
-01.png)
Screening Process
Level One
Screened concepts for Purpose & Need and reasonability
The study team used generalized land use, planning, geotechnical, roadway engineering, traffic, safety, and environmental data. Concepts that did not meet Purpose & Need or that had a fatal flaw (an impact or combination of impacts that prohibit a concept from being built) were eliminated. Additional Level 1 Screening details are available online: Level 1 Screening
Level Two
Compared concepts using qualitative and quantitative planning-level data
-
Gathered Data. The study team gathered and analyzed refined datasets for each concept, including traffic analysis.
-
Performed Comparative Analysis. The study team used the data to compare each concept's performance against the others, evaluating how well each concept met the study's Purpose & Need, feasibility, and goals.
Results include:
Carried Forward: Considered
reasonable and feasible, and
may be considered for further
evaluation in this study or
subsequent NEPA review and
project development.
Eliminated: Did not meet
Purpose & Need, had a fatal
flaw, or was considered
unreasonable.
Not Recommended: Will
not be evaluated further due
to comparatively negligible
benefits or higher impacts.
Level Three
Will analyze concepts using performance measures to refine recommendations
Concepts carried forward may proceed into further design and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review to identify final recommendations. This study may result in several short- and long-term proposed improvements. Multiple reasonable concepts may advance and will be called alternatives in later phases, which may be funded separately through future projects.
Recap: Level 1 Screening
Carried Forward Concepts/Options
Screened concepts may include one or more options (e.g., intersections, routes, or roadway elements, as detailed on individual concept displays). A total of 141 options were screened.
On Alignment
-
Rural Improvements
-
Shoulder Widening, Passing Lanes, Turn Lanes, Roadway Signage, Wildlife Movement, and Geometric Improvements
-
-
Rural Widening
-
Urban Improvements
-
Access Management, Lane Reallocations, and Signal Operation Improvements
-
-
Urban Walking and Biking Improvements
-
Connection to the Latah Trail, Bike Lanes on Roadways, Enhanced Pedestrian Crossing, and Mid-Block Crossing
-
New Alignment
-
New Corridors
-
Moscow
-
Potlatch
-
-
New Routes for Urban Mobility
-
A Street
-
Palouse River Drive
-
Styner Avenue
-
Eliminated Concepts/Options
-
Mountain View Drive to 6th Street
-
Mountain View Drive to D Street
-
Marked Crosswalks
-
The Urban Walking and Biking Improvement Concept was carried forward as an element
-
One specific option, Marked Crosswalks, was eliminated
-
Level 2 Screening Criteria
Purpose & Need
Reduce Congestion
-
Reduce congestion in downtown Moscow
-
Improve roadway capacity
-
Reduce travel times between Lewiston and Coeur d'Alene
Enhance Regional North-South Connection
-
Provide a regional north-south connection that is not impacted by street parking
Accommodate Walking and Biking
-
Accommodate safe, multimodal facilities and connections through downtown Moscow
Promote Safety
-
Provide a facility that corrects geometric deficiencies in accordance with ITD standards
-
Improve intersection safety, including at the US-95/3rd Street intersection or US-95/SH-8 intersection
-
Include design features that have the potential to reduce crashes
Feasibility and Goals
Community
-
Avoid and minimize property impacts
-
Minimize property impact costs
-
Support local and regional planning efforts
Environmental Resources
-
Avoid and minimize impacts on the built environment resources
-
Avoid and minimize impacts on the natural environment resources
Implementation
-
Connect with future projects
-
Consider ease of implementation (permitting, construction complexity, duration)
-
Consider the ability to proceed with phased implementation