US HIGHWAY 20 - ASHTON TO SH 87
POINT PAPERS/ISLAND PARK NEWS ARTICLES
USEFUL TO THE PUBLIC AND OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES
List of Articles With Conclusions
Ashton to SH87 Accident Data
During the Idaho Transportation Department’s workshop on design alternatives for US Highway 20 from Ashton to SH 87, ITD was asked to provide the links to the traffic study and accident study that were used to produce two graphics they presented. To date, only a traffic accident spread sheet has been provided to the Island Park Preservation Coalition. No studies or reports have been provided to IPPC. Why should you care? Because ITD plans to spend 10’s of millions of your tax dollars to upgrade this section of US 20. Detailed, peer reviewed, traffic studies and accident studies must be made available to the public before ITD considers design alternatives for this highway. The public must be involved and must have the necessary information to be meaningful team members and to offer alternatives .
The spreadsheet that was provided to IPPC contained 374 rows and 33 columns. Thus there are 12,342 cells in the spreadsheet. The key question is; does the information in the spread sheet support the purpose and need statements that ITD developed and presented?
Members of IPPC are reviewing the spreadsheet that was provided. My task was to study fatality accidents and others are looking at accident trends, wildlife, road conditions, time of year, etc. The spreadsheet reveals that there were 6 fatalities on US 20 from the end of the four lane south of Ashton to SH 87, from 2015 through 2019 (no data for 2020 and 2021). There were two fatalities in 2015, one in 2016, none in 2017, two in 2018, and one in 2019. This equates to about 1.20 fatalities per year. This is approximately the state average for 100 million miles driven. US 20 from the four-lane south of Ashton to SH 87 has about 100 million driven miles driven if you look at the graph presented by ITD at the December 6 workshop. One can conclude that the fatality rate is about average for this road and there is no “apparent” upward trend in fatalities (2015 to 2019).
The spread sheet further reveals that 5 of the 6 fatalities occurred in the winter months when traffic volume was low. One fatality occurred in July when traffic volume was presumably higher. Speed too fast for the conditions and snow, contributed to 3 of the 6 fatalities. A contributing factor in 4 of the fatalities was failing to maintain lane. None of the fatalities involved wildlife. 4 of the fatalities occurred in low or no light conditions. 4 of the fatalities involved trucks. 2 of the fatalities occurred in close proximity to milepost 372. 2 others occurred in close proximity to milepost 382. 1 fatality involved alcohol. None of the fatalities occurred at an intersection.
The fatality data does not seem to reveal any systemic deficiencies in road design but rather human error. While two fatalities did occur near Grave Yard Flats Road (MP372), the circumstances were entirely different. Further, the fatality data does not seem to support the ITD purpose and need statements related to travel time and delays or congestion. The data supported reducing speed and methods to reduce incidents of failing to maintain lane. Rumble strips, for example. Snow removal was important to reducing fatalities but this is not a design issue. Wide shoulders (a design standard) may have helped in one case.
US 20 Injury and Property Damage Accidents 2015-2019
Last week Ken’s Korner reported on fatality incidents on US 20 from approximately Ashton to the intersection with SH 87 near the Montana border. The incident data, provided by the Idaho Transportation Department, revealed that there was no trend toward more fatalities in the 2015 through 2019 timeframe. (The analysis was done by the Island Park Preservation Coalition.) This week the same data is examined by IPPC to determine if there is a trend toward more injury and property damage incidents in the same time period. As stated last week, the spreadsheets provided by ITD contain over 12,000 cells and therefore it takes some time to analyze the data.
The spreadsheets reveal the following: 2015 – 60 incidents, 25 injury and 41 property damage; 2016 – 50 incidents, 26 injury and 27 property damage; 2017 – 87 incidents, 41 injury and 65 property damage; 2018 – 81 incidents, 34 injury and 68 property damage; 2019 – 48 incidents, 16 injury and 41 property damage. Note that one incident could involve multiple vehicles and people. The incidents peaked in 2017 and then declined. This data reveals no trend toward increased incidents. In fact, 2019 had the lowest number of incidents, 48.
Injuries are categorized as A, B, or C in the spreadsheet. These are defined as follows: Injury A – Incapacitating . Any injury, other than a fatal injury, which prevents the injured person from walking, driving, or continuing normal activities. Includes severe lacerations, broken or distorted limbs, skull or chest injuries, abdominal injuries, unconscious at scene, and/or unable to leave the scene without assistance. Excludes momentary unconsciousness. Injury B – Non-incapacitating (visible). B Any injury, other than a fatal or incapacitating injury, which is visible to observers at the scene of the collision. Includes lump on the head, abrasions, bruises, and/or lacerations. Excludes limping (the injury cannot be seen). Injury C – Possible (complaint, but non-evident). C Any injury reported or claimed which does not fall in the other categories. Includes momentary unconsciousness, limping, complaint of pain, nausea, hysteria, and/or claim of injuries. None of the injury categories showed a general upward trend toward more injuries. Injuries are not becoming more severe based on this data. Further, increasing traffic does not appear to be causing more crashes. ITD did not provide any incident data to IPPC for 2020 or 2021. This past week, ITD stated publicly that 2021 was one of the deadliest years on Idaho highways.
ITD has stated that the Planning and Environmental Linkages (PEL) process will identify and analyze US-20 between Ashton and the SH-87 Junction and will look at ways to address the following deficiencies: travel time and delays, congestion, safety – specifically, with the goal of reducing the number and severity of crashes, and outdated design standards. The incident data (provide by ITD) for 2015 through 2019 does not appear to show an increase in the number of incidents nor the severity of these incidents.
US 20 Wildlife and Domestic Animal Incidents 2015-2019
The last two weeks Ken’s Korner reported on fatality and injury/property damage incidents on US 20 from Ashton to the intersection with SH 87 near the Montana border. The incident data, provided by the Idaho Transportation Department, revealed that there was no trend toward more fatalities or injury incidents in the 2015 through 2019 timeframe. This week the same data is examined by Island Park Preservation Coalition (IPPC) to examine wildlife and domestic animal incidents in the same time period. As stated previously, the spreadsheets provided by ITD contain over 12,000 cells and therefore it takes some time to analyze the data.
The spreadsheets reveal the following: 2015 –25 incidents, 21 wildlife and 4 domestic animal, 5 involved injury; 2016 – 12 incidents, 10 wildlife and 0 domestic animal, 2 involved injury; 2017 – 31 incidents, 28 wildlife and 3 domestic animal, 3 injury; 2018 – 35 incidents, 34 wildlife and 1 domestic animal, 5 involved injury; 2019 – 19 incidents, 19 wildlife and 0 domestic animal, 4 involved injury. The incidents peaked in 2018 and then declined. This data reveals no trend toward increased animal incidents. In fact, 2019 had a low number of incidents, 19. 82% of the animal incidents occurred in the dark, suggesting that a lower nighttime speed limit may reduce these incidents. It would certainly reduce the severity of the incidents. Severity is mentioned in ITD’s original purpose and need statements.
When looking at the design of US 20, it is important to know where the wildlife and domestic animal incidents are occurring. There are many ways to look at the data in ITD’s spreadsheet. For this analysis, US 20 was divided into five segments and the number of incidents for each segment was determined as follows: Ashton to Antelope Flat Road (~9 miles) – 46 wildlife, 1 domestic animal; Antelope Flat Road to Pine Haven Drive (~8 miles) – 20 wildlife, 2 domestic animals; Pine Haven Drive to Last Chance (~5 miles) – 12 wildlife, 2 domestic animals; Last Chance to Sawtelle Road (12 miles) – 20 wildlife, 1 domestic animal; Sawtelle Road to SH 87 (~8 miles) – 2 wildlife, 4 domestic animals. Clearly the 9 mile section of US 20 from Ashton to Antelope Flat Road has the highest number or wildlife incidents, 46. 35 of the 46 incidents involving wildlife, occurred from about 1 mile south of the top of the Ashton Hill to about 1 mile north of the top of the Ashton Hill. This would be an ideal place for a reduced speed limit during animal movement and nighttime lighting. The trucks are already moving slower in this area.
