - - 628 369 1234 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.009 - - 0.05 0.08 0.011 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 8 - - 11 15.6 8 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - B C A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.2 0.3 0 - - HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Off-Peak Season 201: Boydstun St & Lake St 2/10/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 10/31/2016 Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Off-Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.6 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 189 88 46 218 107 46 Future Vol, veh/h 189 88 46 218 107 46 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 160 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 208 97 51 240 118 51 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 304 0 597 256 Stage 1 - - - - 256 - Stage 2 - - - - 341 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 6.4 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1268 - 469 788 Stage 1 - - - - 791 - Stage 2 - - - - 725 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1268 - 447 788 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 447 - Stage 1 - - - - 791 - Stage 2 - - - - 692 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.4 14.1 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 447 788 - - 1268 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.263 0.064 - - 0.04 - HCM Control Delay (s) 15.9 9.9 - - 8 0 HCM Lane LOS C A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1 0.2 - - 0.1 - HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Off-Peak Season 202: 2nd St & Lake St 2/10/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 10/31/2016 Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Off-Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.8 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 399 62 52 339 36 45 Future Vol, veh/h 399 62 52 339 36 45 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 60 - 40 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 420 65 55 357 38 47 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 485 0 919 453 Stage 1 - - - - 453 - Stage 2 - - - - 466 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 6.4 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1088 - 304 611 Stage 1 - - - - 645 - Stage 2 - - - - 636 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1088 - 289 611 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 289 - Stage 1 - - - - 645 - Stage 2 - - - - 604 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.1 14.9 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 289 611 - - 1088 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.131 0.078 - - 0.05 - HCM Control Delay (s) 19.3 11.4 - - 8.5 - HCM Lane LOS C B - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 0.3 - - 0.2 - HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Off-Peak Season 203: 3rd St/SH-55 & Railroad Ave 2/10/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 10/31/2016 Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Off-Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 20.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 7 17 98 89 24 62 48 283 136 128 310 5 Future Vol, veh/h 7 17 98 89 24 62 48 283 136 128 310 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - 55 135 - - 135 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 28 68 392 356 96 248 192 1132 544 512 1240 20 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 4110 4334 1250 4292 4072 1404 1260 0 0 1676 0 0 Stage 1 2274 2274 - 1788 1788 - - - - - - - Stage 2 1836 2060 - 2504 2284 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 1 ~ 2 ~ 213 ~ 1 ~ 3 ~ 173 559 - - ~ 388 - - Stage 1 54 77 - ~ 105 135 - - - - - - - Stage 2 98 99 - ~ 39 ~ 76 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 0 ~ 213 - 0 ~ 173 559 - - ~ 388 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - 0 - - 0 - - - - - - - Stage 1 35 0 - ~ 69 ~ 89 - - - - - - - Stage 2 ~ 2 ~ 65 - - 0 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.5 54.8 HCM LOS - - Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 559 - - - - 173 ~ 388 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.343 - - - - 1.434 1.32 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 14.8 - - - - 274.8 189.5 - - HCM Lane LOS B - - - - F F - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.5 - - - - 15.4 23.6 - - Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Off-Peak Season 204: 3rd St/SH-55 & Park St 2/10/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 10/31/2016 Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Off-Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 4 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 7.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 17 9 139 72 14 59 28 405 48 45 446 6 Future Vol, veh/h 17 9 139 72 14 59 28 405 48 45 446 6 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - 40 - - 90 135 - - 135 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 18 10 148 77 15 63 30 431 51 48 474 6 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1096 1114 478 1094 1093 456 481 0 0 482 0 0 Stage 1 573 573 - 516 516 - - - - - - - Stage 2 523 541 - 578 577 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 193 210 591 193 216 609 1092 - - 1091 - - Stage 1 508 507 - 546 538 - - - - - - - Stage 2 541 524 - 505 505 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 155 195 591 132 201 609 1092 - - 1091 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 155 195 - 132 201 - - - - - - - Stage 1 494 485 - 531 523 - - - - - - - Stage 2 458 510 - 355 483 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 15.9 45.9 0.5 0.8 HCM LOS C E Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1092 - - 167 591 140 609 1091 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.027 - - 0.166 0.25 0.653 0.103 0.044 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.4 - - 30.8 13.1 69.5 11.6 8.5 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - D B F B A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.6 1 3.6 0.3 0.1 - - HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Off-Peak Season 205: 3rd St/SH-55 & Colorado St 2/10/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 10/31/2016 Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Off-Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 5 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 3 0 29 15 2 19 7 585 29 21 609 5 Future Vol, veh/h 3 0 29 15 2 19 7 585 29 21 609 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - 135 - - 135 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 3 0 32 16 2 21 8 636 32 23 662 5 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1388 1393 665 1393 1380 652 667 0 0 667 0 0 Stage 1 710 710 - 667 667 - - - - - - - Stage 2 678 683 - 726 713 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 121 143 464 120 146 471 932 - - 932 - - Stage 1 428 440 - 451 460 - - - - - - - Stage 2 445 452 - 419 438 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 111 138 464 109 141 471 932 - - 932 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 111 138 - 109 141 - - - - - - - Stage 1 424 429 - 447 456 - - - - - - - Stage 2 420 448 - 381 427 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 16.2 29.3 0.1 0.3 HCM LOS C D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 932 - - 357 187 932 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.008 - - 0.097 0.209 0.024 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.9 - - 16.2 29.3 9 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - C D A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.3 0.8 0.1 - - HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 Off Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass 201: Boydstun St & Lake St 2/22/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Year 2040 Off Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 6.2 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 67 210 46 101 224 46 Future Vol, veh/h 67 210 46 101 224 46 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 160 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 74 231 51 111 246 51 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 304 0 401 189 Stage 1 - - - - 189 - Stage 2 - - - - 212 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 6.4 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1268 - 609 858 Stage 1 - - - - 848 - Stage 2 - - - - 828 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1268 - 583 858 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 583 - Stage 1 - - - - 848 - Stage 2 - - - - 792 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 2.5 14.6 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 583 858 - - 1268 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.422 0.059 - - 0.04 - HCM Control Delay (s) 15.6 9.5 - - 8 0 HCM Lane LOS C A - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 2.1 0.2 - - 0.1 - HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 Off Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass 202: 2nd St & Lake St 2/22/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Year 2040 Off Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.8 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 399 62 52 339 36 45 Future Vol, veh/h 399 62 52 339 36 45 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 60 - 40 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 420 65 55 357 38 47 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 485 0 919 453 Stage 1 - - - - 453 - Stage 2 - - - - 466 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 6.4 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1088 - 304 611 Stage 1 - - - - 645 - Stage 2 - - - - 636 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1088 - 289 611 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 289 - Stage 1 - - - - 645 - Stage 2 - - - - 604 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.1 14.9 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 289 611 - - 1088 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.131 0.078 - - 0.05 - HCM Control Delay (s) 19.3 11.4 - - 8.5 - HCM Lane LOS C B - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 0.3 - - 0.2 - HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 Off Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass 203: 3rd St/SH-55 & Railroad Ave 2/22/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Year 2040 Off Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 5.8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 7 17 98 89 24 62 48 166 136 128 188 5 Future Vol, veh/h 7 17 98 89 24 62 48 166 136 128 188 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - 55 135 - - 135 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 28 68 392 356 96 248 192 664 544 512 752 20 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 3154 3378 762 3336 3116 936 772 0 0 1208 0 0 Stage 1 1786 1786 - 1320 1320 - - - - - - - Stage 2 1368 1592 - 2016 1796 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 7 ~ 8 408 ~ 5 ~ 12 324 852 - - 585 - - Stage 1 105 135 - ~ 195 228 - - - - - - - Stage 2 183 169 - ~ 77 134 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - ~ 1 408 - ~ 1 324 852 - - 585 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - ~ 1 - - ~ 1 - - - - - - - Stage 1 81 ~ 17 - ~ 151 177 - - - - - - - Stage 2 ~ 15 131 - - ~ 17 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 1.4 15.9 HCM LOS - - Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 852 - - - - 324 585 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.225 - - - - 0.765 0.875 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 10.4 - - - - 44.7 39.8 - - HCM Lane LOS B - - - - E E - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.9 - - - - 6 10 - - Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 Off Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass 204: 3rd St/SH-55 & Park St 2/22/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Year 2040 Off Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 4 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 5.9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 17 9 139 72 14 59 28 288 48 45 324 6 Future Vol, veh/h 17 9 139 72 14 59 28 288 48 45 324 6 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - 40 - - 90 135 - - 135 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 18 10 148 77 15 63 30 306 51 48 345 6 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 843 861 348 839 838 332 351 0 0 357 0 0 Stage 1 444 444 - 391 391 - - - - - - - Stage 2 399 417 - 448 447 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 286 295 700 288 305 714 1219 - - 1213 - - Stage 1 597 579 - 637 611 - - - - - - - Stage 2 631 595 - 594 577 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 238 276 700 211 286 714 1219 - - 1213 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 238 276 - 211 286 - - - - - - - Stage 1 582 556 - 621 596 - - - - - - - Stage 2 547 580 - 442 554 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 13 23.5 0.6 1 HCM LOS B C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1219 - - 250 700 220 714 1213 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.024 - - 0.111 0.211 0.416 0.088 0.039 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 8 - - 21.2 11.5 32.5 10.5 8.1 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - C B D B A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.4 0.8 1.9 0.3 0.1 - - HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 Off Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass 205: 3rd St/SH-55 & Colorado St 2/22/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Year 2040 Off Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 5 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 3 0 29 15 2 19 7 468 29 21 487 5 Future Vol, veh/h 3 0 29 15 2 19 7 468 29 21 487 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - 135 - - 135 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 3 0 32 16 2 21 8 509 32 23 529 5 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1129 1133 532 1133 1120 524 535 0 0 540 0 0 Stage 1 578 578 - 540 540 - - - - - - - Stage 2 551 555 - 593 580 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 183 205 551 182 208 557 1043 - - 1039 - - Stage 1 505 504 - 530 524 - - - - - - - Stage 2 522 516 - 496 503 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 171 199 551 168 202 557 1043 - - 1039 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 171 199 - 168 202 - - - - - - - Stage 1 501 493 - 526 520 - - - - - - - Stage 2 497 512 - 457 492 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 13.5 20.6 0.1 0.3 HCM LOS B C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1043 - - 456 270 1039 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 - - 0.076 0.145 0.022 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.5 - - 13.5 20.6 8.5 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - B C A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.2 0.5 0.1 - - HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Peak Season 201: Boydstun St & Lake St 2/21/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 8.3 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 272 114 134 282 124 100 Future Vol, veh/h 272 114 134 282 124 100 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 160 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 299 125 147 310 136 110 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 424 0 966 362 Stage 1 - - - - 362 - Stage 2 - - - - 604 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 7.1 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 6.1 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 6.1 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1146 - 236 687 Stage 1 - - - - 661 - Stage 2 - - - - 489 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1146 - 208 687 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 208 - Stage 1 - - - - 661 - Stage 2 - - - - 413 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 2.8 32.8 HCM LOS D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 208 687 - - 1146 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.655 0.16 - - 0.128 - HCM Control Delay (s) 50.2 11.2 - - 8.6 0 HCM Lane LOS F B - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 4 0.6 - - 0.4 - HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Peak Season 202: 2nd St & Lake St 2/21/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 654 34 119 722 38 43 Future Vol, veh/h 654 34 119 722 38 43 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 60 - 40 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 688 36 125 760 40 45 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 724 0 1717 706 Stage 1 - - - - 706 - Stage 2 - - - - 1011 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 6.4 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 888 - 100 439 Stage 1 - - - - 493 - Stage 2 - - - - 355 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 888 - 86 439 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 86 - Stage 1 - - - - 493 - Stage 2 - - - - 305 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.4 44.5 HCM LOS E Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 86 439 - - 888 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.465 0.103 - - 0.141 - HCM Control Delay (s) 79 14.1 - - 9.7 - HCM Lane LOS F B - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.9 0.3 - - 0.5 - HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Peak Season 203: 3rd St/SH-55 & Railroad Ave 2/21/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 387.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 144 24 184 7 65 172 68 436 221 252 434 10 Future Vol, veh/h 144 24 184 7 65 172 68 436 221 252 434 10 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 120 0 120 120 0 120 120 0 120 120 0 120 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - 55 135 - - 135 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 576 96 736 28 260 688 272 1744 884 1008 1736 40 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 6872 7184 1996 7158 6762 2426 1896 0 0 2748 0 0 Stage 1 3892 3892 - 2850 2850 - - - - - - - Stage 2 2980 3292 - 4308 3912 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 ~ 76 0 0 ~ 42 319 - - ~ 148 - - Stage 1 ~ 5 ~ 10 - ~ 24 ~ 38 - - - - - - - Stage 2 ~ 20 ~ 22 - ~ 3 ~ 10 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 0 ~ 60 - 0 ~ 33 283 - - ~ 131 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - 0 - - 0 - - - - - - - Stage 1 0 0 - ~ 1 ~ 1 - - - - - - - Stage 2 3540 ~ 1 - - 0 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 7.8 $ 1113.8 HCM LOS - - Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 283 - - - - 33 ~ 131 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.961 - - - -20.848 7.695 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 83.7 - - - -$ 9159.1$ 3076.3 - - HCM Lane LOS F - - - - F F - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 9.4 - - - - 84.9 113 - - Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Peak Season 204: 3rd St/SH-55 & Park St 2/21/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 4 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 145.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 2 14 158 71 12 96 88 628 79 77 509 14 Future Vol, veh/h 2 14 158 71 12 96 88 628 79 77 509 14 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 120 0 120 120 0 120 120 0 120 120 0 120 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - 40 - - 90 135 - - 135 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 2 15 168 76 13 102 94 668 84 82 541 15 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1857 1892 789 1857 1857 950 676 0 0 872 0 0 Stage 1 833 833 - 1017 1017 - - - - - - - Stage 2 1024 1059 - 840 840 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 57 71 394 ~ 57 74 318 925 - - 782 - - Stage 1 366 386 - 289 318 - - - - - - - Stage 2 286 304 - 363 384 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 17 43 309 ~ 13 45 249 819 - - 693 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 17 43 - ~ 13 45 - - - - - - - Stage 1 287 301 - 227 249 - - - - - - - Stage 2 125 238 - 123 300 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 43 $ 1371.7 1.1 1.4 HCM LOS E F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 819 - - 36 309 14 249 693 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.114 - - 0.473 0.544 6.307 0.41 0.118 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 10 - - 174.4 29.7$ 2924.4 29.2 10.9 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - F D F D B - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 - - 1.6 3 12 1.9 0.4 - - Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Peak Season 205: 3rd St/SH-55 & Colorado St 2/21/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Year 2040 PM Peak Hour - Peak Season Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 5 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 5 45 31 3 12 17 623 34 22 693 5 Future Vol, veh/h 0 5 45 31 3 12 17 623 34 22 693 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - 135 - - 135 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 0 5 49 34 3 13 18 677 37 24 753 5 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1545 1555 756 1564 1540 696 759 0 0 714 0 0 Stage 1 804 804 - 733 733 - - - - - - - Stage 2 741 751 - 831 807 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 94 114 411 92 117 445 862 - - 895 - - Stage 1 380 398 - 415 429 - - - - - - - Stage 2 411 421 - 367 397 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 86 109 411 75 111 445 862 - - 895 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 86 109 - 75 111 - - - - - - - Stage 1 372 387 - 406 420 - - - - - - - Stage 2 388 412 - 310 386 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 18.4 75 0.2 0.3 HCM LOS C F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 862 - - 322 98 895 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.021 - - 0.169 0.51 0.027 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.3 - - 18.4 75 9.1 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - C F A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.6 2.3 0.1 - - HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass 201: Boydstun St & Lake St 2/21/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Year 2040 Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 15.1 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 133 253 134 157 249 100 Future Vol, veh/h 133 253 134 157 249 100 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - - - 160 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 146 278 147 173 274 110 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 424 0 752 285 Stage 1 - - - - 285 - Stage 2 - - - - 467 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 6.4 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1146 - 381 759 Stage 1 - - - - 768 - Stage 2 - - - - 635 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1146 - 327 759 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 327 - Stage 1 - - - - 768 - Stage 2 - - - - 545 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 4 41.1 HCM LOS E Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 327 759 - - 1146 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.837 0.145 - - 0.128 - HCM Control Delay (s) 53.4 10.5 - - 8.6 0 HCM Lane LOS F B - - A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 7.3 0.5 - - 0.4 - HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass 202: 2nd St & Lake St 2/21/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Year 2040 Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.5 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 515 34 119 598 38 43 Future Vol, veh/h 515 34 119 598 38 43 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length - - 60 - 40 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 542 36 125 629 40 45 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 0 578 0 1440 560 Stage 1 - - - - 560 - Stage 2 - - - - 880 - Critical Hdwy - - 4.1 - 6.4 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy - - 2.2 - 3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1006 - 148 532 Stage 1 - - - - 576 - Stage 2 - - - - 409 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - 1006 - 130 532 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 130 - Stage 1 - - - - 576 - Stage 2 - - - - 358 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.5 27.5 HCM LOS D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1NBLn2 EBT EBR WBL WBT Capacity (veh/h) 130 532 - - 1006 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.308 0.085 - - 0.125 - HCM Control Delay (s) 44.5 12.4 - - 9.1 - HCM Lane LOS E B - - A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.2 0.3 - - 0.4 - HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass 203: 3rd St/SH-55 & Railroad Ave 2/21/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Year 2040 Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 3 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 260.2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 144 24 184 7 65 172 68 311 221 252 287 10 Future Vol, veh/h 144 24 184 7 65 172 68 311 221 252 287 10 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 120 0 120 120 0 120 120 0 120 120 0 120 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - 55 135 - - 135 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 576 96 736 28 260 688 272 1244 884 1008 1148 40 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 5784 6096 1408 6070 5674 1926 1308 0 0 2248 0 0 Stage 1 3304 3304 - 2350 2350 - - - - - - - Stage 2 2480 2792 - 3720 3324 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 ~ 172 0 0 ~ 84 536 - - ~ 233 - - Stage 1 ~ 13 ~ 22 - 49 ~ 70 - - - - - - - Stage 2 ~ 41 ~ 41 - ~ 7 ~ 21 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 0 ~ 135 - 0 ~ 66 475 - - ~ 206 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - 0 - - 0 - - - - - - - Stage 1 ~ 5 0 - ~ 19 ~ 26 - - - - - - - Stage 2 1316 ~ 16 - - 0 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 2.5 $ 824.4 HCM LOS - - Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 475 - - - - 66 ~ 206 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.573 - - - -10.424 4.893 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 22.2 - - - -$ 4360$ 1796.1 - - HCM Lane LOS C - - - - F F - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 3.5 - - - - 80.9 103.9 - - Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass 204: 3rd St/SH-55 & Park St 2/21/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Year 2040 Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 4 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 67.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 2 14 158 71 12 96 88 503 79 77 370 14 Future Vol, veh/h 2 14 158 71 12 96 88 503 79 77 370 14 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 120 0 120 120 0 120 120 0 120 120 0 120 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - 40 - - 90 135 - - 135 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 2 15 168 76 13 102 94 535 84 82 394 15 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1576 1611 641 1576 1576 817 529 0 0 739 0 0 Stage 1 685 685 - 884 884 - - - - - - - Stage 2 891 926 - 692 692 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 90 105 478 90 111 380 1048 - - 876 - - Stage 1 441 451 - 343 366 - - - - - - - Stage 2 340 350 - 437 448 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 34 66 375 ~ 28 70 298 928 - - 776 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 34 66 - ~ 28 70 - - - - - - - Stage 1 351 357 - 273 291 - - - - - - - Stage 2 170 279 - 183 355 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 28.4 $ 524.5 1.2 1.7 HCM LOS D F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 928 - - 59 375 31 298 776 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.101 - - 0.288 0.448 2.848 0.343 0.106 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 9.3 - - 89.1 22.2$ 1104.3 23.3 10.2 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - F C F C B - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - 1 2.2 10.4 1.5 0.4 - - Notes ~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon HCM 2010 TWSC Year 2040 Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass 205: 3rd St/SH-55 & Colorado St 2/21/2017 McCall Transportation Master Plan 8/18/2016 Year 2040 Peak Season with SH 55 Bypass Synchro 9 Report JGM Page 5 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 5 45 31 3 12 17 498 34 22 554 5 Future Vol, veh/h 0 5 45 31 3 12 17 498 34 22 554 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length - - - - - - 135 - - 135 - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 0 5 49 34 3 13 18 541 37 24 602 5 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1258 1268 605 1277 1252 560 608 0 0 578 0 0 Stage 1 653 653 - 597 597 - - - - - - - Stage 2 605 615 - 680 655 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 - - 4.1 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.5 - 6.1 5.5 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.5 4 3.3 2.2 - - 2.2 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 149 170 501 145 174 532 980 - - 1006 - - Stage 1 460 467 - 493 495 - - - - - - - Stage 2 488 485 - 444 466 - - - - - - - Platoon blocked, %- - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 139 163 501 123 167 532 980 - - 1006 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 139 163 - 123 167 - - - - - - - Stage 1 452 456 - 484 486 - - - - - - - Stage 2 464 476 - 386 455 - - - - - - - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 15 38.3 0.3 0.3 HCM LOS C E Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 980 - - 415 157 1006 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.019 - - 0.131 0.318 0.024 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.7 - - 15 38.3 8.7 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - C E A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 0.4 1.3 0.1 - - KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. 101 South Capitol Blvd, Suite 301 Boise, Idaho 83702 Begin End NB SB EB WB (208) 338-2683 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 267 287 205 142 Fax: (208) 338-2685 2nd Highest Hour 248 267 194 134 3rd Highest Hour 245 263 190 131 Project #:4th Highest Hour 234 251 195 135 Project Name:5th Highest Hour 239 257 184 127 Analyst:6th Highest Hour 232 249 187 130 Date:7th Highest Hour 241 259 121 84 File:8th Highest Hour 190 204 162 113 9th Highest Hour 171 184 131 91 Intersection:10th Highest Hour 147 158 113 78 Scenario:11th Highest Hour 120 129 92 64 12th Highest Hour 115 123 88 61 13th Highest Hour 104 112 80 55 14th Highest Hour 96 103 74 51 15th Highest Hour 96 103 74 51 Warrant Name Analyzed?Met?16th Highest Hour 93 100 72 50 #1 Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Yes Yes 17th Highest Hour 53 57 41 28 #2 Four-Hour Vehicular volume Yes Yes 18th Highest Hour 29 32 23 16 #3 Peak Hour Yes Yes*19th Highest Hour 27 29 21 14 #4 Pedestrian Volume No .20th Highest Hour 11 11 8 6 #5 School Crossing No -21st Highest Hour 8 9 6 4 #6 Coordinated Signal System No -22nd Highest Hour 8 9 6 4 #7 Crash Experience No -23rd Highest Hour 5 6 4 3 #8 Roadway Network No -24th Highest Hour 5 6 4 3 Volume Adjustment Factor =1.0 North-South Approach =Major East-West Approach =Minor Major Street Thru Lanes =1 Minor Street Thru Lanes =1 A 500 150 3 No Speed > 40 mph?No B 750 75 0 No Population < 10,000?Yes A 400 120 7 No Warrant Factor 70%B 600 60 0 No Peak Hour or Daily Count?Peak Hour A 350 105 9 Yes B 525 53 1 No Major Street: 4th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 87% Major Street: 8th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 71% Minor Street: 4th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 95% Minor Street: 8th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 79% Warrant Summary Existing Peak Volumes w BYPASS 19638 McCall Transportation Master Plan NMF 2/27/2017 C:\Users\nfoster\Documents\19638\excel\Signal Warrant\[19638_SWA_RR&3rd_Peak Season Peak Hour_BypassAdjusted.xls]War #3 - Peak HR Input Parameters Hour Major Street Minor Street Analysis Traffic Volumes Park St/3rd St Warrant #1 - Eight Hour Warrant Factor Condition Major Street Requirement Minor Street Requirement Hours That Condition Is Met Condition for Warrant Factor Met? Signal Warrant Met? 70%Yes 100%No 80%No 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600Higher Minor Street Combined Major Street Warrant #2 - Four-Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 500 1000 1500 2000Higher Minor Street Combined Major Street Warrant #3 - Peak Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes Begin End NB SB EB WB 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 390 268 101 104 658 104 154 No 2nd Highest Hour 362 249 96 98 611 98 170 No 3rd Highest Hour 357 246 93 96 603 96 174 No 4th Highest Hour 341 234 96 99 576 99 184 No 5th Highest Hour 349 240 91 93 588 93 179 No 6th Highest Hour 339 233 92 95 571 95 186 No 7th Highest Hour 352 242 60 61 594 61 177 No 8th Highest Hour 278 191 80 82 469 82 231 No 9th Highest Hour 250 172 65 67 421 67 254 No 10th Highest Hour 215 147 56 57 362 57 285 No 11th Highest Hour 176 121 45 47 296 47 323 No 12th Highest Hour 168 115 43 45 283 45 331 No 13th Highest Hour 152 105 39 41 257 41 347 No 14th Highest Hour 140 96 36 37 237 37 359 No 15th Highest Hour 140 96 36 37 237 37 359 No 16th Highest Hour 137 94 35 36 230 36 363 No 17th Highest Hour 78 54 20 21 132 21 430 No 18th Highest Hour 43 29 11 11 72 11 473 No 19th Highest Hour 39 27 10 10 66 10 478 No 20th Highest Hour 16 11 4 4 26 4 508 No 21st Highest Hour 12 8 3 3 20 3 514 No 22nd Highest Hour 12 8 3 3 20 3 514 No 23rd Highest Hour 8 5 2 2 13 2 519 No 24th Highest Hour 8 5 2 2 13 2 519 No 0 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Major Street) 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Minor Street) 1 Warrant Factor 70% Row Index for VLOOKUP 5 Index Major Street Minor Street Break Point x2 x c alt 1 1 1 1460 0.00021 0.74072 734.125 100 2 2 or more 1 1760 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 100 3 2 or more 2 or more 1690 0.00023 0.93419 1081.658 150 4 1 2 or more 1450 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 150 5 1 1 1040 0.00035 0.80083 529.197 75 6 2 or more 1 1160 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 75 7 2 or more 2 or more 1130 0.00033 0.95887 762.050 100 8 1 2 or more 1020 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 100 EB WB Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle On Minor Approach (sec) 16.3 35.2 Number Of Lanes On Minor Street Approach 1 1 Vehicle-Hours Of Stopped Delay On Minor Approach 0.46 1.02 No No Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 101 104 Yes Yes Total Entering Volume On All Approaches During Same Hour 863 Number of Approaches to Intersection 4 Yes NoIs Warrant #3 met based on Condition A criteria? Traffic Volumes Combined Major Street Hour Major Street Minor Street Calculations Is Threshold Met?ThresholdHigher Minor Street Condition A Criteria Lookup Table 100% Factor70% FactorIs Warrant #3 met based on the applicable warrant factor?No War #3 - Peak HR KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. 