HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-13-2010 - 3ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: May 13, 2010
Action Agenda
Item No.
SUBJECT: Orange County Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) Update
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Follow-up Report to 02/02/2010 BOCC Meeting
(Including Attachments 1a through 1d)
2. Orange Unified Transportation Board
Recommendation
3. Advantages and Disadvantages of Potential
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karen Lincoln, 245-2594
Craig Benedict, 245-2592
Actions
PURPOSE: 1. To receive information requested at the February 2, 2010 BOCC meeting
regarding development of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan; and
2. To explicitly endorse a course for proceeding with the Plan.
BACKGROUND: The BOCC, on
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
explicit endorsement by the Board.
provided in Attachment 1:
• Process for approval
• Regional options
February 2, 2010, voted to continue development of the
with a phased plan for improvements to NC 86 but with no
The following additional information was requested and is
• Assumptions underlying designation of the NC 86 as a strategic highway corridor
• Relationship of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan to the Orange County Land Use
Plan
• What is being contemplated to include public comment before the approval of the
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
The Orange Unified Transportation (OUT) Board, at its meeting on April 21, received notification
from the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Planning Division 7 that it was
unwilling to support the County's proposal for a phased construction plan for "unscheduled"
improvements to NC 86.
Orange Unified Transportation (OUT) Board Recommendation - In response to NCDOT's
unwillingness to support the County's proposal, the OUT Board unanimously recommends the
Board of Commissioners explicitly:
• Endorse the principle of strategic highway corridors;
• Proceed with development of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan to include NC 86 as
a strategic highway corridor; and
2
Make a statement to the North Carolina Department of Transportation stressing the Board
is 1) troubled by the Department's use/requirement of a particular design for all highways
designated a strategic highway corridors, as every area is different and a "cookie cutter"
design may not the best way in every instance to achieve mobility to meet traffic needs;
and 2) concerned also that the Department dictates a design for the corridor without local
input and prior to any contextual planning studies for the corridor improvements.
Notes from the OUT Board's meeting are provided in Attachment 2 for additional context.
Attachment 3 lists several advantages and disadvantages of the two options for proceeding with
development of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan. The following are the key advantage
and disadvantage taken from this attachment:
Adopt a CTP showing NC 86 as a
Future Ex resswa Delay CTP Development to Request
Chan a of Facilit T e
Major Advantage NCDOT recognized multi-modal If request is approved by the Board
transportation plan will facilitate the of Transportation, the CTP will
process for programming all modes better reflect the County's vision for
of transportation projects requested northern Orange County
b the Count
Major Disadvantage There is no guarantee that the There is no guarantee that the
Board of Transportation will, in the Board of Transportation will approve
future, approve the change of facility the change of facility type for NC 86.
type for NC 86.
If the County, in coordination with NCDOT, develops a CTP and the County does not adopt the
transportation plan, the County will not have a NCDOT-recognized CTP for planning and
programming transportation projects. NCDOT may in the future require a mutually adopted CTP
for federal-aid projects.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The Comprehensive Transportation Plan will require planning staff
resources, but can be completed with existing staff.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board:
1. Receive information requested at the February 2, 2010 BOCC meeting regarding
development of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan; and
2. Explicitly endorse a course for proceeding with the Plan.
Attachment 1 3
Follow-Up to BOCC February 2, 2010 Meeting
The BOCC, on February 2, 2010, voted to continue development of the Comprehensive
Transportation Plan with a phased plan for improvements to NC 86 with no explicit endorsement
by the Board, and requested specific information regarding:
• Process for approval
• Regional options
• Assumptions underlying designation of the NC 86 as a strategic highway corridor
• Relationship of the comprehensive Transportation Plan to the Orange County Land Use
Plan
• What is being contemplated to include public comment before the approval of the
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
The following responses help clarify the Comprehensive Transportation Plan process including
opportunities for public input, the Strategic Highway Corridors Vision Plan assumptions and
relationship between the Land Use Plan and the Comprehensive Transportation Plan.
Process for approval. Orange County must adopt the Comprehensive Transportation Plan
before the North Carolina Board of Transportation will consider it for adoption. The BOCC must
hold a public hearing prior to adopting the plan.