There are dozens of more ways to look at this data. A detailed, peer reviewed, accident study would do that.
Moving The Goal Posts?
Why is the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) conducting a Planning and Environmental Linkages (PEL) study of the US-20 corridor between Ashton and the ID-87 Junction. ITD data shows that this study will cost $6 million dollars over 2 years. (That money could fill a lot of potholes.) The answer to this question may be that ITD did a very poor job on planning the Targhee Pass project in Island Park. The public was left out of the process while out of state and out of the country conservation organizations were deeply involved and even produced data for ITD to use in the planning process. 4 out of 5 Voters in Fremont voted to oppose wildlife overpasses and fences on US 20 in Fremont County and that likely has not changed.
What is a PEL process. “Planning and Environmental Linkages (PEL) processes help weigh the benefits and impacts of proposed transportation system improvements to the environment, community, and economy during the transportation planning process. The purpose of PEL is to coordinate statewide and transportation planning with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process to streamline project delivery.” PELs are apparently rare in Idaho. This is like a “do over” in Island Park following the Targhee Pass Project. Will Island Park residents and Fremont County residents have the resolve to say no again and fight for what they want for US 20? We will see.
According to ITD, “the PEL process will identify and analyze US-20 between Ashton and the SH-87 Junction and will look at ways to address the following deficiencies: travel time and delays, congestion, safety – specifically, with the goal of reducing the number and severity of crashes, and outdated design standards.” ITD incident/crash data (2015 to 2019) does not show a trend toward more incidents.
ITD stated that: “the PEL will look at preliminary concept alternatives that can be implemented as funding becomes available. Using public input, and data from the traffic and other scientific studies, the project team will develop concept level alternatives for the corridor.” ITD had provided no new data or reports until February 2022, after the alternatives workshop in Island Park. This new report is a must read and Ken’s Korner will report on it next week. You will not believe the conclusions.
Recently, ITD stated that: “traffic studies will be updated often throughout the PEL process to reflect the vibrant and changing nature of the population traveling the highway.” No traffic studies or accident studies were provided at either public meeting in Island Park nor to the Island Park Preservation Coalition.
Last week ITD stated: “The range of alternatives were screened (meaning evaluated) to determine whether or not they meet a number of criteria related to the Draft Purpose and Need including the following: Improves safety and reduces congestion, minimizes environmental impacts, accommodates future traffic needs”. Compare this to the purpose and need statement (see above) presented at the public meetings. Are the goal posts moving?
Disappointment In IP
On February 24, 2022, the Idaho Transportation Department posted a status update on the US-20 Ashton to SH-87 planning. This was a significant update because it contained a “Preliminary Traffic Operations Report”. The Report is based on data that is four years old. The data was collected by JUB Engineers in “September” 2018 for most of the road segments from Ashton to SH-87. No traffic data was collected from Ashton north to Sheep Falls Road nor from Island Park Lodge north to SH-87. JUB Engineers applied a “fudge factor” to the data to predict traffic volume for the high traffic months of June, July, and August because their data was collected in September. Horrocks Engineers, who authored the traffic study, also applied a “fudge factor” to the data to “project” the 2018 data to 2021. This factor was a linear 3.4% per year increase in traffic. So they added about 10.2% (a guess) to the traffic volume on the road segments.
It is very disappointing that ITD elected not to share the JUB Engineers traffic data at any of the public meetings held in Island Park or Ashton. This was critical data. It is even more disappointing that ITD held the road design alternatives workshop in Island Park and Ashton prior to publishing the Preliminary Traffic Operations Report. This was critical information that could have been used by the public to suggest alternatives. Adding to the disappointment is the fact that ITD has done the first “down selection” of the alternatives without public involvement. In addition, the public was told that ITD was “starting from scratch” on this project but is now using old data from 2018!
This report was authored and stamped by Benjamin Burke from Horrocks Engineers. Mr. Burke is a former employee of ITD District 6 and was involved in the controversial Targhee Pass Project on US-20. The report uses the horizon year of 2050. Yes, 28 years into the future using 2018 data. The report is based on 3.4% traffic growth for 32 years. No justification is provided for projecting 3.4% growth for the next 28 years, only the first 4 years. The conclusions are based on the four peak traffic months, not on the yearly average. The peak traffic hour of the day was also used to make the traffic volume look worse.
It is very important to review the conclusions and recommendations that were made in the Preliminary Traffic Operations Report by Horrocks Engineers. They are as follows: “Many of the existing US 20 project segments currently meet the recommended minimum standards for LOS (Level of Service). However, as traffic volumes increase, the LOS of more segments will drop below the minimum standards. In the horizon year of 2050, most segments will not meet the minimum standards for LOS without increasing the number of lanes. Improving the highway to a four-lane configuration will bring the LOS up to, or above, the recommended minimum standards for most of the segments. For those segments that are still estimated to operate below the recommended minimum LOS with the added lanes, minor adjustments to the roadway characteristics, including increasing the free-flow speed and decreasing access density are recommended.”
So let us summarize what we know: the traffic data is incomplete and old, the planning year (2050) is 28 years away, the traffic growth rate is not based on any facts after 2021, peak traffic months and hours were used, the level of service with the current road is OK now, the report calls for a four lane road, increased speeds, less access, and road configuration changes, ITD has done a preliminary down selection of alternatives with no public involvement, the JUB Engineers data was withheld from the public at the workshops, etc. The Island Park Chamber of Commerce and the Island Park Mayor and City Council better read this report. It has profound implications for our community. (More on Horrocks Engineers next week!)
Phony Calculation
Last week Ken’s Korner introduced you to a “Preliminary Traffic Operations Report” for US 20 between Ashton and SH 87, produced by Horrocks Engineers, for the Idaho Department of Transportation. This traffic report was based on incomplete data from 2018 and “fudge factors” were applied to project the data to 2021 and 2050. 32 years into the future. Horrocks did traffic projections for the highest traffic summer months and the highest traffic hour. Read last week’s Ken’s Korner for details on the suspect assumptions.
This week we will examine how Horrorks Engineers calculated the level of service (LOS) for 24 US 20 road segments between Ashton and SH 87. There are 6 levels of service, A thru F. A is the best service and F is the worst. For US 20, ITD wants a level of service of B for rolling rural areas and C for mountainous areas. To get the 2021 traffic density, they increased the 2018 traffic data by 3.4% linearly based on one traffic camera located near Sheep Falls. So, in 10 years, the traffic would increase by 34% and in 32 years it would increase by 108.8% using this approach. Horrocks Engineers used the McTrans Highway Capacity Software HCS7 to calculate the LOS for the 24 road segments for the years 2021 and 2050. The calculation is based on physical highway features, like lane width, and the “peak” traffic volume among other things. Horrocks Engineers concluded that in 2021 only 7 of the 24 northbound segments meet the minimum LOS and 10 of the 24 southbound segments meet the minimum LOS. In 2050 only one northbound segment and no southbound segments would meet the minimum LOS. Remember that in 2050, ITD predicted that traffic will be 108.8% higher than 2018.
Now let’s look at whether the computer program provides good predictions of the level of service for the 24 road segments. The best way to do this is to look at Figures 7 and 8 in the report and look at the calculated speed in 2021. The computer program says the average travel speed in Last Chance is 29.1 mph northbound during the peak hours, 32.9 at Ponds Lodge, 30.4 at Elk Creek, 29.8 at Mack’s Inn, 30.2 at Sawtelle, and 31.2 at Valley View. Think back to 2021. Did you ever drive thru these areas at these low speeds in 2021? If you did, you would likely have a tourist or a semi driving up your tailpipe! The point is that the computer program is generating ridiculously low travel speeds. This results in poor predictions of the level of service for these and other segments of the road. Further, it leads to justifying a four lane, high speed highway thru Island Park and possibly bypassing local businesses. One can only conclude that this traffic report is flawed. ITD should conduct a new traffic study, with real data, not calculated data, before committing 10’s of millions of dollars to this project. Let’s get it right. No phony calculations and assumptions.
