HomeMy WebLinkAbout1958-07-09Meridlen Cit
Meet ca1L6d to o
Ha.Il 1
and
thc u
to
Yea.
Bld of thc
with
for
I.leyes at
3 ea
thc
b.
Pitlsn re a.
Famcrls
ldrick
ea.
t ea
f
soft dec to scnt th
Board B st H Iliil-1 hes
St atc
Clulf ssked a9ao to r
d to erLend thc 1
w.Dion res nedc I
u trc houses to t
to hese trc houseg.
and scconded 1dr
ounc tho rc ueSt of on xlcst Pinc eve trc
to be hooked to the seue Ilne 8t lcaEt 8 5r linc and
ant rratcr gcrvicec 8190 both r & serer to bc to
atl esgment forned t Attornc at thc of
ick 5caYeaBrour I ea
hat ttion ras ro da b R.E
It. lbtion Pesaed.
for hcu rida trash heul
seconded W.S. Brom
accSenttScrvicc bc acoe
thet bc rotalned cJand 0ions and
drick
forand oollcctloa tcn. Motion Passcd
secondcd l{.s.hat t
theansu?8nec co o ctrthcIn
$sion and insurc {r1land
c be authorizcd to
the Screr Plant
lon ras made -lr8.n
ssed.id Stre & Bower Avcnuo. Motlrlarchousa area on Mc
Meettobefore the Councsanebeno other
ourned.stood
}tayor:
a
II
I
I
,l
ODII
perm:
p3ascc r
I
I
I
I
I
q
In accordance wlth Or.dlnance No.95
d,eallng ylth the renoval of trash and garbage^. fDoEthe Clty of Mer1d.1an, lAahs.lle, tbe Sanltary Senrlce rleh to submlt thefollowln8 b1d., to the Mayor and the Clty CounclL ofM€rld.lan, Idaho.
S1ngle fanl1y resldence ( curaddltlonal 25/tor cartT outs o
r alry) $1.25 per no.5 feet or leas.
bof7
Multlple duelllngs three unlts or leas
$1.25 for flret unlt.
$1.OO each ad.dltlonal unlt.
Multlple dre1lln6 four unlts or rnore ( curb or aIIy ).$1.25 for the f1r8t can.75/ eacn addltlonal. can.
Connerclal Rates per uonth ( curb or a1ly) .
..On6 plck up per re6ki
$1.e5 for flrst oan and ljl eaoh atLdttlonal oan.
,Multtple plck up per r€ck;
S1.25 flrst can and 751 eacn adalltlornl plck up day roqulrcdl.
'15y', second can and 751 acA addtltlonal plck up day requlnea.
( curb on ally).
1.OO per yard.
Rate by the hour or yard,
v.hl chever 1s the Br€ater.
Bulk
Bulk
(
(
llght welght
heavy relght )
)
Rate by the hour;
S5.OO for one Ean and tnrck.
$?.oo ror tvo man and tnrok.
& ot noney to be retalnEd by clty of llerldlaa for
coIl.ectlng an&, h11llng sariloc.
r &rclosed packer typo tnrek to be uEed.
Sanltary Serv
-2/r/4.4-D
f Ultn nr0s. I.Li.Str Sr,raV I0r.
2508 Ponl St.
Boise, I daho
June 5, 1958
r. lioyor anal UeEbr'rs of Council:
Subject: Bid on Garbage Collection.
iiesidential and Cosmercial conbinel.
The gcrrice rill be conducte,l tm (e) t,ines reekly
the yeaf &round on all resi{ent,ial occounts. Scrvice yill
be conrlucted oue (f) tiue Caily for commerciol or rec;uesteC
neet,ing buildiags. (tlerluest,ed by Ua.yor a,nd Council. )
0O,ia!it.aC hL .PrrlUr.J:
The nonthly price on conmercial &ccount3 rill be ar-
rived a.t, or e $5.15 per rrorking hour. The tine rill be
kept separately on eaeh account, per day. Iine per etop rill
be Ceterminei a,fter one reek of serrice. Iu this Borlner,
?e can give tbe business accotrDt, o feirer price as a,n iniivi-
dual .