Regional options. Attachment 1(a) is a map of Pittsylvlania County, Virginia, and Caswell,
Person, Alamance and Orange Counties in North Carolina showing the major transportation
routes. NC 86 is the most direct route, and the one that traffic will continue to use, from the
metropolitan Danville area to the Chapel Hill/Durham metropolitan area. Transferring traffic
through other existing corridors in northern Orange County would also negatively impact the
rural character of the County.
Assumptions underlying designation of NC 86 as a strategic highway corridor. Attachment 1(b)
is a Strategic Highway Corridors Reference provided by North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) staff that worked on the project. The document makes specific
reference to NC 86, and indicates how NC 86 characterizes primary criteria used to designate
the strategic highway corridors. Those characteristics include:
• Mobility -Serves long-distance and/or regional travel including long haul trucks (is a
truck route), tourists, and other motorists passing through a region.
• Connectivity - Provides a vital connection between activity centers Durham-Chapel Hill-
Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization (Durham/Chapel Hill area, Research
Triangle Park, Raleigh-Durham International Airport, the University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill and UNC Hospitals, North Carolina Central University, Duke University and
Medical Center) and Danville, Virginia (Danville Metropolitan Planning Organization).
• Interstate Connectivity -Provides an important connection between existing interstate
(140/85 at Hillsborough) to Future I-785/US 29 in Danville, VA.
Relationship of the comprehensive Transportation Plan to the Orange County Land Use Plan -
The relationship between land use and transportation is noted in the relationship/links to the
goals and objectives of the relative elements of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan.
Attachment 1(c) is the full text of related goals/objectives from the Land Use Element and the
Transportation Element of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan abbreviated below.
Attachment 1
4
Comprehensive Plan Goals/Objectives
Land Use Element
Objective LU-1.1
Coordinate the location of higher intensity
development with existing or planned
adequate supporting infrastructure such as
public transportation, streets (among others)
Transportation Element
Objective T-3.4:
Direct development to higher density mixed-
use districts along transit corridors and make
necessary multi-modal transportation
improvements to service lands that are slated
for future intense development
Land Use Goal 3:
Coordinate land use patterns that limit sprawl
that are supported by an efficient and balanced
transportation system
Objective LU-3.2:
Coordinate land use patterns to facilitate the
expanded use of non-auto modes of travel, the
increased occupancy of automobiles and the
use of an energy-efficient transportation
system
Transportation Goal 3:
Integrated land use planning and
transportation planning that serves existing
development, supports future development
Objective T-1.1:
Increase the occupancy of automobiles
through ridesharing and other means; and
expand the use of public transit (including bus
and rail), walking, and biking as primary modes
of travel.
Objective LU-3.10: Objective T-1.5:
Identify viewsheds along major transportation Identify prime viewsheds along major
corridors and amend land use regulations to transportation corridors and protect these
protect them areas
Objective LU-5-3 Objective T-2.3:
Develop and coordinate an emergency Increase countywide access for emergency
disaster plan (would involve evacuation routes vehicles, including ways to improve response
appropriate for the need) times, both for existing and new developments
What is being contemplated to include public comment before the approval of the
Comprehensive Transportation Plan. Attachment 1(d) is the timeline for the transportation plan
development approved by the Board in that includes opportunities for public involvement. A
survey to obtain public comment on needs was completed in October 2009. Public workshops
and comment periods will be held prior to development of alternatives to be analyzed, for the
draft recommended plans for each mode, and a public hearing will be held for the recommended
final Comprehensive Transportation Plan that goes to the Board for adoption.
HIGHWAY ROUTES
PITTSYLVANIA COUNTY, VA TO CHAPEL HILL, NC
- _. >a
,- ~a
_ - _ _
-- -
N
~
~_---~
_ ~~. m
_.
~~ ~
- ,:.~~ _~',~
- -
t
~~ ° ~ ~~i~ __
- a
.. a » ._
.. - _ _
_.