Moving Goalposts Again
Three traffic studies/reports have been completed for US 20 roughly between Ashton and SH 87. The first was completed in 2006, the second in 2019, and the last in February of 2022. Each study used a different method to determine the traffic volume to be used to determine the level of service for the road. The best way to understand the different methods is to read quotes from the studies.
The first quote is from the 2006 study written by HDR Transportation Engineering: “Perhaps the most challenging issue confronted during the US 20 corridor planning process is the widely fluctuating traffic volumes. This fluctuation results from a higher than average seasonal variation in use, which reflects the primary summer recreation-related uses on and through the corridor. Traffic volumes reach an annual high in July and a low in January. Permanent traffic counters recorded traffic volumes in July as approximately 98 percent higher than the annual average daily traffic, and in January, traffic volumes drop 52 percent below the annual ADT. This puts summer volume highs at approximately five times greater than winter volume lows.….. A significant factor in determining appropriate improvements is the assessment of Design Hour Volume (DHV). Design Hour Volumes are commonly calculated using the 30th highest hour for the roadway, typically around 85 percent of the peak hour of traffic for the road on an annual basis. However, on US 20, the 30th highest hour is well over 90 percent of the peak hour for the road due to the makeup of the traffic using the highway (i.e. seasonal and weekend traffic). This creates concerns that improvements planned to accommodate DHV’s using this method will likely exceed the routine capacity needs for the corridor and would not support ITD’s goal of context sensitive design…. To address concerns that recommendations should be appropriate for the majority of the corridor’s traffic volumes and context sensitive, an alternative methodology was used. The Alternative Capacity Analysis method for calculating DHV is described in the AASHTO Greenbook and multiplies the average of the top three hours on the corridor by 50 percent. This analysis may or may not yield a lower traffic volume, but it should provide a LOS result that is more reflective of the actual traffic situation. This methodology is called out specifically for use in the situation where a highly seasonal use roadway is being analyzed. For the US 20 corridor, it was determined that this method would be used…...”
The second quote is from the 2019 traffic study done by JUB Engineers, Inc.: “The 2016 plan states that it captures the summer recreation period by using the 30th highest hour methodology in determining the design hour volume. The 30th highest hour volume calculated in the 2016 plan was higher than the design hourly volume used in the 2006 study, which can be attributed to the methodology applied in each study, as well as a 30% increase in traffic volumes on the study section of US 20 since the 2006 study was completed.”
The third quote is from the 2022 traffic study completed by Horrocks Engineers: “Traffic data used to calculate the Level of Service was collected in 2018 and a 3.4% linear growth rate was applied to each location to project to the year of 2021 and to the horizon year of 2050. Because this roadway has high seasonal fluctuations in traffic volume, the peak hour volumes were selected based on the average four highest months (June-September).”
Do you see how the goalposts moved? The first study said it was inappropriate to use the 30th highest hour methodology. The second study used this methodology. The third escalated the design traffic volume by using the peak hour volumes for June to September. Why should you care? The third and last approach will result in gross over design of US 20 and will be used to justify a 4 lane, high speed highway through Island Park. It will result in significant environmental damage.
ITD’s Big Lie to Island Park
Over the last few weeks Ken’s Korner has been publishing analysis of documents received from the Idaho Transportation Department regarding US Highway 20 from Ashton to SH 87. Conclusions from the analysis have been reported here. The plan was to continue this process in an effort to inform people about potential changes to this segment of US 20. That plan was turned upside down when Governor Brad Little announced we would be getting a four lane highway. That public statement now brings into question if ITD has circumvented the legal process for making these decisions. The governor has never once come to Island Park and asked us what “we” wanted. Is this representative government?
During the first public meeting on this potential highway project, we were told that ITD was “starting from scratch”. This statement was made after there were many complaints about the process used for the Targhee Pass Project on US 20. We are “starting from scratch” was not the truth. Apparently, according to the Governor, we are getting four lanes. If you believe there was a misunderstanding during the Governor’s campaign stop in Ashton last weekend, then read the following quote from ITD’s February 2022 traffic operations report: “Many of the existing US 20 project segments currently meet the recommended minimum standards for LOS (level of service). However, as traffic volumes increase, the LOS of more segments will drop below the minimum standards. In the horizon year of 2050, most segments will not meet the minimum standards for LOS without increasing the number of lanes. Improving the highway to a four-lane configuration will bring the LOS up to, or above, the recommended minimum standards for most of the segments. For those segments that are still estimated to operate below the recommended minimum LOS with the added lanes, minor adjustments to the roadway characteristics, including increasing the free-flow speed and decreasing access density are recommended.”
The people of Island Park and Ashton attended ITD’s US 20 alternatives workshop in December 2021, in good faith. We were asked to provide our input, thoughts, and solutions/alternatives. However, according to the Governor and the traffic report, a four lane was already the recommended solution/alternative. The traffic reports were withheld from the public at both public meetings. It was not until February 2022 that ITD posted three traffic studies on their US 20 website. The third report was dated February 2022, but all the data (real data) used in this report and the Passing Lanes report was old. Some data, dated back to 1993, when the speed limit was 55 mph on this section of highway. The important point is that the alternatives workshop would have had far different results if ITD would have fully disclosed the detailed traffic information with the public. They did not! Were we starting from scratch? You decide. Were we deceived? You decide. Were decisions already made? All evidence looks like it, but you decide. The good news is that this project cannot go forward without completing the NEPA process. Now is the time to build coalitions to strongly influence this project and get what Island Park wants for the Caldera. The other good news is, this is an election year. Politicians may want to listen to you. Imagine Island Park, a recreational community, with a four lane, high speed freeway right through the middle! This freeway will allow little access to local businesses. Will they survive? The “longest main street in America” will be gone. Not a pretty picture!
US 20 Accident Rate
Accident data provided by the Idaho Transportation Department reveals that there is no trend for more fatality or injury accidents on US 20 between Ashton and SH 87. Research also reveals that the accident rate is below the Idaho average for a road of this type. This was reported in Ken’s Korner several weeks ago. Now we learn that the accident rate on US 20 between Ashton and SH 87 is far below the national average. This is documented in an October 18, 2019, J-U-B Engineers, Inc. report to ITD. The report is titled “US 20 Passing Lanes – Revised Existing Conditions and 2042 No-Build Traffic Analysis (Part 1)”.
The report states the following: “Crash Data & Analysis. J-U-B completed a crash analysis using the latest available 5-year (2013-2017) data. A summary of the crash data is included in Appendix C. Based on the data collected, there was a total of 183 crashes within the study area, equivalent to an average crash rate of approximately 47 crashes per 100 million average vehicle miles traveled (AVMT) between 2013 and 2017. Segment 1 (MP 369 - MP 377) had 67 crashes with a crash rate of 59.1 crashes per 100 million average vehicle-miles travelled. Segment 2 (MP 377 – 387) had 66 crashes with a crash rate of 42.9 crashes per 100 million average vehicle-miles travelled. Segment 3 (MP 387 -MP 395) had 50 crashes with a crash rate of 40.5 crashes per 100 million average vehicle-miles travelled. The crash data analyzed is summarized by severity and crash type in Figure 2 and Figure 3, respectively. The overall study area crash rate and individual segment crash rates are significantly lower than the U.S. and State Highways year 2017 statewide average crash rate of 154.5 crashes per 100 million VMT. The crash rates are also lower than the year 2017 average crash rate of 87.36 crashes per 100 million AVMT for rural roadways (both interstate and non-interstate) in Idaho during this same time period.”
Let that sink in! The crash rate on US 20 is over 3 times less than the national average for a road of this type! It is not even close! Remember that ITD’s purpose and need statement led us to believe that the crash rate was going up and that this was a significant issue. Were you misled? You decide. Also remember that you were told that congestion is an issue. Is it? This issue will be examined next week plus a look at conflicts of interest for contractors.
