Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda - 06-18-2013 - 7f
1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: June 18, 2013 Action Agenda Item No. 7-f SUBJECT: Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan Implementation — Staff Follow-Up DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: 1. OCBRIP Overview Frank Clifton, County Manager, 919-245-2300 2. Implementation Plan Process Craig Benedict, Planning Director, 919-245-2575 3. Annual Review and Reporting 4. May 21, 2013 BOCC Comments 5. Staff Comments 6. Bus Route Service Options 7. Bus Route Service Implementation 8. Triangle Transit Materials PURPOSE: To compile comments on the materials presented by Triangle Transit at the May 21, 2013 meeting and identify Orange Public Transit (OPT) bus route service options for public outreach and input. More specifically: 1. Transmit formal BOCC comments from May 21, 2013 to Triangle Transit (TT) staff (Attachment 4); 2. Transmit Manager and Planning staff comments to TT staff (Attachment 5); 3. Approve OPT service options for public outreach discussions (Attachment 6, Part A); 4. Approve service options for TT's Mebane-Efland-Hillsborough-Durham regional express route (Attachment 6, Part B); and 5. Pursue a modified public outreach schedule to implement service in approximately 6 months (i.e., January 2014) vs 9 months (i.e., March 2014) (Attachment 7); BACKGROUND: The Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan (OCBRIP) was approved by the BOCC in June 2012. The half-cent sales tax to implement the Plan was approved by Orange County voters last November and went into effect April 1St of this year. The financial model used to create the OCBRIP has been updated where possible, replacing assumptions with actual County revenue data and adjusting the dates of revenue implementation. This has caused moderate adjustments in the numbers for the Plan, while keeping the overall project delivery schedule intact. Planning staff will ask TT that these changes be clearly identified and annotated for long-term reference. MAY 21 BOCC MATERIALS At the May 21 BOCC meeting, TT staff presented its FY 14 (7/1/2013 — 6/30/2014) proposed budget, implementation plan, and timeline as follows: 2 Attachment 1 — FY14 Durham/Orange BRIP Overview; Attachment 2 - Implementation Plan Process for New Transit Service in Hillsborough, Mebane, and Rural Orange County; and Attachment 3 -Annual Review and Reporting Schedule. AREAS FOR BOCC INPUTAND DIRECTION Planning staff is seeking Board input and/or direction in the following areas: • BOCC and staff comments for formal transmittal to TT; • Guidance on whether to accelerate outreach and abridge the implementation timeline to initiate new bus service earlier than proposed; • How much of the available FY 14 funds to use to support existing versus new bus service; • Interest in strongly encouraging TT to implement a full cross county express route from Mebane-Hillsborough-Durham (with a stop in Efland) via US 70 rather than a partial route, Hillsborough-Durham; and • Authorization to collect public input on a specific set of available bus route service options. BOCC COMMENTS AND FOLLOW-UP- Attachment 4 — Summary of key Board comments conveyed at the May 21 BOCC regular meeting. Link to Granicus web stream of meeting- http://orange-nc.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view id=2&clip id=465 STAFF COMMENTS: Attachment 5 — Planning staff has compiled comments on Triangle Transit's proposed "Timeline of Implementation Plan Events", as well as a list of remaining questions and points of clarification that should be noted. BUS ROUTE SERVICE OPTIONS: Attachment 6 — Based on revenues for bus service communicated by TT, Planning and OPT staff have developed several options for consideration. It is suggested that TT and OPT collect public input on these options during proposed outreach events for consideration as the final implementation plan is decided. The BOCC will be the final arbiter of OPT and inter-County regional services. PUBLIC OUTREACH: Attachment 7 — Staff is recommending a modified public outreach schedule to implement service in approximately 6 months (i.e., January 2014) vs 9 months (i.e., March 2014). TRIANGLE TRANSIT (TT) MATERIALS: Following Chair and Vice-Chair agenda review, staff forwarded the abstract and attachments for this item to TT for review. Materials provided at Attachment 8 were received from TT in response. TT also indicated that it would have additional material to provide to the Board at the meeting. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Although this item does not have an immediate financial impact, the associated activity begins a process to expend: • Approximately $6 Million per year of half-cent transit sales tax revenue; • $7 County vehicle registration fees; 3 • Future $3 regional/TT vehicle registration fees; and • Existing regional/TT rental car tax revenues. The Countywide bus program (i.e. Chapel Hill Transit, TT and OPT) grows from approximately $850,000 in year one to approximately $3.7 Million in year five. Other monies are being reserved for an Amtrak station and other park and ride facilities. Additionally, continued development of the Light Rail Transit (LRT) component over the next two years has been estimated by TT as between $30-$36 Million. The OCBRIP for LRT relies on the assumptions of 50% Federal and 25% State funding, neither of which have been confirmed. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board- 1. Authorize the Manager to transmit formal BOCC comments from May 21, 2013 to Triangle Transit (TT) staff (Attachment 4); 2. Authorize the Manager to transmit Manager and Planning staff comments to TT staff (Attachment 5); 3. Approve OPT service options for public outreach discussions (Attachment 6, Part A); 4. Approve service options for TT's Mebane-Efland-Hillsborough-Durham regional express route (Attachment 6, Part B); and 5. Authorize staff and TT to pursue a modified public outreach schedule to implement service in approximately 6 months (i.e., January 2014) vs. 9 months (i.e., March 2014) (Attachment 7). 4 Attachment 1 01`vA vuulP uuo ysa Iv u"1�4I (o hSllu "VIII @m���ll��� �III�n FY14 Durham/Orange Bus and Rail Investment Plan Overview Total Collections $31.1M (Orange - $7.3M; Durham $23.8M) Total Expenditures $16.3M (Orange -$4.2M; $12.1M) Reserve Funds are maintained to fund an operating reserve and support future capital needs Revenue Available for Bus Services (per County Plans): Orange $736K Durham $673K Revenue includes 1/2 Cent Sales Tax, Vehicle Rental Tax and Vehicle Registration Tax, Grants Expenditures include Administration, Personnel, Consultants, Capital and Transit Services FY14 Proposed Budget meets criteria in County Plans and Implementation A ree aent,s FY14 new revenue draft 4 050813_Assumptions for orange 5 FY14 Draft Budget - Durham/Orange Bus and Rail Investment Plan FY14 Forecast Orange Durham Total Revenue: (Received July 1,2013-June 30,2014) FY14 Fcst based on FY 13 yr end estimate-4% 1/2 Cent Sales Tax 6,283,620 21,730,640 28,014,259 increase in Orange;3%in Durham TReceived July 1,2013-June 30,2014);50% of total collections=$4.5M Orange-10.1%;Durham-20.7%based on 2012 census data;FY14 assumed at 2%growth over Rental Tax 456,375 935,343 1,391,719 FY13 yrend estimate (Received October 1,2013-June 30,2014); FY14 assumed at 2.0%growth in Orange and $7 County Registration Tax 577,071 1,139,764 1,716,835 2.5%in Durham over FY13 year end estimate $3 Regional Registration Tax increase 0 0 0 Pending legislative action Grants/Other 0 0 0 Total Collections 7,317,066 23,805,747 31,122,813 Admin Costs ("75,000 (75,000 (1�)o,000t Operating and capital reserve(50%of sales Reserve pp��������gqppppggggNN (3,193,4E2y (10,969,075 (14,162,557y tax;5%of registration and rental tax) Revenue Available for Bus Svcs 736,250 673,180 1,409,430 Per County plans Expenses: Pro-rated based on hire date includes benefits Personnel` 169,266 568,276 737,542 and employee related expenses Consultants` 3,206,115 10,763,885 13,970,000 Communications Outreach(Bus) 20,000 20,000 Capital dollars are remaining local costs after Capital 25,000 97,000 122,000 grants Transit Services Per Orange Plan OPT is 12%of Orange revenue Orange Public Transit(OPT) 88,350 88,350 available for bus Per Orange Plan CHT is 64%of Orange revenue Chapel Hill Transit(CHT) 471,200 471,200 for bus Durham County 33,658 33,658 Durham Area Transit Authority(DATA) 451,300 451,300 Per Orange Plan TTA is 24%of Orange Triangle Transit Authority(TTA) 176,700 118,620 295,320 revenue available for bus Total Bus Svc Expenses: 736,250 603,578 1,339,828 Bus Revenue Available 736,250 673,180 1,409,430 Remaining 0 69,602 69,602 Total Expenses(incl Admin costs) 4,211,631 12,127,739 16,339,370 Total Revenue 7,317,066 23 805 747 31,122.813 Balance Remaining 3,105,435 11,678,009 14,783,444 Remaining(unreserved) (88,047) 708,933 620,886 Reserve(Operating and Capital) 3,193,482 10,969,075 14,162,557 3,105,435 11,678,009 14,783,444 Light Rail expenses split by county: Durham 77.05% Orange 22.95% FY14 new revenue draft 4 050813 orange meeti ng format 6 Attachment 2 Implementation Plan Process for New Transit Service in Hillsborough, Mebane, and Rural Orange County The goal of this planning process is to create a more detailed Implementation Plan for new regional and local/county transit services and bus capital