CoNl*IiiuLJ:
Trenty (zo) to thirty-tro (az) gellon galvaoizeJ..
Lach residence requireC t,o have one of the above bar-
rels for trash. rin a,d.litional brlrrel for extra, such as:
yar:l trionings, gra.ss, so,!, ashes, or any snall yar,l trasb
vill be included in bclor chorges.
-Y(ICr.S:
I
2
ilesi,lence:
Apartoeats:
iI.25rDrtts
F"4 "d "r'rg".l,t-
il. 25 per nonth.
'll. 25 I' I' f irst account,.
.75 all rent,ed units.
Barrels as ne, ede il.
i)uplexesl rtl.25 per rnonth first, unit.
per nonth secord B,nd additioDol
g'-y' M4 /1
( z)
CIIY Ur' l",..il.rl,lr:
Collection by city------eech month.
Trenty (eO) per cent of nonthly collections for trash
gerrice t,o city for collcct,ing.
Collection of trosh t,o be handleil in sanitery equip-
nent approyed by city; again by Heelth Depertrnent.
All suggcstions by ldayor a^nd Council pcrtoining to a
sa,nitary and health progrBrn .luo to collection of trash,
grotefully accepterl luring periorl of contract.
Thcre *ill be no collecting of trash on folloring rloys:
l. Nenorial Day 4. Thanksgiving
2. Fourth of July 5. Christmas
3. Labor Day 6. Ncr Yea,rs Day
Tha.nk you for your consideration a.n 1 tinc.
Sinc erely,
Kenneth a,nd Clerence Pond
2508 Pond St reet,
Boise, Ida,ho
f,.,.a1, P*^'0
ffi*
-BOISE VALLEY INTERSTATE
ROUTE ANALYSIS
Prepared by
State of Idaho
Department of Highways
Planning & Traffic Division
In Cooperation with
U.S. Department of Cornr-nerce
Bureau of Public Roads
June, 1958Boise, Idaho
ir
!
BOISE VALLEY INTERSTATE
ROUTE A}IALYSIS
SYT.IOPSIS
The Bolse Valley IntersEate route analysls is llmlted
to a control point eoutheagt of Bolse at the nouth of what
is cor:raon 1y called Isaacs Canyon and to a control polnt
approxluately four nlles northwest of Caldwel1, in the
viclnity of Desert Junctlon. The analysis is consldered
ln all elght locatlons ag shcrwn on the attached print.
These routes were reduced co three by virtue of more obvious
reasoos whlch rendered thera trneuitable to the location of
an interstate highwal' through the Boise Va1ley. The renain-
lng routes are described as follows:
(1)
(2)
(3)
Central Valley Route
Ridge Route
Boise to Nar:)pa Route
(Line
(Line
(Line
2)
4)
7)J
Prirnrily, it wa8 considered that these three lines net the
baslc criteria of lnterstate Locatlon and could, therefore,
qualtfy for further study. The criterla nay be sur.r:arized as:
(a)connect as directLy as posslble
the r:iaxirrr:cr nurrber of c ities of
various population groups .
(b) p rovide maxin',rcr service t o;,princ i-
pal metropolltan areas .
(c) traverse nost populous band of
lural territory.
-1-
.,.:,,
I
(d) have their principal termini in
the larger citles and aLso pass
en route through or very closeto the denser clusters of pop -
(e)Best serve our National Defense.
(f) traverse t.o the maxirmrm extent
possible areas having a high
density of rnotor vehicl-e ownet-
ship.
THE FIND IN GS THI S REP ORT ARE BASED UPON THE EVALUAT.