Connecting the Dots - Conflict of Interest
The following is an Idaho Transportation Department request for proposal. Note that this includes Targhee Pass and does not stop at SH 87. “REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR US20 CORRIDOR FROM ASHTON TO TARGHEE PASS PROJECT NO. A023(229) KEY NO. 23229. May 19, 2021. US20 Corridor from Ashton to Targhee Pass. GENERAL INFORMATION PROPOSAL The Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) is seeking qualified and experienced respondents from interested firms to submit a proposal to provide project planning and development services for the US-20 Ashton to Targhee Pass in Fremont County. Final design through PS&E services and Engineer of Record services may be included under a separate phase or contract, at ITD’s sole discretion.” It is critical to note that this “planning” contract can be expanded to include design and engineering services. So the bigger the project scope, the more money the contractor can make. You can make a lot more money from a 4 lane road design than from a 2 lane road design. This allows the “fox in the hen house”. The same company (Horrocks Engineers) that is predicting higher traffic volumes on US 20, can profit from these questionable predictions. Remember this quote from the February 2022, US 20 Ashton to SH 87 traffic study: “Traffic data used to calculate the Level of Service was collected in 2018 and a 3.4% linear growth rate was applied to each location to project to the year of 2021 and to the horizon year of 2050. Because this roadway has high seasonal fluctuations in traffic volume, the peak hour volumes were selected based on the average four highest months (June-September).” This approach results in a very liberal method of determining design traffic volume. This method is much more liberal than in the previous two traffic studies. This results in very suspect determinations of inadequate levels of service for the roadway.
Did you connect the dots? Can the same company responsible for the traffic study profit from predictions of higher traffic volumes on US 20 from Ashton to Targhee Pass? The answer is absolutely! The more complex the road design, the more money that can be made by the contractor.
There is recent history, in Idaho, of contractors profiting in similar ways. Consider the following from an Idaho Statesman investigative report: — Companies that are responsible for checking the quality of Idaho’s road materials have altered the results of their asphalt tests thousands of times, government documents show. Those changes may have allowed contractors that repair and build Idaho’s highway infrastructure to get bonus payments when they should have been penalized for substandard work — or even forced to tear up the asphalt and replace it…..Most of Idaho’s tests are performed by private contractors, since the state cut back on resources it needed to run them in-house, said Bill Fogg, a senior technician who retired from ITD in 2016. “In my opinion, especially towards the end (of my career) there, and I flat told management there ... ‘You guys have given the keys of the hen house right into the fox’s hands, because you privatized too much of this,’” Fogg told the Statesman in an interview in January. (One of the companies that was investigated by the federal government, was Horrocks Engineers, according to the Idaho Statesman.)
Informing The People Of Island Park/Fremont County
Over the past few weeks Ken’s Korner, with help from the Island Park Preservation Coalition, has been studying Idaho Transportation Department planning documents for US Highway 20 between Ashton and SH 87 near the Montana border. A total of 10 Ken’s Korner articles have been written with the observations of this study effort. This was a time consuming process because of the volume of information that was reviewed. The purpose of this article is to summarize the observations so that you may be better informed on US 20 planning and understand the issues. The observations will be provided in a numerical listing for your convenience and easy use. 1. Traffic accident data (from a 12,342 cell spreadsheet) from 2015 to 2019 shows no trend toward more annual fatality accidents. The rate is or about average for Idaho. The data does not seem to reveal any systemic deficiencies in road design. 2. The same spread sheet shows no trend toward more annual injury or property damage accidents and no increase in the severity of these accidents. 3. The ITD data do not reveal a trend toward more annual wildlife or domestic animal accidents. (My conservation friends believe the ITD data underestimates the number of animal accidents. The ITD data is “reported” accidents.) 4. ITD changed the purpose and need statement which focused on accidents to include the environment and future traffic needs. 5. ITD did not share two traffic reports with the public at the public meetings in Island Park. Information from a third traffic report, that was published in February 2022, was also not shared at the public meetings but the information was likely available. This third traffic report has many very questionable assumptions and used a bogus computer program to predict levels of service on the highway. This report also calls for a four lane road, increased speeds, less access, and road configuration/alignment changes. 6. The “Preliminary Traffic Operations Report” included totally bogus predictions of level of service in Island Park. This is evident from the ridiculous speeds calculated by the bogus computer program that was used. During peak hours, this program calculates ~30 mph speeds in Island Park in 2021. Nonsense. 7. Three different methods were used to predict traffic volume for use in designing the highway. The first method was conservative, the second method used a common approach, and the third (2022) used a very liberal approach resulting in lower predicted levels of service. 8. Island Park was told by ITD that they were starting from scratch on the design of the highway. That was not true. There was a traffic report in the works that recommended a four-lane, high speed, limited access highway. The governor announced a four lane highway during a campaign stop in Ashton. 9. Accident rates on US 20 from Ashton to SH 87 are lower than the Idaho average and significantly lower (3 times lower) than the US average. 10. Can the same company responsible for the traffic study profit from predictions of higher traffic volumes on US 20 from Ashton to Targhee Pass? The answer is absolutely! The more complex the road design, the more money that can be made by the contractor.
ITD will likely hold another US 20 Ashton to SH 87 public meeting in May 2022. Hopefully the information provided here and over the last 10 weeks will make you a more informed participant.
What Do You Want For The US 20 Highway Design
There will likely be another meeting on US 20 design alternatives (Ashton to SH 87) in May of 2022. Ken’s Korner has provided information to help you prepare for this meeting and support the alternatives you want. This project will cost 10’s of millions of dollars to design, build, and work through the NEPA process. The design year is 2050. This is 28 years into the future. There is a lot of time to consider alternatives and get it right the first time. One thing you should ask for, as tax payers, is the completion of a multi-year traffic study that is based on real measured data, not on fudge factors, computer programs and incomplete data.
ITD has already down-selected to 22 alternative highway designs. You were not involved in this process nor were our elected officials. Ken’s Korner asked for the alternatives list but was told it would be available at the meeting in May. How can we prepare for the meeting if we do not know the alternatives chosen for us by ITD? Ken’s Korner has filed a public records request with ITD, requesting all information associated with ITD’s down-selection meeting. State law requires that this information be provided in a timely manner. You will be kept informed on the progress of this request. You need this information to be an informed citizen and debate alternatives.
So what highway design do you want? Consider the following: Is a no build option best at this time or maybe a modified no build design where a passing lane is added or an intersection is slightly modified to reduce congestion on the peak traffic days? Remember traffic volume on US 20 is low most of the year and most hours of the day.
Let’s ask another question. Why should we oppose a four lane, high speed, limited access road in Island Park? Here are some answers for you to consider: it will divide our community, result in high speeds, result in wildlife overpasses, there will be fewer access points to businesses, there will be difficulty crossing the four lane for ATVs and snowmobiles, may result in bypassing IP in some areas and result in loss of business, much more environmental damage will be caused by four lanes including more damage to wet lands, imagine the environmental damage when building four lane bridges at multiple river crossings (premiere fly fishing rivers) , there could be a negative impact on Yellowstone Cutthroat Trout, there will be a much, much higher initial cost, there will be higher maintenance costs, there will be higher snow removal costs, you will lose the historic “Longest Main Street in America”, etc. I am sure you can think of many more reasons to oppose a four lane, high speed limited access highway through Island Park and the greater Caldera.
POINT PAPERS/ISLAND PARK NEWS ARTICLES
USEFUL TO THE PUBLIC AND OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES
List of Articles With Conclusions
- Ashton to SH87 Accident Data – Conclusion: There is no trend toward more fatalities based on 2015 to 2019 incident data provided by ITD.
- US 20 Injury and Property Damage Accidents 2015-2019 – Conclusion: There is no trend toward more injuries or property damage (same data).
- US 20 Wildlife and Domestic Animal Incidents 2015-2019 – Conclusion: There were 122 incidents, 82 % occurred at night suggesting a lower nighttime speed limit should be considered.
- Moving The Goal Posts? – Conclusion: The purpose and need statements were changed after the public meetings in Island Park and Ashton.