facilities that serve Hillsborough, Mebane, and rural Orange County, based on the projects and estimated revenues identified in the Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan (OCBRIP). The OCBRIP currently identifies the following projects in this study area: Regional Services • A new Mebane-Hillsborough-Durham Express route ($195,000 per year—$97,000 of which are allocated in Orange County) • Route 420 — Hillsborough-Chapel Hill frequency increase (this service was implemented in 2012). Local Services • Continued operation of the Hillsborough Circulator ($116,000 per year) • Expansion of Hillsborough Circulator to Saturdays ($29,000 per year) • Improve capacity of demand response service to rural areas ($254,000 per year) Capital Projects The total amount for bus capital projects (such as Park-and-Ride lots, bus shelters, and accessibility improvements at bus stops) in the OCBRIP is $6.7M. Local revenue only covers 10% of the capital project costs; the rest would be covered by other sources, including state and federal grants. Specific projects were not identified in the plan. Discussions will need to take place with other stakeholders in Orange County, including Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and UNC, to determine how these capital dollars should be allocated. It will take approximately five years to roll out all of these new transit services and capital projects in Orange County. For FY14, Triangle Transit is authorized to spend up to $177,000 in Orange County on regional service. $110,000 of this is programmed to be spent to improve the frequency of a route between Southpoint and UNC in the NC-54 corridor that is currently experiencing standing room only conditions. $67,000 of this could be spent to begin a route between Hillsborough and Durham. OPT is authorized to spend up to $88,350 in FY14. We believe that the following steps are important to a successful outcome. Coordination with TARPO and KFH Group will need to take place to avoid duplication on similar efforts. Public Involvement Robust public involvement for the Implementation Plan will be conducted in four ways in June and July 2013. First, a survey of current Orange Public Transit riders will be conducted through either paper surveys distributed by drivers or by staff ride-a-longs. These surveys will gather input on improvements or additions that can be made to the system regarding service times, destinations, trip purposes and service types. 7 Attachment 2 Second, a series of public meetings will be held in five areas of the county: Hillsborough, White Cross/Bingham Township, Mebane, Cedar Grove Township and the Little River/Eno Townships. These meetings will also collect input on the transportation needs of Orange County citizens. Third, the Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard) will be given a presentation at one of their regular meetings and asked for their feedback and suggestions. Finally, meetings with Orange County Commissioners and other key stakeholders will be held to better understand how transit can aid their goals and priorities for the county. Current Conditions and Needs Fred Fravel of the KFH Group is currently under contract with NCDOT to prepare a Community Transportation Service Plan and a Consolidation Study for OPT and CHT. The first Technical Memorandum in this study includes detailed analysis of the county and regional demographics, a transit dependence index percentage (TDIP) for the county, and an evaluation of major trip generators. This data will be used to help development specific transit services within Orange County. Triangle Transit staff will perform a more detailed analysis of the commuter market between northern Orange County and Durham, including an analysis of the commute sheds of various Park-and-Ride lot options. This analysis will help shape recommendations for the regional route proposed between Mebane, Hillsborough, and Durham. Performance Standards The Implementation Plan will review existing performance standards for the different types of transit service proposed for the service area (regional fixed-route, local fixed-route, demand response, etc.) and recommend appropriate changes to these standards. The plan will also establish timelines for the evaluation of the transit services proposed, including any minimum operation periods to allow these services to get established before changes or potential elimination is explored. Recommendations and Implementation Using the information gathered from current conditions and needs, public involvement, and field work (such as bus timings), specific transit services will be proposed. For both regional and local service, this will include a proposed