Idaho Transportation Board Subcommittee on


State Highway System Adjustments


January 18, 2006



Idaho Transportation Board Vice Chairman Jack Combo, and Member Monte C. McClure (Subcommittee Chair), Local Highway Technical Assistance Council (LHTAC) Administrator Joe Haynes, Deputy Director/Transportation Planning Administrator (TPA) Charles Rountree, and Chief Engineer (CE) Steve Hutchinson met at 3:20 PM on Wednesday, January 18, 2006 at the Idaho Transportation Department, Boise, Idaho. Garry Young, Senior Transportation Planner; Scott Frey, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA); District 6 Engineer (DE) Tom Cole; Assistant District 4 Engineer (ADE) Scott Malone; Secretary to the Board Sue Higgins; and Lance Holmstrom, LHTAC were also present.


Addition of FHWA Official to Subcommittee. TPA Rountree said a recent issue regarding jurisdiction of a state highway right-of-way resulted in the discussion to communicate more effectively with FHWA on relinquishments. He suggested inviting Scott Frey to the Subcommittee meetings to ensure FHWA’s issues are addressed before any relinquishments are made to the state highway system instead of after the fact.


Member Combo supported the recommendation and commented that it would be helpful to get FHWA’s perspective on some of the issues the Subcommittee addresses. Mr. Haynes added that FHWA’s involvement is applicable to the secondary system too.


Mr. Frey summarized the working relationship he has with Mr. Young. He is willing to attend the Subcommittee meetings, as he believes it is important for FHWA to be aware of and concur with Board action rather than be informed of actions already taken.


The consensus of the Subcommittee was to appoint Mr. Frey to the Subcommittee as an ex-officio member. Board Policy B-09-06, State Highway System Adjustments, will need to be revised to reflect this change. ACTION: Rountree; DUE: July 2006


Board Member Gary Blick joined the meeting at this time.


Review Rating System. Based on an earlier discussion, Mr. Young revised the rating system to allow more points for the economic criterion when rating routes for addition or relinquishment to the state highway system. The maximum allotment for Economics was raised from 11 to 20. Because very few routes on or off the system use the Interstate System Continuity criterion, this item would be eliminated except when such a route would require this criterion for consideration, in which case an extra 10 points would be assigned. For most cases, there would be a total of 100 points possible, but if the Interstate System Continuity criterion needs to be considered, a total of 110 points would be possible. He provided information on how currently-rated routes would be impacted with this change.


Mr. Haynes said his Council has been briefed on the current system. He would like an opportunity to review the revised rating system with the Council.


The consensus of the Subcommittee was to have Mr. Haynes discuss the revised rating with the Council and all of the Subcommittee members to review the proposal and provide comments to Mr. Young.  ACTION: Subcommittee members; DUE: March 2006


Possible relinquishment of SH-79, City of Jerome, District 4. CE Hutchinson said staff has been negotiating with the City of Jerome on the possible relinquishment of SH-79.


City Engineer Scott Bybee presented the City’s request:

1.   the true cost of chipping and sealing the road in 2010;

2.      the true cost for roto-milling and an asphalt overlay;

3.      maintenance equipment: six-wheel dump truck with sander and snow plow, and a lawn mower;

4.       traffic signal at South Lincoln (SH-79) and I Street and South Lincoln and D Street if warranted by January 2011;

5.      funds to create a “boulevard” on South Lincoln; and

6.      repair current deficiencies prior to the agreement taking effect.


The proposal is for the entire stretch of SH-79, from I-84 to Main Street, approximately three miles.


ADE Malone provided the District’s comments on the proposal.