- Disappointment In IP – Conclusion: It is very disappointing that ITD elected not to share the JUB Engineers traffic data at any of the public meetings held in Island Park or Ashton. This was critical data. It is even more disappointing that ITD held the road design alternatives workshop in Island Park and Ashton prior to publishing the Preliminary Traffic Operations Report.
- Phony Calculation – Conclusion: One can only conclude that the traffic report is flawed. ITD should conduct a new traffic study, with real data, not calculated data, before committing 10’s of millions of dollars to this project.
- Moving Goalposts Again – Conclusion: Three different methods were used to determine the highway level of service. The latest (2-22) uses very poor assumptions.
- ITD’s Big Lie to Island Park – Conclusion: This project did not “start from scratch” as we were told.
- US 20 Accident Rate – Conclusion: The accident rate is below Idaho averages and far below US averages.
- Connecting the Dots - Conflict of Interest – Is the same company doing the traffic study going to do the engineering also?
- Informing The People Of Island Park/Fremont County – Conclusion: Useful information has been provided to the public and they can decide to act on it.
- What Do You Want For The US 20 Highway Design – Conclusion: A four lane highway will be destructive to the livability environment of the Caldera.
Ashton to SH87 Accident Data
During the Idaho Transportation Department’s workshop on design alternatives for US Highway 20 from Ashton to SH 87, ITD was asked to provide the links to the traffic study and accident study that were used to produce two graphics they presented. To date, only a traffic accident spread sheet has been provided to the Island Park Preservation Coalition. No studies or reports have been provided to IPPC. Why should you care? Because ITD plans to spend 10’s of millions of your tax dollars to upgrade this section of US 20. Detailed, peer reviewed, traffic studies and accident studies must be made available to the public before ITD considers design alternatives for this highway. The public must be involved and must have the necessary information to be meaningful team members and to offer alternatives .
The spreadsheet that was provided to IPPC contained 374 rows and 33 columns. Thus there are 12,342 cells in the spreadsheet. The key question is; does the information in the spread sheet support the purpose and need statements that ITD developed and presented?
Members of IPPC are reviewing the spreadsheet that was provided. My task was to study fatality accidents and others are looking at accident trends, wildlife, road conditions, time of year, etc. The spreadsheet reveals that there were 6 fatalities on US 20 from the end of the four lane south of Ashton to SH 87, from 2015 through 2019 (no data for 2020 and 2021). There were two fatalities in 2015, one in 2016, none in 2017, two in 2018, and one in 2019. This equates to about 1.20 fatalities per year. This is approximately the state average for 100 million miles driven. US 20 from the four-lane south of Ashton to SH 87 has about 100 million driven miles driven if you look at the graph presented by ITD at the December 6 workshop. One can conclude that the fatality rate is about average for this road and there is no “apparent” upward trend in fatalities (2015 to 2019).
The spread sheet further reveals that 5 of the 6 fatalities occurred in the winter months when traffic volume was low. One fatality occurred in July when traffic volume was presumably higher. Speed too fast for the conditions and snow, contributed to 3 of the 6 fatalities. A contributing factor in 4 of the fatalities was failing to maintain lane. None of the fatalities involved wildlife. 4 of the fatalities occurred in low or no light conditions. 4 of the fatalities involved trucks. 2 of the fatalities occurred in close proximity to milepost 372. 2 others occurred in close proximity to milepost 382. 1 fatality involved alcohol. None of the fatalities occurred at an intersection.
The fatality data does not seem to reveal any systemic deficiencies in road design but rather human error. While two fatalities did occur near Grave Yard Flats Road (MP372), the circumstances were entirely different. Further, the fatality data does not seem to support the ITD purpose and need statements related to travel time and delays or congestion. The data supported reducing speed and methods to reduce incidents of failing to maintain lane. Rumble strips, for example. Snow removal was important to reducing fatalities but this is not a design issue. Wide shoulders (a design standard) may have helped in one case.
US 20 Injury and Property Damage Accidents 2015-2019
Last week Ken’s Korner reported on fatality incidents on US 20 from approximately Ashton to the intersection with SH 87 near the Montana border. The incident data, provided by the Idaho Transportation Department, revealed that there was no trend toward more fatalities in the 2015 through 2019 timeframe. (The analysis was done by the Island Park Preservation Coalition.) This week the same data is examined by IPPC to determine if there is a trend toward more injury and property damage incidents in the same time period. As stated last week, the spreadsheets provided by ITD contain over 12,000 cells and therefore it takes some time to analyze the data.
The spreadsheets reveal the following: 2015 – 60 incidents, 25 injury and 41 property damage; 2016 – 50 incidents, 26 injury and 27 property damage; 2017 – 87 incidents, 41 injury and 65 property damage; 2018 – 81 incidents, 34 injury and 68 property damage; 2019 – 48 incidents, 16 injury and 41 property damage. Note that one incident could involve multiple vehicles and people. The incidents peaked in 2017 and then declined. This data reveals no trend toward increased incidents. In fact, 2019 had the lowest number of incidents, 48.
Injuries are categorized as A, B, or C in the spreadsheet. These are defined as follows: Injury A – Incapacitating . Any injury, other than a fatal injury, which prevents the injured person from walking, driving, or continuing normal activities. Includes severe lacerations, broken or distorted limbs, skull or chest injuries, abdominal injuries, unconscious at scene, and/or unable to leave the scene without assistance. Excludes momentary unconsciousness. Injury B – Non-incapacitating (visible). B Any injury, other than a fatal or incapacitating injury, which is visible to observers at the scene of the collision. Includes lump on the head, abrasions, bruises, and/or lacerations. Excludes limping (the injury cannot be seen). Injury C – Possible (complaint, but non-evident). C Any injury reported or claimed which does not fall in the other categories. Includes momentary unconsciousness, limping, complaint of pain, nausea, hysteria, and/or claim of injuries. None of the injury categories showed a general upward trend toward more injuries. Injuries are not becoming more severe based on this data. Further, increasing traffic does not appear to be causing more crashes. ITD did not provide any incident data to IPPC for 2020 or 2021. This past week, ITD stated publicly that 2021 was one of the deadliest years on Idaho highways.
ITD has stated that the Planning and Environmental Linkages (PEL) process will identify and analyze US-20 between Ashton and the SH-87 Junction and will look at ways to address the following deficiencies: travel time and delays, congestion, safety – specifically, with the goal of reducing the number and severity of crashes, and outdated design standards. The incident data (provide by ITD) for 2015 through 2019 does not appear to show an increase in the number of incidents nor the severity of these incidents.
US 20 Wildlife and Domestic Animal Incidents 2015-2019
The last two weeks Ken’s Korner reported on fatality and injury/property damage incidents on US 20 from Ashton to the intersection with SH 87 near the Montana border. The incident data, provided by the Idaho Transportation Department, revealed that there was no trend toward more fatalities or injury incidents in the 2015 through 2019 timeframe. This week the same data is examined by Island Park Preservation Coalition (IPPC) to examine wildlife and domestic animal incidents in the same time period. As stated previously, the spreadsheets provided by ITD contain over 12,000 cells and therefore it takes some time to analyze the data.
The spreadsheets reveal the following: 2015 –25 incidents, 21 wildlife and 4 domestic animal, 5 involved injury; 2016 – 12 incidents, 10 wildlife and 0 domestic animal, 2 involved injury; 2017 – 31 incidents, 28 wildlife and 3 domestic animal, 3 injury; 2018 – 35 incidents, 34 wildlife and 1 domestic animal, 5 involved injury; 2019 – 19 incidents, 19 wildlife and 0 domestic animal, 4 involved injury. The incidents peaked in 2018 and then declined. This data reveals no trend toward increased animal incidents. In fact, 2019 had a low number of incidents, 19. 82% of the animal incidents occurred in the dark, suggesting that a lower nighttime speed limit may reduce these incidents. It would certainly reduce the severity of the incidents. Severity is mentioned in ITD’s original purpose and need statements.