routing (or service area if demand response), frequency and span of service, associated capital facilities and locations, estimated costs of operations and capital projects, and a timeline for implementing each service. The first draft of the Implementation Plan will be presented to the Orange County Board of County Commissioners and the Triangle Transit Board of Trustees for feedback and guidance. A memo on the draft will also be sent to the Durham County Commissioners, Hillsborough Town Council, and Mebane City Council. The first draft will also be presented during a second round of public meetings to gather further input on the service proposals to ensure that they meet the needs of the residents of Orange County. When a final draft has been completed, it will be presented for approval to the Orange County BOCC and the TTA Board. 8 Attachment 2 Timeline of Implementation Plan Events Date Events Stakeholders Involved May 2013 Creation of survey tools and public Triangle Transit planning staff, meeting materials, selection of public OPT staff, OC planning staff, meeting locations, evaluation of current Hillsborough planning staff, conditions Fred Fravel June-July 2013 Public meetings, customer surveys, All three planning staffs, OPT OUTBoard presentation, meetings with staff, OPT customers, Orange BOCC and other stakeholders County citizens, OUTBoard, Orange County BOCC August 2013 Preparation of first draft All three planning staffs, OPT staff September-October First draft of Implementation Plan Orange County BOCC, 2013 presented to associated Boards. Triangle Transit BOT, Orange Second round of public involvement County Manager, Durham events. Bus capital projects discussion. County BOCC, Mebane City Council, Hillsborough Town Council, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, UNC, same stakeholders as 1St round of public meetings November 2013 Preparation of final draft Both planning staffs, OPT staff December 2013 Presentation of Final Draft to Same stakeholders as first draft associated boards for approval of Implementation Plan ??? Implementation of first services/bus OPT, Triangle Transit capital projects In addition to these events, we'd like to discuss the creation of a project management team consisting of members of Triangle Transit, Orange County Planning, Hillsborough Planning, and OPT that would meet regularly throughout the process. Attachment 3 ACTIVITY 2013 Due Date Due Date for Following Years Communicate annual revenue forecast to all service partners May 10, 2013 December of prior year Meet to discuss coordination of annual programs March November of prior year Triangle Transit Completes Annual Program for City of Durham and Triangle Transit May 10, 2013 January 15 Receive Annual Program from Chapel Hill, Orange Co. and Durham Co. May 31, 2013 January 31 Determine Eligibility of Annual Programs May 24, 2013 February 28 Triangle Transit Board Approval of Annual Programs June 26, 2013 April Staff Working Group meeting to discuss potential Changes to Plans Summer Summer Complete Annual Report for DATA, Triangle Transit bus and rail activities Early October September 15 Receive Annual Reports from Chapel Hill, Orange Co. and Durham Co. Early October September 30 Complete Annual Report for All Activities Late October October 31 Present Annual Report to Counties, MPO, and TTA Board November November Request Changes to County Plans November Fall Receive Approval for Changes to County Plans January 2014 Winter D rt rt n 3 CD rt AN 10 Attachment 4 Key BOCC Comments/Questions From May 21, 2013 Meetinq A) Fiscal Year (FY) Financial Summary/Budget Format: 1) Commissioner Dorosin commented on the "Admin Costs" line in the FY 2014 budget/forecast (Attachment 1) produced by Triangle Transit ($75,000 each for Orange and Durham Counties) and stated that it should further specify and itemize what these costs are meant to address. If this cost is meant to support a senior financial analyst to manage revenues and expenses, Commissioner Dorosin asks that this specification be made and shown as such on the draft budget/forecast. 