The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda - 05-17-2011- 8dORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: May 17, 2011 Action Agenda Item No. 8 - d SUBJECT: Orange County Comprehensive Transportation Plan Deficiency Analysis DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: 1. Map of Future Highway Deficiencies Karen Lincoln, 245-2580 2. PowerPoint Presentation Craig Benedict, 245-2592 3. Revised Time Frame PURPOSE: To consider endorsing assumptions and data projections used for developing the deficiency analysis for highways. BACKGROUND: Orange County, in June 2009, approved a resolution endorsing a comprehensive transportation planning study for Orange County. The study is being completed through a coordinated effort of the Orange Unified Transportation Board, Orange County Planning, the Triangle Area Rural Planning Organization, the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization and the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT). A Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) Steering Committee, comprised of representatives of those groups, has completed the following actions: • Held a public workshop to kick-off the process (September 2009) • Conducted an on-line public survey (October -November 2009); • Collected current traffic data and projected future traffic (August 2010 -October 2010) • Analyzed traffic growth rates to use in final data projections (November 2010) • Prepared a highway deficiency analysis (November -December 2010) • Held a public input meeting on the deficiency analysis (February 2011) Although not represented in the CTP Steering Committee, the Burlington-Graham Metropolitan Planning Organization (BGMPO) has opportunities to comment. County and NCDOT staff apprise the BGMPO Transportation Planning Manager of any transportation plan developments. CURRENT SITUATION: The steering committee is now ready to develop alternatives to be considered in the Draft Transportation Plan. The committee seeks approval to develop plan alternatives based on the deficiency analysis, i.e. the assumptions and data projections used to develop it. Next steps include: 1. Develop draft transportation plan for all modes; 2. Seek public input, advisory board comments; and 3. Present to BOCC for comment/direction before developing final plan for public hearing. 2 Attachment 1 is a highway deficiency map illustrating future volume-to-capacity ratios for year 2035. Attachment 2 is a copy of the presentation. Attachment 3 shows the anticipated time frame for completing the transportation plan. 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 the presentation; and 2. Endorse the deficiency analysis to be used in developing alternatives for the draft transportation plan. Orange County Attachment1 3 BORN ° n ~ _.. O,p y ~ a 'q9 ,, P w c 9 3 o~ C. ~ _ q_ S ~ ~ dqE~ yo A ~ ,.t ~ ~. ~ F ~ Y F _ LAWS STORE _ mP a ~ q^~ OLIN ~ ~ ~ -_ ,r y~ ~ yi} tt ~ E~ ~c . a TEL RNER CNVR ci y WM OARR ~ ~ YEA SON[`' l'-) ~ F .LONESOME 3 _ - P i ' ~p ~ \ R ( ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ,l _ L 1 ~ 1, ~ti 7 - u' 1 1 ~ . SO H ~. > ;. ff~~ =:_. 2 ' ~ ~ ~ ~ I. y= ! ~ ' ~ ~;~ y. 1 5yQ 10;N10N i - PS i ~Yl ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ W ~ `-~a *a. 1, ~, _ ly ~ ~ • i 1 ^fn 'YN Y- I vd ~. I ~~1~ Ali . l ~ ~~ ti" ~ ,~ ~Vf H ~ 7° . ~. ~' ~ ~~ ~f * ~~ ~ T OA -„~; ~~ .j a - , ~ x(70 _ i - x ~ -. ~ .~sa ~.. - ~ .. . ~1 it l _ i `~ g ~ ~+ ~ oM`' 4~0 o~U ~' I ~ 4 fi -_ , - _' ~_. ~ ,x y m . r _. r ll ~ ~ ~ i ~' - v $ ~ MTNVR MINN~ ^{ ~;~ 1. '.'=4 f' '}~`_ c ~ ~ 0 ~ 3 '.k J ~ m ~ li { o o ~~ >F ~l t_ .,. .. ~ W i ~ ~ ~ ` ~ ` - ~ T ~ `h'.. 1 ,\ l -ltlE3 15 S Ji ~J _ ~~ ~ .r. -Il 4H3 , - ; , ! ~' r q} ~ , t S°i ~i L - w ; _ "I ~~, y~g~GQ f +y... Y` ~V~ 1 ~H~p ~ •~ ~' OLD EENSBO • ^+~ 1 ~ ~ T ~ r ;~ ~ ~ 3 l ~ ,fir xa ~ . z _= ` ~ . . ,.. .