101 South Capitol Blvd, Suite 301 Boise, Idaho 83702 Begin End EB WB NB SB (208) 338-2683 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 386 416 124 0 Fax: (208) 338-2685 2nd Highest Hour 359 387 117 0 3rd Highest Hour 354 381 115 0 Project #:4th Highest Hour 338 364 118 0 Project Name:5th Highest Hour 345 372 111 0 Analyst:6th Highest Hour 335 361 113 0 Date:7th Highest Hour 349 376 73 0 File:8th Highest Hour 275 296 98 0 9th Highest Hour 247 266 79 0 Intersection:10th Highest Hour 212 229 68 0 Scenario:11th Highest Hour 174 187 56 0 12th Highest Hour 166 179 53 0 13th Highest Hour 151 162 48 0 14th Highest Hour 139 150 45 0 15th Highest Hour 139 150 45 0 Warrant Name Analyzed? Met? 16th Highest Hour 135 146 43 0 #1 Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Yes Yes 17th Highest Hour 77 83 25 0 #2 Four-Hour Vehicular volume Yes Yes 18th Highest Hour 42 46 14 0 #3 Peak Hour Yes Yes* 19th Highest Hour 39 42 12 0 #4 Pedestrian Volume No . 20th Highest Hour 15 17 5 0 #5 School Crossing No - 21st Highest Hour 12 12 4 0 #6 Coordinated Signal System No - 22nd Highest Hour 12 12 4 0 #7 Crash Experience No - 23rd Highest Hour 8 8 2 0 #8 Roadway Network No - 24th Highest Hour 8 8 2 0 Volume Adjustment Factor =1.0 North-South Approach =Minor East-West Approach =Major Major Street Thru Lanes =1 Minor Street Thru Lanes =1 A 500 150 0 No Speed > 40 mph?No B 750 75 1 No Population < 10,000?Yes A 400 120 1 No Warrant Factor 70% B 600 60 7 No Peak Hour or Daily Count?Peak Hour A 350 105 6 No B 525 53 8 Yes Major Street: 4th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 87% Major Street: 8th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 71% Minor Street: 4th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 95% Minor Street: 8th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 79% 70%Yes 100%No 80%No Warrant #1 - Eight Hour Warrant Factor Condition Major Street Requirement Minor Street Requirement Hours That Condition Is Met Condition for Warrant Factor Met? Signal Warrant Met? Input Parameters Hour Major Street Minor Street Analysis Traffic Volumes Boydstun Street/W Lake Street Warrant Summary 2040 Peak Future Volumes 19638 McCall Transportation Master Plan NMF 3/16/2017 H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\excel\Signal Warrant\[19638_SWA_Boydstun&Lake_future pk.xls]Data Input 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #2 - Four-Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 500 1000 1500 2000Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #3 - Peak Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes Begin End EB WB NB SB 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 386 416 124 0 802 124 112 Yes 2nd Highest Hour 359 387 117 0 745 117 127 No 3rd Highest Hour 354 381 115 0 735 115 130 No 4th Highest Hour 338 364 118 0 702 118 140 No 5th Highest Hour 345 372 111 0 717 111 135 No 6th Highest Hour 335 361 113 0 696 113 141 No 7th Highest Hour 349 376 73 0 724 73 133 No 8th Highest Hour 275 296 98 0 571 98 186 No 9th Highest Hour 247 266 79 0 513 79 210 No 10th Highest Hour 212 229 68 0 441 68 244 No 11th Highest Hour 174 187 56 0 361 56 286 No 12th Highest Hour 166 179 53 0 345 53 295 No 13th Highest Hour 151 162 48 0 313 48 313 No 14th Highest Hour 139 150 45 0 289 45 327 No 15th Highest Hour 139 150 45 0 289 45 327 No 16th Highest Hour 135 146 43 0 281 43 332 No 17th Highest Hour 77 83 25 0 160 25 410 No 18th Highest Hour 42 46 14 0 88 14 461 No 19th Highest Hour 39 42 12 0 80 12 467 No 20th Highest Hour 15 17 5 0 32 5 504 No 21st Highest Hour 12 12 4 0 24 4 510 No 22nd Highest Hour 12 12 4 0 24 4 510 No 23rd Highest Hour 8 8 2 0 16 2 516 No 24th Highest Hour 8 8 2 0 16 2 516 No 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Major Street) 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Minor Street) 1 Warrant Factor 70% Row Index for VLOOKUP 5 Index Major Street Minor Street Break Point x2 x c alt 1 1 1 1460 0.00021 0.74072 734.125 100 2 2 or more 1 1760 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 100 3 2 or more 2 or more 1690 0.00023 0.93419 1081.658 150 4 1 2 or more 1450 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 150 5 1 1 1040 0.00035 0.80083 529.197 75 6 2 or more 1 1160 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 75 7 2 or more 2 or more 1130 0.00033 0.95887 762.050 100 8 1 2 or more 1020 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 100 NB SB Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle On Minor Approach (sec) 37.8 0.0 Number Of Lanes On Minor Street Approach 1 1 Vehicle-Hours Of Stopped Delay On Minor Approach 1.30 0.00 No No Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 124 0 Yes No Total Entering Volume On All Approaches During Same Hour 926 Number of Approaches to Intersection 3 Yes ThresholdHigher Minor Street Condition A Criteria Lookup Table 100% Factor70% FactorIs Warrant #3 met based on the applicable warrant factor?Yes NoIs Warrant #3 met based on Condition A criteria? Traffic Volumes Combined Major Street Hour Major Street Minor Street Calculations Is Threshold Met? War #3 - Peak HR KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. 101 South Capitol Blvd, Suite 301 Boise, Idaho 83702 Begin End EB WB NB SB (208) 338-2683 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 386 291 249 0 Fax: (208) 338-2685 2nd Highest Hour 359 270 236 0 3rd Highest Hour 354 267 230 0 Project #:4th Highest Hour 338 255 237 0 Project Name:5th Highest Hour 345 260 223 0 Analyst:6th Highest Hour 335 253 227 0 Date:7th Highest Hour 349 263 147 0 File:8th Highest Hour 275 207 197 0 9th Highest Hour 247 186 159 0 Intersection:10th Highest Hour 212 160 137 0 Scenario:11th Highest Hour 174 131 112 0 12th Highest Hour 166 125 107 0 13th Highest Hour 151 113 97 0 14th Highest Hour 139 105 90 0 15th Highest Hour 139 105 90 0 Warrant Name Analyzed? Met? 16th Highest Hour 135 102 87 0 #1 Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Yes Yes 17th Highest Hour 77 58 50 0 #2 Four-Hour Vehicular volume Yes Yes 18th Highest Hour 42 32 27 0 #3 Peak Hour Yes Yes* 19th Highest Hour 39 29 25 0 #4 Pedestrian Volume No . 20th Highest Hour 15 12 10 0 #5 School Crossing No - 21st Highest Hour 12 9 7 0 #6 Coordinated Signal System No - 22nd Highest Hour 12 9 7 0 #7 Crash Experience No - 23rd Highest Hour 8 6 5 0 #8 Roadway Network No - 24th Highest Hour 8 6 5 0 Volume Adjustment Factor =1.0 North-South Approach =Minor East-West Approach =Major Major Street Thru Lanes =1 Minor Street Thru Lanes =1 A 500 150 6 No Speed > 40 mph?No B 750 75 0 No Population < 10,000?Yes A 400 120 9 Yes Warrant Factor 70% B 600 60 5 No Peak Hour or Daily Count?Peak Hour A 350 105 10 Yes B 525 53 7 No Major Street: 4th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 87% Major Street: 8th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 71% Minor Street: 4th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 95% Minor Street: 8th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 79% 70%Yes 100%No 80%Yes Warrant #1 - Eight Hour Warrant Factor Condition Major Street Requirement Minor Street Requirement Hours That Condition Is Met Condition for Warrant Factor Met? Signal Warrant Met? Input Parameters Hour Major Street Minor Street Analysis Traffic Volumes Boydstun Street/W Lake Street Warrant Summary 2040 Peak Future Volumes w BYPASS 19638 McCall Transportation Master Plan JGM 3/16/2017 H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\excel\Signal Warrant\[19638_SWA_Boydstun&Lake_future pk w BYPASS ADJUSTED.xls]Data Input 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #2 - Four-Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 500 1000 1500 2000Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #3 - Peak Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes Begin End EB WB NB SB 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 386 291 249 0 677 249 147 Yes 2nd Highest Hour 359 270 236 0 629 236 164 Yes 3rd Highest Hour 354 267 230 0 620 230 167 Yes 4th Highest Hour 338 255 237 0 592 237 178 Yes 5th Highest Hour 345 260 223 0 605 223 173 Yes 6th Highest Hour 335 253 227 0 588 227 179 Yes 7th Highest Hour 349 263 147 0 611 147 170 No 8th Highest Hour 275 207 197 0 482 197 224 No 9th Highest Hour 247 186 159 0 433 159 248 No 10th Highest Hour 212 160 137 0 372 137 280 No 11th Highest Hour 174 131 112 0 305 112 318 No 12th Highest Hour 166 125 107 0 291 107 326 No 13th Highest Hour 151 113 97 0 264 97 342 No 14th Highest Hour 139 105 90 0 244 90 355 No 15th Highest Hour 139 105 90 0 244 90 355 No 16th Highest Hour 135 102 87 0 237 87 359 No 17th Highest Hour 77 58 50 0 135 50 427 No 18th Highest Hour 42 32 27 0 74 27 472 No 19th Highest Hour 39 29 25 0 68 25 477 No 20th Highest Hour 15 12 10 0 27 10 508 No 21st Highest Hour 12 9 7 0 20 7 513 No 22nd Highest Hour 12 9 7 0 20 7 513 No 23rd Highest Hour 8 6 5 0 14 5 518 No 24th Highest Hour 8 6 5 0 14 5 518 No 6 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Major Street) 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Minor Street) 1 Warrant Factor 70% Row Index for VLOOKUP 5 Index Major Street Minor Street Break Point x2 x c alt 1 1 1 1460 0.00021 0.74072 734.125 100 2 2 or more 1 1760 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 100 3 2 or more 2 or more 1690 0.00023 0.93419 1081.658 150 4 1 2 or more 1450 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 150 5 1 1 1040 0.00035 0.80083 529.197 75 6 2 or more 1 1160 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 75 7 2 or more 2 or more 1130 0.00033 0.95887 762.050 100 8 1 2 or more 1020 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 100 NB SB Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle On Minor Approach (sec) 41.1 0.0 Number Of Lanes On Minor Street Approach 1 1 Vehicle-Hours Of Stopped Delay On Minor Approach 3.98 0.00 No No Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 349 0 Yes No Total Entering Volume On All Approaches During Same Hour 926 Number of Approaches to Intersection 4 Yes ThresholdHigher Minor Street Condition A Criteria Lookup Table 100% Factor70% FactorIs Warrant #3 met based on the applicable warrant factor?Yes NoIs Warrant #3 met based on Condition A criteria? Traffic Volumes Combined Major Street Hour Major Street Minor Street Calculations Is Threshold Met? War #3 - Peak HR KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. 101 South Capitol Blvd, Suite 301 Boise, Idaho 83702 Begin End NB SB EB WB (208) 338-2683 12:00 AM 1:00 AM 8 7 0 2 Fax: (208) 338-2685 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 5 3 0 1 2:00 AM 3:00 AM 1 2 0 2 Project #:3:00 AM 4:00 AM 8 6 2 2 Project Name:4:00 AM 5:00 AM 13 7 1 2 Analyst:5:00 AM 6:00 AM 25 17 2 11 Date:6:00 AM 7:00 AM 53 44 3 32 File:7:00 AM 8:00 AM 180 110 21 88 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 221 153 29 94 Intersection:9:00 AM 10:00 AM 267 167 57 96 Scenario:10:00 AM 11:00 AM 295 187 55 105 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 402 215 72 135 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 492 257 92 181 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 501 262 91 171 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 477 243 89 154 Warrant Name Analyzed? Met? 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 458 270 80 150 #1 Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Yes Yes 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 402 252 70 151 #2 Four-Hour Vehicular volume Yes Yes 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 377 251 51 161 #3 Peak Hour Yes Yes* 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 291 184 36 114 #4 Pedestrian Volume No . 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 183 135 14 75 #5 School Crossing No - 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 167 114 21 60 #6 Coordinated Signal System No - 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 102 62 13 38 #7 Crash Experience No - 10:00 PM 11:00 PM 61 44 5 19 #8 Roadway Network No - 11:00 PM 12:00 AM 32 23 2 8 Volume Adjustment Factor =1.0 North-South Approach =Major East-West Approach =Minor Major Street Thru Lanes =1 Minor Street Thru Lanes =1 A 500 150 6 No Speed > 40 mph?No B 750 75 2 No Population < 10,000?Yes A 400 120 7 No Warrant Factor 70% B 600 60 7 No Peak Hour or Daily Count?Daily A 350 105 9 Yes B 525 53 7 No Warrant Summary 2015 Thursday May 14, 2015 Daily Volumes 19638 McCall Transportation Master Plan JGM 3/16/2017 H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\excel\Signal Warrant\[19638_SWA_RR&3rd_Peak Season Daily.xls]Warrant Summary Input Parameters Hour Major Street Minor Street Analysis Traffic Volumes N 3rd Street (SH-55)/Railroad Ave Warrant #1 - Eight Hour Warrant Factor Condition Major Street Requirement Minor Street Requirement Hours That Condition Is Met Condition for Warrant Factor Met? Signal Warrant Met? 70%Yes 100%No 80%No 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #2 - Four-Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 500 1000 1500 2000Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #3 - Peak Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes Begin End NB SB EB WB 12:00 AM 1:00 AM 8 7 0 2 15 2 517 No 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 5 3 0 1 8 1 523 No 2:00 AM 3:00 AM 1 2 0 2 3 2 527 No 3:00 AM 4:00 AM 8 6 2 2 14 2 518 No 4:00 AM 5:00 AM 13 7 1 2 20 2 513 No 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 25 17 2 11 42 11 496 No 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 53 44 3 32 96 32 455 No 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 180 110 21 88 291 88 326 No 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 221 153 29 94 374 94 279 No 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 267 167 57 96 434 96 248 No 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 295 187 55 105 482 105 225 No 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 402 215 72 135 617 135 168 No 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 492 257 92 181 749 181 126 Yes 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 501 262 91 171 763 171 122 Yes 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 477 243 89 154 720 154 134 Yes 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 458 270 80 150 728 150 132 Yes 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 402 252 70 151 654 151 155 No 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 377 251 51 161 627 161 165 No 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 291 184 36 114 475 114 228 No 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 183 135 14 75 318 75 310 No 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 167 114 21 60 281 60 332 No 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 102 62 13 38 164 38 407 No 10:00 PM 11:00 PM 61 44 5 19 104 19 450 No 11:00 PM 12:00 AM 32 23 2 8 55 8 486 No 4 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Major Street) 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Minor Street) 1 Warrant Factor 70% Row Index for VLOOKUP 5 Index Major Street Minor Street Break Point x2 x c alt 1 1 1 1460 0.00021 0.74072 734.125 100 2 2 or more 1 1760 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 100 3 2 or more 2 or more 1690 0.00023 0.93419 1081.658 150 4 1 2 or more 1450 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 150 5 1 1 1040 0.00035 0.80083 529.197 75 6 2 or more 1 1160 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 75 7 2 or more 2 or more 1130 0.00033 0.95887 762.050 100 8 1 2 or more 1020 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 100 EB WB Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle On Minor Approach (sec) 49.0 49.0 Number Of Lanes On Minor Street Approach 1 1 Vehicle-Hours Of Stopped Delay On Minor Approach 2.48 4.64 No Yes Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 182 341 Yes Yes Total Entering Volume On All Approaches During Same Hour 2017 Number of Approaches to Intersection 4 Yes YesIs Warrant #3 met based on Condition A criteria? Traffic Volumes Combined Major Street Hour Major Street Minor Street Calculations Is Threshold Met?ThresholdHigher Minor Street Condition A Criteria Lookup Table 100% Factor70% FactorIs Warrant #3 met based on the applicable warrant factor?Yes War #3 - Peak HR KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. 101 South Capitol Blvd, Suite 301 Boise, Idaho 83702 Begin End NB SB EB WB (208) 338-2683 12:00 AM 1:00 AM 15 16 0 3 Fax: (208) 338-2685 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 9 7 0 1 2:00 AM 3:00 AM 2 5 0 4 Project #:3:00 AM 4:00 AM 14 13 3 3 Project Name:4:00 AM 5:00 AM 23 16 1 3 Analyst:5:00 AM 6:00 AM 46 37 3 21 Date:6:00 AM 7:00 AM 96 97 6 64 File:7:00 AM 8:00 AM 328 245 42 175 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 402 340 58 188 Intersection:9:00 AM 10:00 AM 485 371 113 191 Scenario:10:00 AM 11:00 AM 536 416 109 210 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 731 478 144 269 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 895 571 184 362 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 911 583 182 341 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 868 540 178 308 Warrant Name Analyzed? Met? 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 833 599 159 300 #1 Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Yes Yes 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 731 559 140 301 #2 Four-Hour Vehicular volume Yes Yes 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 685 557 102 322 #3 Peak Hour Yes Yes* 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 529 409 71 227 #4 Pedestrian Volume No . 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 333 300 27 149 #5 School Crossing No - 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 303 253 41 119 #6 Coordinated Signal System No - 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 186 138 25 76 #7 Crash Experience No - 10:00 PM 11:00 PM 110 97 10 38 #8 Roadway Network No - 11:00 PM 12:00 AM 58 51 3 16 Volume Adjustment Factor =1.0 North-South Approach =Major East-West Approach =Minor Major Street Thru Lanes =1 Minor Street Thru Lanes =1 A 500 150 12 Yes Speed > 40 mph?No B 750 75 10 Yes Population < 10,000?Yes A 400 120 13 Yes Warrant Factor 70% B 600 60 12 Yes Peak Hour or Daily Count?Daily A 350 105 14 Yes B 525 53 14 Yes 70%Yes 100%Yes 80%Yes Warrant #1 - Eight Hour Warrant Factor Condition Major Street Requirement Minor Street Requirement Hours That Condition Is Met Condition for Warrant Factor Met? Signal Warrant Met? Input Parameters Hour Major Street Minor Street Analysis Traffic Volumes N 3rd Street (SH-55)/Railroad Ave Warrant Summary 2015 Thursday May 14, 2015 Daily Volumes 19638 McCall Transportation Master Plan JGM 3/16/2017 H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\excel\Signal Warrant\[19638_SWA_Park&3rd_Peak Season Daily.xls]War #3 - Peak HR 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #2 - Four-Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 500 1000 1500 2000Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #3 - Peak Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes Begin End NB SB EB WB 12:00 AM 1:00 AM 15 16 0 3 31 3 505 No 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 9 7 0 1 16 1 516 No 2:00 AM 3:00 AM 2 5 0 4 7 4 524 No 3:00 AM 4:00 AM 14 13 3 3 27 3 508 No 4:00 AM 5:00 AM 23 16 1 3 39 3 498 No 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 46 37 3 21 83 21 465 No 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 96 97 6 64 193 64 388 No 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 328 245 42 175 573 175 185 No 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 402 340 58 188 742 188 128 Yes 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 485 371 113 191 856 191 100 Yes 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 536 416 109 210 952 210 84 Yes 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 731 478 144 269 1209 269 75 Yes 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 895 571 184 362 1466 362 75 Yes 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 911 583 182 341 1494 341 75 Yes 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 868 540 178 308 1408 308 75 Yes 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 833 599 159 300 1432 300 75 Yes 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 731 559 140 301 1290 301 75 Yes 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 685 557 102 322 1242 322 75 Yes 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 529 409 71 227 938 227 86 Yes 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 333 300 27 149 633 149 163 No 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 303 253 41 119 556 119 192 No 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 186 138 25 76 324 76 306 No 10:00 PM 11:00 PM 110 97 10 38 207 38 378 No 11:00 PM 12:00 AM 58 51 3 16 109 16 446 No 11 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Major Street) 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Minor Street) 1 Warrant Factor 70% Row Index for VLOOKUP 5 Index Major Street Minor Street Break Point x2 x c alt 1 1 1 1460 0.00021 0.74072 734.125 100 2 2 or more 1 1760 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 100 3 2 or more 2 or more 1690 0.00023 0.93419 1081.658 150 4 1 2 or more 1450 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 150 5 1 1 1040 0.00035 0.80083 529.197 75 6 2 or more 1 1160 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 75 7 2 or more 2 or more 1130 0.00033 0.95887 762.050 100 8 1 2 or more 1020 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 100 EB WB Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle On Minor Approach (sec) 49.0 49.0 Number Of Lanes On Minor Street Approach 1 1 Vehicle-Hours Of Stopped Delay On Minor Approach 2.48 4.64 No Yes Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 182 341 Yes Yes Total Entering Volume On All Approaches During Same Hour 2017 Number of Approaches to Intersection 4 Yes ThresholdHigher Minor Street Condition A Criteria Lookup Table 100% Factor70% FactorIs Warrant #3 met based on the applicable warrant factor?Yes YesIs Warrant #3 met based on Condition A criteria? Traffic Volumes Combined Major Street Hour Major Street Minor Street Calculations Is Threshold Met? War #3 - Peak HR KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. 101 South Capitol Blvd, Suite 301 Boise, Idaho 83702 Begin End NB SB EB WB (208) 338-2683 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 267 287 205 142 Fax: (208) 338-2685 2nd Highest Hour 248 267 194 134 3rd Highest Hour 245 263 190 131 Project #:4th Highest Hour 234 251 195 135 Project Name:5th Highest Hour 239 257 184 127 Analyst:6th Highest Hour 232 249 187 130 Date:7th Highest Hour 241 259 121 84 File:8th Highest Hour 190 204 162 113 9th Highest Hour 171 184 131 91 Intersection:10th Highest Hour 147 158 113 78 Scenario:11th Highest Hour 120 129 92 64 12th Highest Hour 115 123 88 61 13th Highest Hour 104 112 80 55 14th Highest Hour 96 103 74 51 15th Highest Hour 96 103 74 51 Warrant Name Analyzed? Met? 16th Highest Hour 93 100 72 50 #1 Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Yes Yes 17th Highest Hour 53 57 41 28 #2 Four-Hour Vehicular volume Yes Yes 18th Highest Hour 29 32 23 16 #3 Peak Hour Yes Yes* 19th Highest Hour 27 29 21 14 #4 Pedestrian Volume No . 20th Highest Hour 11 11 8 6 #5 School Crossing No - 21st Highest Hour 8 9 6 4 #6 Coordinated Signal System No - 22nd Highest Hour 8 9 6 4 #7 Crash Experience No - 23rd Highest Hour 5 6 4 3 #8 Roadway Network No - 24th Highest Hour 5 6 4 3 Volume Adjustment Factor =1.0 North-South Approach =Major East-West Approach =Minor Major Street Thru Lanes =1 Minor Street Thru Lanes =1 A 500 150 3 No Speed > 40 mph?No B 750 75 0 No Population < 10,000?Yes A 400 120 7 No Warrant Factor 70% B 600 60 0 No Peak Hour or Daily Count?Peak Hour A 350 105 9 Yes B 525 53 1 No Major Street: 4th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 87% Major Street: 8th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 71% Minor Street: 4th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 95% Minor Street: 8th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 79% 70%Yes 100%No 80%No Warrant #1 - Eight Hour Warrant Factor Condition Major Street Requirement Minor Street Requirement Hours That Condition Is Met Condition for Warrant Factor Met? Signal Warrant Met? Input Parameters Hour Major Street Minor Street Analysis Traffic Volumes Park St/3rd St Warrant Summary Existing Peak Volumes w BYPASS 19638 McCall Transportation Master Plan NMF 3/16/2017 H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\excel\Signal Warrant\[19638_SWA_RR&3rd_Peak Season Peak Hour_BypassAdjusted.xls]Warrant Summary 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #2 - Four-Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 500 1000 1500 2000Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #3 - Peak Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes Begin End NB SB EB WB 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 267 287 205 142 554 205 193 Yes 2nd Highest Hour 248 267 194 134 515 194 210 No 3rd Highest Hour 245 263 190 131 508 190 213 No 4th Highest Hour 234 251 195 135 485 195 223 No 5th Highest Hour 239 257 184 127 495 184 218 No 6th Highest Hour 232 249 187 130 481 187 225 No 7th Highest Hour 241 259 121 84 500 121 216 No 8th Highest Hour 190 204 162 113 395 162 268 No 9th Highest Hour 171 184 131 91 355 131 289 No 10th Highest Hour 147 158 113 78 305 113 318 No 11th Highest Hour 120 129 92 64 249 92 351 No 12th Highest Hour 115 123 88 61 238 88 358 No 13th Highest Hour 104 112 80 55 216 80 373 No 14th Highest Hour 96 103 74 51 199 74 383 No 15th Highest Hour 96 103 74 51 199 74 383 No 16th Highest Hour 93 100 72 50 194 72 387 No 17th Highest Hour 53 57 41 28 111 41 445 No 18th Highest Hour 29 32 23 16 61 23 482 No 19th Highest Hour 27 29 21 14 55 21 486 No 20th Highest Hour 11 11 8 6 22 8 512 No 21st Highest Hour 8 9 6 4 17 6 516 No 22nd Highest Hour 8 9 6 4 17 6 516 No 23rd Highest Hour 5 6 4 3 11 4 520 No 24th Highest Hour 5 6 4 3 11 4 520 No 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Major Street) 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Minor Street) 1 Warrant Factor 70% Row Index for VLOOKUP 5 Index Major Street Minor Street Break Point x2 x c alt 1 1 1 1460 0.00021 0.74072 734.125 100 2 2 or more 1 1760 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 100 3 2 or more 2 or more 1690 0.00023 0.93419 1081.658 150 4 1 2 or more 1450 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 150 5 1 1 1040 0.00035 0.80083 529.197 75 6 2 or more 1 1160 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 75 7 2 or more 2 or more 1130 0.00033 0.95887 762.050 100 8 1 2 or more 1020 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 100 EB WB Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle On Minor Approach (sec) 165.8 20.2 Number Of Lanes On Minor Street Approach 1 1 Vehicle-Hours Of Stopped Delay On Minor Approach 9.44 0.80 Yes No Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 205 142 Yes Yes Total Entering Volume On All Approaches During Same Hour 901 Number of Approaches to Intersection 4 Yes ThresholdHigher Minor Street Condition A Criteria Lookup Table 100% Factor70% FactorIs Warrant #3 met based on the applicable warrant factor?Yes YesIs Warrant #3 met based on Condition A criteria? Traffic Volumes Combined Major Street Hour Major Street Minor Street Calculations Is Threshold Met? War #3 - Peak HR KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. 101 South Capitol Blvd, Suite 301 Boise, Idaho 83702 Begin End NB SB EB WB (208) 338-2683 4:30 PM 5:30 PM 481 497 26 86 Fax: (208) 338-2685 2nd Highest Hour 460 476 25 82 3rd Highest Hour 440 454 24 79 Project #:4th Highest Hour 419 433 23 75 Project Name:5th Highest Hour 399 412 22 71 Analyst:6th Highest Hour 378 391 20 68 Date:7th Highest Hour 357 369 19 64 File:8th Highest Hour 337 348 18 60 9th Highest Hour 308 318 17 55 Intersection:10th Highest Hour 265 273 14 47 Scenario:11th Highest Hour 216 224 12 39 12th Highest Hour 207 214 11 37 13th Highest Hour 188 194 10 34 14th Highest Hour 173 179 9 31 15th Highest Hour 173 179 9 31 Warrant Name Analyzed? Met? 16th Highest Hour 168 174 9 30 #1 Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Yes Yes 17th Highest Hour 96 99 5 17 #2 Four-Hour Vehicular volume Yes Yes 18th Highest Hour 53 55 3 9 #3 Peak Hour Yes Yes* 19th Highest Hour 48 50 3 9 #4 Pedestrian Volume No . 