2) Commissioner Dorosin commented on the "Personnel" and "Consultants" lines in the FY 2014 budget/forecast ($169,266 and $3,206,115, respectively, for Orange County) provided in Attachment 1 and stated that they should further specify and itemize what these costs are meant to address including a sub-listing of the titles of the positions and respective costs associated with personnel expenditures and a sub-listing of the consultants, their respective tasks, and respective costs associated with each consultant expenditure. B) Other Commissioner Questions/Comments 1) Commissioners McKee and Price requested clarification on what was meant by the proposed Mebane-Hillsborough-Durham route being categorized as an express route and requested further clarification on what such a route meant for stops that would serve rural citizens along U.S. 70 versus 1-85 (a route traversing 20+ miles with only four [4] stops is still considered an express route). Commissioner McKee suggested that citizens' needs would best be served with a route involving U.S. 70 versus I-85. They further stated that the categorization and nature of the proposed route's implementation should align with the needs of citizens rather than just determining route logistics using an exclusively data-driven approach. 2) Commissioner Gordon requested further clarification on the sizable $6 million difference in the $30-$36 million range projected for the cost of project development and planning consulting services associated with the light rail component of the plan and stated that the reasons provided of there being uncertainties associated with environmental scoping costs corresponding to different alignment alternatives (Route options C1 and C2 were submitted, and alternative C2 was preferred by the BOCC and MPO) considered should be explained and made apparent in future Triangle Transit correspondence and presentations to the Board and to the public. There 11 Attachment 4 should be an explanation as to why there is such a large variation in potential cost outcomes. 3) Commissioner Pelissier suggested that existing and future Orange County bus route information should be provided in a user-friendly format that is easily accessible to the public online in one place, or in a manner in which it is clear to the public where such information exists. This could mean providing back-links to Triangle Transit's website on the Orange County website showing such route information, or it could mean showing such information on Orange County's website and providing a back-link on Triangle Transit's website. 4) Commission Chair Jacobs requested that Triangle Transit get back to the Board of County Commissioners regarding the exchange of emails pertaining to the Hillsborough Train Station, changes in Federal programs, and coordination with the railroad company's staff. 5) Regarding the proposed east-west express route for Orange County, Commission Chair Jacobs mentioned that ridership analysis to evaluate route alignment and logistics is important, but the County is also looking at the utility of the route from the perspective of supporting adopted land use plans and supporting land use goals and objectives, supporting economic development, and being used as a tool for social justice. These considerations should factor heavily into the planning for the proposed route. 12 Attachment 5 A) Staff Questions/Comments: 1) The C1 and C2 light rail alignment alternatives were both submitted for further study and environmental review by Triangle Transit; however, the BOCC and MPO both adopted the C2 light rail alignment as the locally preferred alternative to take priority for further study over that of the C1 alignment alternative (Exhibit 1 of Attachment 5). To reel in the wide variation in cost outcomes (i.e., the $6 million difference in the $30-36 million forecasted) associated with the environmental review and further project development process for both alignments because of the potential uncertainties identified regarding environmental constraints, a basic constraints analysis should be completed before proceeding to more intense environmental review and study as part of the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) process to more clearly identify the environmental challenges and associated costs of both routes so environmental and project development consulting funds can be more efficiently allocated toward the C2 alignment first. A large sum of money should not be spent on the environmental scoping/review and project development process for the C1 alignment when the C2 alignment is preferred and likely involves fewer environmental challenges (e.g., Jordan Lake wetlands as an issue with the C1 alignment). The C1 alignment should only be studied intensively in the NEPA process if the results of studying the C2 alignment indicate that the C2 alignment will present more profound environmental challenges than what is likely for the C1 alignment. 