~ t . - P ' ~ ~ - ~;< ~ -; t ~`~ _ ~ 0 i1v Capacity Deficiency Analysis ° 05 ' Z 203 5 Volume/Capacity Mlles Anticipated Problem Areas for 2035 (V/C) Map Under Capacity (V/C = 0 - 0.7) N ~~`~ , cee Near Capacity (V/C = 0.8 - 0.9) ®~ A • •~ W E Over Capacity (V/C = (1.0 +) ~ 0 Municipal Boundaries s . e<<g `e~e~, Municipal ETJ COmprellenSlVe Burlington-Graham MPO Transportation Plan Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro MPO Capacity Deficiency 4 Orange County Comprehensive Transportation Plan *Rural Area t~pf NORTH C1q r Oy h~ Y c z 0 t 99~`~'orm1.N~0.P May 17, 2011 ®``es` ~ c°trr A u °<<4 date"~ 1 Overview • ~ Review: What is a Comprehensive Transportation Plan? • What has been accomplished so far? - Goal: get your input and consensus on the data • What are the next steps? Slide NCDOT Transportation Planning Branch 5 MPO / RPO Areas TARPO = Triangle Area Rural Planning Organization Slide Reminder: • This plan is for RPO area • Encompasses no municipalities ~,~ ,~ ~ I~' ~ ~ ~ r ~, ~,<~ ,~_r. ,~'~. ~ z i Mebane ' ~-'"` Hillsborough ~ ~~ ~- ~., ~ ~~ i ~~~-~.+ __ Chapel Hill ! ~~ ~ t ` ,. Slide_ Study Area 4 2 6 What is a CTP? (Comprehensive Transportation Plan) • Updated process for transportation planning - Orange County Thoroughfare Plan, 1990 (not adopted) • Long-range (25-30 years) • Multi-modal • Fiscally unconstrained (no funding or priorities) • Purpose/Objectives... - Reduce traffic congestion and improve safety - Identify existing and future problem areas - Generate information decision-makers can use to guide future transportation dec~~deons 5 What is a CTP? • Incorporates local interests, community goals, and statewide needs in one common plan • Developed by steering committee with representation from NCDOT, Orange County planning, OUTBoard, and Triangle Area RPO - Coordination with surrounding MPOs and counties • Adopted/endorsed at 3 levels - County (adoption) - MPO/RPO (endorsement) - State (adoption) Slide 6 3 7 What is a CTP? • Multi-modal - Highway, Public Transportation, Rail, Bicycle, Pedestrian • Final plan is comprised of... - A map set of recommendations for each mode - A written report for documentation ~~ Why Develop a CTP? • It's the law - GS 136-66.2 • Recommendations address future travel demand -not just for vehicles, but for all modes - Ensures that data and projections are in place to support projects - Informs future land use planning and corridor protection • Documentation is customer-friendly and easy to update • Awell-informed public - Public workshops are included - Local officials are regularly updated ~ :~~' -Plans available on NC®~T website 4 8 Typical Sequence of NCDOT Project Development 0 PLANNING PROGRAMMING DESIGN RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION -CTP STUDY -: STIP DA7A LAND BIDDING ---------~-~~~~ PDEA- COLLECTION PROCUREMENT PROCESS RPO PROJECT PRIORITIZATION EVALUATION ALIGNMENT SELECTION EASEMENT NCDOT BOARD ENVIRONMENTAL ATTAINMENT AWARDS PROJECTS DOCUMENTS TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC CONTRACT PRESENTEDTO ALTERNATIVE FACILITY DESIGN ASSISTANCE CONTRACT NCDOT BOARD STUDIES ESTIMATESB ADMINISTRATION FOR STIP OUANITIES LEGAL ACTION CONSIDERATION PUBLIC COMPLETED INVOLVEMENT PROJECT 23 YEARS UP TO 7 1-2 YEARS 1-2 YEARS 1-2 YEARS YEARS Slide 9 CTP Progress Roadway Network Data Collection Public Surveys d' ~ . Traffic Growth r Rates Traffic ' Projections ~~r ~..I+ Capacity Deficiencies J, Public ' -' Drop-in We are here (HIGHWAY) 5 9 ~T -, ~ ~ t ~ i ~ : ` .~~ -- - r Roadwa ~': y ~ Network Map ~ ,~. yr _ ;. =All the roads chosen to v !' study and gather data ~ -- ~ i~ _ y j ~~ ~ ~ ,~ -~ ' ~~ t ~ f cr t D~~T gg,,, 1loatlrw, NwwoA 'Y~` Slide Onnga County ~ .......... mror~wn Growth Rate Map • Begins with the roads in the studied network • Gather historical traffic count data - Date back to 1990 - Committee reviews the various growth rates for each road, and decides on a final rate based on local knowledge (usually 1-3% per year) - Final growth rate is used to project the current traffic counts to the horizon year (2035) Slide 6 10 Growth Rate Map i .._.