APPENDIX A: Idaho 55 South Corridor Turn Lane Warrant Study Appendix A | Idaho 55 South Corridor Plan Turn Lane Warrant Study APPENDIX A: Idaho 55 South Corridor Turn Lane Warrant Study In summer 2011, Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) District 3 Traffic Section staff collected intersection data for six intersections on Idaho 55 between Nampa and Marsing. The cross streets from west to east were: Pride Lane, Chicken Dinner Road, Pecan Lane, Wagner Road, Riverside Road and Kimball Road. In fall 2013, additional data was collected at the Hoskins Road intersection. ITD Traffic Manual Section 451.00 was used to determine if turn bays were warranted at the seven intersections studied. The criteria called for design hourly volume to be used. Instead, collected data was used instead of the design hourly volume because the design hourly volume is an estimate and the actual count data is a better representation. Also, Section 451.00 is intended to be used for turn lanes for new approaches; the intersections studied are existing approaches. Two graphs were constructed for each intersection: one for each left turn and one for each right turn. In each graph, a line or point that crosses the determination line indicates that a turn lane is warranted. Idaho 55 and Hoskins Road (3-leg T-intersection, no east leg): Hoskins Road: Left-Turn Lane Warrant 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 Number of Vehicles of per Number Hour Vehicles 50 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Number of Left Turning Vehicles Eastbound Determination Line A left-turn bay is warranted for the northbound travel lane. Page | 1 Appendix A | Idaho 55 South Corridor Plan Turn Lane Warrant Study Hoskins Road: Right-Turn Lane Warrant 600 500 400 300 200 Number of Vehicles of per Number Hour Vehicles 100 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Number of Right Turning Vehicles Westbound Determination Line A right-turn bay is warranted for the westbound travel lane. Idaho 55 and Pride Lane (standard 4-leg intersection): Pride Lane: Left-Turn Lane Warrant 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 Number of Vehicles of per Number Hour Vehicles 50 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Number of Left Turning Vehicles Determination Line Eastbound Westbound A left-turn bay is warranted for the eastbound travel lane. Page | 2 Appendix A | Idaho 55 South Corridor Plan Turn Lane Warrant Study Pride Lane: Right-Turn Lane Warrant 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 Number of Vehicles of per Number Hour Vehicles 50 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Number of Right Turning Vehicles Determination Line Eastbound Westbound A right-turn bay is warranted for the westbound travel lane. Idaho 55 and Chicken Dinner Road (standard 4-leg intersection): Chicken Dinner Road: Left-Turn Lane Warrant 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 Number of Vehicles of per Number Hour Vehicles 50 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Number of Left Turning Vehicles Determination Line Eastbound Westbound A left-turn bay is warranted for the westbound travel lane. Page | 3 Appendix A | Idaho 55 South Corridor Plan Turn Lane Warrant Study Chicken Dinner Road: Right-Turn Lane Warrant 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 Number of Vehicles of per Number Hour Vehicles 50 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Number of Right Turning Vehicles Determination Line Eastbound Westbound A right-turn bay is warranted for the westbound travel lane. Idaho 55 and Pecan Lane (3-leg angled T-intersection, no north leg): Pecan Lane: Left-Turn Lane Warrant 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 Number of Vehicles of per Number Hour Vehicles 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Number of Left Turning Vehicles Determination Line Eastbound Westbound Left-turn bays are not warranted for this intersection. Page | 4 Appendix A | Idaho 55 South Corridor Plan Turn Lane Warrant Study Pecan Lane: Right-Turn Lane Warrant 450 400 350 300 250 Determination Line 200 Eastbound 150 Westbound 100 Number of Vehicles of per Number Hour Vehicles 50 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Number of Right Turning Vehicles Right-turn bays are not warranted for this intersection. Idaho 55 and Wagner Road (standard 4-leg intersection): Wagner Road: Left-Turn Lane Warrant 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 Number of Vehicles of per Number Hour Vehicles 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Number of Left Turning Vehicles Determination Line Eastbound Westbound A left-turn lane is not warranted for this intersection. Page | 5 Appendix A | Idaho 55 South Corridor Plan Turn Lane Warrant Study Wagner Road: Right-Turn Lane Warrant 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 Number of Vehicles of per Number Hour Vehicles 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Number of Right Turning Vehicles Determination Line Eastbound Westbound A right-turn lane is warranted for the westbound travel lane. Idaho 55 and Riverside Road (3-leg T-intersection, no north leg): Riverside Road: Left-Turn Lane Warrant 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 Number of Vehicles of per Number Hour Vehicles 50 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 Number of Left Turning Vehicles Determination Line Westbound A left- turn lane is warranted for the westbound travel lane. Page | 6 Appendix A | Idaho 55 South Corridor Plan Turn Lane Warrant Study Riverside Road: Right-Turn Lane Warrant 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 Number of Vehicles of per Number Hour Vehicles 50 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Number of Right Turning Vehicles Determination Line Eastbound A right-turn lane is warranted for the eastbound direction. Idaho 55 and Kimball Road (4-leg intersection, north and south legs offset): Kimball Road: Left-Turn Lane Warrant 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 Number of Vehicles of per Number Hour Vehicles 50 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Number of Left Turning Vehicles Determination Line Eastbound Westbound A left-turn lane is warranted for the eastbound direction. A left-turn lane could also be considered for the westbound direction since there is a point right on the determination line. Page | 7 Appendix A | Idaho 55 South Corridor Plan Turn Lane Warrant Study Kimball Road: Right-Turn Lane Warrant 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 Number of Vehicles of per Number Hour Vehicles 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Number of Right Turning Vehicles Determination Line Eastbound Westbound A right-turn lane is warranted for the westbound traffic. A future project priority table has been provided below to illustrate the difference in the number of data points above the warrant determination line for the studied intersections. Future Project Priority Table Left Turn Right Turn Eastbound Westbound Eastbound Westbound Kimball 9 12 - 10 Riverside n/a 1 2 n/a Wagner - - - 11 Pecan n/a - - n/a Chicken Dinner - 8 - 7 Pride 4 - - 3 Hoskins 6 5 Riverside Road has the highest need and priority for intersection improvements. Pride Lane has the next priority for improvements but only meets warrants for vehicle movements to the north side of the intersection. Page | 8 APPENDIX B: Idaho 55, Marsing to Nampa, Access Management Plan FINAL REPORT IDAHO 55, MARSING TO NAMPA, ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN PROJECT NO. A009(967), KEY NO. 09967 Prepared for: Mark Wasdahl, ITD District 3 With Cooperation from: Canyon County Canyon Highway District No. 4 City of Caldwell City of Nampa COMPASS Prepared by: Six Mile Engineering, P.A. April 2011 (Thispageleftblank) FINAL REPORT IDAHO 55, MARSING TO NAMPA, ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................1 Plan Summary .......................................................................................................................................1 Participating Agencies ...........................................................................................................................2 WHAT IS ACCESS MANAGEMENT? ......................................................................................................3 Examples of Access-Managed Facilities ...............................................................................................3 Access Management Benefits ...............................................................................................................4 For Roadway Users ...........................................................................................................................4 For Businesses ..................................................................................................................................5 For Transportation and Land Use Agencies ......................................................................................5 WHY ACCESS MANAGEMENT IS NEEDED ON IDAHO 55...................................................................6 Safety ....................................................................................................................................................6 Crash History .....................................................................................................................................6 Potential Crash Reductions ...............................................................................................................7 Mobility ..................................................................................................................................................8 Existing Roadway Characteristics .....................................................................................................8 Existing Traffic .................................................................................................................................10 Land Use .........................................................................................................................................11