2) Staff Budget/Financial Summary Comments in Addition to BOCC Comments (Exhibit 2 of Attachment 5): a) Staff suggests preparation and presentation of a draft budget/financial summary in February of each year by Triangle Transit to incorporate into the upcoming Orange County fiscal year (July 1St — June 30th) budgeting process so that support for Orange Public Transportation (OPT) can be determined before the preparation and finalization of Orange County's general budget. b) Staff suggests that the budget/financial summary specify the limits of the fiscal year(s) (FY) to which it is referring. Is this the forecast for Orange County's fiscal year (July 1St — June 30th), or is this the forecast for some other fiscal year? c) Staff suggests that the detail regarding when revenues from each source are received further specify whether each period provided is the time period during which the revenue is actually received or when the revenue is levied. Because there is a 3-month lag from when revenues are levied to when they are actually received, what is provided may just capture when the revenue is received; however, if it applies to just when the 13 Attachment 5 revenue is levied, there is a period of time during which revenue is being levied that is unaccounted for (April 2013 — June 2013). Staff suggests the FY 2014 budget/forecast specify received versus levied. d) Staff suggests inserting a column to the left of the forecast totals provided for Orange and Durham Counties that provides entries for the projections provided in the Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan (OCBRIP) and Durham County Bus and Rail Investment Plan (DCBRIP), respectively. e) Staff suggests that Triangle Transit provide a breakdown within or as an attachment to the FY 2014 and beyond budgets/forecasts for what happens to any revenue over the recorded projected amounts and how that revenue will be allocated. As contemplated by Triangle Transit and emphasized by the County Manager, the revenues exceeding the projected amounts should go to a separate account for specific use to be determined by the three (3) parties to the Interlocal Implementation Agreement for the OCBRIP. The FY 2014 and beyond budget(s)/forecast(s) should make clear that any overage revenues should not be divided in proportional accordance with the allocated amounts currently provided in the forecast unless agreed to by all three (3) parties. f) Staff requests clarification in the forecast on whether the reserve amounts provided are intentional in accordance with a pre-determined plan or model or whether the reserve line is also meant to capture excess revenues above the projected amounts for each line or are meant to capture excess amounts between what is provided in the OCBRIP and DCBRIP and the actual amounts. Generally, provide further specification of what the "Reserve" line is meant to capture. g) The FY 2014 Budget/Financial Summary should itemize and show how much money is being put aside in reserve for capital projects other than the light rail component as provided in the OCBRIP, including but not limited to the Hillsborough Rail Station and the various park and ride lots and bus shelters, and how those amounts will build over time from FY to FY. Although only 10% of the of the cost of these capital projects is anticipated to be covered by local revenue sources, the budget and financial forecast should show how this local revenue source will build over time to support such projects. 3) Staff suggests that the performance standards mentioned on page 2 of Attachment 2 be sensitive to the nature of currently unserved and underserved transit-dependent populations and not just assess the performance of routes based on ridership volume alone but also whether such routes are addressing the human service and social equity needs of Orange County. These performance standards should also consider the 14 Attachment 5 duration of time it takes for unserved and underserved populations to adjust to the newly implemented routes and should be developed in a collaborative manner involving all three (3) parties to the Interlocal Implementation Agreement. 4) The Hillsborough Circulator route is currently funded via a Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) grant administered by the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), which typically provides transit operating assistance for a period of up to three (3) years under Federal guidelines. However, OPT is waiting on an answer from NCDOT regarding whether the funding will be available for the full three (3) years to support the service until June 6, 2014, particularly between October 1, 2013, and June 6, 2014. If this funding will be available until June 2014, OCBRIP revenues should not be necessary to support the existing service, and between now and June 2014, new sources of revenue can be pursued to provide at least partial funding of the service beginning in June 2014. However, if this funding will not be available until June 2014, OCBRIP revenues may need to be considered for partial or full funding