When looking at the design of US 20, it is important to know where the wildlife and domestic animal incidents are occurring. There are many ways to look at the data in ITD’s spreadsheet. For this analysis, US 20 was divided into five segments and the number of incidents for each segment was determined as follows: Ashton to Antelope Flat Road (~9 miles) – 46 wildlife, 1 domestic animal; Antelope Flat Road to Pine Haven Drive (~8 miles) – 20 wildlife, 2 domestic animals; Pine Haven Drive to Last Chance (~5 miles) – 12 wildlife, 2 domestic animals; Last Chance to Sawtelle Road (12 miles) – 20 wildlife, 1 domestic animal; Sawtelle Road to SH 87 (~8 miles) – 2 wildlife, 4 domestic animals. Clearly the 9 mile section of US 20 from Ashton to Antelope Flat Road has the highest number or wildlife incidents, 46. 35 of the 46 incidents involving wildlife, occurred from about 1 mile south of the top of the Ashton Hill to about 1 mile north of the top of the Ashton Hill. This would be an ideal place for a reduced speed limit during animal movement and nighttime lighting. The trucks are already moving slower in this area.
There are dozens of more ways to look at this data. A detailed, peer reviewed, accident study would do that.
Moving The Goal Posts?
Why is the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) conducting a Planning and Environmental Linkages (PEL) study of the US-20 corridor between Ashton and the ID-87 Junction. ITD data shows that this study will cost $6 million dollars over 2 years. (That money could fill a lot of potholes.) The answer to this question may be that ITD did a very poor job on planning the Targhee Pass project in Island Park. The public was left out of the process while out of state and out of the country conservation organizations were deeply involved and even produced data for ITD to use in the planning process. 4 out of 5 Voters in Fremont voted to oppose wildlife overpasses and fences on US 20 in Fremont County and that likely has not changed.
What is a PEL process. “Planning and Environmental Linkages (PEL) processes help weigh the benefits and impacts of proposed transportation system improvements to the environment, community, and economy during the transportation planning process. The purpose of PEL is to coordinate statewide and transportation planning with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process to streamline project delivery.” PELs are apparently rare in Idaho. This is like a “do over” in Island Park following the Targhee Pass Project. Will Island Park residents and Fremont County residents have the resolve to say no again and fight for what they want for US 20? We will see.
According to ITD, “the PEL process will identify and analyze US-20 between Ashton and the SH-87 Junction and will look at ways to address the following deficiencies: travel time and delays, congestion, safety – specifically, with the goal of reducing the number and severity of crashes, and outdated design standards.” ITD incident/crash data (2015 to 2019) does not show a trend toward more incidents.
ITD stated that: “the PEL will look at preliminary concept alternatives that can be implemented as funding becomes available. Using public input, and data from the traffic and other scientific studies, the project team will develop concept level alternatives for the corridor.” ITD had provided no new data or reports until February 2022, after the alternatives workshop in Island Park. This new report is a must read and Ken’s Korner will report on it next week. You will not believe the conclusions.
Recently, ITD stated that: “traffic studies will be updated often throughout the PEL process to reflect the vibrant and changing nature of the population traveling the highway.” No traffic studies or accident studies were provided at either public meeting in Island Park nor to the Island Park Preservation Coalition.
Last week ITD stated: “The range of alternatives were screened (meaning evaluated) to determine whether or not they meet a number of criteria related to the Draft Purpose and Need including the following: Improves safety and reduces congestion, minimizes environmental impacts, accommodates future traffic needs”. Compare this to the purpose and need statement (see above) presented at the public meetings. Are the goal posts moving?
Disappointment In IP
On February 24, 2022, the Idaho Transportation Department posted a status update on the US-20 Ashton to SH-87 planning. This was a significant update because it contained a “Preliminary Traffic Operations Report”. The Report is based on data that is four years old. The data was collected by JUB Engineers in “September” 2018 for most of the road segments from Ashton to SH-87. No traffic data was collected from Ashton north to Sheep Falls Road nor from Island Park Lodge north to SH-87. JUB Engineers applied a “fudge factor” to the data to predict traffic volume for the high traffic months of June, July, and August because their data was collected in September. Horrocks Engineers, who authored the traffic study, also applied a “fudge factor” to the data to “project” the 2018 data to 2021. This factor was a linear 3.4% per year increase in traffic. So they added about 10.2% (a guess) to the traffic volume on the road segments.
It is very disappointing that ITD elected not to share the JUB Engineers traffic data at any of the public meetings held in Island Park or Ashton. This was critical data. It is even more disappointing that ITD held the road design alternatives workshop in Island Park and Ashton prior to publishing the Preliminary Traffic Operations Report. This was critical information that could have been used by the public to suggest alternatives. Adding to the disappointment is the fact that ITD has done the first “down selection” of the alternatives without public involvement. In addition, the public was told that ITD was “starting from scratch” on this project but is now using old data from 2018!
This report was authored and stamped by Benjamin Burke from Horrocks Engineers. Mr. Burke is a former employee of ITD District 6 and was involved in the controversial Targhee Pass Project on US-20. The report uses the horizon year of 2050. Yes, 28 years into the future using 2018 data. The report is based on 3.4% traffic growth for 32 years. No justification is provided for projecting 3.4% growth for the next 28 years, only the first 4 years. The conclusions are based on the four peak traffic months, not on the yearly average. The peak traffic hour of the day was also used to make the traffic volume look worse.
It is very important to review the conclusions and recommendations that were made in the Preliminary Traffic Operations Report by Horrocks Engineers. They are as follows: “Many of the existing US 20 project segments currently meet the recommended minimum standards for LOS (Level of Service). However, as traffic volumes increase, the LOS of more segments will drop below the minimum standards. In the horizon year of 2050, most segments will not meet the minimum standards for LOS without increasing the number of lanes. Improving the highway to a four-lane configuration will bring the LOS up to, or above, the recommended minimum standards for most of the segments. For those segments that are still estimated to operate below the recommended minimum LOS with the added lanes, minor adjustments to the roadway characteristics, including increasing the free-flow speed and decreasing access density are recommended.”
So let us summarize what we know: the traffic data is incomplete and old, the planning year (2050) is 28 years away, the traffic growth rate is not based on any facts after 2021, peak traffic months and hours were used, the level of service with the current road is OK now, the report calls for a four lane road, increased speeds, less access, and road configuration changes, ITD has done a preliminary down selection of alternatives with no public involvement, the JUB Engineers data was withheld from the public at the workshops, etc. The Island Park Chamber of Commerce and the Island Park Mayor and City Council better read this report. It has profound implications for our community. (More on Horrocks Engineers next week!)
Phony Calculation
Last week Ken’s Korner introduced you to a “Preliminary Traffic Operations Report” for US 20 between Ashton and SH 87, produced by Horrocks Engineers, for the Idaho Department of Transportation. This traffic report was based on incomplete data from 2018 and “fudge factors” were applied to project the data to 2021 and 2050. 32 years into the future. Horrocks did traffic projections for the highest traffic summer months and the highest traffic hour. Read last week’s Ken’s Korner for details on the suspect assumptions.
This week we will examine how Horrorks Engineers calculated the level of service (LOS) for 24 US 20 road segments between Ashton and SH 87. There are 6 levels of service, A thru F. A is the best service and F is the worst. For US 20, ITD wants a level of service of B for rolling rural areas and C for mountainous areas. To get the 2021 traffic density, they increased the 2018 traffic data by 3.4% linearly based on one traffic camera located near Sheep Falls. So, in 10 years, the traffic would increase by 34% and in 32 years it would increase by 108.8% using this approach. Horrocks Engineers used the McTrans Highway Capacity Software HCS7 to calculate the LOS for the 24 road segments for the years 2021 and 2050. The calculation is based on physical highway features, like lane width, and the “peak” traffic volume among other things. Horrocks Engineers concluded that in 2021 only 7 of the 24 northbound segments meet the minimum LOS and 10 of the 24 southbound segments meet the minimum LOS. In 2050 only one northbound segment and no southbound segments would meet the minimum LOS. Remember that in 2050, ITD predicted that traffic will be 108.8% higher than 2018.