1
- - -- --
a u ~ / `-^
~' 1
P
d, Legend
i0 +~ MULTI-LANE
'°
A ~ MAJOR ROUTE
9 STATE ROUTE
US ROUTE
f~i. '' fir.. . r^x~ FJ~'' p r_- ~-• o
Z
b ~
.~'-
I
r
.. 1
2 1 0 3 1 8 8 f0 12
APEL HILL
,.;
4~
s
BOW
14
D
m
w
Attachment 1(b) 6
STRATEGIC HIGHWAY CORRIDORS REFERENCE
NC 86 is designated a Strategic Highway Corridor by the North Carolina Board of
Transportation (BOT). The BOT adopted the Strategic Highway Corridors (SHC)
initiative on September 2, 2004 as a part of the Statewide Transportation Plan.
The purpose of the SHC initiative is to provide a network of high-speed, safe, reliable
highways throughout North Carolina for the efficient movement of people and goods.
These Corridors are critical to statewide mobility and connectivity and promote a vision
of modern transportation, supportive of economic opportunities, and environmental
excellence. The initiative offers NCDOT and its stakeholders an opportunity to consider
long-term vision when making land use decisions and design and operational decisions
on the highway system. The creation of a long-term vision identifies the ultimate
desired facility type (freeway, expressway, boulevard, or thoroughfare) for each corridor.
Following adoption by the BOT, the Secretaries from the North Carolina Department of
Transportation, Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the Department
of Commerce, along with the Governor, signed the Strategic Highway Corridors Policy
Statement. This statement promotes a partnership between the three agencies to meet
the goals of the SHC initiative as described above. Additional information on the SHC
initiative is located at www.ncdot.org/~shc.
The Strategic Highway Corridors were designated using adata-driven approach,
supplemented by historical information and input from other agencies and the public,
primarily through a series of regional forums. One or more of the following primary
criteria characterizes the designation of the corridors:
^ Mobility. This criterion focuses on whether a corridor currently serves or has the
potential to expeditiously move a high volume of traffic. These include facilities
that are vital to the state's and/or region's interest and serves long-distance
and/or regional travel, whose users may be long haul trucks, tourists, and/or
motorists passing through a region.
Connectivity. This criterion focuses on whether a corridor provides a vital
connection between Activity Centers. Activity Centers are defined as
destinations, encompassing statewide, regional, and places just outside of North
Carolina's borders that serve the state's citizens. These centers are the starting
and/or ending point for the movement of people and goods and include the
following:
• Urban Areas with a Population of 20,000 or greater
• State Seaports
• Major Airports
• Major Intermodal Terminals
• Major Military Bases
• University of North Carolina System Campuses
;.
Attachment 1(b) 7
Major Tourist Attractions
Trauma Centers
Interstate Connectivity. This criterion focuses on whether a corridor provides
an important connection between existing and/or planned interstates.
Interstates, as routes of national significance, primarily move people, goods, and
military units between states and across the country.
Interstate Reliever. This criterion focuses on whether a corridor currently
serves or has the potential to serve as a reliever route to an existing interstate
facility. A reliever route is considered to be an alternate facility (typically running
parallel to the facility for along-distance) to the interstate(s). Facilities that
relieve interstates for short distances or are used as alternates in the event of an
incident or construction are not considered Interstate relievers.
Additional elements were also taken into consideration to support the corridor selection
process. These include the following:
^ Hurricane Evacuation Route. This criterion focuses on whether a corridor is
considered a major route from the NC Emergency Management's Coastal
Evacuation Route Map.
^ Cited in a Prominent Report. Certain reports list the need for improvements
along major corridors in the state, mainly to improve economic conditions in a
particular area. One such report is the Rural Prosperity Task Force Report,
completed in 2000, which supports improvements for three prominent corridors in
rural North Carolina.
Part of a Major Highway System. This criterion focuses on whether a corridor
is part of a national, statewide, economic, or military highway system. Major
highway systems include the Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate
and Defense Highways, the National Highway System, the North Carolina
Intrastate System, the Appalachian Development Highway System, and
STRAHNET. STRAHNET is the Department of Defense's Strategic Highway
Network for moving military personnel and equipment.