for the existing Hillsborough Circulator service. B) Staff Notes/Points of Clarification on OCBRIP and Implementation Agreement 1) Implementation Agreement (Exhibit 3 of Attachment 5): a) On page 2, the last sentence of the 1St paragraph and the second sentence of the 2nd paragraph under term #7 of the Interlocal Implementation Agreement of the OCBRIP states: "However, CHT and OPT may use a portion of the bus service funds provided in the Plan to pay for the increased cost of existing bus services during the duration of this Agreement in the manner described below. The `CHT Share' shall be a percentage derived by dividing the CHT local expenditures for bus services each year by the total of local expenditures for bus services by both CHT and OPT in that year." To provide additional context regarding how this prescribed ratio is derived, the total local expenditure for CHT in FY 2010 was approximately $3.7 million and the total local expenditure for OPT was approximately $330,000. This results in an approximately eight (8) percent OPT share of the total that can be spent on the increased cost of existing bus services. s 15 Attachment 5 b) Manager's Comment: In response to Commissioners' questions/comments regarding revenues received that may exceed those amounts projected by the FY 2014 budget/forecast (Exhibit 2 of Attachment 5), all three (3) parties to the Interlocal Implementation Agreement for the OCBRIP would have to come together and agree on how that money will be sub-allocated and spent, and it is possible that any such overages could be used for additional bus services or routes as those overage amounts do not have to be reserved for future light rail or light rail development costs. 2) OCBRIP: a) On page six (6) of Appendix B: Proposed Bus Service Enhancements of the OCBRIP, a percentage split of bus operation costs by Federal/State/Local/Fares share is provided under the table titled "Total Bus Operations and Maintenance Costs By Year' (Exhibit 4 of Attachment 5). Under the existing Federal transportation authorization (MAP-21) and depending on the location of selected routes relative to the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Urbanized Area (UZA), OPT may be eligible for funding at least 50% of the operating/maintenance costs of its operations via Federal or state sources. However, the allocation of funds addressed in the OCBRIP only applies to locally raised sources of revenue. As such, there should be an expectation of additional leveraging of funds from Federal and State sources to result in a greater overall sum of money, and by extension, hours to provide bus services. If OPT is awarded a Federal grant to provide operating assistance that requires a 50% local revenue match, a hypothetical $58,000 to provide 1,000 hours of what would otherwise be exclusively locally funded service could translate into the ability to provide 2,000 hours of service with the same $58,000. b) To provide clarification of what is considered existing service versus new service, routes/projects/service existing before July 2009 are considered existing, and routes/projects/service implemented after July 2009 are considered new. As a result, the current Hillsborough Circulator route that came online in June 2011 is still considered new. 16 Attachment 5, Exhibit 1 RESOLU"I"JON TO A 11PROVE THE LOCALLV-PRETERRED ALTERNATIVE (LPA) FOR THE DUR1UkN1-OR,(kNGE C'0,1,�N'I'Y 'I'RA,NSI'I'('011,1,t,IDI OR Februar i y 8, 2012 and seeorade(,] by'T,V, ......................................... MeTTIM• CW-1.4X"J'Ce o-j fbil,Ifie,aclopfior, resolution, and (11U)n lacing put to a vote, was duly adopted, 'WHEREAS�, tlic SpecW 'Transit Advisory,Commission (STAC"), 41, NlayAA)S as cluded rail trarisit extending fronin ttaleigli u Du rl'iain to Chapel HM; ,wid WHEREAS, the Durfiam-Cfiapekl fill-Carrboro Metropoliuiia Phinniog Organization(DCHC MN)), illetaperated the STAC'roil transk into fl e adol:)ted 2035 t-,Ong kary rramportation Plata in Aprfl ,2009; alid WHEIWAS, the Niortl°i Carolina Ceneral A", enibly approved the Congestim Relief'111terniodail Trmispiclrt bill in Aiigust 2009 that enables local areas to fund public triaispoll'tation through urea increase in sales tax,car registratwti 1a'esaikf special district property, Imes; and WHEREAS, the Triangle]"ransit Authofi y("I'll"A)iinplcnaentcd fliell"tiangle Rcp gional Transit Pro grain M 20 10 to stiady the financial, ridersl1q), ervirc)riniental oad public inpul aspects of rcgUltial husand rail Irmnsit, arTd sub' ..;equently cordo(,led as visioniog,processalid Traris4iotial Arialysas to stud'y rail con Mors in Dvrhain, Orai'i,ige, aind Wake cotwifies, and NIVIIUREAS, thc ITik colnpleted an Alternatives Analysis on Itic t1irec highest-perfortnirig corriolors that 4icluded thC DUrl"mai.