20th Highest Hour 19 20 1 3 #5 School Crossing No - 21st Highest Hour 14 15 1 3 #6 Coordinated Signal System No - 22nd Highest Hour 14 15 1 3 #7 Crash Experience No - 23rd Highest Hour 10 10 1 2 #8 Roadway Network No - 24th Highest Hour 10 10 1 2 Volume Adjustment Factor =1.0 North-South Approach =Major East-West Approach =Minor Major Street Thru Lanes =1 Minor Street Thru Lanes =1 A 500 150 0 No Speed > 40 mph?No B 750 75 4 No Population < 10,000?Yes A 400 120 0 No Warrant Factor 70% B 600 60 8 Yes Peak Hour or Daily Count?Peak Hour A 350 105 0 No B 525 53 9 Yes Major Street: 4th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 87% Major Street: 8th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 70% Minor Street: 4th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 87% Minor Street: 8th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 70% 70%Yes 100%No 80%Yes Warrant #1 - Eight Hour Warrant Factor Condition Major Street Requirement Minor Street Requirement Hours That Condition Is Met Condition for Warrant Factor Met? Signal Warrant Met? Input Parameters Hour Major Street Minor Street Analysis Traffic Volumes N 3rd Street (SH-55)/Park Street Warrant Summary 2040 off-peak season - RTs removed 19638 McCall Transportation Master Plan NMF 3/16/2017 H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\excel\Signal Warrant\[19638_SWA_Park&3rd_Off-Peak Season Peak Hour_2040.xls]Warrant Summary 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #2 - Four-Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 500 1000 1500 2000Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #3 - Peak Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes Begin End NB SB EB WB 4:30 PM 5:30 PM 481 497 26 86 978 86 81 Yes 2nd Highest Hour 460 476 25 82 936 82 86 No 3rd Highest Hour 440 454 24 79 894 79 93 No 4th Highest Hour 419 433 23 75 852 75 101 No 5th Highest Hour 399 412 22 71 810 71 110 No 6th Highest Hour 378 391 20 68 768 68 120 No 7th Highest Hour 357 369 19 64 727 64 132 No 8th Highest Hour 337 348 18 60 685 60 145 No 9th Highest Hour 308 318 17 55 626 55 165 No 10th Highest Hour 265 273 14 47 538 47 200 No 11th Highest Hour 216 224 12 39 440 39 245 No 12th Highest Hour 207 214 11 37 421 37 254 No 13th Highest Hour 188 194 10 34 381 34 275 No 14th Highest Hour 173 179 9 31 352 31 291 No 15th Highest Hour 173 179 9 31 352 31 291 No 16th Highest Hour 168 174 9 30 342 30 296 No 17th Highest Hour 96 99 5 17 196 17 386 No 18th Highest Hour 53 55 3 9 108 9 447 No 19th Highest Hour 48 50 3 9 98 9 454 No 20th Highest Hour 19 20 1 3 39 3 498 No 21st Highest Hour 14 15 1 3 29 3 506 No 22nd Highest Hour 14 15 1 3 29 3 506 No 23rd Highest Hour 10 10 1 2 20 2 514 No 24th Highest Hour 10 10 1 2 20 2 514 No 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Major Street) 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Minor Street) 1 Warrant Factor 70% Row Index for VLOOKUP 5 Index Major Street Minor Street Break Point x2 x c alt 1 1 1 1460 0.00021 0.74072 734.125 100 2 2 or more 1 1760 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 100 3 2 or more 2 or more 1690 0.00023 0.93419 1081.658 150 4 1 2 or more 1450 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 150 5 1 1 1040 0.00035 0.80083 529.197 75 6 2 or more 1 1160 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 75 7 2 or more 2 or more 1130 0.00033 0.95887 762.050 100 8 1 2 or more 1020 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 100 EB WB Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle On Minor Approach (sec) 16.9 22.2 Number Of Lanes On Minor Street Approach 1 1 Vehicle-Hours Of Stopped Delay On Minor Approach 0.47 0.64 No No Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 101 104 Yes Yes Total Entering Volume On All Approaches During Same Hour 1090 Number of Approaches to Intersection 4 Yes ThresholdHigher Minor Street Condition A Criteria Lookup Table 100% Factor70% FactorIs Warrant #3 met based on the applicable warrant factor?Yes NoIs Warrant #3 met based on Condition A criteria? Traffic Volumes Combined Major Street Hour Major Street Minor Street Calculations Is Threshold Met? War #3 - Peak HR KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. 101 South Capitol Blvd, Suite 301 Boise, Idaho 83702 Begin End NB SB EB WB (208) 338-2683 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 676 461 174 179 Fax: (208) 338-2685 2nd Highest Hour 628 428 165 169 3rd Highest Hour 619 422 161 166 Project #:4th Highest Hour 591 403 165 170 Project Name:5th Highest Hour 605 412 156 160 Analyst:6th Highest Hour 587 400 159 163 Date:7th Highest Hour 610 416 103 105 File:8th Highest Hour 482 328 138 142 9th Highest Hour 433 295 111 115 Intersection:10th Highest Hour 372 254 96 98 Scenario:11th Highest Hour 304 207 78 81 12th Highest Hour 291 198 75 77 13th Highest Hour 264 180 68 70 14th Highest Hour 243 166 63 64 15th Highest Hour 243 166 63 64 Warrant Name Analyzed? Met? 16th Highest Hour 237 161 61 63 #1 Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Yes Yes 17th Highest Hour 135 92 35 36 #2 Four-Hour Vehicular volume Yes Yes 18th Highest Hour 74 51 19 20 #3 Peak Hour Yes Yes* 19th Highest Hour 68 46 17 18 #4 Pedestrian Volume No . 20th Highest Hour 27 18 7 7 #5 School Crossing No - 21st Highest Hour 20 14 5 5 #6 Coordinated Signal System No - 22nd Highest Hour 20 14 5 5 #7 Crash Experience No - 23rd Highest Hour 14 9 3 4 #8 Roadway Network No - 24th Highest Hour 14 9 3 4 Volume Adjustment Factor =1.0 North-South Approach =Major East-West Approach =Minor Major Street Thru Lanes =1 Minor Street Thru Lanes =1 A 500 150 6 No Speed > 40 mph?No B 750 75 8 Yes Population < 10,000?Yes A 400 120 7 No Warrant Factor 70% B 600 60 10 Yes Peak Hour or Daily Count?Peak Hour A 350 105 9 Yes B 525 53 10 Yes Major Street: 4th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 87% Major Street: 8th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 71% Minor Street: 4th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 95% Minor Street: 8th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 79% 70%Yes 100%Yes 80%Yes Warrant #1 - Eight Hour Warrant Factor Condition Major Street Requirement Minor Street Requirement Hours That Condition Is Met Condition for Warrant Factor Met? Signal Warrant Met? Input Parameters Hour Major Street Minor Street Analysis Traffic Volumes Park St/3rd St Warrant Summary 2040 Peak Future Volumes w BYPASS 19638 McCall Transportation Master Plan NMF 3/16/2017 H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\excel\Signal Warrant\[19638_SWA_Park&3rd_Peak Season Peak Hour_2040_BypassAdjusted.xls]Data Input 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #2 - Four-Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 500 1000 1500 2000Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #3 - Peak Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes Begin End NB SB EB WB 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 676 461 174 179 1137 179 75 Yes 2nd Highest Hour 628 428 165 169 1056 169 75 Yes 3rd Highest Hour 619 422 161 166 1042 166 75 Yes 4th Highest Hour 591 403 165 170 995 170 79 Yes 5th Highest Hour 605 412 156 160 1017 160 77 Yes 6th Highest Hour 587 400 159 163 987 163 80 Yes 7th Highest Hour 610 416 103 105 1027 105 76 Yes 8th Highest Hour 482 328 138 142 810 142 110 Yes 9th Highest Hour 433 295 111 115 728 115 132 No 10th Highest Hour 372 254 96 98 625 98 165 No 11th Highest Hour 304 207 78 81 512 81 211 No 12th Highest Hour 291 198 75 77 489 77 221 No 13th Highest Hour 264 180 68 70 443 70 243 No 14th Highest Hour 243 166 63 64 409 64 260 No 15th Highest Hour 243 166 63 64 409 64 260 No 16th Highest Hour 237 161 61 63 398 63 266 No 17th Highest Hour 135 92 35 36 227 36 365 No 18th Highest Hour 74 51 19 20 125 20 435 No 19th Highest Hour 68 46 17 18 114 18 443 No 20th Highest Hour 27 18 7 7 45 7 493 No 21st Highest Hour 20 14 5 5 34 5 502 No 22nd Highest Hour 20 14 5 5 34 5 502 No 23rd Highest Hour 14 9 3 4 23 4 511 No 24th Highest Hour 14 9 3 4 23 4 511 No 8 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Major Street) 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Minor Street) 1 Warrant Factor 70% Row Index for VLOOKUP 5 Index Major Street Minor Street Break Point x2 x c alt 1 1 1 1460 0.00021 0.74072 734.125 100 2 2 or more 1 1760 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 100 3 2 or more 2 or more 1690 0.00023 0.93419 1081.658 150 4 1 2 or more 1450 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 150 5 1 1 1040 0.00035 0.80083 529.197 75 6 2 or more 1 1160 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 75 7 2 or more 2 or more 1130 0.00033 0.95887 762.050 100 8 1 2 or more 1020 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 100 EB WB Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle On Minor Approach (sec) 15.0 103.5 Number Of Lanes On Minor Street Approach 1 1 Vehicle-Hours Of Stopped Delay On Minor Approach 0.73 5.15 No Yes Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 174 179 Yes Yes Total Entering Volume On All Approaches During Same Hour 1490 Number of Approaches to Intersection 4 Yes ThresholdHigher Minor Street Condition A Criteria Lookup Table 100% Factor70% FactorIs Warrant #3 met based on the applicable warrant factor?Yes YesIs Warrant #3 met based on Condition A criteria? Traffic Volumes Combined Major Street Hour Major Street Minor Street Calculations Is Threshold Met? War #3 - Peak HR KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. 101 South Capitol Blvd, Suite 301 Boise, Idaho 83702 Begin End NB SB EB WB (208) 338-2683 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 364 375 26 86 Fax: (208) 338-2685 2nd Highest Hour 338 348 25 81 3rd Highest Hour 333 344 24 80 Project #:4th Highest Hour 318 328 25 82 Project Name:5th Highest Hour 326 335 23 77 Analyst:6th Highest Hour 316 326 24 79 Date:7th Highest Hour 329 339 15 51 File:8th Highest Hour 259 267 21 68 9th Highest Hour 233 240 17 55 Intersection:10th Highest Hour 200 206 14 47 Scenario:11th Highest Hour 164 169 12 39 12th Highest Hour 157 161 11 37 13th Highest Hour 142 146 10 34 14th Highest Hour 131 135 9 31 15th Highest Hour 131 135 9 31 Warrant Name Analyzed? Met? 16th Highest Hour 127 131 9 30 #1 Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Yes No 17th Highest Hour 73 75 5 17 #2 Four-Hour Vehicular volume Yes No 18th Highest Hour 40 41 3 9 #3 Peak Hour Yes No 19th Highest Hour 36 38 3 9 #4 Pedestrian Volume No . 20th Highest Hour 15 15 1 3 #5 School Crossing No - 21st Highest Hour 11 11 1 3 #6 Coordinated Signal System No - 22nd Highest Hour 11 11 1 3 #7 Crash Experience No - 23rd Highest Hour 7 8 1 2 #8 Roadway Network No - 24th Highest Hour 7 8 1 2 Volume Adjustment Factor =1.0 North-South Approach =Major East-West Approach =Minor Major Street Thru Lanes =1 Minor Street Thru Lanes =1 A 500 150 0 No Speed > 40 mph?No B 750 75 0 No Population < 10,000?Yes A 400 120 0 No Warrant Factor 70% B 600 60 6 No Peak Hour or Daily Count?Peak Hour A 350 105 0 No B 525 53 7 No Major Street: 4th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 87% Major Street: 8th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 71% Minor Street: 4th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 95% Minor Street: 8th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 79% Warrant Summary 2040 Off Peak Future Volumes w BYPASS 19638 McCall Transportation Master Plan NMF 3/16/2017 H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\excel\Signal Warrant\[19638_SWA_Park&3rd_Off-Peak Season Peak Hour_2040_BypassAdjusted.xls]Warrant Summary Input Parameters Hour Major Street Minor Street Analysis Traffic Volumes Park St/3rd St Warrant #1 - Eight Hour Warrant Factor Condition Major Street Requirement Minor Street Requirement Hours That Condition Is Met Condition for Warrant Factor Met? Signal Warrant Met? 70%No 100%No 80%No 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #2 - Four-Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 500 1000 1500 2000Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #3 - Peak Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes Begin End NB SB EB WB 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 364 375 26 86 739 86 129 No 2nd Highest Hour 338 348 25 81 687 81 144 No 3rd Highest Hour 333 344 24 80 677 80 147 No 4th Highest Hour 318 328 25 82 646 82 158 No 5th Highest Hour 326 335 23 77 661 77 153 No 6th Highest Hour 316 326 24 79 642 79 159 No 7th Highest Hour 329 339 15 51 667 51 151 No 8th Highest Hour 259 267 21 68 526 68 205 No 9th Highest Hour 233 240 17 55 473 55 229 No 10th Highest Hour 200 206 14 47 406 47 262 No 11th Highest Hour 164 169 12 39 333 39 302 No 12th Highest Hour 157 161 11 37 318 37 310 No 13th Highest Hour 142 146 10 34 288 34 327 No 14th Highest Hour 131 135 9 31 266 31 341 No 15th Highest Hour 131 135 9 31 266 31 341 No 16th Highest Hour 127 131 9 30 259 30 345 No 17th Highest Hour 73 75 5 17 148 17 418 No 18th Highest Hour 40 41 3 9 81 9 466 No 19th Highest Hour 36 38 3 9 74 9 472 No 20th Highest Hour 15 15 1 3 30 3 506 No 21st Highest Hour 11 11 1 3 22 3 512 No 22nd Highest Hour 11 11 1 3 22 3 512 No 23rd Highest Hour 7 8 1 2 15 2 517 No 24th Highest Hour 7 8 1 2 15 2 517 No 0 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Major Street) 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Minor Street) 1 Warrant Factor 70% Row Index for VLOOKUP 5 Index Major Street Minor Street Break Point x2 x c alt 1 1 1 1460 0.00021 0.74072 734.125 100 2 2 or more 1 1760 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 100 3 2 or more 2 or more 1690 0.00023 0.93419 1081.658 150 4 1 2 or more 1450 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 150 5 1 1 1040 0.00035 0.80083 529.197 75 6 2 or more 1 1160 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 75 7 2 or more 2 or more 1130 0.00033 0.95887 762.050 100 8 1 2 or more 1020 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 100 EB WB Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle On Minor Approach (sec) 23.5 0.0 Number Of Lanes On Minor Street Approach 1 1 Vehicle-Hours Of Stopped Delay On Minor Approach 0.95 0.00 No No Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 145 0 Yes No Total Entering Volume On All Approaches During Same Hour 851 Number of Approaches to Intersection 4 Yes NoIs Warrant #3 met based on Condition A criteria? Traffic Volumes Combined Major Street Hour Major Street Minor Street Calculations Is Threshold Met?ThresholdHigher Minor Street Condition A Criteria Lookup Table 100% Factor70% FactorIs Warrant #3 met based on the applicable warrant factor?No War #3 - Peak HR KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. 101 South Capitol Blvd, Suite 301 Boise, Idaho 83702 Begin End NB SB EB WB (208) 338-2683 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 467 443 122 175 Fax: (208) 338-2685 2nd Highest Hour 434 412 115 166 3rd Highest Hour 428 406 113 162 Project #:4th Highest Hour 408 388 116 166 Project Name:5th Highest Hour 418 396 109 157 Analyst:6th Highest Hour 405 385 111 160 Date:7th Highest Hour 422 400 72 103 File:8th Highest Hour 333 316 97 139 9th Highest Hour 299 284 78 112 Intersection:10th Highest Hour 257 244 67 96 Scenario:11th Highest Hour 210 199 55 79 12th Highest Hour 201 190 52 75 13th Highest Hour 182 173 48 68 14th Highest Hour 168 159 44 63 15th Highest Hour 168 159 44 63 Warrant Name Analyzed? Met? 16th Highest Hour 163 155 43 61 #1 Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Yes Yes 17th Highest Hour 93 89 24 35 #2 Four-Hour Vehicular volume Yes Yes 18th Highest Hour 51 49 13 19 #3 Peak Hour Yes Yes* 19th Highest Hour 47 44 12 18 #4 Pedestrian Volume No . 20th Highest Hour 19 18 5 7 #5 School Crossing No - 21st Highest Hour 14 13 4 5 #6 Coordinated Signal System No - 22nd Highest Hour 14 13 4 5 #7 Crash Experience No - 23rd Highest Hour 9 9 2 4 #8 Roadway Network No - 24th Highest Hour 9 9 2 4 Volume Adjustment Factor =1.0 North-South Approach =Major East-West Approach =Minor Major Street Thru Lanes =1 Minor Street Thru Lanes =1 A 500 150 6 No Speed > 40 mph?No B 750 75 7 No Population < 10,000?Yes A 400 120 7 No Warrant Factor 70% B 600 60 8 Yes Peak Hour or Daily Count?Peak Hour A 350 105 8 Yes B 525 53 9 Yes Major Street: 4th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 87% Major Street: 8th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 71% Minor Street: 4th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 95% Minor Street: 8th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 79% 70%Yes 100%No 80%Yes Warrant #1 - Eight Hour Warrant Factor Condition Major Street Requirement Minor Street Requirement Hours That Condition Is Met Condition for Warrant Factor Met? Signal Warrant Met? Input Parameters Hour Major Street Minor Street Analysis Traffic Volumes N 3rd Street (SH-55)/Railroad Avenue Warrant Summary 2040 Off-Peak Season p.m. Peak Hour Volumes 19638 McCall Transportation Master Plan JGM 3/16/2017 H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\excel\Signal Warrant\[19638_SWA_RR&3rd_off-peak FUTURE_ADJUSTED.xls]War #3 - Peak HR 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #2 - Four-Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 500 1000 1500 2000Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #3 - Peak Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes Begin End NB SB EB WB 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 467 443 122 175 910 175 90 Yes 2nd Highest Hour 434 412 115 166 846 166 102 Yes 3rd Highest Hour 428 406 113 162 834 162 105 Yes 4th Highest Hour 408 388 116 166 796 166 114 Yes 5th Highest Hour 418 396 109 157 814 157 109 Yes 6th Highest Hour 405 385 111 160 790 160 115 Yes 7th Highest Hour 422 400 72 103 822 103 107 No 8th Highest Hour 333 316 97 139 648 139 157 No 9th Highest Hour 299 284 78 112 582 112 182 No 10th Highest Hour 257 244 67 96 501 96 216 No 11th Highest Hour 210 199 55 79 410 79 260 No 12th Highest Hour 201 190 52 75 391 75 269 No 13th Highest Hour 182 173 48 68 355 68 289 No 14th Highest Hour 168 159 44 63 328 63 304 No 15th Highest Hour 168 159 44 63 328 63 304 No 16th Highest Hour 163 155 43 61 319 61 310 No 17th Highest Hour 93 89 24 35 182 35 395 No 18th Highest Hour 51 49 13 19 100 19 453 No 19th Highest Hour 47 44 12 18 91 18 459 No 20th Highest Hour 19 18 5 7 36 7 501 No 21st Highest Hour 14 13 4 5 27 5 508 No 22nd Highest Hour 14 13 4 5 27 5 508 No 23rd Highest Hour 9 9 2 4 18 4 515 No 24th Highest Hour 9 9 2 4 18 4 515 No 6 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Major Street) 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Minor Street) 1 Warrant Factor 70% Row Index for VLOOKUP 5 Index Major Street Minor Street Break Point x2 x c alt 1 1 1 1460 0.00021 0.74072 734.125 100 2 2 or more 1 1760 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 100 3 2 or more 2 or more 1690 0.00023 0.93419 1081.658 150 4 1 2 or more 1450 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 150 5 1 1 1040 0.00035 0.80083 529.197 75 6 2 or more 1 1160 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 75 7 2 or more 2 or more 1130 0.00033 0.95887 762.050 100 8 1 2 or more 1020 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 100 EB WB Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle On Minor Approach (sec) 14.6 35.9 Number Of Lanes On Minor Street Approach 1 1 Vehicle-Hours Of Stopped Delay On Minor Approach 0.49 1.75 No No Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 122 175 Yes Yes Total Entering Volume On All Approaches During Same Hour 1207 Number of Approaches to Intersection 4 Yes ThresholdHigher Minor Street Condition A Criteria Lookup Table 100% Factor70% FactorIs Warrant #3 met based on the applicable warrant factor?Yes NoIs Warrant #3 met based on Condition A criteria? Traffic Volumes Combined Major Street Hour Major Street Minor Street Calculations Is Threshold Met? War #3 - Peak HR KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. 101 South Capitol Blvd, Suite 301 Boise, Idaho 83702 Begin End NB SB EB WB (208) 338-2683 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 350 321 122 113 Fax: (208) 338-2685 2nd Highest Hour 325 298 115 107 3rd Highest Hour 321 294 113 105 Project #:4th Highest Hour 306 281 116 107 Project Name:5th Highest Hour 313 287 109 101 Analyst:6th Highest Hour 304 279 111 103 Date:7th Highest Hour 316 290 72 67 File:8th Highest Hour 249 229 97 90 9th Highest Hour 224 205 78 72 Intersection:10th Highest Hour 193 177 67 62 Scenario:11th Highest Hour 158 144 55 51 12th Highest Hour 151 138 52 49 13th Highest Hour 137 125 48 44 14th Highest Hour 126 116 44 41 15th Highest Hour 126 116 44 41 Warrant Name Analyzed? Met? 16th Highest Hour 123 112 43 40 #1 Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Yes Yes 56%17th Highest Hour 70 64 24 23 #2 Four-Hour Vehicular volume Yes Yes 18th Highest Hour 39 35 13 12 #3 Peak Hour Yes No 19th Highest Hour 35 32 12 11 #4 Pedestrian Volume No . 20th Highest Hour 14 13 5 5 #5 School Crossing No - 21st Highest Hour 11 10 4 3 #6 Coordinated Signal System No - 22nd Highest Hour 11 10 4 3 #7 Crash Experience No - 23rd Highest Hour 7 6 2 2 #8 Roadway Network No - 24th Highest Hour 7 6 2 2 Volume Adjustment Factor =1.0 North-South Approach =Major East-West Approach =Minor Major Street Thru Lanes =1 Minor Street Thru Lanes =1 A 500 150 0 No Speed > 40 mph?No B 750 75 0 No Population < 10,000?Yes A 400 120 1 No Warrant Factor 70% B 600 60 5 No Peak Hour or Daily Count?Peak Hour A 350 105 6 No B 525 53 7 No Major Street: 4th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 87% Major Street: 8th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 71% Minor Street: 4th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 95% Minor Street: 8th-Highest Hour / Peak Hour 79% 70%No 100%No 80%No Warrant #1 - Eight Hour Warrant Factor Condition Major Street Requirement Minor Street Requirement Hours That Condition Is Met Condition for Warrant Factor Met? Signal Warrant Met? Input Parameters Hour Major Street Minor Street Analysis Traffic Volumes Railroad St/3rd St Warrant Summary 2040 Off Peak Future Volumes w BYPASS 19638 McCall Transportation Master Plan NMF 3/16/2017 H:\projfile\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\excel\Signal Warrant\[19638_SWA_RR&3rd_Off-Peak Season Peak Hour_2040_BypassAdjusted.xls]Warrant Summary 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #2 - Four-Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 500 1000 1500 2000Higher Minor StreetCombined Major Street Warrant #3 - Peak Hour 100% Warrant Factor 2 Major / 2 Minor 2 Major / 1 Minor 1 Major / 2 Minor 1 Major / 1 Minor Traffic Volumes Begin End NB SB EB WB 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 350 321 122 113 671 122 149 No 2nd Highest Hour 325 298 115 107 623 115 166 No 3rd Highest Hour 321 294 113 105 615 113 169 No 4th Highest Hour 306 281 116 107 587 116 180 No 5th Highest Hour 313 287 109 101 600 109 175 No 6th Highest Hour 304 279 111 103 583 111 181 No 7th Highest Hour 316 290 72 67 606 72 172 No 8th Highest Hour 249 229 97 90 478 97 226 No 9th Highest Hour 224 205 78 72 429 78 250 No 10th Highest Hour 193 177 67 62 369 67 281 No 11th Highest Hour 158 144 55 51 302 55 319 No 12th Highest Hour 151 138 52 49 289 52 327 No 13th Highest Hour 137 125 48 44 262 48 344 No 14th Highest Hour 126 116 44 41 242 44 356 No 15th Highest Hour 126 116 44 41 242 44 356 No 16th Highest Hour 123 112 43 40 235 43 360 No 17th Highest Hour 70 64 24 23 134 24 428 No 18th Highest Hour 39 35 13 12 74 13 472 No 19th Highest Hour 35 32 12 11 67 12 477 No 20th Highest Hour 14 13 5 5 27 5 508 No 21st Highest Hour 11 10 4 3 20 4 513 No 22nd Highest Hour 11 10 4 3 20 4 513 No 23rd Highest Hour 7 6 2 2 13 2 519 No 24th Highest Hour 7 6 2 2 13 2 519 No 0 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Major Street) 1 Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach (Minor Street) 1 Warrant Factor 70% Row Index for VLOOKUP 5 Index Major Street Minor Street Break Point x2 x c alt 1 1 1 1460 0.00021 0.74072 734.125 100 2 2 or more 1 1760 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 100 3 2 or more 2 or more 1690 0.00023 0.93419 1081.658 150 4 1 2 or more 1450 0.00015 0.67328 809.779 150 5 1 1 1040 0.00035 0.80083 529.197 75 6 2 or more 1 1160 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 75 7 2 or more 2 or more 1130 0.00033 0.95887 762.050 100 8 1 2 or more 1020 0.00025 0.73111 586.099 100 EB WB Total Stopped Delay Per Vehicle On Minor Approach (sec) 44.7 0.0 Number Of Lanes On Minor Street Approach 1 1 Vehicle-Hours Of Stopped Delay On Minor Approach 2.17 0.00 No No Volume on Minor Street Approach During Same Hour 175 0 Yes No Total Entering Volume On All Approaches During Same Hour 906 Number of Approaches to Intersection 4 Yes ThresholdHigher Minor Street Condition A Criteria Lookup Table 100% Factor70% FactorIs Warrant #3 met based on the applicable warrant factor?No NoIs Warrant #3 met based on Condition A criteria? Traffic Volumes Combined Major Street Hour Major Street Minor Street Calculations Is Threshold Met? War #3 - Peak HR Attachment E Parking Management Strategies Attachment D - Parking Management Strategies Accomplishments Since 2009 Study Removed minimum parking requirements in the MRA Parking dimension standards in zoning code adjusted to reflect current standards Completed construction of Timbercrest garage Timbercrest garage made available for public parking to support the downtown businesses, including the ice rink patrons Supplemented the signage for the Timbercrest garage to make parking easier to find Designated the north side of the Urban Renewal Lot for snow storage while leaving the south and east sides available for parking. Snow is hauled to Riverfront Park or other pre-selected locations outside the CBD after all designated snow storage sites in the CBD are full during large snow years Overnight boat trailer parking in Urban Renewal Lot is allowed with the purchase of a pass Long-term (72-hours max) snowmobile trailer parking is allowed in the Mill Street and golf course parking lots The McCall Downtown Master Plan has identified street sections with wider sidewalks in the downtown core Bicycle parking is required for new development Strategies to Consider in an Updated Parking Management Plan Strategies from 2009 Parking Study Code Changes Modify existing zoning code to reflect current MRA parking requirements in the downtown core assuming downtown property owners are willing to form a BID for public parking improvements, snow removal, and other improvements benefiting the businesses within the CBD zone. The boundaries for the BID should be similar to the CBD zone. Modify the existing system to reduce the retail/commercial parking requirements, similar to the MRA parking requirements, in the CBD and modify the in-lieu parking fees, if a BID is established for the CBD. Shared parking agreements: Allow for shared parking agreements when appropriate but modify the code so shared parking needs to be within 400 feet (or another defined "reasonable" distance) instead of the current 300 feet. Adopt a shared parking provision in the zoning ordinance that reflects the Urban Land Institute’s shared parking methodology for mixed use developments or uses a reference. Paid Parking Install parking meters for the on-street parking in the downtown core. These areas have more demand for parking and higher occupancy so the meters will encourage turnover and require less code enforcement time. Limit on-street metered parking to 2-hours to encourage turnover. Implement an introductory public education program. Opportunities for Increased On-Street Parking The City of McCall should develop specific street sections to identify locations for on-street parking where it is not currently provided in and near downtown.Timbercrest Garage Clarify public parking within the structure and update agreements if necessary. Downtown Snow Removal Attachment D - Parking Management Strategies The Public Works Department should develop an official snow removal plan for the downtown. Identify and set aside other small areas that will not impact public parking areas for overflow snow storage. Further explore geothermal snow melting systems and the respective cost and environmental impact. Development of Public Lots Public lots that are not fully developed like the parking lot behind City Hall and the 1st Street lot should be formalized and developed into functional surface parking lots to encourage people to park in these locations then walk. Appropriate surfacing, stormwater, sidewalks, landscaping, and way- finding signage should be implemented Boat and Snowmobile Trailer Parking Do not allow boat or snowmobile trailer parking on city streets. Designate premium paid boat trailer parking in the Urban Renewal Lot. The City should revisit the grant agreement with IDPR to charge a fee for the area that was designated for boat trailer parking. Methods of collecting payment may be a fee collection box, a multi-space meter, and/or a boat launch fee Identify additional non-premium (free) and overnight or long-term to park in a designated section of other public lots beyond those already identified Wayfinding and Regulatory Signage Install additional blue “Public Parking” signs similar to the ones currently in place. These signs should be slightly larger at the major access points to the public parking areas. Examples would include double sided signs at the intersections of 1st Street, and Lake Street, 3rd Street and Railroad Avenue, and 3rd Street and Park Street. From these points, additional signs should be installed at each turn and public parking lot entrance. Pedestrian Access / Sidewalks Construct wider sidewalks in downtown per the recommended street sections in the 2013 McCall Downtown Master Plan The City will initiate the construction of wider sidewalks using multiple methods, including local option tax funding for street reconstruction and working with business and property owners. Parking Enforcement Regular and frequent parking enforcement for all public on-street and off-street parking areas in the City of McCall should be the standard. Stagger the enforcement officer’s shifts so parking enforcement is more regular and consistent. Provide hand-held ticket writers to the parking enforcement personnel. With this system, the City will be able to easily track repeat offenders. Booting/Towing If there are numerous habitual offenders, the City of McCall should investigate the feasibility of a relatively inexpensive booting or towing program. Colorado Street Pave and widen Colorado Street to provide parallel parking where feasible. Explore shared parking opportunities among businesses. Sight Distance at Intersections Evaluate intersections for available sight distance and restrict parking adjacent to intersections as necessary to provide adequate sight distance. Develop a city standard for parking distance from intersections. Parking Management Create a mission statement for the City’s parking program. Attachment D - Parking Management Strategies Bicycle Parking Identify areas where additional bicycle parking is needed and look for opportunities to add additional parking in these areas. Future Structured Parking When the City of McCall is ready to consider building a parking garage, the following steps should be taken: Determine the demand for the facility, how many spaces, and what other amenities, if any, are required for the garage. Will there be retail/commercial space in the garage? Select a site: Where is the best location for the garage and what sites are available that would accommodate a reasonably efficient parking structure. What is the cost of site acquisition? Look for opportunities to co-locate the garage with development to help offset the cost of the structure with revenue sources (e.g., rents, sales of office/condo space) Develop alternative garage conceptual plans. Develop preliminary cost estimates. Select final garage concept. Parking structure design. Develop financing program. Strategies to Consider in an Updated Parking Management Plan Investigate technology to improve the efficiency of the existing parking (e.g., parking sensors, apps) Investigate adding parking capacity outside the downtown core that is either within walking distance of the core or can be served by a shuttle service during peak periods Routinely monitor (e.g., every 2-3 years) use of the parking supply and adapt strategies, as necessary Work with downtown businesses to encourage employee parking in less utilized locations Provide for electric vehicle charging stations, including potential public locations and potential requirements for private development to provide them December 7, 2017 page 1 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers To: Nathan Stewart, P.E., Public Works Director Phillip Bowman, P.E., City Engineer Cris Malvich, Streets Superintendent From: Bryan Foote, P.E. Kip Davidson, P.E. Date: December 7, 2017 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM #3 Subject: McCall Streets Department: Roadway Network, Capital Improvement Plan and Maintenance Improvement Plan Executive Summary In concurrence with the City of McCall Transportation Master Plan, this technical memorandum presents the findings of the Streets Asset Management Program. The purpose of this memorandum is to describe the state of McCall’s existing roadway system, prescribe cost effective treatments to maintain the existing transportation infrastructure, and to propose a plan to improve failing pavements while making essential upgrades to stormwater and multimodal facilities. A detailed list of the Streets Department seasonal expenditures is provided. This memorandum proposes a 10-year capital improvement plan (CIP) and a 10-year maintenance improvement plan (MIP) for the City of McCall based on anticipated funding. Table of Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................................. 1 List of Appendices .................................................................................................... 2 Streets Department Asset Management Program .................................................... 3 Streets Department Annual Budget Analysis .......................................................... 19 Capital Improvement Plan ....................................................................................... 21 Maintenance Improvement Plan ............................................................................. 23 Results & Implementation ....................................................................................... 27 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 29 References ............................................................................................................. 30 Appendices ............................................................................................................. 