NC 86 between Durham/Chapel Hill and Danville is designated as Strategic Highway
Corridor # 38. The entire corridor is as follows:
^ NC 86 Truck between I-40/85 and NC 86 in Hillsborough (Orange County)
^ NC 86 between NC 86 Truck in Hillsborough (Orange County) to the North
Carolina/Virginia state line, just south of Future I-785/US 29 in Danville, VA
This corridor connects the Durham/Chapel Hill and Danville, VA areas, a length of
approximately 42 miles.
Attachment 1(b) 8
The Durham/Chapel Hill area is identified as an activity center as it is designated
as the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization (DCHC
MPO), and includes the Research Triangle Park and Raleigh-Durham
International Airport (RDU); the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC-
CH) and North Carolina Central University (NCCU); major tourist destinations
such as Duke University, the North Carolina Museum of Life and Science, and
Durham Bulls Athletic Park; and the University of North Carolina Hospitals (Level
I Trauma Center) and Duke University Medical Center (Level I Trauma Center)
Danville, VA is identified as an activity center as the area is designated as the
Danville Metropolitan Planning Organization.
This corridor connects I-40/85 at Hillsborough to Future I-785/US 29 in Danville, VA.
US 29 continues north to provide additional connections to the Lynchburg, VA and
Charlottesville, VA MPOs. The NC 86 corridor is the primary route between the
Triangle area and Danville, VA area.
The NC 86 Corridor is envisioned as an Expressway, according to the SHC Vision Plan.
The following characterizes an Expressway:
^ Functional Puraose: High Mobility, Low to Moderate Access
^ AASHTO Design Classification: Arterial
^ Posted Speed Limit: 45 mph to 60 mph
^ Control of Access: Limited or Partial
^ Traffic Signals: Not Allowed
^ Driveways:
Limited Control of Access -Not Allowed
Partial Control of Access -One Driveway Connection per Parcel; Consolidate
and/or Share Driveways and Limit Access to Connecting Streets or Service
Roads; Restrict to Right-in/Right-out
^ Cross-Section: Minimum 4 Lanes with a Median
^ Connections: Provided only at Interchanges for Major Cross Streets and At-
Grade Intersections for Minor Cross Streets; Use of Acceleration and
Deceleration Lanes for At-Grade Intersections
^ Median Crossovers: Allowed; Alternatives to All-Movement Crossovers
Encouraged; Minimum Spacing between All-Movement Crossovers is 2000 feet
(posted speed limit of greater than 45 mph) or 1200 feet (posted speed limit of 45
mph or less)
Attachment 1(b) 9
Full Control of Access is defined as providing connections to a facility only via ramps at
interchanges. All cross-streets are grade-separated and no private driveway
connections allowed. A control of access fence is placed along the entire length of the
facility and at a minimum of 1000 feet beyond the ramp intersections on the Y lines
(minor facility) at interchanges (if possible).
Limited Control of Access is defined as providing connections to a facility provided only
via ramps at interchanges (major crossings) and at-grade intersections (minor crossings
and service roads). No private driveway connections allowed. A control of access
fence is placed along the entire length of the facility, except at intersections, and at a
minimum of 1000 feet beyond the ramp intersections on the Y lines (minor facility) at
interchanges (if possible).
Partial Control of Access is defined as providing connections to a facility provided via
ramps at interchanges, at-grade intersections, and private driveways. Private driveway
connections are normally defined as a maximum of one connection per parcel. One
connection is defined as one ingress and one egress point. The use of shared or
consolidated connections is highly encouraged. Connections may be restricted or
prohibited if alternate access is available through other adjacent public facilities. A
control of access fence is placed along the entire length of the facility, except at
intersections and driveways, and at a minimum of 1000 feet beyond the ramp terminals
on the minor facility at interchanges (if possible).
Attachment 1(c) 10
Chapter 5. Land Use Element
Objective LU-1.1:
Coordinate the location of higher intensity /high density residential and non-residential
development with existing or planned locations of public transportation, commercial and
community services, and adequate supporting infrastructure (i.e., water and sewer, high-
speed Internet access, streets, and sidewalks), while avoiding areas with protected natural
and cultural resources. This could be achieved by increasing allowable densities and
creating new mixed-use zoning districts where adequate public services are available. (See
also Economic Development Objectives ED-2.1, ED-2.3, ED-2.10, and Water and
Wastewater Objective WW-2.)