Now let’s look at whether the computer program provides good predictions of the level of service for the 24 road segments. The best way to do this is to look at Figures 7 and 8 in the report and look at the calculated speed in 2021. The computer program says the average travel speed in Last Chance is 29.1 mph northbound during the peak hours, 32.9 at Ponds Lodge, 30.4 at Elk Creek, 29.8 at Mack’s Inn, 30.2 at Sawtelle, and 31.2 at Valley View. Think back to 2021. Did you ever drive thru these areas at these low speeds in 2021? If you did, you would likely have a tourist or a semi driving up your tailpipe! The point is that the computer program is generating ridiculously low travel speeds. This results in poor predictions of the level of service for these and other segments of the road. Further, it leads to justifying a four lane, high speed highway thru Island Park and possibly bypassing local businesses. One can only conclude that this traffic report is flawed. ITD should conduct a new traffic study, with real data, not calculated data, before committing 10’s of millions of dollars to this project. Let’s get it right. No phony calculations and assumptions.
Moving Goalposts Again
Three traffic studies/reports have been completed for US 20 roughly between Ashton and SH 87. The first was completed in 2006, the second in 2019, and the last in February of 2022. Each study used a different method to determine the traffic volume to be used to determine the level of service for the road. The best way to understand the different methods is to read quotes from the studies.
The first quote is from the 2006 study written by HDR Transportation Engineering: “Perhaps the most challenging issue confronted during the US 20 corridor planning process is the widely fluctuating traffic volumes. This fluctuation results from a higher than average seasonal variation in use, which reflects the primary summer recreation-related uses on and through the corridor. Traffic volumes reach an annual high in July and a low in January. Permanent traffic counters recorded traffic volumes in July as approximately 98 percent higher than the annual average daily traffic, and in January, traffic volumes drop 52 percent below the annual ADT. This puts summer volume highs at approximately five times greater than winter volume lows.….. A significant factor in determining appropriate improvements is the assessment of Design Hour Volume (DHV). Design Hour Volumes are commonly calculated using the 30th highest hour for the roadway, typically around 85 percent of the peak hour of traffic for the road on an annual basis. However, on US 20, the 30th highest hour is well over 90 percent of the peak hour for the road due to the makeup of the traffic using the highway (i.e. seasonal and weekend traffic). This creates concerns that improvements planned to accommodate DHV’s using this method will likely exceed the routine capacity needs for the corridor and would not support ITD’s goal of context sensitive design…. To address concerns that recommendations should be appropriate for the majority of the corridor’s traffic volumes and context sensitive, an alternative methodology was used. The Alternative Capacity Analysis method for calculating DHV is described in the AASHTO Greenbook and multiplies the average of the top three hours on the corridor by 50 percent. This analysis may or may not yield a lower traffic volume, but it should provide a LOS result that is more reflective of the actual traffic situation. This methodology is called out specifically for use in the situation where a highly seasonal use roadway is being analyzed. For the US 20 corridor, it was determined that this method would be used…...”
The second quote is from the 2019 traffic study done by JUB Engineers, Inc.: “The 2016 plan states that it captures the summer recreation period by using the 30th highest hour methodology in determining the design hour volume. The 30th highest hour volume calculated in the 2016 plan was higher than the design hourly volume used in the 2006 study, which can be attributed to the methodology applied in each study, as well as a 30% increase in traffic volumes on the study section of US 20 since the 2006 study was completed.”
The third quote is from the 2022 traffic study completed by Horrocks Engineers: “Traffic data used to calculate the Level of Service was collected in 2018 and a 3.4% linear growth rate was applied to each location to project to the year of 2021 and to the horizon year of 2050. Because this roadway has high seasonal fluctuations in traffic volume, the peak hour volumes were selected based on the average four highest months (June-September).”
Do you see how the goalposts moved? The first study said it was inappropriate to use the 30th highest hour methodology. The second study used this methodology. The third escalated the design traffic volume by using the peak hour volumes for June to September. Why should you care? The third and last approach will result in gross over design of US 20 and will be used to justify a 4 lane, high speed highway through Island Park. It will result in significant environmental damage.
ITD’s Big Lie to Island Park
Over the last few weeks Ken’s Korner has been publishing analysis of documents received from the Idaho Transportation Department regarding US Highway 20 from Ashton to SH 87. Conclusions from the analysis have been reported here. The plan was to continue this process in an effort to inform people about potential changes to this segment of US 20. That plan was turned upside down when Governor Brad Little announced we would be getting a four lane highway. That public statement now brings into question if ITD has circumvented the legal process for making these decisions. The governor has never once come to Island Park and asked us what “we” wanted. Is this representative government?
During the first public meeting on this potential highway project, we were told that ITD was “starting from scratch”. This statement was made after there were many complaints about the process used for the Targhee Pass Project on US 20. We are “starting from scratch” was not the truth. Apparently, according to the Governor, we are getting four lanes. If you believe there was a misunderstanding during the Governor’s campaign stop in Ashton last weekend, then read the following quote from ITD’s February 2022 traffic operations report: “Many of the existing US 20 project segments currently meet the recommended minimum standards for LOS (level of service). However, as traffic volumes increase, the LOS of more segments will drop below the minimum standards. In the horizon year of 2050, most segments will not meet the minimum standards for LOS without increasing the number of lanes. Improving the highway to a four-lane configuration will bring the LOS up to, or above, the recommended minimum standards for most of the segments. For those segments that are still estimated to operate below the recommended minimum LOS with the added lanes, minor adjustments to the roadway characteristics, including increasing the free-flow speed and decreasing access density are recommended.”
The people of Island Park and Ashton attended ITD’s US 20 alternatives workshop in December 2021, in good faith. We were asked to provide our input, thoughts, and solutions/alternatives. However, according to the Governor and the traffic report, a four lane was already the recommended solution/alternative. The traffic reports were withheld from the public at both public meetings. It was not until February 2022 that ITD posted three traffic studies on their US 20 website. The third report was dated February 2022, but all the data (real data) used in this report and the Passing Lanes report was old. Some data, dated back to 1993, when the speed limit was 55 mph on this section of highway. The important point is that the alternatives workshop would have had far different results if ITD would have fully disclosed the detailed traffic information with the public. They did not! Were we starting from scratch? You decide. Were we deceived? You decide. Were decisions already made? All evidence looks like it, but you decide. The good news is that this project cannot go forward without completing the NEPA process. Now is the time to build coalitions to strongly influence this project and get what Island Park wants for the Caldera. The other good news is, this is an election year. Politicians may want to listen to you. Imagine Island Park, a recreational community, with a four lane, high speed freeway right through the middle! This freeway will allow little access to local businesses. Will they survive? The “longest main street in America” will be gone. Not a pretty picture!
US 20 Accident Rate
Accident data provided by the Idaho Transportation Department reveals that there is no trend for more fatality or injury accidents on US 20 between Ashton and SH 87. Research also reveals that the accident rate is below the Idaho average for a road of this type. This was reported in Ken’s Korner several weeks ago. Now we learn that the accident rate on US 20 between Ashton and SH 87 is far below the national average. This is documented in an October 18, 2019, J-U-B Engineers, Inc. report to ITD. The report is titled “US 20 Passing Lanes – Revised Existing Conditions and 2042 No-Build Traffic Analysis (Part 1)”.
The report states the following: “Crash Data & Analysis. J-U-B completed a crash analysis using the latest available 5-year (2013-2017) data. A summary of the crash data is included in Appendix C. Based on the data collected, there was a total of 183 crashes within the study area, equivalent to an average crash rate of approximately 47 crashes per 100 million average vehicle miles traveled (AVMT) between 2013 and 2017. Segment 1 (MP 369 - MP 377) had 67 crashes with a crash rate of 59.1 crashes per 100 million average vehicle-miles travelled. Segment 2 (MP 377 – 387) had 66 crashes with a crash rate of 42.9 crashes per 100 million average vehicle-miles travelled. Segment 3 (MP 387 -MP 395) had 50 crashes with a crash rate of 40.5 crashes per 100 million average vehicle-miles travelled. The crash data analyzed is summarized by severity and crash type in Figure 2 and Figure 3, respectively. The overall study area crash rate and individual segment crash rates are significantly lower than the U.S. and State Highways year 2017 statewide average crash rate of 154.5 crashes per 100 million VMT. The crash rates are also lower than the year 2017 average crash rate of 87.36 crashes per 100 million AVMT for rural roadways (both interstate and non-interstate) in Idaho during this same time period.”