31 December 7, 2017 page 2 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers List of Figures Figure 1. Idaho Street, Minor Collector ............................................................................ 5 Figure 2. W Forest Street at N Mission Street, Minor Collector ....................................... 5 Figure 3. E Deinhard Lane from Commerce Street to N Samson Trail, Major Collector .. 6 Figure 4. Warren Wagon Road, Major Collector ............................................................. 6 Figure 5. Stibnite Street, Major Collector ......................................................................... 7 Figure 6. E Forest Lane at Kasper St, Minor Collector (Unpaved) .................................. 7 Figure 7. Summary of Entire Paved Network Condition .................................................. 8 Figure 8. Paved Network Remaining Service Life ........................................................... 9 Figure 9. Unpaved Network Remaining Service Life ..................................................... 11 Figure 10. RSL Distribution of Paved Segments ........................................................... 13 Figure 11. June 2016 Observed Governing Distresses – Paved ................................... 14 Figure 12. June 2016 Observed Governing Distresses – Unpaved .............................. 14 Figure 13. Pavement Condition vs. Repair Cost. Excerpt from Reference (2) .............. 16 Figure 14. Timing of Surface Treatments. Excerpt from Reference (2) ......................... 17 Figure 15. Pavement Treatment per RSL, June 2016 Pavement Conditions ................ 17 Figure 16. Goal of Average Paved Network RSL Condition .......................................... 18 Figure 17. McCall CIP, 2017 - 2026 .............................................................................. 22 Figure 18. McCall MIP, 2017 - 2026 .............................................................................. 25 Figure 19. CIP & MIP Implementation Results .............................................................. 27 Figure 20. CIP & MIP Spending Summary .................................................................... 28 List of Appendices Appendix A – Functional Classification Map Appendix B – Surface Rating Sheets & FHWA Distress Identification Manual for the Long-Term Pavement Performance Program Appendix C – Complete June 2016 Pavement Inventory Results Appendix D – Roadway Groups Appendix E – Prescriptive Treatment Costs Appendix F – Streets Department Budget Tables Appendix G – Capital Improvement Plan Table Appendix H – Maintenance Improvement Plan Table December 7, 2017 page 3 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Streets Department Asset Management Program The City of McCall owns and maintains 49.3 centerline miles of public streets, with 41.9 miles consisting of asphalt surfaces and 7.4 miles consisting of gravel surfaces. A map of the existing network highlighting the functional classification of each street segment is available in Appendix A of this technical memorandum. To evaluate the city roadway network, the Transportation Asset Management Software (TAMS) has been utilized to conduct surface inventories of the asphalt and gravel surfaced roadways. TAMS was developed by the Utah Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP) in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Local Technical Assistance Program. Purpose & Methodology The TAMS software utilizes a Geographic Information System (GIS) interface to input and update infrastructure data and ultimately supplies cities with a powerful asset inventory system. The pavements module allows users to input physical characteristics of a roadway segment, such as length, width, pavement area, importance, and functional classification. The primary purpose of TAMS is to inventory the quality of the pavement by logging the pavement distresses observed along individual roadway segments. The inventory may be done for asphalt pavement, concrete pavement, and gravel or natural surfaces. The City of McCall roadway network is comprised of asphalt and gravel surfaces. The pavement inventory system utilizes a systematic ranking system for different distress types that typically contribute to the degradation and eventual failure of a roadway, both gravel and asphalt. Asphalt pavement distress categories include: Cracking (Fatigue, Edge, Transverse, Longitudinal, Block) Patching and Potholes Surface Deformation (Rutting, Roughness) Drainage Deficiencies Miscellaneous Distresses The pavement inventory system allows the user to identify distress types within several categories stated above. The user then attributes a severity and density of occurrence to the pavement distress. A typical rating sheet can be found in Appendix B, along with additional information explaining asphalt pavement distresses from the FHWA publication Distress Identification Manual for the Long-Term Pavement Performance Program, Reference (1). December 7, 2017 page 4 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Gravel or unpaved roadways experience different surface distresses compared to paved roadways. The unpaved surface distress categories include: Corrugations Dust Potholes Roadside Drainage Loose Aggregate Rutting Cross Section The FHWA has developed a methodology to estimate the condition of pavement based on its distresses. Remaining service life (RSL) is a measure of the anticipated remaining years a roadway segment has until failure, or is considered unacceptable. The RSL measurement is a snapshot in time of how a segment of pavement is operating structurally, and the severity of its deficiencies. This rating system gives agencies a valuable metric to aid in managing their roadway network. Deterioration of a roadway network often varies each year compared to the specified RSL scale developed through research completed by FHWA and other agencies. Harsh freeze-thaw cycles, an increase in heavy vehicle traffic, and other isolated events can cause increased deterioration of roadways. Likewise, roadways may not deteriorate structurally at the logical rate of 1-year-RSL per year. It is important to conduct pavement inventories in a specified interval to document deterioration trends and ensure maintenance planning is based on current field data. The City of McCall intends to conduct pavement assessments every 3 years. Pavement Inventory Findings To assist in developing the City's Transportation Master Plan, McCall completed a pavement inventory of the paved and unpaved roads within the city limits of McCall in June of 2016. A representative of Horrocks Engineers and the City Streets Department Superintendent conducted the inventory over the span of one week while temperatures were moderate and traffic within the city was low compared to typical summer months. Each roadway segment was visually evaluated for pavement distresses, and a picture was taken at intervals on each street. The full inventory results of the June 2016 pavement inventory can been found in Appendix C of this document. The complete inventory identified 454 roadway segments throughout the 49.3 miles of roadway assessed. Figures 1 through 6 summarize the condition of the City’s roadways and identify the varying pavement conditions that make up the network. Numerous pavement distresses are displayed in the following pictures, which were taken during the June 2016 inventory. They are organized from low RSL to high RSL, with an unpaved roadway to conclude. December 7, 2017 page 5 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Figure 1. Idaho Street, Minor Collector Pavement Distresses: Block Cracking, Edge Cracking, Transverse Cracking, Potholes and Patching Remaining Service Life (2016): 2 Years (near failure) Figure 2. W Forest Street at N Mission Street, Minor Collector Pavement Distresses: Edge Cracking, Block Cracking, Fatigue Cracking, Potholes and Patching, Extensive Crack Seals Remaining Service Life (2016): 4 Years December 7, 2017 page 6 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Figure 3. E Deinhard Lane from Commerce Street to N Samson Trail, Major Collector Pavement Distresses: Rutting, Edge Cracking, Drainage, Transverse Cracking Remaining Service Life (2016): 8 Years Figure 4. Warren Wagon Road, Major Collector Pavement Distresses: Rutting, Patching, Transverse Cracks Remaining Service Life (2016): 14 Years December 7, 2017 page 7 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Figure 5. Stibnite Street, Major Collector Pavement Distresses: None Remaining Service Life (2016): 20 Years Figure 6. E Forest Lane at Kasper St, Minor Collector (Unpaved) Unpaved/Gravel Distresses: Cross Section, Roadside Drainage, Dust, Loose Agg. Remaining Service Life (2016): 4 Years (Unpaved) December 7, 2017 page 8 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Figures 8 and 9 contain the pavement inventory data color-coded per segment of the city’s network, and can be viewed on the following four pages. Segments coded green have a higher RSL compared to red segments. These figures are helpful during the improvement planning process by identifying areas in the city that group well together based on geography and pavement condition. For instance, the downtown core (1st Street, 2nd Street, Park Street, Lenora Street) is noticeably in worse condition compared to the streets in its vicinity. Overall Network Remaining Service Life Using a weighted average of each segment RSL and the surface area of the pavement, an average RSL of the entire paved network was calculated. The results of the 2011, 2013, and 2016 pavement inventories can be found in Figure 7. This measure is a macroscopic view of how the network, as a whole, is maintaining its structural integrity. Between 2011 and 2013, the city’s network experienced a degradation of 2.4 RSL years, and 0.4 RSL years between 2013 and 2016. CITY OF MCCALL’S AVERAGE PAVED NETWORK RSL YEAR 2011 – 12.8 YEARS YEAR 2013 – 10.4 YEARS YEAR 2016 – 10.0 YEARS Figure 7. Summary of Entire Paved Network Condition Payette Lake AlleyAlley Svc R d Svc R d DwyDwyMMoorrggaannDDrr 1st St1st StColorado StColorado St E Park StE Park St Lakeside AveLakeside Ave N Mission StN Mission StW Fore s t S t W Fore s t S t MM aa tthh eerrRRddStibnite StStibnite St Rio Vista BlvdRio Vista Blvd Chad D r Chad D rWWaarrrreennWWaaggoonnRRdd EE DD ee ii nn hh aa rrdd LL nn SSMMiissssiioonnSSttNNMMiissssiioonnSSttWest Mountain RdWest Mountain Rd WWDDeeiinnhhaarrddLLnn HillLnHelmichHayes St Verita RdMarywoodDrWest RdWhitetailDr E Lake StValley View Ln Scott St Halfmoon Ln Sunset StMe a d o w s R d Thula StBrown DrRowland StFloyde St Hayes St Aspen StPinedale S t VeritaRdGambleRdPaulBunyanRdR omine Dr Rice St Idaho St Jacob St ClubRd State StWoodhaven LnHill RdRiver St Kasper StKaren St Gun Hill Rd Washington StNeal StSimmons StCrescentDrTimm StBearBasinRd K ikiCtE Forest St CammyDrPlacidSt C ece WayEagleShoresCtChulaRdLardoStVero n icaLnLakeridgeD r CoyRdVeronic a St Gena W ayCrossRdF o re s tT r a ilsD rEdgewa terCirTim be r crest Loop McBride StBoydstunSt S u n n y Wa yJasper DrGab i L n Burn s Rd RailroadA v e B run dageDrCarmen Dr Hewitt StWhiteBarkRd P in e Terrace D r R id g e R d C h a d L o opKnowles RdIndustrial LoopCresce n t R im D rBoydstun LnHelmich StHe r r i c k S tFor estTrail s C tHubbard DrTJsL o opBoydstunLoopStoneLn Ern e s t o D r Bl u e JayDrGladysLnValleyRimRdSvcRd M e moCi r N 3rd StN 3rd StE Lake StE Lake StWWLL aa kk ee SS tt Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Remaining Service Life 0 0.5 10.25Miles Legend McCall Roads RSL 2016 Survey 18 + Years RSL 12 - 16 Years RSL 6 - 10 Years RSL 0 - 4 Years RSL Other Base Legend McCall Paved Roads June 2016 (West) Figure 8. Paved Network Remaining Service Life (Page 1 of 2) page 9 of 31 AlleyAlley SSvvccRRddNNSS aa mmss oo nn TTrrll DD ww yy11ssttSSttFloyde StFloyde StMill RdMill RdColorado StColorado St S Samson TrlS Samson TrlKrahn LnKrahn LnDavis AveDavis AveRailroad AveRailroad AveWWoooolleeyy AAvvee LL iicc kkCC rreeeekkRRddE Deinhard LnE Deinhard Ln SSpprriinnggMMoouunnttaaiinnBBllvvddDavis AveDavis AveSSttaatteePPaarrkkRRddEEllddeerrbbeerrrryy LLooooppDDooggwwoo oo dd LLooooppCChh oo kkeecc hh ee rr rr yy LLooooppBlackberry Lo o p Blackberry Lo o p AA ss ppee nn LL oo oo pp S u i t or Ln ParLnQuakieLnMay RdC a m a s P l PlymouthRd Eagle DrPenstem e n P lDivotLn ValleySpringsRdJohnAldenM i l e s Standish Rd TimberCirDragonfly Loop Fairway Dr Jacob St Clements RdSnowberry PlMcCallAveCarico RdReedy Ln Hemlock St PilgrimCoveRdMo`s Way Colo rado St PonderosaStThula StGarnet St B i t t e r r o o t D rShadyLnOpal St Buckboar d WayFloyde StAspen StP ottsDrThompson Ave Fir St BlackwellAveLouisa Ave4th StE P a rkStBalshae DrDawsonAveHill RdBridle Path Way E Forest St WardStL i c k C r e ek Rd Idaho St S a n d W e d g e Ct Diamond St Washington St KaitlynL o o p E Lake StCamp RdRuby St EismanStAgate St Strawberry Ln Mayflo w e rRdBe llflowerPlSuns e t S t StocktonCtBlue H a zeWay PlacidSt R i n gelS t Shelia Ln MajesticVie w Dr Lawre n ceDrEllisRdSam son C t NSamsonTrl T i m m StAnn StAspen Aly Stockton Dr McBride St Spruce St Wildhorse DrRooseveltAve H e avensGateCtKnights RdBroken Rein R dDo u g l a s D rFairwayLoopRailroadAve W o o d l ands D r Graham Dr Commerce StMcG i n n i s St Vio l e t W ay Flynn Ln Firew ee d D rConifer Ln Chipmunk Ln ShadyL n Loop Mo u n t a in Meadow Dr SmittyAveBaycolt WayAlle n AveBrady D r Julies RdKoski D rAspenRidgeLnCarico Ct DeerF ores t Dr Fo x LnSyringaD r GinneyWayCedar L nUniversityLn Cee Way Lo opFox Ridge Ln Fox RidgeLnN 3rd StN 3rd StState Hwy 55State Hwy 55S 3rd StS 3rd St Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Remaining Service Life 0 0.5 10.25Miles Legend McCall Roads RSL 2016 Survey 18 + Years RSL 12 - 16 Years RSL 6 - 10 Years RSL 0 - 4 Years RSL Other Base Legend McCall Paved Roads June 2016 (East) Figure 8. Paved Network Remaining Service Life (Page 2 of 2) page 10 of 31 Payette Lake AlleyAlley Svc R d Svc R d DwyDwyMMoorrggaannDDrr 1st St1st StColorado StColorado St E Park StE Park St Lakeside AveLakeside Ave N Mission StN Mission StW Fore s t S t W Fore s t S t MM aa tthh eerrRRddStibnite StStibnite St Rio Vista BlvdRio Vista Blvd Chad D r Chad D rWWaarrrreennWWaaggoonnRRdd EE DD ee ii nn hh aa rrdd LL nn SSMMiissssiioonnSSttNNMMiissssiioonnSSttWest Mountain RdWest Mountain Rd WWDDeeiinnhhaarrddLLnn HillLnHelmichHayes St Verita RdMarywoodDrWest RdWhitetailDr E Lake StValley View Ln Scott St Halfmoon Ln Sunset StMe a d o w s R d Thula StBrown DrRowland StFloyde St Hayes St Aspen StPinedale S t VeritaRdGambleRdPaulBunyanRdR omine Dr Rice St Idaho St Jacob St ClubRd State StWoodhaven LnHill RdRiver St Kasper StKaren St Gun Hill Rd Washington StNeal StSimmons StCrescentDrTimm StBearBasinRd K ikiCtE Forest St CammyDrPlacidSt C ece WayEagleShoresCtChulaRdLardoStVero n icaLnLakeridgeD r CoyRdVeronic a St Gena W ayCrossRdF o re s tT r a ilsD rEdgewa terCirTim be r crest Loop McBride StBoydstunSt S u n n y Wa yJasper DrGab i L n Burn s Rd RailroadA v e B run dageDrCarmen Dr Hewitt StWhiteBarkRd P in e Terrace D r R id g e R d C h a d L o opKnowles RdIndustrial LoopCresce n t R im D rBoydstun LnHelmich StHe r r i c k S tFor estTrail s C tHubbard DrTJsL o opBoydstunLoopStoneLn Ern e s t o D r Bl u e JayDrGladysLnValleyRimRdSvcRd M e moCi r N 3rd StN 3rd StE Lake StE Lake StWWLL aa kk ee SS tt Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Remaining Service Life 0 0.5 10.25Miles Legend McCall Roads Unpaved RSL 2016 Survey 9 + Years RSL 7 - 8 Years RSL 4 - 6 Years RSL 0 - 2 Years RSL Other Base Legend McCall Un-paved Roads June 2016 (West) Figure 9. Unpaved Network Remaining Service Life (Page 1 of 2) page 11 of 31 AlleyAlley SSvvccRRddNNSS aa mmss oo nn TTrrll DD ww yy11ssttSSttFloyde StFloyde StMill RdMill RdColorado StColorado St S Samson TrlS Samson TrlKrahn LnKrahn LnDavis AveDavis AveRailroad AveRailroad AveWWoooolleeyy AAvvee LL iicc kkCC rreeeekkRRddE Deinhard LnE Deinhard Ln SSpprriinnggMMoouunnttaaiinnBBllvvddDavis AveDavis AveSSttaatteePPaarrkkRRddEEllddeerrbbeerrrryy LLooooppDDooggwwoo oo dd LLooooppCChh oo kkeecc hh ee rr rr yy LLooooppBlackberry Lo o p Blackberry Lo o p AA sspp ee nn LL oo oo pp S u i t or Ln ParLnQuakieLnMay RdC a m a s P l PlymouthRd Eagle DrPenstem e n P lDivotLn ValleySpringsRdJohnAldenM i l e s Standish Rd TimberCirDragonfly Loop Fairway Dr Jacob St Clements RdSnowberry PlMcCallAveCarico RdReedy Ln Hemlock St Mo`s Way Colo rado St PonderosaStThula StGarnet St B i t t e r r o o t Dr ShadyLnOpal St Buckboar d WayFloyde StAspen StP ottsDrThompson Ave Fir St BlackwellAveLouisa Ave4th StBalshae DrDawsonAveHill RdBridle Path Way WardStL i c k C r e ek Rd E Forest St S a n d W e d g e Ct Diamond St Washington St KaitlynL o o p Idaho St E Lake StCamp RdRuby St EismanStAgate St Strawberry Ln L e n o raS tMayflow e rRdBe llflowerPlSuns e t S t StocktonCtBlueHaze Way PlacidSt R i n gelS t Shelia Ln MajesticVie w Dr Lawre n ceDrEllisRdSam son Ct NSamsonTrl T i m m StAnn StAspen Aly StocktonDr McBride St Spruce St Wildhorse DrKnights RdRooseveltAve H e avensGateCtBroken Rein R dDou g l a s D rFairwayLoopRailroadAve W o o d l ands Dr Graham Dr Commerce StMcG i n n i s St Vio l e t W ay Flynn Ln Firew e e d D rConifer Ln Chipmunk Ln ShadyL n LoopPilgrimCoveRd Mo u n t a in Meadow Dr SmittyAveBaycolt WayAlle n AveBrady D r Julies RdKoski D rAspenRidgeLnCarico Ct DeerF or est Dr Fo x LnSyringaD r GinneyWayCedar L nUniversityLn Cee Way Lo opFox Ridge Ln Fox RidgeLnN 3rd StN 3rd StState Hwy 55State Hwy 55S 3rd StS 3rd St Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Remaining Service Life 0 0.5 10.25Miles Legend McCall Roads Unpaved RSL 2016 Survey 9 + Years RSL 7 - 8 Years RSL 4 - 6 Years RSL 0 - 2 Years RSL Other Base Legend McCall Un-paved Roads June 2016 (East) Figure 9. Unpaved Network Remaining Service Life (Page 2 of 2) page 12 of 31 December 7, 2017 page 13 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Figure 10 presents the distribution of paved roadway segments as a function of the corresponding RSL. The June 2016 pavement inventory results show a normal distribution with a majority of roadway segments belonging in the 6 to 14-year RSL range. It is important to note that the distribution is a function of centerline length. Figure 10. RSL Distribution of Paved Segments The governing distress is observed to be the highest in severity and frequency along a roadway segment. The TAMS software allows for the input of each applicable distress and then reports what the governing distress is for each segment. Figures 11 and 12 summarize the governing distresses for the city’s paved and unpaved segments. The most observed governing distress on paved segments is edge cracking (48%), which constitutes continuous cracks that intersect the pavement edge and typically within 2 feet of the edge. This distress is typically attributed to poor shoulder drainage. The second most observed distress is fatigue cracking (25%), which constitutes a series of interconnected cracks usually within the wheel path. The more severe fatigue cracking occurrences can separate the pavement into sharp-angled pieces and is a result of repeated traffic loadings. Fatigue cracking is a primary sign of aging pavement and can lead to break-up of the asphalt surface and exposure of the base material. 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 02468101214161820PERCENTAGE OF NETWORK LENGTH WITH CORRESPONDING RSLREMAINING SERVICE LIFE, YEARS June 2016 Paved Network RSL Distribution December 7, 2017 page 14 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Figure 11. June 2016 Observed Governing Distresses – Paved Figure 12. June 2016 Observed Governing Distresses – Unpaved 25% 11% 3% 2% 48% 5%1%1%4% Governing Distresses ‐ Paved Roads Fatigue Cracking Transverse Cracking Longitundial Cracking Block Cracking Edge Cracking Pothole/Patching Rutting Surface Roughness No Distress 32% 27% 5% 19% 7% 6%4% Governing Distresses ‐ Unpaved Roads X‐Section Roadside Drainage Rutting Potholes Loose Aggregate Dust Corrugation December 7, 2017 page 15 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers The most observed governing distress on unpaved segments is poor roadway cross section (32%). Maintaining a gravel road with a uniform normal crown that does not contain any surface depression will drain water off the gravel road, prolonging the integrity of the surface. Poor cross section grading will allow puddles and excess moisture to remain within the road surface. The second most observed governing distress on unpaved surfaces is roadside drainage (27%). Gravel roads should be equipped with both adequate shoulders and roadsides ditches to promote good drainage. Streets Asset Cost Calculator With the use of TAMS, in tandem with the City of McCall’s GIS streets shapefile data and the pavement inventory results, a cost estimation-planning tool was created to aid in the programming of maintenance and improvement projects. The City of McCall’s Streets Asset Cost Calculator utilizes the surface area of a specified street or group of streets and an estimated unit price per prescriptive treatment to estimate a conservative construction cost. For the City’s paved street network, inventory segments with similar functional classification, RSL, and geographic location were grouped together. From the 454 original roadway segments identified in the 2016 inventory, Horrocks Engineers and City staff were able to establish 73 roadway groups. Each paved street under city ownership is included in a roadway group. Grouping appropriate streets together allows for a more manageable approach, compared to planning on a street-by-street basis. The average RSL for each roadway group was calculated, and weighted based on individual segment surface area. A summary of the roadway groups, physical information, average RSL, and costs pertaining to each treatment type is located in Appendix D. Each roadway group was then analyzed on a long-term basis to identify street surface maintenance-treatments, street surface improvements, stormwater drainage improvements, and multi-modal improvements. Improvements to stormwater systems and multi-modal are only considered when a roadway group is slated for reconstruction. Unit costs per square yard of pavement surface were estimated for prescriptive treatment based on 2016 market prices. Prescriptive treatments are categorized as routine, preventative, rehabilitative, or reconstruction. Specific treatments and the estimated unit price per square yard can be viewed in Appendix E and are color-coded based on category. Streets Asset Management Goals Due to the high elevation and location of the City of McCall, asphalt pavement can deteriorate quickly due to extreme freeze-thaw cycles and heavy impact from snow removal equipment, tire chains and studs. The Streets Department strives to maintain structurally sound pavement surfaces while preventing excess wear. Maintaining pavement surfaces and establishing adequate drainage facilities will prevent moisture from entering the road section and will minimize future reconstruction expenditure. December 7, 2017 page 16 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers The goal of the McCall Streets Department Asset Management Program is to produce a pavement network that is maintainable in a cost-effective way and to create a cyclical process of maintaining its streets. The department must economize spending to maximize the utility of the city roadway network. Maintenance planning was completed to minimize spending long-term by applying the appropriate pavement treatment at the correct time using the RSL measure. For instance, a chip seal treatment is known to be most beneficial to the life of a pavement when the segment is classified in the 8 to 14- year RSL range. Similarly, it is not cost effective to chip seal a pavement segment classified in the 4 to 8-year RSL range because the pavement is passed the point of no return, and a more expensive treatment is warranted to replace the existing pavement. In some cases, it is economical to allow a pavement segment to degrade to the point in which full reconstruction of the pavement section is warranted. Reconstruction projects, although expensive, allow the city to plan for future improvements to pathways, storm drain systems, water and sewer systems, and parking areas. Figures 13 and 14 describe the general relationship of pavement treatments and the associated costs. The best-case scenario is to maintain all asphalt surfaces so they remain in good condition while primarily investing in preservation maintenance treatments. Maintaining a high quality roadway network would keep repair costs low, but this accomplishment is unrealistic for most cities. Lack of funding, accelerated pavement aging, waiting too long to conduct maintenance, and unforeseen events often prevent this scenario from occurring. Figure 13. Pavement Condition vs. Repair Cost. Excerpt from Reference (2) December 7, 2017 page 17 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Figure 14. Timing of Surface Treatments. Excerpt from Reference (2) Treatment Implementation Using the asset management goals, a general framework for applying treatments to city streets with varying RSL was formulated. Figure 15 summarizes the treatments, as a function of RSL, which will be most cost effective. It is important to note that not all streets will receive treatment before its structural quality will degrade into a less cost effective treatment category. Figure 15. Pavement Treatment per RSL, June 2016 Pavement Conditions ‐2% 2% 6% 10% 14% 18% 22% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20PERCENTAGE OF SEGMENTS WITH CORRESPONDING RSLREMAINING SERVICE LIFE, YEARS City of McCall's Asphalt Pavement Treatment Strategy Preventative Maintenance ‐Chip Seal‐ Routine Maintenance ‐Fog Coat, Chip Seal newly constructed‐ Rehabilitation Mill & Inlay Reconstruct & Improve December 7, 2017 page 18 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers The City, through discussions with project engineers and the City Council has established the goal to have an average paved network RSL between the range of 12 to 15 years RSL. This average RSL constitutes a well-maintained and fiscally manageable network. In that range, a majority of roadways would fall in the preventative and routine maintenance category over several years, and a small proportion of the city’s lane miles would require the more expensive rehabilitation and reconstruction treatments. Keeping a bulk of the city’s network in the efficient range would allow the Streets Department a window of allowable time to apply efficient treatments before streets start to degrade to a point when treatments that are more expensive are needed. Figure 16 summarizes the current condition of McCall’s paved roadway network in comparison to the target average RSL range. As of June 2016, the paved network is below the desired condition that would constitute an economically efficient network. Strategic project planning to maximize available funding will be critical to improving the health of the network to the target average RSL range. More information regarding anticipated improvement and maintenance projects and the associated funding can be viewed in following sections of this memorandum. Figure 16. Goal of Average Paved Network RSL Condition December 7, 2017 page 19 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Streets Department Annual Budget Analysis The Streets Department works year-round to maintain drivable and safe roadways. Each season requires different maintenance activities and brings unique challenges to the department. Typical activities per season are outlined below. Summer Maintenance Activities: asphalt repair/maintenance – cracks and potholes blading & dust abatement for gravel roads street sweeping & catch basin cleanout stormwater maintenance (ditch cleaning & culvert replacement) signing, striping & illumination city parking lot maintenance hanging banners and light pole flags Winter Maintenance Activities: snow plowing & removal ice melt preparation for Winter Carnival pothole repair tree removal Department Administration: department facilities & supplies city administration employees city engineering and improvement project management staff management and crew supervision Figure 17 summarizes the average spending of the Streets Department based on the 2015, 2016, and 2017 Annual Budget. Appendix F contains the details of the Streets Department Budget for these years. In November 2015, the residents of McCall voted to pass a local option tax (L.O.T.) to provide a financial solution to repair the crumbling streets and to improve streets with needed storm drain systems, pathways, and bike-friendly facilities. The Streets L.O.T. started generating revenue in January of 2016. Based on the funding received from January through December of 2016, the Public Works Department anticipates using $1,000,000 of Streets L.O.T. revenue per year on Capital Improvement projects and $265,000 of Streets L.O.T. revenue per year for Maintenance Improvement projects. The Streets Department will make available $85,000 to be put towards Maintenance Improvement projects for a total budget of $350,000 per year. Figure 17 also shows how the Streets L.O.T. revenue will work alongside the Streets General Fund. The funds described by the pie chart on the left in Figure 17 represents the work done by the department with city streets crews. The improvement projects will be completed by area contractors that are awarded projects through a competitive bidding process. December 7, 2017 page 20 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Administration, $372,778 *Capital Projects, $461,857 Summer Maintenance, $630,726 Winter Maintenance, $421,280 25% 20%22% 33% Capital Improvement Plan Reconstruction Projects, $1,000,000 Maintenance Improvement Plan Projects (Provided by Streets General Fund), $85,000 Maintenance Improvement Plan Projects (Provided by L.O.T.), $265,000 Figure 17. Streets Department Budget, General Fund and Streets L.O.T. Fund. * Streets budget going towards capital projects not included in CIP Annual Fixed Maintenance Certain pavement deficiencies, such as minor transverse cracks and potholes, can be addressed on an as-need basis throughout the year. The Streets Department can apply a crack seal treatment or patch to protect the paved roadway from further deterioration and to protect the base material from excess moisture. These treatments do not necessarily improve the RSL of a roadway, but they help prolong pavement life thereby reducing the rate of RSL decrease. Historically, the Streets Department crew has applied a crack seal treatment to 130,000 square yards of paved road per year. This amounts to approximately 20% of the paved surface of the city’s network receiving treatment, not taking into account any repeat applications. Likewise, the Streets Department historically applies approximately 114,000 square yards of patch treatment to asphalt surfaces. Roughly 15% of the city’s paved network receives asphalt patching and pothole repair each year. The city owns and maintains approximately 8 miles of gravel streets. The Streets Department re-grades each segment twice a year to maintain an effective cross slope and to prevent any ponding, rutting, and corrugations. Magnesium chloride is applied for dust abatement measures. Gravel roads have not been considered for maintenance improvement or capital improvement projects because annual maintenance is adequate to upkeep the integrity of the surface. Unpaved streets are typically in residential areas and do not receive heavy-vehicle traffic. However, it should be noted that some of the City's gravel roads are in need of drainage system improvements. Average Annual General Streets Budget (2015, 2016, 2017) - $1,886,641 Maintenance Total, $350,000 Annual Streets L.O.T. for Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Projects - $1,350,000 December 7, 2017 page 21 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Depending on time of application, costs associated with annual fixed maintenance are presented in Summer Maintenance or Winter Maintenance cost. A majority of gravel surface and asphalt repair is done during the summer months. Streets Department staff wages are incorporated into the two maintenance seasons. The Streets Department has invested in the Elements Asset & Work Management Program by NOVOTX to track department expenditures efficiently, primarily fixed maintenance activities and crew activities. The Elements program is web- based and incorporates ArcGIS features to track department actions spatially. Capital Improvement Plan Utilizing the asset inventory and planning tools previously described a 10-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is presented in Figure 18. Improvement projects are specifically