ION OF ?HE FOLLOWING:
Origln and Destination Data
Traffic Volurnes
Roadway Capacity
Road User Benefits
Improvement Costs
Acc iden ts
Inventory of existing routes
Land Use & Projected Development
THE FINDINGS LISTED BELOhI:
L The desire lines of traffic are shown on Figure I. The,najor desire characteristics are as follows:
1. The prlncipal focal point of alltraffic in the Boise Valley is direct-
ed to Boise.
2, Major desire lines in order of thelr
magnitude are:
Caldwell to Nampa
Meridian to Boise
Boise to Desert Junction
Ca1dwell to Boise
Nanpa to Boise
3. Traffic characteristics shor., that:
a. Nine out of ten cars will stop
in Boise.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(s)
(6)
(7)
(8)
a
b
c
d
e
-2-
ulation .
.'i:
r I :1 .i
;!i
--. .1 :,.... -.
I ."."-. ..."'"
b. Four out of ten cars will stop
ln Naopa.c. Slx out of ten cars will stop
in Ca1dwel1.
II. Trafflc assignnents imedlately west of Boise shows
that the following volur;res will be expected to use the
lnterstate highway ln 1975.
Central Valley - 14,6C0 Average Daily
Ridge Route - 8,480 Average Daily
Nanpa to Boise - 13,450 Average Daily
T:raf f io
Traffic
Traffic
III. A conparisoD of Beneflts to Coste are sturnarlzed ln a
table attached. ?his table should be clarlfied by lndicat-
ing that:
1. The three routes under consideraticin e6sentia11y
traverae irrigated land which is very sinil r ln
propetEy value with the exceptlon of an urban penetrat-
.!.' .i ion into Boise.
2. Construction Ccsts are identical for the rural
portLons cf che highway. Lower total construction
costs for Ltne 4 ls due to the total By-Pass of Bolee.
3. Road User Srvlngs are reflected ln two srays,
nalnly, eewing Eraf f ic and savlngs in dlstance.
Line 4 ie km ln vohne and also out of direction,
consequentll, lon ln road user savings. Line 7 on
the other hand ls high in volurne and r^rhlle sonewhat '
out of dlrectioo provides a substantlal increase i.n
road user eavings. Line 2 is rnost direct with
-3-
1
2
3
.1.i ..,,., -:
ll
I ', i.):'
\J \/
essentially the sarre volur.re as line 7, therefore,
lt results in the hlghest road user savings.
IV. Accldent Reductlon Sovlngs is directly related to
assigrnent of traffic to the lnterstate. Therefore, llres
2 and 7 have the highest savings due to accident reductlon.
V. An evaluat ion of the existing land use, future develop-
ment of the area and present hlghway systen shows:
1. Bolge Vall.ey is an extensively lrrigated area
which ls subJect to contlnual subdlvlslon necessary
tc support an lncreased euburban populatlon.
2. Present developuent of the area shorrs extenslve
suburban developuent pru,jected llest and Souchwest fror:r
Bolse.
3. Present East West Htghways that ser:\re the Bolse
Valley include US 20 and SH 44 on elther slde of the
Boise River on the Northern extrenity of the Va11ey.
US 30 prorrides a central route stralght west frocr
Boise to Nanpa and then Northwest to Caldwell. The
renaln ing half of the overatl irrigated area ls served
by a nuober of cormty seccndary routes.
4. Rlght of Way ls bd.ng purchased at the present
tine for the constructlon of a four lane divided
highway between Boise and Meridlan on US 30.
-4-
"::
!:
FRO}I THE ABOVE FINDINGS THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE STUDY ARE
RESOLVED AS FOLLOIIS:
1. The lntergtate highrray should penetratc the
CIty of Boise in order to serve trafflc.
2. MaJor traffic deslre llnes between valley cotrr-
nunities show Justificatlon for bending of through
traffic to Berve 1oca1 needs.
3. By-Pass flgures show JuetificaEion for present
By-Pass of Nanpa and Caldrrell and future By-Pass of
Boise.