Land Use Goal 3: A variety of land uses that are coordinated within a program and pattern that
limits sprawl, preserves community and rural character, minimizes land use conflicts, supported
by an efficient and balanced transportation system.
Objective LU-3.2:
Coordinate land use patterns to facilitate the expanded use of nonauto modes of travel, the
increased occupancy of automobiles, and the development and use of an energy-efficient
transportation system. (See also Transportation Objective T-1.1, Economic Development
Objective ED-2.3, and Air and Energy Resources Objective AE-8.)
Objective LU-3.10:
Identify prime viewsheds along major transportation corridors and other areas, and amend
County land use ordinances to ensure longterm protection of viewsheds. (See also Natural
Areas Objective NA- 16, Parks and Recreation Objective PR-5.4, and Transportation
Objective T-1.5.)
Objective LU-5-3:
Develop and coordinate an emergency disaster plan and community education program to
increase awareness of the dangers of natural and human-made emergency events and
understand how best to prepare.
Attachment 1(c) 11
Chapter 9 Transportation Element
Objective T-1.1:
Increase the occupancy of automobiles through ridesharing and other means; and expand
the use of public transit (including bus and rail), walking, and biking as primary modes of
travel. (See also Economic Development Objective ED-2.3.)
Objective T-1.5:
Identify prime view sheds along major transportation corridors and protect these areas for
their scenic and natural resource values. (See also Parks and Recreation Objective PR-5.4.)
Objective T-2.3:
Increase countywide access for emergency vehicles, including ways to improve response
times, both for existing and new developments. (See also Services and Community Facilities
Objectives PST-2 and PST-5.)
Transportation Goal 3: Integrated land use planning and transportation planning that serves
existing development, supports future development, and is consistent with the County's land use
plans, which include provisions for preserving the natural environment and community
character.
Objective T-3.4:
Direct development to higher density mixed-use districts along transit corridors and make
necessary multi-modal transportation improvements to service lands that are slated for future
intense development, such as Economic Development Districts.
Task Timeline O ortunities for ublic involvement in red 2009 2010
Development of Orange County Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) ~
w
c.
w
3
~
~
~
Q ~
~
m ~
~
E
d
~
~.
'~", ~
~
. L
Q
~
_
~L
~
=
w
~
Develop CTP Vision:
(Adopted goals and objectives of the Transportation Element of Comprehensive Plan)
Establish Community Vision
Conduct Goals & Objectives Survey -Goals and objectives were established in the
Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, a survey for citizen input regarding
trans ortation needs has been com leted.
Conduct needs assessment:
Collect & project data
b Data collected for 2035 LRTP
~ NCDOT to collect additional data for Orange County and refine model for Orange County
Analyze deficiencies
~ NCDOT to produce deficiency analysis
~ NCDOT, DCHC MPO, TARPO presentation to BOCC
~ BOCC Endorses data & projections
Develo alternatives Hi hwa ,Transit, Bic cle, Pedestrian
~a Public Workshop
~ Public input.
b The OUTBoard will coordinate with pertinent advisory boards
~ CTP Committee develops alternative based on data, public comment from the public
worksho and adviso board comment
DCHC MPO
• Develo Draft MPO CTP
• Release Draft MPO CTP for ublic comment
• Public in ut - ublic worksho sin Durham and Oran a Coun
• Trans ortation Adviso Committee TAC holds ublic hearin
• Pre are recommended MPO CTP
• TAC ado is final MPO CTP includes onion of Oran a Coun within the MPO area
Develop Recommended Orange County CTP
~ Hold' Public workshop
b Present to Advisory Boards for comment
~ Present to BOCC for comment
Develop final plan
~ CTP Committee develops final recommendation
~ BOCC holds public hearing
D
v
n
3
m
a
N
Attachment 2 14
Orange Unified Transportation Board April 21St Meeting Notes Related to CTP Recommendation
The transportation board, at its meeting on April 21, made the following conclusions:
• Traffic is increasing on NC 86.
• NC 86 meets criteria to be designated as a Strategic Highway Corridor.