listed for years 2017-2026, and an additional 16 capital improvement projects have been identified for preliminary development. The CIP and additional 16 preliminary projects are representative of specific roadway groups, as previously discussed in the Streets Asset Management Section. Additionally, as supplementary grant money or Streets L.O.T. revenue is gathered, these projects may be moved into the 10-year CIP in a future year. Each improvement project will implement strategies outlined in the Complete Streets Policy adopted by the City of McCall on November 3, 2011. This policy ensures city street facilities will be designed in a safe, comfortable, and convenient manner for all types of users. There is no singular design prescription for a Complete Street, rather, each street is unique and responds to its community context. An extensive Alternatives Analysis will be conducted for each L.O.T. Streets Improvement Project. AlleyAlley SSvvccRRddNNSS aa mmss oo nn TTrrllDwyDwy MMoorrggaann DDrr 1st St1st StFloyde StFloyde St Davis AveDavis AveMill RdMill RdE Park StE Park StW Fore s t S t W Fore s t S t MMaatt hh eerr RRdd Stibnite StStibnite St N Mission StN Mission StRRii oo VViissttaaBBllvvdd Krahn LnKrahn Ln S Samson TrlS Samson TrlDavis AveDavis AveN Samson TrlN Samson TrlRRaaiillrrooaaddAAvveeWWoooolleeyy AAvvee Elo RdElo RdSSMMiissssiioonnSSttE Deinhard LnE Deinhard LnNNMMiissssiioonnSStt SSpprriinnggMMoouunnttaaiinnBBllvvddWW DD ee ii nn hh aa rr dd LL nnHill LnS u itor Ln ParLnEJacobStMay RdCamas PlEagle DrRiverRanchRdDivotLnValleySpringsRdRa w hideLoop Fairway Dr Jacob St Carmen Dr Carico RdClements RdScott St McCallAve2nd StReedy Ln Hemlock St Colo rado St PonderosaStThula StGarnet St Brown DrOpal St Buckb o ardWayFloyde StAspen StThompson Ave Fir St GambleRdRice St Idaho St Louisa AveBitterroot DrState StDawsonAveHill RdBridle Path Way WardStL i c k Creek Rd Kasper StDiamond St Washington StNeal StSimmons StStockton DrE Lake StCamp RdRuby St Shelia LnEismanStAgate St K ikiCtL e n o raS tE Forest St CammyDrSuns e t S tPlacid StR i n gelS t Cece Way Lawren ceDrEllisRdEagle Shores CtChu la Rd Sam son CtCrossRdNSamsonTrl T i m m StEd gewa terCirAnn StAspen Aly McBride St Spruce St Firew e e d D rWildhorse DrS u n n y Way Saddlehorn Ln Gab i L n RooseveltAve Broken Rein R dFairway LoopBur n s Rd RailroadA v e B r un d ageDrHewitt St Commerce StMcG i n n i s St Woo d l a nds D rSmittyAveBaycolt WayAlle n AveJulies RdHelmich StCarico C t DeerF o r e st Dr Ernesto DrFox LnSyringaD r Ch a d LoopSvcRd M e moCi r Fox Ridge LnN 3rd StN 3rd StW Lake S t W Lake S t State Hwy 55State Hwy 55 E Lake StE Lake St S 3rd StS 3rd St Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Capital Improvement Plan 0 0.5 10.25Miles Legend CIP Roads Other Roads Future improvement projects beyond 10 Years Reconstruction & improve in next 10 years Years 2017 - 2026 and Future Projects Mather Rd 2021 Construction - Replace pavement section - Improve roadside drainage - Upgrade main stormwater pipe Idaho and Brown Ct 2018 Construction - Replace pavement section - Improve roadside drainage - Add separated pathway Park St and Thompson Ave 2025 Construction - Replace pavement section - Improve roadside drainage - Add Pedestrian Facilities Wooley Ave 2026 Construction - Replace pavement section - Improve roadside drainage - Add separated pathway E, Deinhard Ln 2023 Construction - Replace pavement section - Improve separated pathway - Upgrade access to businesses Commerce St 2017 Construction - Replace pavement section - Install roadside ditches - Improve access to businesses S. Mission St 2022 Construction - Federally Funded Project - Replace pavement section - Connect existing pathway to existing buffered bike lane Downtown Core Projects 2018 - 2020 Construction - 2nd and Lenora streets complete in 2019 - Veteran's Alley and Park St complete in 2020 - Replacement of entire core, which is important to McCall's overall character - Improve sidewalks, on-street parking, street lighting and event space - 1st St parking lot improvements anticipated in 2024 Figure 18. McCall CIP, 2017 - 2026 (Page 1 of 1) page 22 of 31 December 7, 2017 page 23 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers The City of McCall CIP incorporates the projects and construction timeline that have been suggested by the Downtown Core Feasibility Study. Projects outside the downtown core were prioritized based on the following criteria, in order of importance: 1. Remaining Service Life of existing facility 2. Function Classification of street and traffic volume 3. Community Value 4. Need for pathway, storm drain, or utility improvements 5. CIP program funding and outside funding sources Full details regarding the 10-year CIP and the projects that have been identified for preliminary development including programmed implementation date, and project component estimated costs can be found in Appendix G. The 2017-2026 CIP proposes improvements to 11 streets, one alley, and construction of a major urban stormwater management facility. The plan encompasses 3.8 centerline miles of roadway, which constitutes 8.6% of the paved city network. The estimated cost for the proposed CIP is approximately $11,000,000 and includes engineering design and construction engineering. Project construction estimates reflect costs in 2017. Inflation was deemed to have a negligible effect on the overall Streets L.O.T. budget. The department anticipates if construction costs steadily rise in forth coming years, the revenue brought in from the Streets L.O.T. will also rise and offset. The list of preliminary projects, which are next in line to be adopted into the 10- year CIP, totals 5.8 centerline miles, or 13.6% of the paved network. Estimated construction costs total approximately $13,000,000. This list can be viewed in Appendix G. Maintenance Improvement Plan Using the planning tools described in previous sections of this memo, Horrocks and City staff have developed a Maintenance Improvement Plan (MIP) that identifies and schedules routine and preventative maintenance projects for selected roadway groups over the next 10 years. Small pavement rehabilitation projects of lengths less than 0.30 miles and in areas that multi-modal and storm water-drainage system improvements have not been identified are considered part of the MIP. A budget of $350,000 per year for MIP projects has been used for project identification. Any funds not spent each year are carried over to subsequent years. The June 2016 pavement inventory identified a large percentage of the paved network that lies in the preventative and routine maintenance spectrum. The goal of the proposed MIP is to prevent good-conditioned streets to fall into a condition that would constitute a more expensive treatment. Initial planning utilized the concept of a 5-year cycle. One 5-year cycle consists of three heavy routine and preventative maintenance years and two rehabilitative maintenance years on streets where improvements have December 7, 2017 page 24 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers not been identified. Rehabilitative measures, as part of the MIP, are completed on pavement that have reached the end of their useful like. Additionally, the MIP incorporates routine and preventative treatments for streets that are planned for reconstruction. The goal is to apply a preventative measure to newly constructed streets within two to three years of completion to protect the City’s investment in improved street facilities. Likewise, many streets will receive multiple maintenance treatments. For example, roadways that receive a rehabilitative treatment as identified in the CIP or MIP, depending on size, will typically receive a preventative chip seal several years after the initial treatment. The 10-year MIP is presented in Figure 19. Full details of the MIP can be found in Appendix H. The presented MIP proposes 39.1 centerline miles of routine, preventative, and rehabilitation maintenance treatments. Proposed spending on MIP projects is approximately $350,000 per year. Additional Streets L.O.T. revenue that is allocated for maintenance projects may be used for additional routine maintenance on streets that have received preventative treatments. !!!!!! AlleyAlley SS vvcc RRdd DDwwyyMorgan D r Morgan D r 2nd St2nd St1st St1st StEE LLaakkeeSSttColorado StColorado St E Park StE Park St N Mission StN Mission StLakeside AveLakeside Ave W Fore s t S t W Fore s t S t MMaa tt hh ee rr RRdd Stibnite StStibnite St Rio Vista BlvdRio Vista Blvd Chad D r Chad D rBoydstun StBoydstun StE Deinhard LnE Deinhard Ln S Mission StS Mission StN Mission StN Mission StW Deinhard LnW Deinhard Ln Hill LnSc o tt St Hayes St W h i t e t a i l D r W Forest St Valley View Ln E Park St Scott St Fir St Hayes St 2nd StSunset St Tim b e r c r e s t L o o p Thula StBrown DrRowland StFloyde StAspen StPinedale S t Karen St GambleRdR omine Dr Rice St Idaho St Jacob S tState StHill RdRiver St Kasper StCoy Rd Washington StNeal StSimmons StE Lake StKikiCtE Forest St CammyDrTimm S t Cece WayEagleShoresCtVeritaRdChulaRdLardo StGena W a yC rossR dEdgewa t erCirMcBride StBoydstunSt S u n n y Wa yJasper DrGab i L n B urnsRd RailroadAveCarmen D r Hewitt St R i d g e R d P i ne TerraceDr Chad Loop Placid StIndust ri a lLoopHelmich StHe r ri c k StHubbard DrErn e s t o D r Brund a g e DrValleyRimRdSvcRd M e moCirN 3rd StN 3rd StW Lake S t W Lake S t E Lake StE Lake St Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Maintenance Improvement Plan 0 0.25 0.50.125Miles Legend MIP Roads Phase 1 !!! !!!!!! ! !!2017, Micro seal 2017, Rehabilitate pavement 2018, Chip Seal 2018, Fog Seal 2019, Chip Seal 2020, Chip Seal 2020, Rehabilitate Pavement 2021, Chip Seal 2021, Fog Seal 2021, Rehabilitate Pavement 2022, Chip Seal 2022, Rehabilitate Pavement 2023, Chip Seal 2024, Rehabilitate Pavement 2025, Rehabilitate Pavement 2026, Chip Seal MIP Roads Phase 2 2026, Chip Seal 2024, Chip Seal 2023, Chip Seal Years 2017 - 2026 West Figure 19. McCall MIP, 2017 - 2026 (Page 1 of 2) page 25 of 31 !!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!! !! AlleyAlley SSvvccRRddNN SS aa mmss oo nn TTrrll DD ww yyFloyde StFloyde St EE LLaakkeeSSttCCoolloorraa ddoo SS ttMill RdMill RdS Samson TrlS Samson TrlDavis AveDavis AveN Samson TrlN Samson TrlRRaaiillrrooaaddAAvveeLick Creek RdLick Creek Rd WW oo oolleeyy AAvvee E Deinhard LnE Deinhard Ln SSpprriinnggMMoouunnttaaiinnBBllvvddDavis AveDavis AveEEllddeerrbbeerrrryy LLoooopp DDooggwwoooo dd LLoo oo pp C o tt a g e Ct W o o d y D r Suitor Ln Par LnQuakie LnBi r di eBlvdC o l u m b i n e P lE Jacob StMay RdC a m a s P lEagle DrPenstemen PlDivot LnValleySpringsRdM ile s S t a n d i s h Rd TimberCirD r a gonfly LoopFairway Dr Jacob St Clements RdSnowberry PlMcCallAve ShadyLnEllis RdCarico RdReedy Ln Hemlock St Mo`s Way Colo rado St PonderosaStGarnet St Bitterroot Dr Opal St B u ckboardWayP ottsDrThompson Ave Floyde St Fir St BlackwellAveLouisa AveE P a rkS t Balshae DrDawsonAveHill RdBrid le Pa th Way WardStL i c k Creek Rd S a n d W e d g e Ct Diamond St KaitlynL o o p Railroad AveE Lake StCamp RdR uby St Washington St EismanStAgate St McBride St Strawberry Ln L e n o ra S tMayflo w erRdBe llflowerPlSuns e t St StocktonCtBlueHaze Way R i n gelS t MajesticViewDrLawre n ceDrSam son Ct NSamsonTrl T i m m StAnnSt Aspen Aly Alpine StSpruce St Wildhorse DrSaddlehorn LnUniversityLnRooseveltAve H eavensGateCtBroken Rein R d Dou g l a s D rFairwayLoopWoodlandsDr Graham Dr Commerce StMcG i n n i s S t Vi o l e t W a y Flynn Ln F i r e w e e d Dr Conifer Ln Chipmunk Ln Pilgrim Cove RdM o untain M eadow Dr SmittyAveSwanie WayBaycolt WayAlle n AveBrady D r Koski Dr Knights RdAspenRidgeLnCarico C t DeerF o re s t Dr Fo x LnSyringaDr Kaitlyn L o o p GinneyWayCe d a rL n Cee Way Loop Fox Ridge Ln Fox Rid g e LnN 3rd StN 3rd StS 3rd StS 3rd St Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community Maintenance Improvement Plan 0 0.25 0.50.125Miles Years 2017 - 2026 East Stockton Dr Figure 19. McCall MIP, 2017 - 2026 (Page 2 of 2) page 26 of 31 December 7, 2017 page 27 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Results & Implementation The Streets L.O.T. revenue will be used on improvement projects that will best benefit the Streets Department in achieving their goal of creating a healthy roadway network that is safe for the traveling public while economizing cost. Figure 20 summarizes the anticipated RSL with respect to different improvement funding amounts. The red line signifies the average network RSL if the Streets Department were to cease all maintenance efforts. The health of the network would degrade at a high rate over the next 10 years. The purple line represents the anticipated health of the network if the Streets Department did not receive the $1,265,000 Streets L.O.T. revenue for improvement projects. At this funding level, the health of the network would gradually worsen over the next 10 years and the expense to create an economically efficient network would grow to an unsurmountable amount. Lastly, the green line represents the estimated effect of the proposed CIP and MIP plans outlined in previous sections of this memorandum. If the city invests the anticipated Streets L.O.T. revenue of $1,265,000 plus the $85,000 from the Streets General Fund into improvement projects, the overall health of the network is expected to recover gradually over the next 10 years. Despite the planned improvements to the city’s roadway infrastructure, the analysis shows that within the next 10 years, the overall condition of the roadway network will remain below the target RSL range that constitutes as economically efficient. Future pavement inventories will provide data to check the accuracy of the presented forecast. Figure 20. CIP & MIP Implementation Results December 7, 2017 page 28 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Figure 21 incorporates the CIP and MIP cost estimates and anticipated streets program revenue to aid in annual budget balancing. A shortfall in funding may occur in years 2020, 2023, and 2024 based on 2017 project estimates. To compensate for the shortfall, monetary support from outside funding sources may be needed. Additional revenue from state and federal grants should be sought. Figure 21. CIP & MIP Spending Summary December 7, 2017 page 29 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Conclusion The City of McCall Streets Asset Management Program has allowed the Streets Department to analyze the current condition of its roadway network and estimate maintenance and reconstruction costs for specific projects. A strategic plan to improve McCall’s crumbling roadway network has been proposed in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and Maintenance Improvement Plan (MIP). Anticipated revenue assumptions were made to plan improvement projects over the span of the next 10 years. Based on the analysis, the department expects the health of their network will improve gradually, but only over the long term. It anticipates being short of the goal of providing an economically efficient network to its citizens during the 10 years of implementation. This is primarily due to the high cost of reconstruction projects required on many of the city's high-use roads and urban areas. However, utilizing the asset management strategy presented herein, the Streets Department outlines an implementation program that makes the best use of available funding. It is important to recognize that the proposed CIP and MIP implementation schedules presented are intended to be dynamic. The Streets Department will continue to assess the city streets by conducting a pavement inventory every three years. Accordingly, the CIP and MIP will be updated based on future inventories, damage due to inclement weather and traffic loading, and input from citizens. The City of McCall has published a website that outlines the proposed CIP and MIP programs using an interactive map. Citizens may continually check the interactive map to keep informed of the timeline of planned reconstruction and maintenance projects by navigating to the “Maps/GIS” tab at www.mccall.id.us. December 7, 2017 page 30 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers References 1. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. Distress Identification Manual for the Long-Term Pavement Performance Program. By John S. Miller, and William Y. Bellinger. 4th ed. N.p.: n.p., 2003. Print. FHWA-RD-03-031 2. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. Pavement Remaining Service Interval Implementation Guidelines. By Gary E. Elkins, Gonzalo R. Rada, Jonathan L. Groeger, and Beth Visintine. N.p.: n.p., 2013. Print. FHWA-HRT-13-050. December 7, 2017 page 31 of 31 City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Appendices Appendix A – Functional Classification Map Appendix B – Surface Rating Sheets & FHWA Distress Identification Manual for the Long-Term Pavement Performance Program Appendix C – Complete June 2016 Pavement Inventory Results Appendix D – Roadway Groups Appendix E – Prescriptive Treatment Costs Appendix F – Streets Department Budget Tables Appendix G – Capital Improvement Plan Tables Appendix H – Maintenance Improvement Plan Table December 7, 2017 Appendix City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Appendix A – Functional Classification Map PilgrimCoveRdMoonridgeDrBrookDrClubHillBlvdValley View Ln McCallAve1stStPayetteDrReedy LnMeadows RdStibnite St LupineLnIdaho St ChadDr Knights RdThula StRiver Ranch RdMill RdBitterr o o t D r C h r i s L n ClubRd LichenLnCoyRdMoon Dr W Forest S t Stockton Dr C o l o r a d o S t WhitetailDr OspreyViewDrS undanceDrJohnAldenStateParkRdErn e s t o D r AspenRidgeLnShelia Ln Krahn Ln Woodlands Dr Strawberry LnFlynn Ln SvcRd N S a ms onTrlChipmunk Ln F a irway Dr Ridge R dBearBasinRd ValleyRim R dCrowleyLn NisulaRdMigratoryRidgeWayRawhideLoopF a w nlullyDr MatherRd Rio Vista Blvd NMissionStWL a k e S t Mission StSpringMountainBlvdDavis AveN3rdSt E Lake St BoydstunStLick Creek Rd S 3rd St Wooley AveWarrenWagonRd E Deinhard Ln Elo RdSMissionSt S Samson TrlWDeinha r d L n West Mountain RdÉÈ55 Payette Lake McCall Transportation Master Plan August 2017 ¯ Figure 1 Proposed Roadway Functional Classifications McCall, Idaho H:\19\19638 - McCall Comprehensive Plan\gis\XX Proposed Functional Roadway Classifications.mxd - jmarkosian - 8:55 AM 8/23/2017Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Idaho West FIPS 1103 Feet Data Source: City of McCall, Topo Data Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Functional Classifications Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Major Collector Minor Collector Local City Limits 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Miles December 7, 2017 Appendix City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Appendix B – Surface Rating Sheets & FHWA Distress Identification Manual for the Long-Term Pavement Performance Program ASPHALT DISTRESS RATING SHEET Extent Low Medium High Low Medium High 0 None 1 Crack WP or 1' off C&G Length 2 Crack WP or 1'-2' off C&G Length >30% of Surface Area or Length 0 None > 15'x15' Squares 15'-10'x Squares < 10'x10' Squares Low Cracks < 1/4"123 Low Cracks < 1/4"123 Medium Cracks 1/4"to 3/4"456 Medium Cracks 1/4"to 3/4"456 High Cracks > 3/4"789 High Cracks > 3/4"789 Low Medium High Low Medium High 0 None 1 Crack Full Length 2 Cracks Full Length > 2 Cracks Full Length 0 None 0-10% of Length 10-30% of Length >30% of Length Low Cracks < 1/4"123 Low Cracks < 1/4"123 Medium Cracks 1/4"to 3/4"456 Medium Cracks 1/4"to 3/4"456 High Cracks > 3/4"789 High Cracks > 3/4"789 Low Medium High Low Medium High 0 None > 100' between Cracks 100'-20' between Cracks < 20' between Cracks 0 None 0-10% of Length 10-30% of Length > 30% of Length Low Cracks < 1/4"123 Low 0-6" from Curb 123 Medium Cracks 1/4"to 3/4" 456 Medium 6-18" from Curb 456 High Cracks > 3/4"789 High 18" from Curb 789 Excellent Good Fair Poor UTILITY CUTS SeverityExtent BLOCK CRACKINGFATIGUE CRACKING Extent SeverityTRANSVERSE CRACKING LONGITUDINAL CRACKING EDGE CRACKINGSeverity Excellent 0 Low <3/8" High >3/4"SeverityExtent SeverityMed 1/2"-3/4" Drainage / Roughness Extent SeverityNote: to rate potholes use the same form with the following changes to the severity: Low is <1" deep, Med is 1"-2" deep and High is >2" Rutting Extent Unpaved Rating Sheet NO Defects Low Med High Low 123 Med 456 High 789 NO Defects Low Med High NO Defects Low Med High Low 123 Low (<1 in.)123 Med 456 Med (1 - 3 in.)456 High 789 High (>3 in.)789 NO Defects Low Med High Low 123 Med 456 High 789 CORRUGATIONS EXTENT S E V E R I T Y STREETS: SECTION NO: START: END: START MILEAGE: END MILEAGE: RUTTING EXTENT S E V E R I T Y POTHOLES EXTENT S E V E R I T Y ROADSIDE DRAINAGE CONDITION S E V E R I T Y GOOD FAIR POOR DUST IMPROPER X-SECTION S E V E R I T Y GOOD FAIR POOR CONDITION S E V E R I T Y LIGHT MEDIUM HEAVY LOOSE AGGREGATE EXTENT S E V E R I T Y CONDITION This section covers asphalt concrete-surfaced pavements (ACP), including ACP over- lays on either asphalt concrete (AC) or portland cement concrete (PCC) pavements. Each of the distresses has been grouped into one of the following categories: A.Cracking B.Patching and Potholes C.Surface Deformation D.Surface Defects E.Miscellaneous Distresses Table 1 summarizes the various types of distress and unit of measurement. Some distresses also have defined severity levels. TABLE 1.Asphalt Concrete-Surfaced Pavement Distress Types DEFINED DISTRESS UNIT OF SEVERITY TYPE MEASURE LEVELS? A.Cracking / page 3 1. Fatigue Cracking Square Meters Yes 2. Block Cracking Square Meters Yes 3. Edge Cracking Meters Yes 4a. Wheel Path Longitudinal Cracking Meters Yes 4b.Non-Wheel Path Longitudinal Cracking Meters Yes 5. Reflection Cracking at Joints Transverse Reflection Cracking Not Measured N/A Longitudinal Reflection Cracking Not Measured N/A 6. Transverse Cracking Number, Meters Yes B.Patching and Potholes / page 15 7. Patch/Patch Deterioration Number, Square Meters Yes 8. Potholes Number, Square Meters Yes C.Surface Deformation / page 21 9. Rutting Millimeters No 10. Shoving Number, Square Meters No D.Surface Defects / page 25 11. Bleeding Square Meters No 12. Polished Aggregate Square Meters No 13. Raveling Square Meters No E.Miscellaneous Distresses / page 29 14. Lane-to-Shoulder Dropoff Not Measured N/A 15. Water Bleeding and Pumping Number, Meters No 1 1 DISTRESSES FOR PAVEMENTS WITH ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACES This section includes the following distresses: 1.Fatigue Cracking 2.Block Cracking 3.Edge Cracking 4a.Longitudinal Cracking—Wheel Path 4b.Longitudinal Cracking—Non-Wheel Path 5.Reflection Cracking at Joints 6.Transverse Cracking Measurement of crack width is illustrated in Figure 1. Figure 2 depicts the effect on severity level of a crack, in this case block cracking, due to associated random cracking. A 3 Cracking FIGURE 1 Measuring Crack Width in Asphalt Concrete-Surfaced Pavements FIGURE 2 Effect on Severity Level of Block Cracking due to Associated Random Cracking FATIGUE CRACKING Description Occurs in areas subjected to repeated traffic loadings (wheel paths). Can be a series of interconnected cracks in early stages of development. Develops into many-sided, sharp-angled pieces, usually less than 0.3 meters (m) on the longest side, characteristically with a chicken wire/alligator pattern, in later stages. Must have a quantifiable area. Severity Levels LOW An area of cracks with no or only a few connecting cracks; cracks are not spalled or sealed; pumping is not evident. MODERATE An area of interconnected cracks forming a complete pattern; cracks may be slightly spalled; cracks may be sealed; pumping is not evident. HIGH An area of moderately or severely spalled interconnected cracks forming a complete pattern; pieces may move when subjected to traffic; cracks may be sealed; pumping may be evident. How to Measure Record square meters of affected area at each severity level. If different severity levels existing within an area cannot be distinguished, rate the entire area at the highest severity present. 4 1 ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACES FIGURE 3 Distress Type ACP 1—Fatigue Cracking 5 Cracking FIGURE 6 Distress Type ACP 1—Moderate Severity Fatigue Cracking FIGURE 7 Distress Type ACP 1—High Severity Fatigue Cracking with Spalled Interconnected Cracks FIGURE 5 Distress Type ACP 1—Low Severity Fatigue Cracking FIGURE 4 Distress Type ACP 1—Chicken Wire/Alligator Pattern Cracking Typical in Fatigue Cracking BLOCK CRACKING Description A pattern of cracks that divides the pavement into approximately rectangular pieces. Rectangular blocks range in size from approximately 0.1 m2 to 10 m2. Severity Levels LOW Cracks with a mean width ≤6 millimeters (mm); or sealed cracks with sealant material in good condition and with a width that cannot be determined. MODERATE Cracks with a mean width > 6 mm and ≤19 mm; or any crack with a mean width ≤19 mm and adjacent low severity random cracking. HIGH Cracks with a mean width > 19 mm; or any crack with a mean width ≤19 mm and adjacent moderate to high severity random cracking. How to Measure Record square meters of affected area at each severity level. If fatigue cracking exists within the block cracking area, the area of block cracking is reduced by the area of fatigue cracking. Note: An occurrence should be at least 15 m long before rating as block cracking. 6 2 ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACES FIGURE 8 Distress Type ACP 2—Block Cracking FIGURE 9 Distress Type ACP 2—Block Cracking with Fatigue Cracking in the Wheel Paths FIGURE 10 Distress Type ACP 2—High Severity Block Cracking EDGE CRACKING Description Applies only to pavements with unpaved shoulders. Crescent-shaped cracks or fairly continuous cracks which intersect the pavement edge and are located within 0.6 m of the pavement edge, adjacent to the shoulder. Includes longitudinal cracks outside of the wheel path and within 0.6 m of the pavement edge. Severity Levels LOW Cracks with no breakup or loss of material. MODERATE Cracks with some breakup and loss of material for up to 10 percent of the length of the affected portion of the pavement. HIGH Cracks with considerable breakup and loss of material for more than 10 percent of the length of the affected portion of the pavement. How to Measure Record length in meters of pavement edge affected at each severity level. The combined quantity of edge cracking cannot exceed the length of the section. 3 7 Cracking FIGURE 11 Distress Type ACP 3—Edge Cracking FIGURE 12 Distress Type ACP 3—Low Severity Edge Cracking LONGITUDINAL CRACKING Description Cracks predominantly parallel to pavement centerline. Location within the lane (wheel path versus non-wheel path) is significant. Severity levels LOW A crack with a mean width ≤6 mm; or a sealed crack with sealant material in good condition and with a width that cannot be determined. MODERATE Any crack with a mean width > 6 mm and ≤19 mm; or any crack with a mean width ≤19 mm and adjacent low severity random cracking. HIGH Any crack with a mean width > 19 mm; or any crack with a mean width ≤19 mm and adjacent moderate to high severity random cracking. 8 4 ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACES FIGURE 13 Distress Type ACP 4—Longitudinal Cracking How to Measure Record separately: 4A. WHEEL PATH LONGITUDINAL CRACKING Record the length in meters of longitudinal cracking within the defined wheel paths at each severity level. Record the length in meters of longitudinal cracking with sealant in good condition at each severity level. Note: Any wheel path longitudinal crack that has associated random cracking is rated as fatigue cracking. Any wheel path longitudinal crack that meanders and has a quantifiable area is rated as fatigue cracking. 4B. NON-WHEEL PATH LONGITUDINAL CRACKING Record the length in meters of longitudinal cracking not located in the defined wheel paths at each severity level. Record the length in meters of longitudinal cracking with sealant in good condition at each severity level. 9 Cracking FIGURE 14 Distress Type ACP 4a—Moderate Severity Longitudinal Cracking in the Wheel Path FIGURE 15 Distress Type ACP 4b—High Severity Longitudinal Cracking not in the Wheel Path REFLECTION CRACKING AT JOINTS Description Cracks in asphalt concrete overlay surfaces that occur over joints in concrete pavements. Note: The slab dimensions beneath the AC surface must be known to identify reflection cracks at joints. Severity Levels LOW An unsealed crack with a mean width ≤6 mm; or a sealed crack with sealant material in good condition and with a width that cannot be determined. MODERATE Any crack with a mean width > 6 mm and ≤19 mm; or any crack with a mean width ≤19 mm and adjacent low severity random cracking. HIGH Any crack with a mean width > 19 mm; or any crack with a mean width ≤19 mm and adjacent moderate to high severity random cracking. 10 5 ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACES FIGURE 16 Distress Type ACP 5—Reflection Cracking at Joints How to Measure Recorded as longitudinal cracking (ACP4) or transverse cracking (ACP6) on LTPP surveys. 11 Cracking FIGURE 17 Distress Type ACP 5—High Severity Reflection Cracking at Joints TRANSVERSE CRACKING Description Cracks that are predominantly perpendicular to pavement centerline. Severity Levels LOW An unsealed crack with a mean width ≤6 mm; or a sealed crack with sealant material in good condition and with a width that cannot be determined. MODERATE Any crack with a mean width > 6 mm and ≤19 mm; or any crack with a mean width ≤19 mm and adjacent low severity random cracking. HIGH Any crack with a mean width > 19 mm; or any crack with a mean width ≤19 mm and adjacent moderate to high severity random cracking. 12 6 ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACES FIGURE 18 Distress Type ACP 6—Transverse Cracking Asphalt Concrete Surfaces How to Measure Record number and length of transverse cracks at each severity level. Rate the entire transverse crack at the highest severity level present for at least 10 percent of the total length of the crack. Length recorded, in meters, is the total length of the crack and is assigned to the highest severity level present for at least 10 percent of the total length of the crack. Also record length in meters of transverse cracks with sealant in good condition at each severity level. Note: The length recorded is the total length of the well-sealed crack and is assigned to the severity level of the crack. Record only when the sealant is in good condition for at least 90 percent of the length of the crack. If the transverse crack extends through an area of fatigue cracking, the length of the crack within the fatigue area is not counted. The crack is treated as a single transverse crack, but at a reduced length. Cracks less than 0.3 m in length are not recorded. 13 Cracking FIGURE 19 Distress Type ACP 6—Low Severity Transverse Cracking FIGURE 20 Distress Type ACP 6—Moderate Severity Transverse Cracking FIGURE 21 Distress Type ACP 6—High Severity Transverse Cracking This section includes the following distresses: 7.Patch/Patch Deterioration 8.Potholes B 15 Patching and Potholes PATCH/PATCH DETERIORATION Description Portion of pavement surface, greater than 0.1 m2, that has been removed and replaced or additional material applied to the pavement after original construction. Severity Levels LOW Patch has, at most, low severity distress of any type including rutting < 6 mm; pumping is not evident. MODERATE Patch has moderate severity distress of any type or rutting from 6 mm to 12 mm; pumping is not evident. HIGH Patch has high severity distress of any type including rutting > 12 mm, or the patch has additional different patch material within it; pumping may be evident. How to Measure Record number of patches and square meters of affected surface area at each severity level. Note: Any distress in the boundary of the patch is included in rating the patch. Rutting (settlement) may be at the perimeter or interior of the patch. 16 7 ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACES FIGURE 22 Distress Type ACP 7—Patch/Patch Deterioration 17 Patching and Potholes FIGURE 23 Distress Type ACP 7—Low Severity Patch FIGURE 24 Distress Type ACP 7—Moderate Severity Patch FIGURE 25 Distress Type ACP 7—High Severity Patch POTHOLES Description Bowl-shaped holes of various sizes in the pavement surface. Minimum plan dimension is 150 mm. Severity Levels LOW < 25 mm deep. MODERATE 25 mm to 50 mm deep. HIGH > 50 mm deep. How to Measure Record number of potholes and square meters of affected area at each severity level. Pothole depth is the maximum depth below pavement surface. If pothole occurs within an area of fatigue cracking the area of fatigue cracking is reduced by the area of the pothole. 