4, There is very llttLe dlfference to the assignnents
of traffic <;n lines 2 md 7.
5. A conparlson of Bcnefits to Costs favor the
Central Va1ley Route or Line 2.
6. Line 7 provldes the best balance to the exlsting
hlghway systeLr. Thls takes into account the develop-
raen t of US 30 bctween Cole School and Meridian to a
four laoe expressway as planned by the depar&aent
and also rellevln8 the need for any major hlghway
lnprovenen t between Merldian and Nanpa.
7. Line 7 wlll nore nearly extend along the develop-
nent pattern of projected euburban extension South-
west of Bolse, providing fast and safe cormtrter
gervice .
-5-
j
: .t i
:.'. _. ;-
.il
v\7
8. Line 7 llee between two ltrportant Valley feed-
er routes , narlely, Franklin Road and Overland Road ,
whlch will very adequatly serve the interstate as
frontage roads and/or coLlector rcutes.
9. Line 2 disrupts suburban developnent a1o'ng preeent
US 30 in and adj acen c to Meridlan and would require
the construction of a longer connecting route to
serve Nampa.
FROM A STUDY OF THE FINDINGS AND A}I EVALUATION OF THE
CONCLUSIONS.IT IS CONSIDERED TI{AT THE FOLI,OIJING RECOMMENDAT-
ION TJILL BEST SERVE THE BOISE VALLEY TRAFFIC rlND CONTINUE TO
PRESERVE AND ENSURE THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMET]T OF TITE AREA.
1. The adoptton of line 7 ls the nost suitable route
for lnterstate locatton through the rural section of the
Boise Val1ey.
2. That line 7 be temlnatcd for the present at a
polnt ldest of Cole Road where the rolte turns north-
east to penetrate the City of Bolse.
3. Further study be made of the intenlal trafflc
needs wlthin the City of Bolse and surrounding Met'
ropolltan Area.
4. Al lgnnen t for thc future Bolse By-Pass should
be flrned and Rlght-of-tlay designated for prlor pur-
chase of a controlled access facllity whlch rray be
-6-
\rv
desiBnated Interstate or Primary at a later dater
depending upon the outcoEe of the Boiee l,letropolltan
Study recorrrended in Iten 3.
5. The present four lane divlded facillty through
Caldwell, which was built by Interstate funds s orae
years a8o, should be brought up to current Interstate
Standards.
6. An interchange to be provlded between Caldrell
and Nanpa ln the vicinity of SH 72 or what is nore
cor.f,ionly knom as Karcher Junctlon.
7 . Narrpa to be ser:\red by two lnterchanges, one West
of Town at the approxinate intersection of the sugar
Factory Road, and East of town where US 30 lntersectB
the recor:mended lnterstate locatlon.
8. Meridian to be served by an interchange on SH 69
or the Kuna Road .
9. Other transfer points, grade separationo and
otructures to be located on flnal location and deslgn
as requlred to best serve trafflc and land use.
-7-
., :t 1.; '
,>
BENEFIT . COST SUMMARY
Line 2
(Cent,raL Valley Route)
Line 4
(Ridge Route)
Line 7 Line 8
(Nanpa-Bolse Rt) (combi::it""(
Road User Cost (Existlng)
Road User Cost (Proposal)
B enefit
Total Inprov. Cost
AnnuaL Cost
B/c Ratlo
Length (Miles)
$45 , 119 ,696
$42,434,289
$ 2,685,4O7
$25,225,9OO
I 1,334,182
2.OL
36 .9
$45 ,119,696
$43, 598 , 197
$ 1,443,868
$20 "025,700
$ 1,115,287
1.30
35 .1
$45,LLg,696
$43,082,019
i 2,037,677
$25,729,500
$ 1,354,917
I .50
37 .8
$45,LL9,696
$43,045,064
$ 2,O73,532
$27 ,729,500
$ 1,468,917
t.4l
37.8 + 8.1
(By Pass)
(
I
i
j