• Traffic coming from the Danville Virginia area and Caswell County to access the many
attractions in the Chapel Hill/Durham area use NC 86 and will continue to use NC 86 in the
future, regardless of whether the road is improved or not.
• The strategic corridor plan provides along-term vision that prescribes an ultimate design to
accommodate projected future traffic
• Improvements will be made as traffic on NC 86 warrants improvements
• The traffic is not approaching the need for the ultimate design
• There is insufficient right-of-way to construct the ultimate design
• There are no available funds to construct the ultimate design in the foreseeable future
• The Comprehensive Transportation Plan can be updated and amended
• If the County does not adopt a Comprehensive Transportation Plan, the County will be
forgoing planning for transit and bicycle and pedestrian needs.
• There is a legitimate concern that overbuilding NC 86 is not in the interest of maintaining
the rural character of the northern Orange County and the Colonial Heritage Scenic Byway.
• North Carolina Department of Transportation Planning Division has contacted Division 7
regarding a phased construction plan for NC 86 to implement the strategic highway
corridor's ultimate expressway design and Division 7 is unwilling to support a phased plan
for an unscheduled construction project.
• Orange County has two options:
1. Develop and adopt a Comprehensive Transportation Plan with NC 86 designated as a
strategic highway corridor with ultimate 4-lane divided highway design; or
2. Interrupt development of the transportation plan while the County requests a revision of
facility type for the NC 86 strategic highway corridor, from expressway (4-lanes with
median) to boulevard (2-lanes with median).
The transportation board voted unanimously to recommend the Board of Commissioners explicitly:
• Endorse the principle of strategic highway corridors;
• Proceed with development of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan to include NC 86 as
a strategic highway corridor; and
• Make a statement to the North Carolina Department of Transportation stressing the Board
is troubled by the Department's use/requirement of a particular design for all highways
designated a strategic highway corridors, as every area is different and a "cookie cutter"
design may not the best way in every instance to achieve mobility to meet traffic needs;
and
The Board is also concerned the Department dictates a design for the corridor without local
input and prior to any contextual and planning studies for the corridor improvements.
Attachment 3
Advantages/Disadvantages of Endorsing NC 86 as a Future Expressway Versus Delaying CTP
Process
15
Adopt a CTP showing NC 86 as a
Future Expressway
ADVANTAGES
DISADVANTAGES
Orange County moves forward with
establishing a framework for planning
multi-modal transportation
improvements, fulfilling Comprehensive
Plan Transportation Element objective 2
for Goal 3 (Integrated Land Use
Planning and Transportation Planning)
• Multi-modal TIP projects can be
programmed from the CTP (NCDOT
may require in the future)
Changes in NCDOT organization strive
for transparency in transportation
decisions, increasing the County's case
for a future review of the State's
strategic highway corridors and
proposed designs.
• Traffic is increasing on NC 86 and is not
going to use another route, it is better to
plan for the future now
• NC 86 is adopted by the County as a
strategic highway corridor with a future
expressway design
Delay CTP Development to Request
Change of Facility Type
The six-month delay to request an
amendment to the State Strategic
Highway Corridors Vision Plan will not
change NCDOT's priority for developing
the Countys CTP but there is no
guarantee of State Transportation
Planning staff immediate availability to
proceed afterward
• Current 2035 traffic projections for NC 86
north of NC 57 do not warrant an
expressway
• The County may be successful in
downgrading the future facility type for
NC 86 and be more confident in adopting
the CTP
A request to first amend the State
Strategic Highway Corridors Vision Plan
will delay the CTP process for
approximately six months; the County
may have to wait until NCDOT
Transportation Planning staff is available
to resume the study.
• There is no guarantee that the NC
Board of Transportation will approve a
future request to amend the Strategic
Highway Corridors Vision Plan for NC
86
There is no guarantee that the NC Board
of Transportation will approve a request
to amend the Strategic Highway
Corridors Vision Plan for NC 86
If the Board of Transportation does not
approve the County's request for NC 86
design and the County does not adopt
the CTP, the new CTP prioritization
process would give Orange County a low
priority for NCDOT coordination in
developing a CTP (prioritization
considers the last attempt of developing
a CTP)
15