18 8 ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACES FIGURE 26 Distress Type ACP 8—Potholes 19 Patching and Potholes FIGURE 27 Distress Type ACP 8—Low Severity Pothole FIGURE 28 Distress Type ACP 8—Moderate Severity Pothole FIGURE 29 Distress Type ACP 8—Moderate Severity Pothole, Close-up View FIGURE 30 Distress Type ACP 8—High Severity Pothole, Close-up View This section includes the following types of surface deformations: 9.Rutting 10.Shoving C 21 Surface Deformation RUTTING Description A rut is a longitudinal surface depression in the wheel path. It may have associated transverse displacement. Severity Levels Not applicable. Severity levels could be defined by categorizing the measurements taken. A record of the measurements taken is much more desirable, because it is more accurate and repeatable than are severity levels. How to Measure Specific Pavement Studies (SPS)-3 ONLY. Record maximum rut depth to the nearest millimeter, at 15.25-m intervals for each wheel path, as measured with a 1.2-m straight edge. All other LTPP sections: Transverse profile is measured with a Dipstick® profiler at 15.25-m intervals. 22 9 ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACES FIGURE 31 Distress Type ACP 9—Rutting FIGURE 32 Distress Type ACP 9—Rutting FIGURE 33 Distress Type ACP 9—Standing Water in Ruts December 7, 2017 Appendix City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Appendix C – Complete June 2016 Pavement Inventory Results Seg # Road_Name From_Address To_Address Number_of _Lanes Seg_W idth Seg_Length Area Speed_Lim Surface_Type Importance RSL_2016 RSL_2013 RSL_2011 Deterioration Ratio (2016 vs 2013) Reduction in RSL/Year 172 1st St Railroad Ave Idaho Street 2 24 193 514 25 mph Asphalt Medium 2 4 4 0.67 210 1st St Colorado Street Washington Street 2 24 315 840 25 mph Asphalt Medium 2 4 4 0.67 211 1st St Washington Street Railroad Ave 2 24 131 348 25 mph Asphalt Medium 2 2 2 0.00 213 1st St Forest Street Park Street 2 24 102 271 25 mph Asphalt Medium 6 6 6 0.00 214 1st St Park Street Park Street 2 46 82 420 25 mph Asphalt Medium 2 2 6 0.00 215 1st St Park Street Lenora Street 2 46 244 1,247 25 mph Asphalt Medium 0 2 2 0.67 225 1st St E Lake Street Lenora Street 2 46 299 1,528 25 mph Asphalt Medium 0 2 2 0.67 1812 1st St Forest Street Idaho Street 2 24 372 992 25 mph Asphalt Medium 6 6 6 0.00 195 2nd St Washington Street 2nd Street 2 24 122 324 25 mph Unpaved Low 5 5 7 0.00 228 2nd St Lenora Street Park Street 2 63 321 2,245 25 mph Asphalt Medium 2 2 4 0.00 229 2nd St E Lake Street Lenora Street 2 63 322 2,253 25 mph Asphalt Medium 8 10 12 0.67 1436 4th Street Lenora Street Dead End 2 22 279 682 25 mph Asphalt Low 6 6 6 0.00 1377 4th Street N Park Street Lenora Street 2 24 320 852 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 12 14 0.67 1072 Agate St Carico Road Carico Court 2 24 418 1,115 25 mph Unpaved Low 9 8 10 ‐0.33 1328 AGATE ST AGATE ST DAVIS AVE 1 12 440 586 15 mph Unpaved Low 0 0 0 0.00 886 Allen Ave Ringel Street Floyde Street 2 24 302 807 25 mph Asphalt Low 8 8 10 0.00 1134 Allen Ave Sunset Street Ringle Street 2 24 264 703 25 mph Asphalt Low 6 6 6 0.00 1482 Allen Ave Timm Street Sunset Street 2 24 495 1,319 25 mph Asphalt Low 8 8 8 0.00 1822 ALLEY 3RD STREET 2ND STREET 1 16 386 686 5 mph Asphalt Low 14 14 20 0.00 1823 ALLEY BEHIND ICESKATING RINK 2ND STREET 1ST STREET 1 18 360 720 5 mph Asphalt Low 10 10 10 0.00 1824 ALLEY BEHIND STERLING BANK INT W/ IST STREET INT W/ 2ND STREET 1 12 439 586 5 mph Asphalt Low 0 0 0 0.00 1825 ALLEY BEHIND US BANK INT W/ 2ND STREET INT W/ 3RD STREET 1 14 379 590 5 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 12 0.00 781 Alpine St Wanda Ave Thompson Ave 2 24 652 1,739 25 mph Asphalt Low 6 6 6 0.00 1330 Alpine St Thompson Ave Wooley Ave 2 24 705 1,881 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 6 0.00 1507 Ann St Wanda Ave Thompson Street 2 24 649 1,730 25 mph Asphalt Low 6 6 6 0.00 1461 Aspen Aly Clements Road Ponderosa Ave 2 24 668 1,780 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 7 0.00 276 Aspen Ridge Ln 1050 Quakie Lane 1100 Majestic View Ct 2 24 641 1,710 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 20 0.00 570 Aspen Ridge Ln 1255 Spring Moutain Blvd 1400 Bitterroot Drive 2 24 1,992 5,313 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 10 14 ‐0.67 1290 Aspen Ridge Ln 1110 Bitterroot Drive 1245 Quakie Lane 2 24 1,874 4,998 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 12 0.00 549 Aspen Street Stibnite Street Dead End 2 20 202 448 10 mph Unpaved Low 0 0 0 0.00 273 Balshae Dr Strawberry lane Flynn Lane 2 24 304 810 25 mph Unpaved Low 8 8 10 0.00 671 Bay Colt Way Saddle Horn Drive Ponderosa Ave 2 24 286 763 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 10 10 0.00 672 Bay Colt Way Saddlehorn Lane Thompson Ave 2 24 256 683 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 10 10 0.00 1291 Bay Colt Way Thompson Ave Broken Rein Road 2 24 504 1,344 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 10 10 0.00 737 BEAR BASIN RD HWY 55 MEADOWS RD 2 24 671 1,790 25 mph Unpaved Low 1 5 6 1.33 740 BEAR BASIN RD PRIVATE DR SERVICE RD 2 24 1,371 3,656 25 mph Unpaved Low 4 4 4 0.00 742 BEAR BASIN RD SERVICE RD CITY LIMITS 2 24 221 590 25 mph Unpaved Low 4 4 4 0.00 966 BEAR BASIN RD MEADOWS RD PRIVATE DR 2 24 699 1,864 25 mph Unpaved Low 4 3 5 ‐0.33 1294 Bellflower Pl 1090 Bitterroot Drive 1160 2 24 506 1,351 25 mph Asphalt Low 14 14 20 0.00 278 Bitterroot Dr Fireweed Dr Bellflower Place 2 24 2,247 5,991 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 10 10 0.00 450 Bitterroot Dr Majestic View Drive Apen Ridge Ln 2 24 966 2,575 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 12 14 0.67 922 Bitterroot Dr Fireweed Dr Majestic View Drive 2 24 1,653 4,408 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 10 14 0.00 1061 Bitterroot Dr 1000 Spring Moutain Blvd Fireweed Dr 2 24 280 745 25 mph Asphalt Low 8 6 10 ‐0.67 1064 Bitterroot Dr Bellflower Place Fireweed Dr 2 24 181 483 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 12 0.00 24 Blackwell Ave Koski Drive Douglas Drive 2 24 260 694 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 14 14 0.67 1301 Blackwell Ave Douglas Drive Brady Drive 2 24 268 714 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 14 0.00 1492 Blue Haze Way 1100 Potts Drive 1116 Swainie Way 2 24 506 1,350 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 8 10 ‐0.67 131 Boydston St Industrail Loop West Valley Rd 2 40 122 544 35 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 20 20 16 0.00 1139 Boydstun Ln Hayes Street Boydstun Loop 2 24 1,122 2,991 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 7 0.00 1237 Boydstun Ln W lake Street Hayes Street 2 24 562 1,499 25 mph Unpaved Low 9 9 10 0.00 1299 Boydstun Loop Boydstun Lane W Lake Street 2 24 906 2,417 25 mph Asphalt Low 0 0 0 0.00 8 Boydstun St Industrail Loop Industrail Loop 3 40 288 1,279 35 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 18 20 16 0.67 13 Boydstun St Whitetail Drive Lakeside Ave 3 40 668 2,967 35 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 20 20 16 0.00 14 Boydstun St Gena Way Verita Rd 3 40 486 2,162 35 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 20 20 16 0.00 52 Boydstun St Pinedale Street Whitetail Drive 3 40 645 2,865 35 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 18 20 16 0.67 55 Boydstun St Veronica Street Gena Way 3 40 619 2,750 35 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 20 20 16 0.00 130 Boydstun St Verita Rd PineDale Street 3 40 552 2,454 35 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 20 20 16 0.00 150 Boydstun St Lakeside Ave W Lake Street 2 40 477 2,121 35 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 20 20 16 0.00 169 Boydstun St Rio Vista Blvd Veronica Street 3 40 325 1,444 35 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 20 20 16 0.00 207 Boydstun St West Valley Rd Rio Vista Blvd 3 40 676 3,003 35 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 20 20 16 0.00 264 Boydstun St Warren Wagon Road Hayes Street 2 24 711 1,897 25 mph Unpaved Low 8 8 7 0.00 1560 Boydstun St W Deinhard Lane Industrial Loop 3 40 245 1,089 35 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 20 20 16 0.00 30 Brady Dr 630 Brady Drive 664 Brady Drive 2 24 857 2,287 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 14 0.00 904 Brady Dr 630 Brady Drive 634 Brady Drive 2 24 272 724 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 14 0.00 1026 Brady Dr Woodlands Drive Koski Drive 2 24 384 1,025 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 6 12 ‐2.00 1302 Brady Dr 640 Douglas Drive 646 Brady Drive 2 24 328 874 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 12 12 0.67 1264 Bridle Path Way Ponderosa Ave Bay Colt Way 2 24 317 845 25 mph Asphalt Low 8 8 10 0.00 1303 Bridle Path Way Buckboard Way Pondersora Ave 2 24 373 995 25 mph Asphalt Low 8 8 10 0.00 1292 Broken Rein Rd Bay Colt Way Buckboard Way 2 24 902 2,405 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 10 10 0.00 352 Brown Dr Idaho Street Idaho Street 2 45 181 906 20 mph Asphalt Low 4 4 4 0.00 833 Brundage Dr Mather Rd Mather Rd 2 24 1,151 3,068 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 4 4 4 0.00 602 Buckboard Way Thompson Ave Saddlehorn Lane 2 24 223 595 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 10 10 0.00 1293 Buckboard Way Broken Rein Road Thompson Ave 2 24 614 1,637 25 mph Asphalt Low 8 8 10 0.00 1304 Buckboard Way Saddlehorn Lane Bridle Path Way 2 24 197 526 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 10 10 0.00 785 Burns Rd Mather Rd Mather Rd 2 24 933 2,487 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 10 10 12 0.00 1305 Cammy Dr Rio Visita Blvd Rio Visita Blvd 2 24 1,221 3,255 25 mph Unpaved Low 4 4 4 0.00 548 Camp Rd Floyde Street Floyde Street 2 24 393 1,048 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 7 0.00 1306 Carico Ct Carico Road Agate Street 2 24 707 1,884 25 mph Unpaved Low 9 7 10 ‐0.67 510 Carico Rd Lick Creek Road Carico Ct 2 24 185 493 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 10 8 10 ‐0.67 782 Carico Rd Conifer Lane Strawberry Lane 2 24 249 664 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 14 12 14 ‐0.67 1003 Carico Rd Chipmunk Lane Conifer Lane 2 24 250 667 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 14 12 12 ‐0.67 1038 Carico Rd Strawberry lane Flynn Lane 2 24 323 861 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 14 14 14 0.00 1073 Carico Rd Carico Ct Agate Street 2 24 177 472 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 12 8 10 ‐1.33 1232 Carico Rd Agate Street Chipmunk Lane 2 24 129 343 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 14 10 14 ‐1.33 838 Carmen Dr Pinedale Street Rio Vista Blvd 2 24 1,177 3,139 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 14 14 20 0.00 1280 Cece Way Rio Vista Blvd Rio Vista Blvd 2 24 526 1,402 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 14 14 14 0.00 1308 Cece Way Rio Vista Blvd Rio Vista Blvd 2 24 702 1,873 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 16 16 16 0.00 813 Cedar Lane Spring Mountain Blvd Mountain Cove Ct 2 24 1,346 3,589 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 12 12 0.67 771 Chipmunk Ln Pilgrim Cove Road Carico Road 2 24 2,877 7,672 25 mph Unpaved Low 9 8 10 ‐0.33 1311 Chula Rd Rio Vista Blvd Rio Vista Blvd 2 24 579 1,543 25 mph Unpaved Low 4 4 4 0.00 1462 Clements Rd Reedy Lane Aspen Aly 2 24 167 446 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 7 0.00 21 Colorado St N Samson Trail Ward Street 2 24 669 1,784 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 6 0.00 35 Colorado St Syringa Drive Syringa Drive 2 24 300 799 25 mph Asphalt Low 8 8 12 0.00 99 Colorado St Ward Street N 3rd Street 2 24 523 1,395 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 6 0.00 194 Colorado St N 3rd Street 1st Street 2 24 807 2,152 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 4 6 6 0.67 256 Colorado St North Samson Trail Syringa Drive 2 24 238 634 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 10 12 0.00 257 Colorado St Syringa Drive Colorado Street 2 24 149 397 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 12 0.00 1315 Commerce St Deinhard Ln Jacobs St 2 26 1,318 3,806 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 2 2 2 0.00 Seg # Road_Name From_Address To_Address Number_of _Lanes Seg_W idth Seg_Length Area Speed_Lim Surface_Type Importance RSL_2016 RSL_2013 RSL_2011 Deterioration Ratio (2016 vs 2013) Reduction in RSL/Year 361 Conifer Ln Pilgrim Cove Rd Carico Road 2 24 2,872 7,658 25 mph Unpaved Low 9 8 9 ‐0.33 277 Cross Rd Forest Street Mather Rd 2 24 617 1,645 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 6 0.00 25 Davis Ave Thompson Ave Wooley Ave 2 24 663 1,768 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 10 14 0.00 61 Davis Ave Lawrence Drive Suitor Lane 2 24 181 483 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 12 14 0.67 70 Davis Ave Wanda Ave Thompson Ave 2 24 682 1,818 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 6 6 0.00 81 Davis Ave Spruce Street Private Dwy 2 24 178 475 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 10 14 0.00 85 Davis Ave Blue Water Circle Lawrence Drive 2 24 183 488 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 12 14 0.67 121 Davis Ave Spruce Street Spruce Street 2 24 67 179 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 10 12 0.00 126 Davis Ave Fir Street Spruce Street 2 24 322 860 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 8 14 0.00 153 Davis Ave Suitor Lane Private Dwy 2 24 567 1,511 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 10 16 0.00 196 Davis Ave Wooley Ave Fir Street 2 24 245 655 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 10 12 0.67 197 Davis Ave Hemlock Street Reedy Lane 2 24 353 942 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 12 14 1.33 198 Davis Ave Reedy Ln Blue Water Circle 2 24 122 325 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 14 14 1.33 199 Davis Ave Private Dwy Fairway Drive 2 24 216 576 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 10 14 0.00 200 Davis Ave Private Dwy Ruby Street 2 24 764 2,037 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 10 14 0.00 201 Davis Ave Ruby Street Lick Creek Rd 2 24 246 655 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 14 16 0.00 202 DAVIS AVE DIAMOND ST AGATE ST 2 24 127 338 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 14 20 0.00 235 DAVIS AVE LICK CREEK DIAMOND ST 2 24 268 715 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 14 14 0.00 2400 Davis Ave Private Dwy Hemlock Street 2 24 131 348 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 8 14 0.00 528 Dawson Ave Spruce Street Hemlock Street 2 24 370 987 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 8 0.00 1329 Dawson Ave Pine Street Spruce Street 2 24 565 1,506 25 mph Unpaved Low 8 8 8 0.00 1322 DAWSON ST HEMLOCK ST DEAD END 2 22 244 597 25 mph Unpaved Low‐Medium 4 4 4 0.00 1331 Deer Forest Drive Spring Mountain Blvd Spring Mountain Blvd 2 24 710 1,892 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 20 0.00 1314 Denali Court Wooley Ave Dead End 2 22 569 1,391 15 mph Unpaved Low 6 6 6 0.00 1327 Diamond St Davis Ave Diamond Street 1 12 340 454 25 mph Asphalt Low 4 4 4 0.00 880 Douglas Dr 648 Blackwell Ave 666 Brady Drive 2 24 907 2,419 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 12 0.00 1815 DRIVEWAY BEHIND CITY HALL INT. W/ PARK STREET INT W/ 1ST STREET 2 20 951 2,113 15 mph Unpaved Medium 5 5 0 0.00 565 E Deinhard Ln N 3rd Street Thula Street 2 32 841 2,991 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 18 20 20 0.67 1338 E Deinhard Ln Commerce Street N Samson Trail 2 36 1,882 7,529 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 8 6 0.00 1340 E Deinhard Ln N 3rd Street Commerce Street 2 40 993 4,413 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 6 6 0.00 1341 E Deinhard Ln Thula Street Mission Street 2 34 1,691 6,389 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 18 20 14 0.67 445 E Lake St Thrid Street Pine Street 2 30 617 2,057 25 mph Asphalt Medium 14 14 16 0.00 567 E Lake St Fir Street Hemlock Street 2 30 760 2,535 25 mph Asphalt Medium 8 8 8 0.00 1121 E Lake St Pine Street Fir Street 2 30 396 1,319 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 8 10 0.00 1381 E Lake Street Opal Street Dead End 1 14 975 1,516 15 mph Asphalt Low 2 2 4 0.00 1358 Edgewater Cir Forest Street Mather Road 2 24 646 1,723 25 mph Unpaved Low 4 4 4 0.00 486 Ernesto Dr Gena Way Rio Vista Blvd 2 24 1,819 4,850 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 14 14 14 0.00 1359 Ernesto Dr Pinedale Street Gena Way 2 24 1,097 2,926 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 12 12 14 0.00 1735 Fairway Loop Lick Creek Road Lick Creek Road 2 24 929 2,478 25 mph Unpaved Low 9 7 10 ‐0.67 1241 FIR ST E LAKE ST MILL RD 2 52 167 964 15 mph Asphalt Medium 14 14 8 0.00 1265 Fir St Davis Ave Ponderosa Street 2 24 680 1,813 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 10 10 0.00 1240a Fir St Roosevelt Ave Mill St Parking Lot 2 26 180 4,590 15 mph Asphalt Medium 20 na na 825 Fireweed Dr 1001 Bitterroot Drive 1056 Bitterroot Drive 2 24 2,470 6,586 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 10 6 0.00 372 Floyde St Eisman Street Allen Ave 2 24 671 1,789 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 8 8 8 0.00 425 Floyde St N 3rd Street Hill Road 2 24 302 804 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 6 0.00 885 Floyde St Camp Rd Eisman Street 2 24 232 620 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 8 8 8 0.00 1112 Floyde St N 3rd Street Country Craftsman Loop 2 24 466 1,242 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 10 12 12 0.67 1132 Floyde St Allen Ave Smitty Ave 2 24 302 805 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 8 0.00 1373 Floyde St Hill Rd Camp Rd 2 24 292 778 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 8 0.00 1178 Flynn Ln Strawberry Lane Carico Road 2 24 2,454 6,545 25 mph Unpaved Low 8 5 9 ‐1.00 122 FOREST LN INT W/ KASPER INT W/ 1 ST STREET 1 12 450 601 5 mph Unpaved Low 4 0 0 ‐1.33 38 Forest St Mission Street Cross Rd 2 24 993 2,647 25 mph Asphalt Medium 4 4 6 0.00 75 FOREST ST EDGEWATER CIR MATHER RD 2 24 79 211 25 mph Asphalt Medium 10 10 10 0.00 162 Forest St MIssion Street Kasper Street 1 12 858 1,145 25 mph Unpaved Low 4 4 4 0.00 217 FOREST ST GAMBLE RD HILL LN 2 24 642 1,713 25 mph Asphalt Medium 10 10 10 0.00 218 FOREST ST HILL LN EDGEWATER CIR 2 24 609 1,624 25 mph Asphalt Medium 4 6 10 0.67 1517 Forest Trails Ct Forest Trails Drive Dead End 2 24 667 1,779 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 14 14 0.67 1518 Forest Trails Dr W Lake Street Forest Trails Ct 2 24 646 1,722 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 14 14 14 0.00 112 Fox Ln 150 Fox Ridge Ln 180 Fox Ridge Ln 2 24 782 2,084 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 12 12 0.67 113 Fox Ridge Ln 675 Fox Ridge Ln 696 Fox Ln 2 24 1,011 2,697 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 12 12 0.67 1565 Fox Ridge Ln 625 S Samson Trail 633 Fox Ln 2 24 837 2,232 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 12 12 0.67 1627 Fox Ridge Ln 633 Fox Ridge Ln 696 Fox Ridge Ln 2 24 829 2,210 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 12 12 0.67 1378 Gabi Ln Rio Vista Blvd Rio Vista Blvd 2 24 820 2,185 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 14 14 16 0.00 532 Gamble Rd Forest Street Mather Rd 2 24 401 1,069 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 6 0.00 1379 Gamble Rd E Lake Street Hewitt Street 2 24 356 948 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 8 0.00 1404 Gamble Rd Hewitt Street Forest Street 2 24 250 667 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 8 10 0.67 1383 Garnet St McCall Ave Ruby 2 24 173 462 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 0 4 ‐2.33 1279 Gena Way Boydstun Street Ernesto Drive 2 24 611 1,629 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 14 14 14 0.00 1386 Ginney Way Spring Mountain Blvd Spring Mountain Blvd 2 24 1,350 3,601 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 12 12 0.67 1490 Graham Dr 1078 Potts Drive 1125 Mos Way 2 24 1,111 2,962 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 10 14 0.00 520 Hayes St Hubbard Drive Boydstun Lane 2 24 200 534 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 8 0.00 521 Hayes St Herrick Street Boydstun Street 2 26 337 973 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 8 0.00 715 Hayes St Boydstun Street Jasper Drive 2 24 251 670 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 8 0.00 968 Hayes St Jasper Drive Hubbard Drive 2 24 261 697 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 10 0.00 1098 Hayes St Warren Wagon Road Herrick Street 2 26 216 623 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 12 12 12 0.00 569 Heavens Gate Ct 1100 Heavens Gate Ct 1165 Majestic View Drive 2 24 856 2,282 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 12 0.00 827 HELMICK ST UNNAMED SCOTT RD 1 14 152 236 25 mph Unpaved Low 0 0 0 0.00 927 HELMICK ST SCOTT ST MISSION ST 2 20 315 699 15 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 7 0.00 1395 HELMICK ST RICE ST UNAMED 1 14 508 791 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 0 0.00 48 Hemlock St Louisa Ave Dawson Ave 2 24 328 875 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 6 8 0.00 67 Hemlock St Mill Road McCall Ave 2 24 76 203 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 8 8 0.00 80 Hemlock St Dawson Ave Davis Ave 2 24 170 454 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 8 8 0.67 127 Hemlock St East Lake Street Mill Rd 2 24 141 376 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 12 12 12 0.00 220 Hemlock St McCall Ave Greystone Dr 2 24 195 519 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 8 8 0.00 221 Hemlock St Greystone Drive Roosevelt Ave 2 24 127 340 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 8 8 0.00 223 Hemlock St Roosevelt Ave Roosevelt Ave 2 24 113 301 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 8 8 0.00 224 Hemlock St Roosevelt Ave Louisa Ave 2 24 353 942 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 6 8 0.00 1401 Herrick St Hayes Street Herrick Street 2 24 639 1,703 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 12 12 0.67 1403 Herrick St Hayes Street Herrick Street 2 24 302 807 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 7 0.00 1405 Hewitt St Gamble Rd State Street 2 24 1,182 3,152 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 6 0.00 1376 HILL LN FOREST ST DEAD END 1 14 435 677 15 mph Unpaved Low 4 4 4 0.00 791 Hill Rd Floyde Street Hill Road 2 24 314 836 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 7 0.00 331 Hubbard Dr Hayes Street Romine Drive 2 24 731 1,949 25 mph Unpaved Low 8 8 9 0.00 351 Idaho St 1st Street Kasper Street 2 24 484 1,290 20 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 4 6 6 0.67 423 Idaho St Kasper Street Brown Circle Dr 2 24 594 1,583 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 2 4 4 0.67 1048 Idaho St Brown Circle Dr Mission Street 2 24 268 714 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 2 6 6 1.33 1111 IDAHO ST 3RD ST WARD ST 2 24 367 979 10 mph Unpaved Low 4 4 2 0.00 1549 Industrial Loop W Deinhard lane Boydstun Street 2 24 803 2,142 25 mph Unpaved Low‐Medium 7 7 7 0.00 Seg # Road_Name From_Address To_Address Number_of _Lanes Seg_W idth Seg_Length Area Speed_Lim Surface_Type Importance RSL_2016 RSL_2013 RSL_2011 Deterioration Ratio (2016 vs 2013) Reduction in RSL/Year 1810 Industrial Loop Boydstun Street Edge of Pavement 2 24 514 1,371 15 mph Asphalt Low 8 8 8 0.00 1808 Jacob St Commerce Street Virginia Blvd 2 24 38 101 25 mph Asphalt Low 6 6 6 0.00 987 Jacobs St Virginia Blvd Valley Springs Rd 2 24 136 363 25 mph Asphalt Low 4 4 8 0.00 988 Jacobs St State Hwy 55 Virginia Blvd 2 24 540 1,441 25 mph Asphalt Low 6 6 6 0.00 1406 Jacobs St Virginia Blvd Commerce St 2 24 438 1,169 25 mph Asphalt Low 4 6 6 0.67 484 Jasper Dr Hayes Street Romine Drive 2 24 752 2,006 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 9 0.00 1408 Kaitlyn Loop Spring Mountain Blvd Kaitlyn Loop 2 24 359 958 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 12 0.00 1409 Kaitlyn Loop Kaitlyn Loop Kaitlyn Loop 2 24 1,112 2,966 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 14 0.00 1410 Karen St Veronica Rd Verita Rd 2 24 459 1,223 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 14 14 16 0.00 1412 Karen St Boydstun Street Veronica Rd 2 24 410 1,092 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 12 12 16 0.00 1414 Karen St Verita Rd TJs Loop 2 24 345 920 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 12 12 14 0.00 669 Kasper St Forest Street Park Street 2 24 214 570 20 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 14 14 14 0.00 990 Kasper St Idaho Street Forest Street 2 24 324 865 20 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 12 14 14 0.67 271 Knowles Rd West Lake Street Private Dwy 2 24 179 477 25 mph Unpaved Low 8 8 8 0.00 1176 Knowles Rd Private Dwy Dwy 2 24 561 1,497 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 7 0.00 1419 Knowles Rd Dwy Dwy 2 24 409 1,091 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 7 0.00 1149 Koski Dr 650 Blackwell Ave 664 Brady Drive 2 24 744 1,984 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 12 0.00 1420 Koski Dr Blackwell Ave Woodlands Dr 2 24 616 1,642 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 14 0.00 574 Lakeridge Dr Woodhaven Court Lakeridge Drive 2 24 3,326 8,870 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 10 10 0.00 1548 LAKERIDGE DR MEADOWS RD WOODHAVEN CT 2 24 1,144 3,049 25 mph Asphalt Low 6 8 8 0.67 1 Lakeside Ave Boydstud Street Rowland Street 2 24 938 2,501 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 8 8 8 0.00 2 Lakeside Ave Lardo's Street W Lake Street 2 24 184 491 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 14 0.00 68 Lakeside Ave Rowland Street Lardos Street 2 24 361 962 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 10 10 14 0.00 530 Lardo St LakeSide Ave River Street 2 24 581 1,550 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 7 0.00 1248 Lawrence Dr Reedy lane Davis Ave 2 24 541 1,442 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 7 0.00 219 Lenora St 4th Street Roosevelt Ave 2 24 505 1,348 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 7 0.00 226 Lenora St 1st Street 2nd Street 2 50 396 2,199 25 mph Asphalt Medium 0 2 2 0.67 227 Lenora St 2nd Street N 3rd Street 2 50 378 2,098 25 mph Asphalt Medium 2 2 2 0.00 232 Lenora St Pine Street Roosevelt Ave 2 24 441 1,176 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 7 0.00 7 Lick Creek Rd Timber Circle Pilgrim Cove Road 2 24 263 702 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 10 14 ‐1.33 32 Lick Creek Rd Evergreen Drive Carico Road 2 24 129 343 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 10 14 ‐1.33 104 Lick Creek Rd Carico Road Fairway Loop 2 24 308 822 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 12 12 12 0.00 234 Lick Creek Rd Davis Avenue Evergreen Drive 2 24 815 2,173 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 10 10 ‐1.33 236 Lick Creek Rd Evergreen Dr Evergreen Dr 2 24 376 1,004 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 12 12 14 0.00 237 Lick Creek Rd Evergreen Drive Timber Circle 2 24 1,090 2,906 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 10 12 ‐1.33 245 Lick Creek Rd Pine Circle Evergreen Drive 2 24 732 1,952 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 10 14 ‐1.33 246 Lick Creek Rd Fairway Loop Pine Circle 2 24 71 190 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 10 14 0.00 259 Lick Creek Rd Spruce Lane Fairway Loop 2 24 293 782 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 10 14 ‐1.33 260 Lick Creek Rd Fairway Loop Spruce Lane 2 24 164 437 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 8 12 ‐2.00 597 Louisa Ave Hemlock Street Lousia Ave 2 24 272 725 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 7 0.00 779 Louisa Ave Hemlock Street Spruce Street 2 24 382 1,018 25 mph Unpaved Low 8 8 8 0.00 1437 Louisa Ave Spruce Street Pine Street 2 24 663 1,767 25 mph Unpaved Low 8 9 10 0.33 275 Majestic View Dr 1310 Bitterroot Drive 1345 Snowberry Place 2 24 513 1,367 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 10 14 ‐0.67 1032 Majestic View Dr 1585 Heavens Gate Ct 1620 Quakie Lane 2 24 641 1,711 25 mph Asphalt Low 14 12 12 ‐0.67 1173 Majestic View Dr 1100 Spring Moutain Blvd 1235 Bitterroot Drive 2 24 1,249 3,330 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 12 0.00 1289 Majestic View Dr 1635 Quakie Ln 1690 Majestic View Dr 2 24 923 2,461 25 mph Asphalt Low 14 12 12 ‐0.67 1439 Majestic View Dr 1355 Snowberry Place 1505 Aspen Ridge Lane 2 24 2,571 6,856 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 12 0.00 1440 Majestic View Dr 1510 Apen Ridge Lane 1575 Heavens Gate Ct 2 24 1,051 2,802 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 14 0.00 18 Mather Rd Burns Rd Burns Rd 2 24 1,283 3,420 25 mph Asphalt Medium 4 4 4 0.00 69 Mather Rd Cross Rd Brundage Drive 2 24 324 865 25 mph Asphalt Medium 10 10 10 0.00 76 Mather Rd Brundage Dr Brundage Dr 2 24 668 1,781 25 mph Asphalt Medium 10 10 10 0.00 173 Mather Rd Brundage Drive Mission Street 2 24 934 2,491 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 4 6 8 0.67 208 Mather Rd Forest Street Edgewater Circle 2 24 248 661 25 mph Asphalt Medium 6 6 8 0.00 1801 Mather Rd Burns Rd Gamble Rd 2 24 469 1,250 25 mph Asphalt Medium 6 6 6 0.00 1804 Mather Rd Gamble Rd Cross Rd 2 24 924 2,465 25 mph Asphalt Medium 6 6 8 0.00 1806 Mather Rd EdgeWater Circle Burns Rd 2 24 442 1,178 25 mph Asphalt Medium 4 4 6 0.00 1807 Mather Rd E Lake Street Forest Street 2 24 417 1,112 25 mph Asphalt Medium 2 2 4 0.00 805 McBride St N 3rd Street Thula Street 2 24 658 1,755 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 8 10 10 0.67 1385 McCall Ave Garnet Street Ruby Street 2 24 113 302 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 10 0.00 1399 McCall Ave Hemlock Ave Opal Street 2 24 2,134 5,690 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 10 0.00 1400 McCall Ave Opal Street Garnet Street 2 24 244 651 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 10 0.00 1442 McGinnis St Timm Street Smitty Ave 2 24 1,401 3,737 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 8 0.00 379 MEADOW RD VERONICA LANE END OF PAVEMENT 2 36 170 679 25 mph Asphalt Low 4 4 8 0.00 625 Meadows Rd CITY LIMITS LAKE RIDGE DR 2 24 260 693 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 12 12 0.67 713 MEADOWS RD BEAR BASIN RD PRIVATE DR 1 12 642 856 5 mph Unpaved Low 0 0 0 0.00 892 MEADOWS RD VERONICA LN LAKERIDGE DR 2 24 575 1,533 25 mph Asphalt Low 8 10 8 0.67 905 MEADOWS RD PRIVATE DR MILE HIGH DR 1 12 641 854 5 mph Unpaved Low 0 0 0 0.00 1209 MEADOWS RD BEAR BASIN RD SERVICE RD 1 12 791 1,055 5 mph Unpaved Low 0 0 0 0.00 1261 MEADOWS RD PRIVATE DR PRIVATE DR 1 12 720 960 5 mph Unpaved Low 0 0 0 0.00 1827 MEADOWS RD MILE HIGH RD VERONICA ST 1 12 1,134 1,511 5 mph Unpaved Low 0 0 0 0.00 31 MILL RD HEMLOCK ST FIR ST 2 22 770 1,882 20 mph Asphalt Medium 8 8 10 0.00 240 MILL RD FIR ST PINE ST 2 22 366 894 20 mph Asphalt Medium 10 10 10 0.00 9 Mission St E Lake Street Park Street 2 26 427 1,233 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 12 12 0.67 10 Mission St Idaho Street Forest Street 2 26 327 945 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 8 12 ‐0.67 16 Mission St Jacob Street City Limits 2 26 1,867 5,393 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 2 2 2 0.00 20 Mission St Scott Street Jacob Street 2 26 634 1,832 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 4 4 6 0.00 50 Mission St Forest Street Park Street 2 26 217 626 25 mph Asphalt Medium 14 8 12 ‐2.00 53 Mission St Stibnite Street Mather Rd 2 26 464 1,339 20 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 8 12 ‐2.00 54 Mission St W Deinhard Lane Stibnite Street 2 26 2,110 6,096 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 10 10 ‐1.33 88 Mission St Rice Street No Name 2 26 526 1,519 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 6 8 0.00 90 Mission St Mather Rd Idaho Street 2 26 678 1,958 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 8 12 ‐2.00 129 Mission St No Name Scott Street 2 26 134 388 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 2 2 8 0.00 5120 Mission St W Deinhard Lane Rice Street 2 26 398 1,150 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 8 8 0.00 1489 Mos Way 1076 Potts Drive 1122 Graham Drive 2 24 1,137 3,033 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 14 0.00 1497 Mos Way 1126 Gramham Drive 1130 Mos Way 2 24 147 393 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 20 0.00 847 Mountain Meadow Dr Spring Mountain Blvd Brundage View Ct 2 24 2,009 5,358 25 