^- r_ .r- - .. L _ a :' ~ l } ~ i ' !/ ti' 1. ~+ , ~ 1 , r ~ , ,, l ~ ~~~- j' ~ l - ~ ' ~ , ~~ j ~ ~._~ .~ ~ ; ` „ ~ ~ ~,~-- ::i __:, ..:r~..~. l~L/ ~~de a.~. coumy ...`.. oa~«»ns~.. oa~cort.non n.n Capacity Deficiencies Map (Volume/Capacity Map) • Objective: target and analyze the future problem areas (to create solutions on the final plan) • Capacity =how much traffic a road can hold (Based on attributes such as speed limit, lane width, number of lanes, etc.) • Deficiencies =problem areas • Projected traffic is compared to the road's existing capacity ~ "Volume/Capacity Ratio" ~ V/C ratio = 1 when road is AT capacity Slide 14 7 11 - ---- ; ~, --f ,, .. ~ ~. ! 1 °- ~ ~' P + r--~ -~ ; i Vol u me/ ~ ` ~ ~`~~.~~` ; i Capacity j - _ Map ,R =Where the problem I~sry'~' ~ ;' areas could be `t ~~ (just a starting point) ~ __ .. s_~, ~~ ; e I _--..! -u.l4.cbN~Cly _ . MaP -Qxr G~p:siryifA~) ~CauYyNa~wey Ml~cv/WMic~ ~fa~T. 44~~ ~~bWy r rrte~, ~~.. Oran9•rn•"l 5 dn+.n CaipMnsM T'rspalNbn Nan Street Appendix (Spreadsheet of data for all the roads in the Network) _. ___ _~_t_„_ _-..__. s ,. __~ _ _ F n 16 8 12 How is this data used? • Examined and reviewed by committee to ensure it is valid, consistent, and complete • Compared to travel demand model volumes • OUTBoard input • Public input • BOCC input - Get your endorsement of the data ~~~ Slide ' Caswell County = -;-~ ---- I _ Person County = CTP complete ~~~ ,~ I J ~ CTP complete ~°-` 1, `~ Burlington it ~ ~ ~ f Durham-Chapel Graham +~ r . Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan +, `~> q~ , ~,f `r ~ Metropolitan Planning ~' ~ ~ Planning Organization ~ Organization (BGMPO) _ l (DCHC MPO) _ CTP complete ~ , CTP in progress _~;/ 1. r~-~~ ~~ ~'~~ ~' ~` ~.. Triangle _ ~ - ~ Area Rural > ~~~ ~ Planning ` i__` ;~ ___~ ;` cnatham County = Organization ~ '--------- '---- - CTP in progress ~TARPO~ Stu~f Area ,8 9 13 Public Participation and Input Public informational session held in Fall 2009 Public survey distributed in Fall 2009 -Nearly 500 responses Public drop-in session ,- ., :; held February 7, 2011 ~ ``~ ~~% . ,~ -Attended by a number ~~ - .j~.. of interested citizens -~--•~~~-~-~~--~~-~ °°-~-~~ Slide 19 10 14 Thank you! Questions? Orange County CTP Website: http://www.ncdot.org/-tpb/planning/orangecounty.html Sarah E. Lee Transportation Engineer NCDOT TPB (919) 707-0946 seleeC~ncdot.gov Scott Walston Triangle Unit Supervisor NCDOT TPB (919) 707-0941 swalston@ncdot.gov Karen Lincoln Transportation Planner Orange County (919) 245-2580 klincoln@co.orange.nc.us Other committee contacts: Paul Guthrie Randy Marshall Nancy Baker Tina Love (TARPO vacant) More info at w sww ncdot.org/~tpb 21 11 DEVELOPMENT OF ORANGE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN (CTP) DEVELOP CTP VISION (COMPLETED) / Establish Community Vision -adopted vision of Transportation Element of Comprehensive Plan (2008) / Goals & Objectives -adopted Goals & Objectives of Transportation Element of Comp, Plan (2008) / Trans ortation Surve -Completed November 2009 2010 2011 2012 CTP TASKS A S 0 N D J F M A M J J A S '0 N D J F M A M J J CONDUCT NEEDS ASSESSMENT - Collect data and project future traffic (NCDOT) - Develo deficient Anal sis NCDOT "~ -k DEVELOP ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS - Public Workshop/Comment Period/Advisory Board input (NCDOT, TARPO, Orange Co.) ' - BOCC endorsement of ro ections and deficiencies, comments Oran a Coun ;~.~;: DEVELOP RECOMMENDED ORANGE COUNTY CTP - Develop Draft Recommended CTP for all modes (Steering Committee) ~~* - Public Workshop/Comment Period/Advisory Board input (NCDOT, TARPO, Orange Ca ~ "'n: .,; - BOCC comments on Draft CTP Oran a Count -; . ~ DEVLOP FINAL ORANGE COUNTY CTP - Develop final CTP (Steering Committee) - Public Hearin on final CTP NCDOT, TARPO, Oran a Coun ~ ADOPTIENDORSE FINAL CTP - Orange County adopts final. CTP ~ - TARPO Endorses final CTP - NCDOT BOT adopts final CTP D rt Ql n rt W ..1