1.      estimated cost: $100,000;

2.      project is programmed in FY06;

3.      estimated cost: $135,000 for both pieces of equipment;

4.      estimated cost: approximately $300,000 each;

5.      possible source of funds: Enhancement Program; and

6.      other repairs could be completed by state forces


In response to Chairman McClure’s question on negotiations, Mr. Bybee replied that the City and District have been discussing various proposals for several years. Chairman McClure questioned the dump truck for the under three-mile route. He asked if it is currently landscaped and who is maintaining the landscaping now. Mr. Bybee replied that there is currently grass in the landscape. The City maintains the landscaping at the I-84 interchange and the City and District work jointly on the maintenance of SH-79. CE Hutchinson added that I-84 is ITD’s priority in that area; SH-79 is a priority for the City.


Member Blick also questioned the request for equipment. He added that other than funds to create a “boulevard”, the proposal includes items that ITD would be taking care of.


Member Combo expressed interest in relinquishing SH-79 if it is not too costly. CE Hutchinson added that SH-79 does not function as a state highway.


The consensus of the group was to have the District and City of Jerome continue negotiating on the relinquishment of SH-79 and to prepare a memorandum of understanding for the Subcommittee to consider. ACTION: Hutchinson;  DUE: May 2006


Possible relinquishment of SH-25. CE Hutchinson said there is no new information on the status of SH-25. Mr. Haynes said he will meet with the local officials to discuss this route. ACTION: Haynes;  DUE: May 2006


Possible relinquishment of SH-33, City of Rexburg and Madison County, District 6. DE Cole said he met with local officials recently to discuss SH-33. A similar proposal to SH-79 was discussed, as the officials looked at the upcoming needs of the highway. He provided a history on this issue. With the extensive growth occurring in and around the City of Rexburg, the City thought it may be advantageous to control jurisdiction on SH-33 in Rexburg, its Main Street.


Mr. Holmstrom said he facilitated some meetings on this route. Two options were explored. The first option realigns SH-33 in that vicinity with US-20, providing SH-33 business routes for the Cities of Rexburg and Sugar City. Both the City of Sugar City and Madison County expressed concerns with maintenance issues related to this proposal. The other option is to re-align a portion of SH-33 from Rexburg north to US-20. This would eliminate the state highway in Rexburg and ITD would assume jurisdiction of a portion of county road to provide connectivity back to US-20. It would not change jurisdiction of SH-33 for the City of Sugar City. CE Hutchinson said that the second option does not relinquish mileage from the state’s system; it only removes the route from within Rexburg.


DE Cole said his preference is the first option. He will continue working with the impacted local officials before exploring the second option further. ACTION: Hutchinson/ Haynes;  DUE: May 2006


Mr. Young asked if it may be feasible to retain the route but not sign it as a state highway/business route.


Possible relinquishment of SH-64, District 2. Mr. Haynes reported that during the last election, there were no changes to the Kamiah Highway District commissioners; therefore, there continues to be no local interest in obtaining jurisdiction of SH-64.


2400 West State/Local Agreement, District 4. CE Hutchinson said staff is still negotiating with the City of Twin Falls on the state/local agreement for 2400 West. Once Phase I of the US-93, Twin Falls Alternate Route is completed, he believes progress will resume on the agreement. In the interim, the District will work with the locals on maintenance and related issues.


Possible addition of Wendell to Hagerman Highway, District 4. District 4 forwarded a request from the Hagerman Highway District to the Subcommittee requesting another rating be completed on the Wendell to Hagerman Highway to determine if it is eligible for addition to the state highway system. The earlier material Mr. Young distributed indicated the route was reviewed in 2002 and scored 63. With the proposed new rating, emphasizing economic importance, the route rated 67.


Mr. Haynes said this proposal also impacts the Wendell Highway District. He suggested contacting those local officials to determine their interest in relinquishing the route.


CE Hutchinson said he does not believe the route functions as a state highway. He suggested 1) contacting both highway districts to ensure their interest in relinquishing the route, and if so, 2) ITD will do a traffic count on the route and possibly another rating. ACTION: 1) Haynes 2) Rountree;  DUE: 1) February 2006 2) May 2006



The meeting adjourned at 5:00 PM.





Respectfully submitted by:



Idaho Transportation Board