mph Asphalt Low 14 12 14 ‐0.67 951 Mountain Meadow Dr Meadow Lake Ct Brudage View Ct 2 24 547 1,458 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 14 0.00 1059 Mountain Meadow Dr Mountain Cove Ct Meadow Lake Ct 2 24 162 432 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 20 0.00 709 N Samson Trl Colorado Street Washington Street 2 24 320 854 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 6 6 0.00 1466 N Samson Trl Washington Street Wanda Ave 2 24 688 1,834 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 6 6 0.00 1467 N Samson Trl Wanda Ave Park Street 2 24 751 2,002 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 6 6 0.00 1809 N Samson Trl Colorado Street End of Asphalt 2 24 689 1,838 25 mph Asphalt Low 4 4 6 0.00 1562 N Samson Trl Spring Mtn Blvd N Samson Tr East Deinhard Lane 2 24 900 2,400 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 8 8 0.67 1382 Opal St McCall Ave East Lake Street 2 14 195 304 20 mph Asphalt Low 6 6 8 0.00 51 Park St North Samson Trail 4th Street 2 24 283 754 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 2 2 2 0.00 98 Park St N Samson Trail Park Street Private Dwy 2 24 325 866 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 6 6 0.00 136 Park St MISSION ST KASPER ST 2 24 861 2,295 25 mph Asphalt Medium 20 0 0 ‐6.67 216 Park St 1st Street Kasper Street 2 24 435 1,161 25 mph Asphalt Medium 20 0 0 ‐6.67 Seg # Road_Name From_Address To_Address Number_of _Lanes Seg_W idth Seg_Length Area Speed_Lim Surface_Type Importance RSL_2016 RSL_2013 RSL_2011 Deterioration Ratio (2016 vs 2013) Reduction in RSL/Year 242 Park St 1st Street 2nd Street 2 40 468 2,082 25 mph Asphalt Medium 0 2 4 0.67 243 Park St 2nd Street N 3rd Street 2 40 382 1,699 25 mph Asphalt Medium 0 2 4 0.67 244 Park St North 3rd Street North Samson Trail 2 24 308 822 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 14 20 0.00 230 Park Street Thompson Ave Dead End 1 16 529 940 15 mph Unpaved Low 4 4 4 0.00 356 Pilgrim Cove Rd Lick Creek Road Chipmunk Lane 2 24 151 403 25 mph Asphalt Medium 6 6 6 0.00 657 Pilgrim Cove Rd Conifer Lane Strawberry Lane 2 24 252 672 25 mph Asphalt Medium 6 6 8 0.00 1071 Pilgrim Cove Rd Cee Loop Cee Loop 2 24 348 927 25 mph Asphalt Medium 4 4 4 0.00 1230 Pilgrim Cove Rd Chipmunk Lane Conifer Lane 2 24 252 673 25 mph Asphalt Medium 6 6 6 0.00 1231 Pilgrim Cove Rd Strawberry Lane Cee Loop 2 24 141 376 25 mph Asphalt Medium 4 4 6 0.00 1555 Pilgrim Cove Rd Cee Loop Miles Standish Road 2 24 284 757 25 mph Asphalt Medium 6 6 6 0.00 238 Pine St Fir Street Railroad Ave 2 35 216 839 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 14 14 20 0.00 239 Pine St East Lake Street Fir Street 2 35 157 611 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 10 10 14 0.00 247 Pine St Railroad Ave Roosevelt Ave 2 35 307 1,193 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 10 10 10 0.00 252 Pine St Roosevelt Ave Lenora Street 2 24 365 974 25 mph Asphalt Medium 12 12 16 0.00 26 Pinedale St Carmen Dr Ernesto Drive 2 24 481 1,282 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 10 10 10 0.00 110 Pinedale St Rowland Street Carmen Dr 2 24 255 679 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 10 10 12 0.00 187 Pinedale St Ernesto Drive Boydstun Street 2 24 211 563 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 8 8 10 0.00 644 Placid St Thula Street Stibnite Street 2 24 510 1,359 25 mph Asphalt Low 6 8 8 0.67 582 Ponderosa Ave Wooley Ave Fir Street 2 24 332 885 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 12 12 12 0.00 1002 Ponderosa Ave Aspen Alley Reedy Lane 2 24 167 444 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 8 8 10 0.00 1172 Ponderosa Ave Fir Street Spruce Street 2 24 315 841 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 12 12 12 0.00 1087 Ponderosa St Wooley Ave Bridle Path Way 2 24 150 400 25 mph Asphalt Low 8 8 10 0.00 1058 Ponderosa Street Spruce Street Aspen Alley 2 24 482 1,286 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 10 10 10 0.00 1458 Potts Dr Blue Haze Way Swainie Way 2 24 602 1,604 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 14 0.00 1493 Potts Drive Mos Way Sring Mountain Blvd 2 24 210 559 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 20 0.00 1494 Potts Drive Graham Drive Mos Way 2 24 306 817 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 20 0.00 1495 Potts Drive Swainie Way Graham Drive 2 24 268 716 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 14 0.00 1496 Potts Drive Blue Haze Way Swainie Way 2 24 240 640 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 14 0.00 212 Railroad Ave 1st Street Edge of Asphalt 2 24 820 2,187 25 mph Unpaved Low 8 7 4 ‐0.33 248 Railroad Ave Third Street Pine Street 2 36 945 3,781 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 14 14 0.00 1811 RAILROAD AVE.INT. WITH 3RD ST END OF PAVEMENT 2 24 208 555 15 mph Asphalt Medium 8 8 8 0.00 1357 Reedy Lane Fairway Drive Golf Course 2 24 421 1,123 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 4 4 6 0.00 373 Reedy Ln Clements Rd Fairway Dr 2 24 267 713 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 8 0.00 656 Reedy Ln Lawrence Drive Ponderosa Ave 2 24 404 1,077 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 8 8 8 0.00 780 Reedy Ln Moore Street Clements Rd 2 24 520 1,386 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 4 4 6 0.00 871 Reedy Ln Davis Ave Lawrence Dr 2 24 245 654 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 4 4 6 0.00 1240 Reedy Ln Ponderosa Ave MooreStreet 2 24 150 399 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 4 4 6 0.00 912 RICE ST MISSION ST PRIVATE DR 1 14 147 228 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 2 0 ‐1.67 1396 RICE ST PRIVATE DR HELMICK ST 1 14 114 178 25 mph Unpaved Low 0 0 0 0.00 1463 Ringel St Allen Ave Smitty Ave 2 24 520 1,387 25 mph Asphalt Low 8 8 8 0.00 40 Rio Vista Blvd Cammy Drive Memo Circle 2 24 1,989 5,303 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 10 14 0.00 42 Rio Vista Blvd Carmen Drive Chula Rd 2 24 1,484 3,957 25 mph Asphalt Medium 8 8 8 0.00 72 Rio Vista Blvd Gabi Lane CeCe Way 2 24 362 965 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 14 14 0.00 73 Rio Vista Blvd CeCe Way Gabi Lane 2 24 221 588 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 14 14 0.00 87 Rio Vista Blvd Gabi Lane Sunny Way 2 24 1,280 3,414 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 12 12 14 0.00 89 Rio Vista Blvd Ernesto Drive Boydstun Street 2 24 2,014 5,370 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 14 14 0.00 179 Rio Vista Blvd Memo Circle CeCe Way 2 24 371 990 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 14 14 0.00 192 Rio Vista Blvd Sunny Way Gabi Lane 2 24 685 1,827 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 14 14 0.00 249 Rio Vista Blvd CeCe Way Ernesto Drive 2 24 1,499 3,997 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 12 14 14 0.67 250 Rio Vista Blvd Chula Rd Cammy Drive 2 24 667 1,780 25 mph Asphalt Medium 14 14 14 0.00 251 Rio Vista Blvd Rowland Street Carmen Street 2 24 850 2,266 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 8 8 0.00 1188 River St Lardo Street Rowland Street 2 24 319 852 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 7 0.00 714 Romine Dr Hubbard Drive Jasper Drive 2 24 262 699 25 mph Unpaved Low 8 8 10 0.00 1099 Romine Dr Warren Wagon Road Jasper Drive 2 24 305 814 25 mph Unpaved Low 8 7 9 ‐0.33 84 Roosevelt Ave Fir Street Greystone Drive 2 24 278 742 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 14 20 0.00 222 Roosevelt Ave Spruce Street Hemlock Street 2 24 372 993 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 16 16 0.67 231 Roosevelt Ave Pine Street Lenora Street 2 24 205 547 25 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 7 0.00 253 Roosevelt Ave Pine Street Fir Street 2 24 371 990 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 14 20 0.00 255 ROOSEVELT AVE HEMLOCK ST DEAD END 2 28 851 2,646 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 14 14 20 0.00 1559 Roosevelt Ave Greystone Drive Spruce Street 2 24 113 300 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 16 16 20 0.00 463 Rowland St River Street Pinedale Street 2 24 732 1,953 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 0 0 0 0.00 1387 Rowland St Lakeside Ave Grove Street 2 24 381 1,017 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 0 0 0 0.00 1388 Rowland St Grove Street River Street 2 24 182 484 25 mph Asphalt Medium 0 0 0 0.00 1384 Ruby St Davis Ave McCall Ave 2 24 394 1,051 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 10 0.00 1561 S Samson Trl Deinhard Lane City Limits 2 24 1,686 4,495 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 10 8 0.00 670 Saddlehorn Ln Bay Colt Way Buckboard Way 2 24 749 1,997 25 mph Asphalt Low 4 4 4 0.00 812 Sand Wedge Ct Spring Mountain Blvd Dead End 2 24 337 898 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 12 0.00 1271 SCOTT ST MISSION ST ALLEY 2 24 136 364 15 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 12 0.00 1274 SCOTT ST MISSION ST HELMICK ST 2 24 261 697 15 mph Unpaved Low 7 7 7 0.00 887 Smitty Ave Sunset Street Ringle Street 2 24 273 729 25 mph Asphalt Low 6 6 6 0.00 1443 Smitty Ave McGinnis St Timm St 2 24 163 433 25 mph Asphalt Low 6 6 8 0.00 1483 Smitty Ave Ringel Street Floyde Street 2 24 383 1,020 25 mph Asphalt Low 8 8 8 0.00 1484 Smitty Ave Timm Street Sunset Street 2 24 284 757 25 mph Asphalt Low 4 4 6 0.00 1438 Snowberry Pl 1840 Snowberry Place 1870 Snowberry Place 2 70 88 686 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 20 0.00 265 Spring Mountain Blvd Cottage Ct Penstemon Place 2 24 279 745 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 6 10 0.00 266 Spring Mountain Blvd Violet Way Cottage Ct 2 24 342 913 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 12 10 10 ‐0.67 284 Spring Mountain Blvd Majestic View Drive Blue Eye Circle 2 24 330 879 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 12 12 14 0.00 438 Spring Mountain Blvd Cedar Lane Majestic View Drive 2 24 397 1,059 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 12 14 ‐0.67 612 SPRING MOUNTAIN BLVD WOODLANDS DRIVE N SAMSON TRAIL 2 24 228 607 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 10 8 0.67 678 Spring Mountain Blvd Sand Wedge Ct Aspen Ridge Lane 2 24 169 449 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 20 8 10 ‐4.00 679 Spring Mountain Blvd Aspen Ridge Lane Cedar Lane 2 24 558 1,489 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 14 16 0.00 823 Spring Mountain Blvd Hearthstone Ct Wooley Ave 2 24 487 1,300 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 10 12 0.00 824 Spring Mountain Blvd Wooley Ave Camas Place 2 24 226 5,428 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 12 12 16 0.00 923 Spring Mountain Blvd Penstemon Place Hearthstone Ct 2 24 613 1,633 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 8 10 0.67 924 Spring Mountain Blvd Camas Place Columbine Place 2 24 470 1,253 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 12 12 16 0.00 1031 Spring Mountain Blvd Mountain Meadow Drive Sand Wedge Ct 2 24 870 2,320 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 20 12 20 ‐2.67 1051 Spring Mountain Blvd Svc Rd Woodlands Drive 2 24 200 533 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 4 4 6 0.00 1332 Spring Mountain Blvd Deer Forest Drive Svc Rd 2 24 2,349 6,264 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 2 6 ‐1.33 1333 Spring Mountain Blvd Bitterroot Drive Deer Forest Drive 2 24 676 1,802 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 6 6 ‐0.67 1334 Spring Mountain Blvd Deer Forest Drive Deer Forest Drive 2 24 382 1,019 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 8 8 0.00 1486 Spring Mountain Blvd Ginney Potts Dr 2 24 848 2,261 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 14 14 0.00 1487 Spring Mountain Blvd Potts Drive Mountain Meadow 2 24 618 1,647 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 20 14 20 ‐2.00 1488 Spring Mountain Blvd LICK CREEK Ginney Way 2 24 387 1,033 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 14 20 0.00 1678 Spring Mountain Blvd Blue Eye Cir Violet Way 2 24 166 443 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 12 14 14 0.67 1120 Spruce St Louisa Ave Roosevelt Ave 2 24 344 919 25 mph Asphalt Low 0 2 2 0.67 1122 Spruce St Davis Ave Dawson Ave 2 24 224 596 25 mph Asphalt Low 4 4 4 0.00 1126 Spruce St Dawson Ave Louisa Ave 2 24 334 892 25 mph Asphalt Low 4 4 4 0.00 1500 Spruce St Davis Ave Ponderosa Street 2 24 661 1,762 25 mph Unpaved Low 12 0 0 ‐4.00 Seg # Road_Name From_Address To_Address Number_of _Lanes Seg_W idth Seg_Length Area Speed_Lim Surface_Type Importance RSL_2016 RSL_2013 RSL_2011 Deterioration Ratio (2016 vs 2013) Reduction in RSL/Year 860 State St Hewitt Street Forest Street 2 24 304 809 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 8 0.00 1206 State St E Lake Street Hewitt Street 2 24 374 999 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 6 6 6 0.00 71 Stibnite St Placid Street Mission Street 2 27 1,454 4,361 20 mph Asphalt Medium 20 10 10 ‐3.33 103 Stibnite St N 3rd Street Aspen Street 2 27 327 980 20 mph Asphalt Medium 20 10 14 ‐3.33 261 Stibnite St Thula Street Placid Street 2 27 137 412 25 mph Asphalt Medium 20 8 8 ‐4.00 262 Stibnite St Aspen Street Thula Street 2 27 144 431 20 mph Asphalt Medium 14 8 8 ‐2.00 446 Strawberry Ln Carico Rd Balshae Drive 2 24 2,448 6,529 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 10 10 12 0.00 529 Strawberry Ln Balshae Drive Pilgrim Cove Rd 2 24 427 1,138 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 12 12 12 0.00 861 Sunset St Smitty Ave Allen Ave 2 24 479 1,278 25 mph Asphalt Low 8 8 8 0.00 1227 Sunset St N 3rd Street Aspen Street 2 24 233 622 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 10 10 10 0.00 1511 Sunset St Aspen Street Thula Street 2 24 132 351 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 10 10 10 0.00 1491 Swainie Way 1063 Potts Drive Blue Haze Way 2 24 884 2,356 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 14 0.00 1498 Swainie Way 1107 Blue Haze Way 1115 Potts Drive 2 24 258 689 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 14 0.00 1499 Swainie Way 1119 Lick Creek Road 1119 Potts Drive 2 24 175 466 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 20 0.00 601 Syringa Dr Colorado Street Colorado Street 2 24 1,079 2,878 25 mph Asphalt Low 8 10 12 0.67 806 Thompson Ave Bay Colt Way Wild Horse Drive 2 24 303 807 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 10 10 0.00 1200 Thompson Ave Davis Ave Bay Colt Way 2 24 283 754 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 12 12 12 0.00 1242 Thompson Ave Alpine Street Davis Ave 2 24 298 795 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 6 6 0.00 1506 Thompson Ave Park Street Private Drive Ann Street 2 24 445 1,186 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 6 6 0.00 1509 Thompson Ave Anna Street Alpine Street 2 24 292 779 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 6 6 0.00 1527 Thompson Ave Wild Horse Drive Buckboard Way 2 24 217 580 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 10 10 0.00 1528 Thompson Ave Wild Horse Drive Wild Horse Drive 2 24 223 595 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 10 10 0.00 390 Thula St E Deinhard Lane McBride Street 2 24 579 1,543 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 10 12 12 0.67 396 Thula St McBride Street Floyde Street 2 24 754 2,011 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 12 12 12 0.00 1318 Thula St 314 Thula Street Sunset Street 2 24 297 791 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 10 10 12 0.00 1319 Thula St Floyde Street 314 Thula Street 2 24 325 867 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 12 12 12 0.00 1510 Thula St Placid Street Stibnite Street 2 24 375 1,001 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 10 10 12 0.00 1512 Thula St Sunset Street Placid Street 2 24 158 420 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 10 10 12 0.00 504 Timm St McGinnis Street Allen Street 2 24 627 1,672 25 mph Asphalt Low 6 6 8 0.00 1444 Timm St 3rd Street Mcginnis Street 2 24 598 1,596 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 8 8 8 0.00 1413 TJs Loop Karen Street Verita Rd 2 24 788 2,102 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 12 12 0.67 1415 Verita Rd TJs Loop Karen Street 2 24 426 1,135 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 14 16 0.67 1537 Verita Rd Timbercrest Loop Timbercrest Loop 2 24 664 1,770 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 10 14 0.00 1551 Veronica Ln Meadows Road Veronica Lane 2 24 580 1,546 25 mph Asphalt Low 8 12 12 1.33 1411 Veronica St Boydstun Street Karen Street 2 24 611 1,629 25 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 14 0.00 1677 VIOLET WAY BITTERROOT DR SPRIING MOUNTAIN BLVD 2 26 1,441 4,164 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 14 14 20 0.00 1079 W Deinhard Ln Mission Street Industrail Loop 2 32 5,918 21,041 35 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 18 20 16 0.67 1802 W Forest St Cross Road Gamble Rd 2 24 1,200 3,201 25 mph Asphalt Medium 8 8 8 0.00 1803 W Forest St State Street Cross Road 2 24 28 74 25 mph Asphalt Medium 4 4 8 0.00 23 Wanda Ave N Samson Trail Ann Street 2 24 481 1,284 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 6 6 0.00 49 Wanda Ave Ann street Alpine Street 2 24 295 787 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 8 8 0.00 137 Wanda Ave Alpine Street Davis Ave 2 24 259 691 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 8 8 0.00 864 Ward Street Washington Street Colorado Street 2 26 302 873 15 mph Asphalt Low 12 12 12 0.00 5 Warren Wagon Rd WhipkEy Street Private Hayes Street Private 2 33 253 926 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 20 14 2.00 27 Warren Wagon Rd Romine Drive City Limits 2 33 617 2,261 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 20 14 2.00 74 Warren Wagon Rd Private Dwy Hayes Street west 2 33 122 446 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 20 20 14 0.00 160 Warren Wagon Rd W Lake Street Owen Drive Private Dr 2 33 620 2,273 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 20 14 2.00 161 Warren Wagon Rd Owen Drive Private Dr Whipkey Street Private 2 33 382 1,400 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 20 14 2.00 177 Warren Wagon Rd Hayes Street Boydstun Street 2 33 736 2,699 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 14 20 14 2.00 178 WARREN WAGON RD ROMINE DR BOYDSTUN ST 2 33 75 274 25 mph Asphalt Low 20 20 14 0.00 1312 Washington St N 3rd Street 2nd Street 2 24 352 938 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 4 6 6 0.67 1313 Washington St 2nd Street 1st Street 2 24 459 1,224 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 4 4 4 0.00 1224 Washington Street N Samson Trail Ward Street 2 26 431 1,244 15 mph Asphalt Low 10 10 12 0.00 1818 WASTE WATER PNDS DIENHARD LN DIENHARD LN 1 18 571 1,141 10 mph Unpaved Medium 5 5 5 0.00 1816 WATER TREATMENT PLANT INT W. BITTERROOT INT W/ BITTERROOT 1 18 985 1,970 5 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 12 12 10 0.00 233 WEST LICK CREEK RD 617 WEST LICK CREEK RD 600 WEST LICK CREEK RD 1 12 323 431 15 mph Asphalt Low 8 10 10 0.67 1526 Wildhorse Dr Thompson Ave Thompson Ave 2 24 724 1,930 25 mph Asphalt Low 6 8 8 0.67 1547 Woodhaven Ct Lakeridge Drive Culusac 2 24 313 834 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 10 10 0.00 1374 Woodlands Dr 600 Spring Mountain Blvd 649 Brady Drive 2 24 2,081 5,548 25 mph Asphalt Low‐Medium 12 10 12 ‐0.67 1375 Woodlands Dr 649 Brady Drive Koski Drive 2 24 1,112 2,964 25 mph Asphalt Low 10 10 12 0.00 34 Wooley Ave Chip Shot Drive Divot Lane 2 24 205 547 20 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 8 8 0.00 111 Wooley Ave Ponderosa Ave Davis Avenue 2 24 656 1,748 20 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 6 8 0.00 133 Wooley Ave Divot Lane Pondersosa Ave 2 24 703 1,874 20 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 4 4 8 0.00 204 Wooley Ave Dawson Ave Louisa Ave 2 24 347 925 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 10 10 0.00 205 Wooley Ave Davis Ave Dawson Ave 2 24 300 800 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 6 8 10 0.67 263 Wooley Ave Spring Mountain Blvd Chip Shot Drive 2 24 1,152 3,072 20 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 8 8 20 0.00 1805 Wooley Ave Alpine Street Dawson Ave 2 24 21 57 25 mph Asphalt Medium‐High 10 10 10 0.00 December 7, 2017 Appendix City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Appendix D – Roadway Groups GROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (FT)TOTAL AREA (SY)IMPORTANCEFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONGROUP AVERAGE RSLGROUP TOTAL COST TREATMENT #1 (ROUTINE)GROUP TOTAL COST TREATMENT #2 (PREVENTATIVE)GROUP TOTAL COST TREATMENT #3 (REHABILITATION)GROUP TOTAL COST TREATMENT #4 (RECONSTRUCTION)GROUP TOTAL COST TREATMENT #5 (STORMWATER)GROUP TOTAL COST TREATMENT #6 (WALKWAYS)GROUP TOTAL COST 11st St (from Park to Colorado)1112 2965 Medium Minor Collector 3.7$890$10,378$0$166,052 $135,757 $333,193 $646,27021st St (from E. Lake to Park)625 3195 Medium Minor Collector 0.3$958$11,182$0$204,480 $115,645 $437,575 $769,84032nd St from E. Lake to Park642 4497 Medium Minor Collector 5.0 $1,349$6,746$0$287,833 $118,860 $562,174 $976,9624 4th St From Park St to the Dead End599 1534 Low Residential 8.2$460$5,370$22,514$0$0$0$28,3445Allen Ave, McGinnis St, Ringel St, Smitty Ave, Sunset St, Timm St5789 15437 Low Residential 6.9 $4,631$54,031 $509,436$0$175,264$0$743,3636 Alley, Alley behind Iceskating Rink746 1406 LowLocal 12.0 $422$4,922$46,407$0$138,016$0$189,7677Alley Behind Banks819 1176 LowLocal 6.0$353$4,115$0$65,835 $151,425$0$221,7288 Alpine St From Wooley to Wanda1357 3620 Low Residential 6.0 $1,086$12,670 $119,457$0$63,801$0$197,0149Ann St Wanda to Thompson649 1730 Low Residential 6.0$519$6,057$57,105$0$30,499$0$94,17910Aspen Ridge Ln, Heavens Gate Ct, Majestic View Dr, Snowberry Pl12399 33515 Low Residential 11.8 $10,054 $117,302$0$0$0$0$127,35711aBay Colt Way, Broken Rein Rd, Buckboard Way, Ponderosa St, Thompson Ave4158 11089Low to Medium High Residential/Local 9.8 $2,490$29,047 $262,460$0$97,389$0$391,38611b Fir St, Ponderosa Ave, 1976 5268Low to Medium High Residential/Local 10.5 $1,580$18,438 $131,413$0$0$0$151,43212Bellflower Pl506 1351 Low Residential 14.0 $405$4,727$0$0$0$0$5,13213Bitterroot Dr, Deer Forest Dr, Fireweed Dr, Violet Way9946 26844 Low Residential 10.7 $8,053$93,954$14,162$0$33,353$0$149,52214Blackwell Ave, Brady Dr, Douglas Dr, Koski Dr, Woodlands Dr7828 20876 Low Residential 11.6 $6,263$73,065$19,468$0$367,933$0$466,72815Blue Haze Way, Ginney Way, Graham Dr, Kaitlyn Loop, Mos Way, Potts Dr, Swainie Way8666 23110 Low Residential 11.3 $6,933$80,886$0$0$0$0$87,81916Boydstun St, Deinhard Ln13553 53100 Medium‐High Major Collector 18.7 $15,930$21,240$0$0$0$0$37,17017Bridle Path Way, Saddlehorn Ln, Wildhorse Dr2163 5768 Low Residential 4.9 $1,151$13,432$0$214,915 $67,641$0$297,14018Brown Dr181 906 Low Residential 0.0$0$272$3,169$50,711$33,506$0$87,65819Brudage Dr1151 3068 Low‐Medium Residential 4.0$920$10,739 $101,253$0$54,078$0$166,99120Burns Rd933 2487 Low‐Medium Residential 6.0$746$8,705$82,080$0$43,838$0$135,36921Carico Rd, Strawberry Ln4188 11167 Low‐Medium Residential 11.2 $3,350$39,085$43,171$0$196,819$0$282,42522Carmen Dr, CeCe Way, Ernesto Dr, Gabi Ln, Gena Way, Rio Vista Blvd, Sunny Way18753 49880 MediumMinor Collector/Residential 12.1 $14,964 $174,581 $712,395$0$137,055$0 $1,038,99523Cedar Ln, Mountain Meadow Dr, Sand Wedge Ct4400 11734 Low Residential 12.3 $3,520$41,069$0$0$63,252$0$107,84124Colorado St ( East of Samson Trail), Syringa Dr, Ward St2068 5581 Low Residential 9.1 $1,674$19,532 $124,402$0$64,927$0$210,53525 Colorado St from 3rd St to Samson Trail1192 3179 Low‐Medium Minor Collector 2.0$954$11,128$0$178,044 $56,036$0$246,16126 Colorado St from 3rd St to 1st St807 2152 Low‐Medium Minor Collector 4.0$646$7,532$0$120,516 $149,300 $80,703 $358,69727Commerce St1318 3806 Low‐Medium Local 2.0 $1,142$13,323$0$243,613 $79,057 $131,762 $468,89628Cross Rd, State St1295 3453 Low‐Medium Residential 2.0 $1,036$12,087 $142,450$0$125,421 $67,795 $348,78929a Davis Ave from Wanda to Spruce St2641 7044 Medium‐High Major Collector 5.1 $2,113$24,653$24,653 $281,752$0$46,314 $379,48629b Davis Ave from Wanda to Lick Creek2762 7365 Medium‐High Major Collector 10.0 $2,210$25,779 $368,271$0$95,532 $110,481 $602,27230 Davis Ave from Lick Creek to Agate395 1054 Medium‐High Local 10.0 $316$3,688$34,775$0$0$15,807 $54,58731E Deinhard Ln2875 11941 Medium‐High Major Collector 7.3 $3,582$41,795$0$764,250$0$99,283 $908,91032E Lake St (from 3rd to Pine), Mill Rd (from Pine to Fir), Pine St, Railroad Ave (from 3rd St to Pine St), Roosevelt Ave4959 16023 MediumMajor/Minor Collector13.2 $22,527$56,080$0$0$143,013 $113,479 $335,09933E Lake St from Pine to Hemlock1156 3854 Medium Local 4.0$0$0$0$158,980 $213,900 $419,787 $792,66634 E Lake St (from Opal to Dead End), Opal St1170 1820 Low Residential 2.7$152$0$5,768$84,911$45,813$0$136,64435Fir St from East Lake St to Mill167 964 Medium Local 14.0 $289$3,374$0$0$0$0$3,663ROAD GROUP SUMMARY ‐ June, 2016 Present State with Treatment CostsUpdated March 2018 36Floyde St from 3rd to Smitty1798 4796 Low‐Medium Minor Collector 7.0 $1,439$16,785$0$158,254$0$0$176,47837Floyde St (from 3rd to Thula), McBride St, Placid St, Sunset St, Thula St4486 11963 Low‐Medium Residential 9.7 $4,577$41,870$44,845$0$23,951$0$115,24338Forest St3551 9470 Medium Minor Collector 6.6 $4,735$0$0$390,628 $208,631 $142,047 $746,04139Forest Trails1313 3501 Low‐Medium Residential 10.0 $1,050$12,253$0$0$0$0$13,30440Fox Ln, Fox Ridge Ln, S Samson Trl (from E. Deinhard to City Limits)5144 13718 Low‐MediumResidential/Minor Collector10.0 $4,116$48,015$0$0$0$168,573 $220,70341Gamble Rd1006 2684 Low‐Medium Residential 6.0$805$9,393$88,564$0$28,464$0$127,22742Hayes St, Herrick St854 2326 Low‐Medium Residential 8.0$698$8,142$0$0$10,133$0$18,97343Hemlock St1503 4009 Medium‐High Minor Collector 6.7 $1,203$14,033 $132,307$0$278,146 $150,349 $576,03744Hewitt St1182 3152 Low‐Medium Residential 6.0$946$11,032 $104,016$0$55,554$0$171,54745Idaho St1345 3587 Low‐Medium Residential 2.7 $1,076$12,554$0$229,555 $63,217 $134,505 $440,90746Industrial Loop1317 3513 LowLocal 7.4 $1,054$12,294$68,546 $171,339 $61,911$0$315,14447Jabobs St1153 3074 Low Residential 5.0$922$10,759 $122,965$0$54,181$0$188,82848Karen St, Timbercrest Lp, TJs Lp, Verita Rd, Veronica St5144 13861 Low Residential 11.6 $4,962$48,514$0$0$0$0$53,47549Kasper St538 1435 Low‐Medium Residential 10.0 $431$5,023$0$0$99,553$0$105,00650Lakeridge Dr, Meadow Rd, Veronica Ln, Woodhaven Ct70375 199529 Low Residential 4.4 $7,408$60,210$75,508$0$0$0$143,12751aRowland St1295 3454 Medium Local 0.0 $1,036$12,088$0$193,408 $60,872$0$267,40451bLakeside Ave, Pinedale St2429 6478 MediumMinor Collector, Local, Residential 8.8 $2,734$22,672$75,133 $141,313$0$0$241,85252Lenora St from 3rd to 1st St773 4297 Medium Minor Collector 0.0 $1,289$15,040$0$275,010 $36,353 $541,426 $869,11853Lick Creek Rd5452 14106 Medium Major Collector 11.7 $4,232$49,135$0$0$241,019 $424,134 $718,52154a Mather Rd, E Lake St to Burns Rd east2389 6371 Medium Minor Collector 3.9 $1,911$22,299$0$356,787 $112,292 $41,688 $534,97854b Mather Rd, Burns Rd east to Brundage Dr1718 4580 Medium Minor Collector 6.8 $1,374$16,030$0$151,142 $80,724$0$249,27054c Mather Rd, Mission to Brundage Dr west1602 4273 Medium Minor Collector 6.5 $1,282$14,954$0$140,994 $75,304$0$232,53455McCall Ave, Ruby St2885 7694 Low‐Medium Local 6.0 $2,308$26,929$0$430,868 $146,545$0$606,65156Mill Rd from Hemlock to Fir770 1882 Medium Minor Collector 8.0$565$6,588$0$105,402 $142,447 $76,998 $331,99957 S Mission St from Deinhard to City Limits3559 10282 Medium‐High Major Collector 3.6 $3,085$35,987$0$658,042 $191,549 $254,383 $1,143,04658a N Mission St from Deinhard to Mather St2574 7435 Medium‐High Major Collector 14.0 $2,230$26,022$0$0$0$102,945 $131,19858b N Mission St from Mather St to E. Lake St1649 4763 Medium‐High Major Collector 12.2 $1,429$16,670 $304,815$0$136,409 $65,946 $525,26859 N Samson Trl from Park St to End of asphalt2448 6529 Medium‐High Minor Collector 5.4 $1,959$22,851$0$215,451 $47,389 $100,828 $388,47760 Park St, Thompson Ave from 3rd St to End1951 5203 Medium‐High Local 6.7$247$2,877$0$175,228 $48,651$60,764 $287,76761Park St from 1st to Mission1296 3457 Medium Local 20.0 $1,037$12,098$0$0$0$129,621 $142,75662Park St from 1st to 3rd851 3781 Medium Minor Collector 0.0 $1,134$13,232$0$241,964 $157,371 $595,458 $1,009,16063Pilgrim Cove Rd, Cee Way Loop3585 9081 Medium Residential 5.3$0$0$0$299,670 $168,499$0$468,16964Reedy Ln2007 5352 Low‐Medium Minor Collector 5.1 $1,606$18,733$0$220,778 $117,916$0$359,03265Scott St from Mission to end136 364 Low Residential 12.0 $109$1,273$0$0$0$0$1,38266Spring Mountain Blvd from Lick Creek Rd to Sand Wedge3059 9518 Medium‐High Major Collector 18.6 $2,803$29,644$9,963$0$0$0$42,41067Spring Mountain Blvd from Sand Wedge to Cottage Ct1793 5578 Medium‐High Major Collector 13.1 $1,886$19,524 $223,128$0$50,204$71,720 $366,46268aSpring Mountain Blvd from Cottage Ct to Bitterroot Dr2075 6456 Medium‐High Major Collector 9.5 $1,937$22,597 $258,251$0$0$83,009 $365,79468bSpring Mountain Blvd from Bitterroot Dr to E Deinhard Ln4735 14330 Medium‐High Major Collector 6.5 $4,299$50,154 $573,189$0$66,284 $189,383 $883,30869Stibnite St2062 6185 Medium Minor Collector 19.6 $1,856$21,648$0$0$0$206,168 $229,67170Wanda Ave1036 2762 Medium‐High Minor Collector 7.1$829$9,668$91,151$0$48,683$0$150,33071Warren Wagon Rd2804 10280 Medium‐High Major Collector 14.2$0$4,112$35,979$0$0$0$40,09072aRailroad Ave (from 3rd St to end of pavement)208 555 Low‐Medium Residential 20.0 $166$1,942$0$0$0$0$2,10872bWashington St1242 3407 Low‐Medium Residential 6.2 $1,022$11,924$0$112,422 $58,356$0$183,72373a Wooley Ave Dawson Ave to Davis Ave668 1782 Medium‐High Major Collector 8.2$535$6,236$39,265$51,206$17,627$0$114,86973bWooley Ave Davis Ave to Spring Mountain Blvd2715 7240 Medium‐High Major Collector 6.5 $2,172$25,341 $144,735 $188,088 $127,608 $271,507 $759,450 December 7, 2017 Appendix City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Appendix E – Prescriptive Treatment Costs City of McCall ‐ Streets Asset Model ROADWAY TREATMENT TYPE AND COST TABLE updated:Aug‐16 Treatment Type Treatment ID Treatment Cost (per yd2) Maintenance Type No Maintenance 1 $0.00 None Crack Seal 2 $0.30 Routine Cold Patch 3 $0.50 Routine Digout and Hot Patch 4 $15.00 Routine Fog Coat 5 $0.40 Routine Grading & Dust Abatement 6 $0.30 Routine Add 3/4" Road Mix & Regrade 7 $3.40 Preventative Single Chip Seal 8 $3.50 Preventative Single Chip Seal (post‐reconstruction) 8a $3.50 Preventative Slurry Seal 9 $1.50 Preventative Crack Seal, Thin Hot Mix Overlay (<2 in) 10 $19.00 Rehabilitation HMA (leveling) & Overlay (<2 in.) 11 $26.00 Rehabilitation Rotomill & Overlay (<2 in)12 $26.00 Rehabilitation Crack Seal, Thick Overlay (3 in.)13 $26.00 Reconstruction Crack Seal, Thick Overlay (4 in.) 14 $33.00 Reconstruction Rotomill & Thick Overlay (3 in.) 15 $33.00 Reconstruction Rotomill & Thick Overlay (4 in.) 16 $40.00 Reconstruction Base Repair\Pavement Replacement (3 in.)17 $32.00 Reconstruction Base Repair\Pavement Replacement (4 in.)18 $39.00 Reconstruction Cold Recycling & Overlay (3 in.) 19 $31.00 Reconstruction Cold Recycling & Overlay (4 in.) 20 $38.00 Reconstruction Subbase/Base/Pavement Replacement (3 inch)21 $56.00 Reconstruction Treatment Type Treatment ID Treatment Cost (per yd2) Maintenance Type Subbase/Base/Pavement Replacement (4 inch)22 $64.00 Reconstruction Stormwater (R‐1) ditches and culverts 23 $28.00 Reconstruction Stormwater (R‐4) ditches and culverts 24 $47.00 Reconstruction Stormwater (R‐8) ditches and culverts 25 $60.00 Reconstruction Stormwater (curb, gutter, stormsewer) 26 $185.00 Reconstruction Sidewalks 1st,27 $500.00 Reconstruction Sidewalks 1st, Park, Lenora 28 $700.00 Reconstruction Sidewalks 2nd Street 29 $875.00 Reconstruction Sidewalks (8 ft, no trees)30 $100.00 Reconstruction Separated Pathway 31 $100.00 Reconstruction 5' bike lanes/paved shoulders 32 $40.00 Reconstruction December 7, 2017 Appendix City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Appendix F – Streets Department Budget Tables 2017 Streets Department Budget 2,096,892 Total Personnel Expenses 974,940.00 Total Operating Expenses (O&M)414,119.00 Total Capital Expenses 564,870.00 Admin - Inter Fund Transfer 142,963.00 Summer - 58% = 7/12 months Winter - 42% = 5/12 months S&W = Summer & Winter S = Summer W = Winter A = Administration S&W 100%58%42% 24-55-150-211 Mechanic Shop Supplies 5,000.00 2,900.00 2,100.00 24-55-150-240 Minor Equipment 5,000.00 2,900.00 2,100.00 24-55-150-250 Motors Fuel & Lubricants 75,000.00 43,500.00 31,500.00 