Let that sink in! The crash rate on US 20 is over 3 times less than the national average for a road of this type! It is not even close! Remember that ITD’s purpose and need statement led us to believe that the crash rate was going up and that this was a significant issue. Were you misled? You decide. Also remember that you were told that congestion is an issue. Is it? This issue will be examined next week plus a look at conflicts of interest for contractors.
Connecting the Dots - Conflict of Interest
The following is an Idaho Transportation Department request for proposal. Note that this includes Targhee Pass and does not stop at SH 87. “REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR US20 CORRIDOR FROM ASHTON TO TARGHEE PASS PROJECT NO. A023(229) KEY NO. 23229. May 19, 2021. US20 Corridor from Ashton to Targhee Pass. GENERAL INFORMATION PROPOSAL The Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) is seeking qualified and experienced respondents from interested firms to submit a proposal to provide project planning and development services for the US-20 Ashton to Targhee Pass in Fremont County. Final design through PS&E services and Engineer of Record services may be included under a separate phase or contract, at ITD’s sole discretion.” It is critical to note that this “planning” contract can be expanded to include design and engineering services. So the bigger the project scope, the more money the contractor can make. You can make a lot more money from a 4 lane road design than from a 2 lane road design. This allows the “fox in the hen house”. The same company (Horrocks Engineers) that is predicting higher traffic volumes on US 20, can profit from these questionable predictions. Remember this quote from the February 2022, US 20 Ashton to SH 87 traffic study: “Traffic data used to calculate the Level of Service was collected in 2018 and a 3.4% linear growth rate was applied to each location to project to the year of 2021 and to the horizon year of 2050. Because this roadway has high seasonal fluctuations in traffic volume, the peak hour volumes were selected based on the average four highest months (June-September).” This approach results in a very liberal method of determining design traffic volume. This method is much more liberal than in the previous two traffic studies. This results in very suspect determinations of inadequate levels of service for the roadway.
Did you connect the dots? Can the same company responsible for the traffic study profit from predictions of higher traffic volumes on US 20 from Ashton to Targhee Pass? The answer is absolutely! The more complex the road design, the more money that can be made by the contractor.
There is recent history, in Idaho, of contractors profiting in similar ways. Consider the following from an Idaho Statesman investigative report: — Companies that are responsible for checking the quality of Idaho’s road materials have altered the results of their asphalt tests thousands of times, government documents show. Those changes may have allowed contractors that repair and build Idaho’s highway infrastructure to get bonus payments when they should have been penalized for substandard work — or even forced to tear up the asphalt and replace it…..Most of Idaho’s tests are performed by private contractors, since the state cut back on resources it needed to run them in-house, said Bill Fogg, a senior technician who retired from ITD in 2016. “In my opinion, especially towards the end (of my career) there, and I flat told management there ... ‘You guys have given the keys of the hen house right into the fox’s hands, because you privatized too much of this,’” Fogg told the Statesman in an interview in January. (One of the companies that was investigated by the federal government, was Horrocks Engineers, according to the Idaho Statesman.)
Informing The People Of Island Park/Fremont County
Over the past few weeks Ken’s Korner, with help from the Island Park Preservation Coalition, has been studying Idaho Transportation Department planning documents for US Highway 20 between Ashton and SH 87 near the Montana border. A total of 10 Ken’s Korner articles have been written with the observations of this study effort. This was a time consuming process because of the volume of information that was reviewed. The purpose of this article is to summarize the observations so that you may be better informed on US 20 planning and understand the issues. The observations will be provided in a numerical listing for your convenience and easy use. 1. Traffic accident data (from a 12,342 cell spreadsheet) from 2015 to 2019 shows no trend toward more annual fatality accidents. The rate is or about average for Idaho. The data does not seem to reveal any systemic deficiencies in road design. 2. The same spread sheet shows no trend toward more annual injury or property damage accidents and no increase in the severity of these accidents. 3. The ITD data do not reveal a trend toward more annual wildlife or domestic animal accidents. (My conservation friends believe the ITD data underestimates the number of animal accidents. The ITD data is “reported” accidents.) 4. ITD changed the purpose and need statement which focused on accidents to include the environment and future traffic needs. 5. ITD did not share two traffic reports with the public at the public meetings in Island Park. Information from a third traffic report, that was published in February 2022, was also not shared at the public meetings but the information was likely available. This third traffic report has many very questionable assumptions and used a bogus computer program to predict levels of service on the highway. This report also calls for a four lane road, increased speeds, less access, and road configuration/alignment changes. 6. The “Preliminary Traffic Operations Report” included totally bogus predictions of level of service in Island Park. This is evident from the ridiculous speeds calculated by the bogus computer program that was used. During peak hours, this program calculates ~30 mph speeds in Island Park in 2021. Nonsense. 7. Three different methods were used to predict traffic volume for use in designing the highway. The first method was conservative, the second method used a common approach, and the third (2022) used a very liberal approach resulting in lower predicted levels of service. 8. Island Park was told by ITD that they were starting from scratch on the design of the highway. That was not true. There was a traffic report in the works that recommended a four-lane, high speed, limited access highway. The governor announced a four lane highway during a campaign stop in Ashton. 9. Accident rates on US 20 from Ashton to SH 87 are lower than the Idaho average and significantly lower (3 times lower) than the US average. 10. Can the same company responsible for the traffic study profit from predictions of higher traffic volumes on US 20 from Ashton to Targhee Pass? The answer is absolutely! The more complex the road design, the more money that can be made by the contractor.
ITD will likely hold another US 20 Ashton to SH 87 public meeting in May 2022. Hopefully the information provided here and over the last 10 weeks will make you a more informed participant.
What Do You Want For The US 20 Highway Design
There will likely be another meeting on US 20 design alternatives (Ashton to SH 87) in May of 2022. Ken’s Korner has provided information to help you prepare for this meeting and support the alternatives you want. This project will cost 10’s of millions of dollars to design, build, and work through the NEPA process. The design year is 2050. This is 28 years into the future. There is a lot of time to consider alternatives and get it right the first time. One thing you should ask for, as tax payers, is the completion of a multi-year traffic study that is based on real measured data, not on fudge factors, computer programs and incomplete data.
ITD has already down-selected to 22 alternative highway designs. You were not involved in this process nor were our elected officials. Ken’s Korner asked for the alternatives list but was told it would be available at the meeting in May. How can we prepare for the meeting if we do not know the alternatives chosen for us by ITD? Ken’s Korner has filed a public records request with ITD, requesting all information associated with ITD’s down-selection meeting. State law requires that this information be provided in a timely manner. You will be kept informed on the progress of this request. You need this information to be an informed citizen and debate alternatives.
So what highway design do you want? Consider the following: Is a no build option best at this time or maybe a modified no build design where a passing lane is added or an intersection is slightly modified to reduce congestion on the peak traffic days? Remember traffic volume on US 20 is low most of the year and most hours of the day.
Let’s ask another question. Why should we oppose a four lane, high speed, limited access road in Island Park? Here are some answers for you to consider: it will divide our community, result in high speeds, result in wildlife overpasses, there will be fewer access points to businesses, there will be difficulty crossing the four lane for ATVs and snowmobiles, may result in bypassing IP in some areas and result in loss of business, much more environmental damage will be caused by four lanes including more damage to wet lands, imagine the environmental damage when building four lane bridges at multiple river crossings (premiere fly fishing rivers) , there could be a negative impact on Yellowstone Cutthroat Trout, there will be a much, much higher initial cost, there will be higher maintenance costs, there will be higher snow removal costs, you will lose the historic “Longest Main Street in America”, etc. I am sure you can think of many more reasons to oppose a four lane, high speed limited access highway through Island Park and the greater Caldera.