24-55-250-465 Communications & Radio 3,000.00 1,740.00 1,260.00 24-55-150-491 Street Lights - Power 24,000.00 13,920.00 10,080.00 24-55-150-500 Rental - Equipment Maintenance 1,500.00 870.00 630.00 24-55-150-521 Rental - Equipment 58,206.00 33,759.48 24,446.52 24-55-150-540 Street Repair Patching 30,000.00 17,400.00 12,600.00 24-55-150-542 Street Repair - ROW Maintenance 3,000.00 1,740.00 1,260.00 24-55-150-547 Signs & Posts 7,000.00 4,060.00 2,940.00 24-55-150-548 Street Repair - Sand Gravel 15,000.00 8,700.00 6,300.00 24-55-150-550 Street Repair - Lights 10,000.00 5,800.00 4,200.00 24-55-150-580 Repairs - Automotive Equipment 40,000.00 23,200.00 16,800.00 24-55-150-590 Repairs - Other Equipment 1,500.00 870.00 630.00 2017 Summer - 58% of O&M GL's 24-55-150-211 Mechanic Shop Supplies 2,900.00 24-55-150-240 Minor Equipment 2,900.00 24-55-150-250 Motors Fuel & Lubricants 43,500.00 24-55-250-465 Communications & Radio 1,740.00 24-55-150-491 Street Lights - Power 13,920.00 24-55-150-500 Rental - Equipment Maintenance 870.00 24-55-150-521 Rental - Equipment 33,759.48 24-55-150-540 Street Repair Patching 17,400.00 24-55-150-542 Street Repair - ROW Maintenance 1,740.00 24-55-150-547 Signs & Posts 4,060.00 24-55-150-548 Street Repair - Sand Gravel 8,700.00 24-55-150-550 Street Repair - Lights 5,800.00 24-55-150-580 Repairs - Automotive Equipment 23,200.00 24-55-150-590 Repairs - Other Equipment 870.00 Summer - 100% of O&M GL's 24-55-150-543 Street Repair - Dust Abatement 25,000.00 24-55-150-546 Street Repair - Storm Drain 4,000.00 24-55-150-549 Street Repair - Street Painting 30,000.00 24-55-150-551 Street Repair - Crack Seal 12,000.00 Total 232,359.48 Admin Fully Loaded Wage 54931.8055 Personnel Expense - 58% Kraig and crew = 306,195.39 58% of Mechanic 41,508.50 Summer Total - 634,995.18 2017 Winter - 42% O&M GL's 24-55-150-211 Mechanic Shop Supplies 2,100.00 24-55-150-240 Minor Equipment 2,100.00 24-55-150-250 Motors Fuel & Lubricants 31,500.00 24-55-250-465 Communications & Radio 1,260.00 24-55-150-491 Street Lights - Power 10,080.00 24-55-150-500 Rental - Equipment Maintenance 630.00 24-55-150-521 Rental - Equipment 24,446.52 24-55-150-540 Street Repair Patching 12,600.00 24-55-150-542 Street Repair - ROW Maintenance 1,260.00 24-55-150-547 Signs & Posts 2,940.00 24-55-150-548 Street Repair - Sand Gravel 6,300.00 24-55-150-550 Street Repair - Lights 4,200.00 24-55-150-580 Repairs - Automotive Equipment 16,800.00 24-55-150-590 Repairs - Other Equipment 630.00 Winter - 100% O&M GL's 24-55-150-548 Street Repair - Road Salt 7,500.00 Total 124,346.52 Admin Fully Loaded Wage 50454.947 Personnel Expense - 42% Kraig and crew = 221,727.70 42% Mechanic 30,057.88 Winter Total - 426,587.05 2017 Administration & Facilities 24-55-150-210 Department Supplies 3,000.00 24-55-150-220 First Aid & Safety 3,000.00 24-55-150-260 Postage 200.00 24-44-150-300 Professional Services 10000.00 24-55-150-310 Attorney Services 1,000.00 24-55-150-350 Engineering Services 7,500.00 24-55-150-400 Advertising/Legal Publications 1,000.00 24-55-150-420 Travel And Meetings 750.00 24-55-150-435 Books/Publications/Subscriptions 500.00 24-55-150-440 Professional Development 5,000.00 24-55-150-460 Telephone 5,313.00 24-55-150-490 Heat, Lights, And Utilities 14,000.00 24-55-150-500 Rental - Office Equipment 2,000.00 24-55-150-560 Repairs - Office Equipment 150.00 24-55-150-570 Repairs Building And Grounds 4,000.00 Admin Transfers - Inter Fund Transfer Expense 24-55-600-910 Administrative Transfer - GF 103,825.00 24-55-600-915 GIS Transfer 13,678.00 24-55-600-972 Fund Transfer - Network Admin 25,460.00 Admin Fully Loaded Wage 198656.861 Total 399,032.86$ 2017 Capital Expenses Reconstruction Projects 24-55-200-706 Browns Circle 45,000.00 Facilities / Equipment Investment 24-55-200-702 Capital Purchases (sweeper)300000.00 Planning 24-55-200-720 Transportation Plan 63,433.00 Capital Maintenance 24-55-200-703 Storm water Improvements 22000.00 24-55-200-705 Paving 10,000.00 24-55-200-713 Chip Sealing 75,000.00 24-55-200-716 Street Maintenance & Rehab 20,000.00 24-55-200-716.1 HB312 - Street Repair & Rehab 29,437.00 Admin Fully Loaded Wage 71407.2165 Total 636,277.22$ 2016 Budget 1,930,020 Total Personnel Expense 960,701.00 Total Operating Expense (O&M)418,982.00 Total Capital Expense 441,349.00 Admin - Inter fund Transfer Expense 108,988.00 Summer - 58% = 7/12 months Winter - 42% = 5/12 months S&W = Summer & Winter S = Summer W = Winter A = Administration S&W 100%58%42% 24-55-150-211 Mechanic Shop Supplies 5,000.00 2,900.00 2,100.00 24-55-150-240 Minor Equipment 5,000.00 2,900.00 2,100.00 24-55-150-250 Motors Fuel & Lubricants 72,400.00 41,992.00 30,408.00 24-55-250-465 Communications & Radio 3,000.00 1,740.00 1,260.00 24-55-150-491 Street Lights - Power 24,000.00 13,920.00 10,080.00 24-55-150-500.1 Rental - Equipment Maintenance 1,500.00 870.00 630.00 24-55-150-521 Rental - Equipment (Lease)58,206.00 33,759.48 24,446.52 24-55-150-542 Street Repair - ROW Maintenance 3,000.00 1,740.00 1,260.00 24-55-150-547 Signs & Posts 7,000.00 4,060.00 2,940.00 24-55-150-548 Street Repair - Sand Gravel 15,000.00 8,700.00 6,300.00 24-55-150-550 Street Repair - Lights 31,230.00 18,113.40 13,116.60 24-55-150-580 Repairs - Automotive Equipment 42,233.00 24,495.14 17,737.86 24-55-150-590 Repairs - Other Equipment 1,500.00 870.00 630.00 2016 Summer - 58% of O&M GL's 24-55-150-211 Mechanic Shop Supplies 2,900.00 24-55-150-240 Minor Equipment 2,900.00 24-55-150-250 Motors Fuel & Lubricants 41,992.00 24-55-250-465 Communications & Radio 1,740.00 24-55-150-491 Street Lights - Power 13,920.00 24-55-150-500.1 Rental - Equipment Maintenance 870.00 24-55-150-521 Rental - Equipment (Lease)33,759.48 24-55-150-542 Street Repair - ROW Maintenance 1,740.00 24-55-150-547 Signs & Posts 4,060.00 24-55-150-548 Street Repair - Sand Gravel 8,700.00 24-55-150-550 Street Repair - Lights 18,113.40 24-55-150-580 Repairs - Automotive Equipment 24,495.14 24-55-150-590 Repairs - Other Equipment 870.00 Summer - 100% of O&M GL's 24-55-150-541 Street Repair - Sealcoat 14,406.12 24-55-150-543 Street Repair - Dust Abatement 25,593.88 24-55-150-546 Street Repair - Storm Drain 4,000.00 24-55-150-549 Street Repair - Street Painting 30,000.00 Total 230,060.02 Admin Fully Loaded Wage 52515.767 Personnel Expense - 58% Kraig and crew = 307,577.10 58% of Mechanic 39,087.12 Summer Total - 629,240.01 2016 Winter - 42% O&M GL's 24-55-150-211 Mechanic Shop Supplies 2,100.00 24-55-150-240 Minor Equipment 2,100.00 24-55-150-250 Motors Fuel & Lubricants 30,408.00 24-55-250-465 Communications & Radio 1,260.00 24-55-150-491 Street Lights - Power 10,080.00 24-55-150-500.1 Rental - Equipment Maintenance 630.00 24-55-150-521 Rental - Equipment (Lease)24,446.52 24-55-150-542 Street Repair - ROW Maintenance 1,260.00 24-55-150-547 Signs & Posts 2,940.00 24-55-150-548 Street Repair - Sand Gravel 6,300.00 24-55-150-550 Street Repair - Lights 13,116.60 24-55-150-580 Repairs - Automotive Equipment 17,737.86 24-55-150-590 Repairs - Other Equipment 630.00 Winter - 100% O&M GL's 24-55-150-548 Street Repair - Road Salt 5,888.00 Total 118,896.98 Admin Fully Loaded Wage 48243.876 Personnel Expense - 42% Kraig and crew = 222,728.26 42% of Mechanic 28,304.46 Winter Total - 418,173.58 2016 Administration and Facilities 24-55-150-210 Department Supplies 3,000.00 24-55-150-220 First Aid & Safety 3,000.00 24-55-150-260 Postage 200.00 24-44-150-300 Professional Services 23500.00 24-55-150-310 Attorney Services 1,000.00 24-55-150-350 Engineering Services 5,000.00 24-55-150-370 Const.Best MGT. Practice Cert 2,925.00 24-55-150-400 Advertising/Legal Publications 500.00 24-55-150-420 Travel And Meetings 750.00 24-55-150-435 Books/Publications/Subscriptions 500.00 24-55-150-440 Professional Development 5,000.00 24-55-150-460 Telephone 4,500.00 24-55-150-490 Heat, Lights, And Utilities 14,000.00 24-55-150-500 Rental - Office Equipment 2,000.00 24-55-150-560 Repairs - Office Equipment 150.00 24-55-150-570 Repairs Building And Grounds 4,000.00 Admin Transfers - Inter Fund Transfer Expense 24-55-600-910 Administrative Transfer - GF 77,551.00 24-55-600-915 GIS Transfer 6,334.00 24-55-600-972 Fund Transfer - Network Admin 25,103.00 Admin Fully Loaded Wage 193187.6095 Total 372,200.61$ 2016 Capital Expenses Reconstruction Projects Facilities / Equipment Investment 24-55-200-702 Capital Purchases 103000.00 Planning 24-55-200-720 Transportation Plan 0.00 Capital Maintenance 24-55-200-703 Storm water Improvements 22000.00 24-55-200-716 Street Maintenance & Rehab 286,912.00 24-55-200-716.1 HB312 - Street Repair & Rehab 29,437.00 Admin Fully Loaded Wage 69056.8975 Total 510,405.90$ 2015 Budget 1,633,008 Total Personnel Expense 899,576.00 Total Operating Expense (O&M)468,220.00 Total Capital Expense 173,336.00 Admin Inter-Fund Transfer Expense 91,876.00 Summer - 58% = 7/12 months Winter - 42% = 5/12 months S&W = Summer & Winter S = Summer W = Winter A = Administration S&W 100%58%42% 24-55-150-211 Mechanic Shop Supplies 5,000.00 2,900.00 2,100.00 24-55-150-240 Minor Equipment 9,500.00 5,510.00 3,990.00 24-55-150-250 Motors Fuel & Lubricants 74,964.00 43,479.12 31,484.88 24-55-250-465 Communications & Radio 3,000.00 1,740.00 1,260.00 24-55-150-491 Street Lights - Power 24,000.00 13,920.00 10,080.00 24-55-150-500 Rental - Equipment Maintenance 1,500.00 870.00 630.00 24-55-150-521 Rental - Equipment 58,206.00 33,759.48 24,446.52 24-55-150-540 Street Repair Patching 47,466.00 27,530.28 19,935.72 24-55-150-542 Street Repair - ROW Maintenance 4,000.00 2,320.00 1,680.00 24-55-150-547 Signs & Posts 7,000.00 4,060.00 2,940.00 24-55-150-548 Street Repair - Sand Gravel 23,000.00 13,340.00 9,660.00 24-55-150-550 Street Repair - Lights 10,000.00 5,800.00 4,200.00 24-55-150-580 Repairs - Automotive Equipment 45,000.00 26,100.00 18,900.00 24-55-150-590 Repairs - Other Equipment 1,500.00 870.00 630.00 2015 Summer - 58% of O&M GL's 24-55-150-211 Mechanic Shop Supplies 2,900.00 24-55-150-240 Minor Equipment 5,510.00 24-55-150-250 Motors Fuel & Lubricants 43,479.12 24-55-250-465 Communications & Radio 1,740.00 24-55-150-491 Street Lights - Power 13,920.00 24-55-150-500 Rental - Equipment Maintenance 870.00 24-55-150-521 Rental - Equipment 33,759.48 24-55-150-540 Street Repair Patching 27,530.28 24-55-150-542 Street Repair - ROW Maintenance 2,320.00 24-55-150-547 Signs & Posts 4,060.00 24-55-150-548 Street Repair - Sand Gravel 13,340.00 24-55-150-550 Street Repair - Lights 5,800.00 24-55-150-580 Repairs - Automotive Equipment 26,100.00 24-55-150-590 Repairs - Other Equipment 870.00 Summer - 100% of O&M GL's 24-55-150-541 Street Repair - Sealcoat 15,000.00 24-55-150-543 Street Repair - Dust Abatement 19,534.00 24-55-150-546 Street Repair - Storm Drain 4,000.00 24-55-150-549 Street Repair - Street Painting 35,000.00 Total 255,732.88 Admin Fully Loaded Wage 49525.4145 Personnel Expense - 58% Kraig and crew = 280,713.01 58 % of Mechanic 41,970.33 Total Summer - 627,941.63 2015 Winter - 42% O&M GL's 24-55-150-211 Mechanic Shop Supplies 2,100.00 24-55-150-240 Minor Equipment 3,990.00 24-55-150-250 Motors Fuel & Lubricants 31,484.88 24-55-250-465 Communications & Radio 1,260.00 24-55-150-491 Street Lights - Power 10,080.00 24-55-150-500 Rental - Equipment Maintenance 630.00 24-55-150-521 Rental - Equipment 24,446.52 24-55-150-540 Street Repair Patching 19,935.72 24-55-150-542 Street Repair - ROW Maintenance 1,680.00 24-55-150-547 Signs & Posts 2,940.00 24-55-150-548 Street Repair - Sand Gravel 9,660.00 24-55-150-550 Street Repair - Lights 4,200.00 24-55-150-580 Repairs - Automotive Equipment 18,900.00 24-55-150-590 Repairs - Other Equipment 630.00 Winter - 100% O&M GL's 24-55-150-545 Street Repair - Snow Removal 2,000.00 24-55-150-548.1 Street Repair - Road Salt 6,000.00 Total 139,937.12 Admin Fully Loaded Wage 45474.4025 Personnel Expense - 42% Kraig and crew = 203,274.94 42% of Mechanic 30,392.31 Winter Total - 419,078.77 2015 Administration and Facilities 24-55-150-210 Department Supplies 6,000.00 24-55-150-220 First Aid & Safety 3,000.00 24-55-150-260 Postage 200.00 24-44-150-300 Professional Services 14000.00 24-55-150-310 Attorney Services 2,000.00 24-55-150-350 Engineering Services 10,000.00 24-55-150-400 Advertising/Legal Publications 500.00 24-55-150-420 Travel And Meetings 2,000.00 24-55-150-435 Books/Publications/Subscriptions 1,000.00 24-55-150-440 Professional Development 6,000.00 24-55-150-460 Telephone 4,500.00 24-55-150-490 Heat, Lights, And Utilities 17,000.00 24-55-150-500 Rental - Office Equipment 2,200.00 24-55-150-560 Repairs - Office Equipment 150.00 24-55-150-570 Repairs Building And Grounds 4,000.00 Admin Transfers - Inter Fund Transfer Expense 24-55-600-910 Administrative Transfer - GF 63,039.00 24-55-600-915 GIS Transfer 6,334.00 24-55-600-972 Fund Transfer - Network Admin 22,503.00 Admin Fully Loaded Wage 182673.4635 Total 347,099.46$ 2015 Capital Expenses Reconstruction Projects 0 Facilities / Equipment Investment 24-55-200-702 Capital Purchases 85000.00 Planning 0.00 Capital Maintenance 24-55-200-703 Stormwater Improvements 25000.00 24-55-200-716 Street Maintenance & Rehab 63,336.00 Admin Fully Loaded Wage 65552.7595 Total 238,888.76$ December 7, 2017 Appendix City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Appendix G – Capital Improvement Plan Table YEARGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION TOTAL LENGTH (MILES)% OF NETWORKFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONGROUP TOTAL COST ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTIONGROUP TOTAL COST STORMWATER GROUP TOTAL COST MULTIMODAL CONSTRUCTION COST CONTINGENCY (25%)DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING COST (25%)TOTAL PROJECT COST201727 Commerce St**0.20.6%Local$417,313$109,900$0$527,213na$157,283$684,5000.2 0.6%$417,313$109,900$0$527,213na$157,283 $690,000201845, 18Idaho St & Brown Drive0.30.7%Local$594,979$86,760$37,654$719,393$71,939$197,833$989,1650.3 0.7%$594,979$86,760$37,654$719,393 $71,939 $197,833 $990,00032nd St from E. Lake to Park0.10.3% Minor Collector$616,253$57,600$169,310$843,163$210,791$263,488$1,317,44252Lenora St from 3rd to 1st St0.10.3% Minor Collector$667,640$77,000$106,082$850,722$212,681$265,851$1,329,2530.3 0.3%$1,283,893 $134,600 $275,392 $1,693,885 $423,471 $529,339 $2,650,0007Veterans' Alley0.20.4% Minor Collector$130,629$10,500$0$141,129$35,282$44,103$220,51462Park St from 1st to 3rd0.20.4% Minor Collector$629,862$44,000$115,691$789,553$197,388$246,735$1,233,6770.3 0.8%$760,491$54,500$115,691 $930,682 $232,671 $290,838 $1,460,000202154cMather Rd from Mission to Brundage *0.30.7% Minor Collector$141,000$75,305$0$216,305$54,076$67,595$337,9770.3 0.7%$141,000$75,305$0$216,305 $54,076 $67,595 $340,00057S. Mission St from Deinhard to City Limits* +0.71.6% Major Collector$177,000$0$0$177,000nana$177,00021st Street from E Lake to Park *0.10.3% Minor Collector$518,205$55,600$91,069$664,874$166,219$207,773$1,038,8660.8 1.9%$695,205$55,600$91,069$841,874 $166,219 $207,773 $1,220,000202331E Deinhard Ln0.51.3% Major Collector$764,250$0$99,283$863,533$215,883$269,854$1,349,2700.5 1.3%$764,250$0$99,283$863,533 $215,883 $269,854 $1,350,0002024naStormwater Facilities *nanaDT Core Project$0$461,050$0$461,050$115,263$144,078$720,3910.0 0.0%$0$461,050$0$461,050 $115,263 $144,078 $730,000202560Park St, Thompson Ave to Davis *0.40.9% Minor Collector$175,230$48,650$60,764$284,644$71,161$88,951$444,7560.4 0.9%$175,230$48,650$60,764$284,644 $71,161 $88,951 $450,000202673bWooley Ave, Davis to Spring Mnt. Blvd *0.61.5% Major Collector$332,825$127,610$271,507$731,942$182,985$228,732$1,143,6590.6 1.5%$332,825$127,610 $271,507 $731,942 $182,985 $228,732 $1,150,0003.8 8.6%$5,165,186 $1,153,975 $951,360 $7,270,521 $1,533,668 $2,182,277 $11,030,000 Denotes use of 10% Contingency due to the completion of Preliminary Design and a Preliminary Project Estimate.YEAR* Denotes project not included in previous capital improvement plan years 2016 to 2022 + Denotes federally funded project. Construction year is undetermined. City cost is 7.43% match of project cost.2023 TOTALS ===>2024 TOTALS ===>2025 TOTALS ===>2026 TOTALS ===>10-Year Totals ===>** Commerce Street reconstruction project awarded. Notice to proceed issued July 12, 2017 and to be completed October 201720202020 TOTALS ===>2021 TOTALS ===>20222022 TOTALS ===>2019 TOTALS ===>McCALL 10-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - 2017 TO 2026 Accelerated DT Core Strategy2017 TOTALS ===>2018 TOTALS ===>2019October 2017 PRIORITY LEVELGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (MILES)% OF NETWORKFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONCOMMUNITY VALUE (Scale from 0-10)AADT (veh. per day)PAVEMENT TREATMENT AND IMPROVEMENTSPRELIMINARY PROJECT COST (2017 cost)HighnaE Lake St from 1st to Mission St0.20.6%Arterial96,760Full Reconstruct, Urban Stormdrain, Sidewalk$1,000,000High 29a Davis Ave from Wanda to Spruce St.0.51.2% Major Collector92,270 Mill & Inlay (4"), Widen Shoulders $720,000High67, 68bSpring Mountain Blvd from Aspen Ridge Ln to E Deinhard Ln1.22.9% Major Collector91,640 Mill & Inlay (4"), Widen Shoulders $1,840,000High58b Mission St from Mather to E Lake St0.30.7% Major Collector8~ 2,000Full Reconstruct, Urban Stormdrain, Bike Lanes$800,000High33E Lake St from Pine to Hemlock0.20.5% Minor Collector7~ 2,000Mill & Inlay (3"), Urban Stormdrain, Sidewalk$1,240,000Medium43Hemlock St0.30.7% Minor Collector6~ 1,500Mill & Inlay (3"), Urban Stormdrain, Sidewalk$880,000Medium28Cross Rd, State St0.20.6% Minor Collector7570Mill & Inlay (3"), Urban Stormdrain, Sidewalk$530,000Medium11st St Park to Colorado0.20.5% Minor Collector6~ 750Full Reconstruct, Urban Stormdrain, Sidewalk$1,000,000Medium25 Colorado St from 3rd St to Samson Trail0.20.5% Minor Collector5~ 500 Full Reconstruct, Ditch Grading$440,000Medium54aMather Rd, E Lake St to Burns0.51.1% Minor Collector5~ 500Full Reconstruct, Ditch Grading, Seperated Pathway$940,000Low38Forest St from Mission to Mather0.71.6% Minor Collector5~ 750Mill & Inlay (3"), Ditch Grading, Bike Lanes$1,160,000Low56Mill Rd from Hemlock to Fir0.10.3% Minor Collector5~ 500Full Reconstruct, Urban Stormdrain, Sidewalk$510,000Low26Colorado St from 3rd St to 1st St0.20.4% Minor Collector4~ 500Full Reconstruct, Urban Stormdrain, Sidewalk$600,000Low54b Mather Rd, from Burns to Brundage0.30.8% Minor Collector3~ 500 Mill & Inlay (3"), Ditch Grading$370,000Low72Washington St, Railroad Ave (from 3rd St to end of pavement)0.30.6%Residential2230 Mill & Inlay (3"), Ditch Grading$310,000Low17aBridle Path Way, Saddlehorn Ln0.30.6%Residential2~150 Full Reconstruct due to frost heave $450,0005.813.6%$12,790,000~ Denotes Estimated AADT.Pavement Treatments to be verified and are dependent on project construction year.McCall Preliminary Development Project List Future Projects to be Funded for ConstructionNOTES:Totals ===>October 2017 December 7, 2017 Appendix City of McCall, Idaho Capital Improvement & Maintenance Improvement Plans Horrocks Engineers Appendix H – Maintenance Improvement Plan Table YearGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (FT)TOTAL AREA (SY)IMPORTANCEFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION2016 GROUP AVERAGE RSLPRESCRIPTIVE TREATMENTESTIMATED COST72a Railroad Ave from 3rd to End of Pavement 208 555 LowLocal8.0Rehabilitate Pavement17,280$ 73a Wooley Ave from Davis to Dawson Ave 300 800 Medium‐High Major Collector6.0Rehabilitate Pavement41,867$ PROJECT SUBTOTAL59,147$ Total Length0.1 milesENGINEERING & ADMIN‐$ TOTAL59,147$ 0.1 total miles 0.2% of Paved Network YearGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (FT)TOTAL AREA (SY)IMPORTANCEFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION2016 GROUP AVERAGE RSLPRESCRIPTIVE TREATMENTESTIMATED COST2018 Project 1naRailroad Ave from End of Pavement to 1st St280 2187 LowLocal7 (unpaved)Convert Gravel to Paved35,000$ PROJECT SUBTOTAL35,000$ Total Length0.1 milesENGINEERING & ADMIN‐$ TOTAL35,000$ YearGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (FT)TOTAL AREA (SY)IMPORTANCEFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION2016 GROUP AVERAGE RSLPRESCRIPTIVE TREATMENTESTIMATED COST2018 Project 2 43Hemlock St1362 3633 Medium‐High Minor Collector6.7Micro seal15,986$ PROJECT SUBTOTAL15,986$ Total Length0.3 milesENGINEERING & ADMIN‐$ TOTAL15,986$ YearGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (FT)TOTAL AREA (SY)IMPORTANCEFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION2016 GROUP AVERAGE RSLPRESCRIPTIVE TREATMENTESTIMATED COST58a Mission St from Deinhard to Mather St 2574 7435 Medium‐High Major Collector 14.0Fog Seal2,980$ Fog seal roadways that were recently chip sealed:69Stibnite St2062 6185 Medium Minor Collector 19.6Fog Seal2,480$ Year 201561Park St from 1st to Mission1296 3457 MediumLocal20.0Fog Seal1,390$ Year 201553Lick Creek Rd5452 14106 Medium Major Collector 11.7Fog Seal5,650$ Year 201566Spring Mountain Blvd Lick Creek to Aspen Ridge3060 9518 Medium‐High Major Collector 17.4Fog Seal3,810$ Year 201571Warren Wagon Rd2804 10280 Medium‐High Major Collector 14.2Fog Seal4,120$ Year 201316Boydstun St, Deinhard Ln13553 53100 Medium‐High Major Collector 18.7Fog Seal21,250$ Year 2013PROJECT SUBTOTAL41,680$ Total Length5.8 milesENGINEERING & ADMIN‐$ Engineering & Admin included in Packages 4 & 5TOTAL41,680$ 2018 Project 3NotesNotesNotes2017 ProjectsReplaced pavement in conjunction with improvements to adjacent businessesRehabilitate pavement & improve cross slope, drainage, and pathway2017 SUMMARY2017 Total$ 59,200.00 NotesMicro seal test strip to determine economy of treatment for future useCity of McCall, IdahoMaintenance Improvement Plan, Years 2017‐2026Date: October 2017 YearGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (FT)TOTAL AREA (SY)IMPORTANCEFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION2016 GROUP AVERAGE RSLPRESCRIPTIVE TREATMENTESTIMATED COST29b Davis Ave from Spruce St. to Lick Creek 2762 7365 Medium‐High Major Collector 10.0Chip Seal25,780$ Year 1 of 2 Year Chip Seal Cycle30Davis Ave from Lick Creek to Agate 395 1054 Medium‐High Local10.0Chip Seal3,690$ 32E Lake St (from 3rd to Pine), Mill Rd (from Pine to Fir), Pine St, Railroad Ave (from 3rd St to Pine St), Roosevelt Ave 4959 16023 MediumMajor/Minor Collector13.2Chip Seal56,080$ 35Fir St from East Lake St to Mill167 964 MediumLocal14.0Chip Seal3,380$ 73aWooley Louisa to Davis Ave668 1782 Medium‐HighMajor Collector8.2Chip Seal6,240$ 11b Ponderosa Ave, Fir St.1976 5268 Low‐Medium Residential11.2Chip Seal18,440$ PROJECT SUBTOTAL113,610$ Total Length2.1 milesENGINEERING & ADMIN17,042$ TOTAL130,652$ YearGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (FT)TOTAL AREA (SY)IMPORTANCEFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION2016 GROUP AVERAGE RSLPRESCRIPTIVE TREATMENTESTIMATED COST27Commerce St1318 3806 Low‐Medium Local20.0Chip Seal13,330$ 2017 reconstruction40Fox Ln, Fox Ridge Ln, S Samson Trl (from E. Deinhard to City Limits)5144 13718 Low‐MediumResidential/Minor Collector10.0Chip Seal48,020$ 14Blackwell Ave, Brady Dr, Douglas Dr, Koski Dr, Woodlands Dr7828 20876 LowResidential11.6Chip Seal73,070$ PROJECT SUBTOTAL134,420$ Total Length2.7 milesENGINEERING & ADMIN20,163$ TOTAL154,583$ 10.6 total miles 25% of Paved Network2018 Total$ 380,000.00 Notes2018 Project 4 Notes2018 Project 5 2018 SUMMARY YearGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (FT)TOTAL AREA (SY)IMPORTANCEFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION2016 GROUP AVERAGE RSLPRESCRIPTIVE TREATMENTESTIMATED COST67Spring Mountain Blvd from Sand Wedge to Aspen Ridge1792 5578 Medium‐High Major Collector 13.7Chip Seal19,530$ Year 2 of 2 Year Chip Seal Cycle68aSpring Mountain Blvd from Cottage Ct to Bitterroot Dr. 2075 6456 Medium‐High Major Collector9.5Chip Seal22,600$ 15Blue Haze Way, Ginney Way, Graham Dr, Kaitlyn Loop, Mos Way, Potts Dr, Swainie Way8666 23110 LowResidential11.3Chip Seal80,890$ 23Cedar Ln, Mountain Meadow Dr, Sand Wedge Ct4400 11734 LowResidential12.3Chip Seal41,070$ PROJECT SUBTOTAL164,090$ 3.2 milesENGINEERING & ADMIN24,614$ TOTAL188,704$ YearGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (FT)TOTAL AREA (SY)IMPORTANCEFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION2016 GROUP AVERAGE RSLPRESCRIPTIVE TREATMENTESTIMATED COST10Aspen Ridge Ln, Heavens Gate Ct, Majestic View Dr, Snowberry Pl 12399 33515 LowResidential11.8Chip Seal117,310$ 13Bitterroot Dr, Deer Forest Dr, Fireweed Dr, Violet Way9946 26844 LowResidential10.7Chip Seal93,960$ 12Bellflower Pl506 1351 LowResidential14.0Chip Seal4,730$ Total Length4.3 milesPROJECT SUBTOTAL216,000$ ENGINEERING & ADMIN32,400$ TOTAL248,400$ 7.5 total miles 18% of Paved Network YearGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (FT)TOTAL AREA (SY)IMPORTANCEFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION2016 GROUP AVERAGE RSLPRESCRIPTIVE TREATMENTESTIMATED COST45Idaho St1345 3587 Low‐Medium Minor Collector 20.0Chip Seal12,560$ Reconstructed in 2018 ‐ Chip Seal18Brown Dr181 906 LowResidential20.0Chip Seal3,170$ Reconstructed in 2018 ‐ Chip Seal64Reedy Ln2007 5352 Low‐Medium Minor Collector5.1Rehabilitate Pavement189,160$ Mill and Inlay (2") (additional Stormwater cost?)19Brundage Dr1151 3068 Low‐Medium Residential4.0Rehabilitate Pavement58,300$ Crack Seal & overlay (2")51aRowland St1295 3454 Medium Minor Collector0.0Rehabilitate Pavement113,990$ 34 E Lake St (from Opal to Dead End), Opal St 1170 1820 LowResidential2.7Rehabilitate Pavement60,060$ PROJECT SUBTOTAL437,240$ Total Length1.4 milesENGINEERING & ADMIN87,448$ TOTAL524,688$ 1.4 total miles 3% of Paved NetworkNotes2019 Project 1 2019 Project 2 2019 SUMMARYConduct Pavement Inventory June 2019 ~$10,000.002019 Total$ 450,000.00 2020 Various ProjectsMill and Inlay (3")Mill and Inlay (3")2020 SUMMARY2020 Total$ 530,000.00 NotesNotes YearGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (FT)TOTAL AREA (SY)IMPORTANCEFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION2016 GROUP AVERAGE RSLPRESCRIPTIVE TREATMENTESTIMATED COST59N Samson Trl from Park St to End of asphalt2448 6529 Medium‐HighMinor Collector5.4Rehabilitate Pavement169,750$ naSpruce St.903 4169 LowResidential0.0 Remove Pavement14,600$ Return to Gravel47Jacob St1153 3074 LowResidential5.0Rehabilitate Pavement101,450$ Mill and Inlay (3")63Pilgrim Cove Rd1428 3808 Medium Residential5.3Rehabilitate Pavement72,360$ Crack Seal & overlay (2")51bLakeside Ave, Pinedale St2429 6478 MediumMinor Collector, Local8.8Chip Seal22,680$ Chip Seal 3, 52, 7, 62, 2Downtown Core3710 9893 MediumMinor Collector20.0Fog Seal3,960$ Fog SealPROJECT SUBTOTAL384,800$ Total Length2.3 milesENGINEERING & ADMIN76,960$ TOTAL461,760$ 2.3 total miles 5% of Paved Network YearGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (FT)TOTAL AREA (SY)IMPORTANCEFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION2016 GROUP AVERAGE RSLPRESCRIPTIVE TREATMENTESTIMATED COST22Carmen Dr, CeCe Way, Ernesto Dr, Gabi Ln, Gena Way, Rio Vista Blvd, Sunny Way 18753 49880 MediumMinor Collector/Residential 12.1Chip Seal174,590$ Year 1 of 3 Year Chip Seal Cycle54c Mather Rd from Mission to Brundage 1602 4273 MediumMinor Collector/Residential 20.0Chip Seal14,960$ 31E Deinhard Ln2875 11941 Medium‐High Major Collector 20.0Chip Seal41,800$ Reconstructed in 2021 ‐ Chip SealPROJECT SUBTOTAL231,350$ Total Length4.4 milesENGINEERING & ADMIN34,703$ TOTAL266,053$ 2022 Project 1NotesMill and Inlay (2")2021 SUMMARY 2021 Total$ 470,000.00 2021 Various Projects Notes YearGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (FT)TOTAL AREA (SY)IMPORTANCEFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION2016 GROUP AVERAGE RSLPRESCRIPTIVE TREATMENTESTIMATED COST2022 Project 236Floyde St from 3rd to Smitty1798 4796 Low‐Medium Minor Collector7.0Rehabilitate Pavement158,260$ Mill and Inlay (3")Total Length0.3 milesPROJECT SUBTOTAL158,260$ ENGINEERING & ADMIN23,739$ TOTAL181,999$ 4.7 total miles 11% of Paved Network YearGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (FT)TOTAL AREA (SY)IMPORTANCEFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION2016 GROUP AVERAGE RSLPRESCRIPTIVE TREATMENTESTIMATED COST58aMission St from Deinhard to Idaho 3252 9393 Medium‐High Major Collector 14.0Chip Seal32,880$ Year 2 of 3 Year Chip Seal Cycle57 Mission St from Deinhard to City Limits 3559 10282 Medium‐High Major Collector 20.0Chip Seal35,990$ Reconstructed in 202269Stibnite St2062 6185 Medium Minor Collector 19.6Chip Seal21,650$ 61Park St from 1st to Mission1296 3457 MediumLocal20.0Chip Seal12,100$ 36Floyde St from 3rd to Smitty1798 4796 Low‐Medium Minor Collector 20.0Chip Seal16,790$ Rehabilitated in 202116Boydstun St, Deinhard Ln13553 53100 Medium‐High Major Collector 18.7Chip Seal185,860$ PROJECT SUBTOTAL305,270$ Total Length4.8 milesENGINEERING & ADMIN45,791$ TOTAL351,061$ 4.8 total miles 12% of Paved Network YearGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (FT)TOTAL AREA (SY)IMPORTANCEFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION2016 GROUP AVERAGE RSLPRESCRIPTIVE TREATMENTESTIMATED COST53Lick Creek Rd5452 14106 Medium Major Collector 11.7Chip Seal49,380$ Year 3 of 3 Year Chip Seal Cycle66Spring Mountain Blvd Lick Creek to Aspen Ridge2891 8994 Medium‐High Major Collector 12.0Chip Seal31,480$ 71Warren Wagon Rd2804 10280 Medium‐High Major Collector 14.2Chip Seal35,980$ 31E Deinhard Ln2875 11941 Medium‐High Major Collector 20.0Chip Seal41,800$ Reconstructed in 2023 ‐ Chip SealPROJECT SUBTOTAL158,640$ Total Length2.7 milesENGINEERING & ADMIN23,796$ TOTAL182,436$ Notes2022 SUMMARY Conduct Pavement Inventory June 2022 ~$10,000.002022 Total$ 460,000.00 Notes2023 SUMMARY 2023 Total$ 360,000.00 Notes2023 Various Projects 2024 Project 1 YearGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (FT)TOTAL AREA (SY)IMPORTANCEFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION2016 GROUP AVERAGE RSLPRESCRIPTIVE TREATMENTESTIMATED COST9Ann St Wanda to Thompson649 1730 LowResidential6.0Rehabilitate Pavement32,880$ Crack Seal & overlay (2")8Alpine St From Wooley to Wanda 1357 3620 LowResidential6.0Rehabilitate Pavement68,780$ Crack Seal & overlay (2")70Wanda Ave1036 2762 Medium‐High Residential7.1Rehabilitate Pavement52,490$ Mill and Inlay (3")PROJECT SUBTOTAL154,150$ Total Length0.6 milesENGINEERING & ADMIN23,123$ TOTAL177,273$ 3.2 total miles 8% of Paved Network YearGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (FT)TOTAL AREA (SY)IMPORTANCEFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION2016 GROUP AVERAGE RSLPRESCRIPTIVE TREATMENTESTIMATED COST55McCall Ave, Ruby St2885 7694 Low‐Medium Local6.0Rehabilitate Pavement200,050$ 20Burns Rd933 2487 Low‐Medium Residential6.0Rehabilitate Pavement47,260$ Crack Seal & overlay (2")41Gamble Rd1006 2684 Low‐Medium Residential6.0Rehabilitate Pavement51,000$ Crack Seal & overlay (2")44Hewitt St1182 3152 Low‐Medium Residential6.0Rehabilitate Pavement59,890$ Crack Seal & overlay (2")Total Length1.1 milesPROJECT SUBTOTAL358,200$ ENGINEERING & ADMIN71,640$ TOTAL429,840$ 1.1 total miles 3% of Paved Network YearGROUP NO.DESCRIPTION (ROAD NAMES WITHIN GROUP)TOTAL LENGTH (FT)TOTAL AREA (SY)IMPORTANCEFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION2016 GROUP AVERAGE RSLPRESCRIPTIVE TREATMENTESTIMATED COST64Reedy Ln2007 5352 Low‐Medium Minor Collector 10.0Chip Seal18,740$ Rehab in 2020, Chip Seal70Wanda Ave1036 2762 Medium‐High Residential12.0Chip Seal9,670$ Rehab in 2024, Chip Seal9Ann St Wanda to Thompson649 1730 LowResidential12.0Chip Seal6,060$ Rehab in 2024, Chip Seal8Alpine St From Wooley to Wanda 1357 3620 LowResidential12.0Chip Seal12,670$ Rehab in 2024, Chip Seal73b Wooley Ave, Davis to Spring Mnt. Blvd 2715 7240 Medium‐High Major Collector 20.0Chip Seal25,350$ Reconstruct in 2024, Chip Seal59N Samson Trl from Park St to End of asphalt2448 6529 Medium‐High Minor Collector 10.0Chip Seal22,860$ Rehab in 2021, Chip Seal60Park St, Thompson Ave to Davis19515203Medium‐HighMinor Collector 20.0Chip Seal18,210$ Reconstruct in 2025, Chip Seal29aDavis Ave from Wanda to Spruce St.26417044Medium‐HighMinor Collector 20.0Chip Seal24,660$ Reconstruct in 2025, Chip Seal63Pilgrim Cove Rd1428 3808 Medium Residential10.0Chip Seal13,330$ Rehab in 2021, Chip Seal55McCall Ave, Ruby St2885 7694 Low‐Medium Local6.0Chip Seal26,930$ Rehab in 2025, Chip SealPROJECT SUBTOTAL178,480$ Total Length3.6 milesENGINEERING & ADMIN26,772$ TOTAL205,252$ 3.6 total miles 9% of Paved NetworkTOTAL ROUTINE TREATMENT (mi)% of NETWORKTOTAL PREVENTATIVE (CHIP SEAL) (mi)% of NETWORKTOTAL SURFACE REHAB (mi)% of NETWORKAVERAGE MAINT. COST PER YEAR6.8 16% 28.668%3.79%371,920$ 2025 Total$ 210,000.00 Maintenance Improvements 10-Year Totals ===>Note: Over the span of 10 years a roadway may receive multiple treatments (Reconstruct/Rehab/Preventative/Routine). 2025 SUMMARY Conduct Pavement Inventory June 2025 ~$10,000.002025 Total$ 440,000.00 NotesNotes2024 SUMMARY 2024 Total$ 360,000.00 Notes2026 Various Projects 2026 SUMMARY Mill and Inlay (2")2024 Project 2 2025 Various Projects