-Oratige corridor in July 2011 and issued, an Addlefiduin to the "Detailed Definition of A IternativesTedinicid Report"in MgjjSjr 2011 whkli,clarified fliat rcasonable alternatives to tfio proposed afigpinients crossing the Little Creck and New Hope C.Teek arcas,will he studied; and WHEREAS, tlw'N"A arid tlie DC1 IC MIPO,have both coax duoed cotnprclicasavc public involvement activities, %liie➢ included pubtic worksliops, puWiclicarings arid presemations to local electV41 hoards" fear`(lie 6siorlirig Process,"I"ransitional Alialy,sasand Alleniatives,Analysisl and WHEREAS, light rail Irarisil ieehnolo),,'t y ha%agreater potential to proniote econoinic growth alrj(j focus transit-supportive aroum::l slation areas as compared ter bias rapid, trallsit teclin(flogy; and VV[IEREAS, afigninent opt,iolo A3 in the UINCstation area I i I s supported y the"folmni ofellapel hill, UNC' at ("hapel Hill, and UNC Ifospitalsand W'OUld aAflOW f0T' future exten,',.,'ioa of tile aliglullent to the vVest to possihie(lestinations such as downtown Cliapel hill"downtoNvira C'arrboro and tfie Carolina North ( ,,,unrLJS; a,Ind 17 WHEREAS, both alignment options CI and C2 are potentially compatible with the overall Z:7 vision for the transit corridor; and WHEREAS, the ridership, costs, environmental impacts, community impacts, and impacts on nearby roadway traffic of alignment options C1 and C2 need to be further studied in the Scoping and Preliminary Engineering/Draft Environmental Impact Statement (PE/DEIS) phases before a final decision is made on whicli alignment should be advanced; and WHEREAS, alignment option D3 in the South Square station area would best promote transit- supportive economic development; and WHEREAS, the adoption of the Locally Preferred Alternative does not include a recommendation for the location of a Rail Operations and Maintenance Facility and the location of this facility will be further studied in the Scoping and PE/DEIS phases; and WHEREAS,, the adoption of the Locally Preferred Alternative will be followed by further study of the alignment and station locations, in the Scoping and PE/DEIS phases when a final decision is made on the remaining active options; and WHEREAS, the substantive issues identified in public comments on the Alternatives Analysis will be addressed in subsequent development steps such as Scoping and PE/DEIS. BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization Transportation Advisory Committee adopts light rail transit technology on the alignment reconuriended in the "Detailed Definition of Alternatives Technical Report" dated July 2011 with the modification,that both the CI and C2 options be carried forward for further study in the Meadommont and Hillmont station areas, with a preference for C2, as the Locally Preferred Alternative for the Durham-Orange County Corridor (as illustrated on the attached inap), and that the DCHC' NPO intends to incoi-porate this LPA into the forthcoming 2040 Long Range Transportation,Plan, provided here on this, the 8"' day of February, 2012. Lydia E. Lavelle, TAC Chair Durham County, North Carolina I certify that Lydia E. Lavelle Personally appeared before me this day acknowledging to me that she signed the forgoing document. Date: February 8, 2012 �AOTAP�, Frederick Brian Rhodes, Notary Public MY 0 ir My Commission expires: May 10, 2015 GOMUSMN EXRRES M - �'UBLIG INP "144f 4 COUVI 10;;111111,1�11,1100 Aerial Seament At -Grade Interstate lJ'S Route NC Route Railroad County Boundary Town of Chapel Hill Chapel Dill €TJ City of Durham Conceptual Station A& NORTH F 0.3 0.6 1.2 Miles •• 19 Attachment 5, Exhibit 2 FY14 Draft Budget - Durham/Grange Bus and Rail Investiment, Plan FY 14 Forecast Orange Durham, Total Revenue; .......................................... FY14 Fcst based an FY1 3 yr end estimate 4% 1/2 Cent Sales Tax 6,283,6201 21,730,640 28,0114,259 Increase In Orange;3%In Durbam ...m .. JuTy-1,20 13-June.30,2014);90—%, of total collections-1$4.5M Orange-M.1%;Durham-2.0.78 based an 2012 ce'-s data;FY14 assumed at 2%growth over Rental Tax 456,375, 9,35,,343 1,391,719 FY13 yr end esUrnote .......... ........... (HMtXqA Wober 1,2013-June 30,2014); FY14 ossmood at 2A groveth in Orange and $7 County RegistratiGn Tax 577,071 1,139,764 1,716,835 2.5%m Durham over FY1 3 y'ear'end estimate $3 Regional Registration,Tax increase 6 0 Pending legislative action —---—----------------------------------------------------- Grants/Other 0 0 0 ----—---------- Total C(ALections 1,317,066 23,805,747 31,122,813 Ajorin,Casts (75,000) (75,000 (150,000) Operating and capital reserve(50%of saies Reserve (3,193,482) (10,969,075) (14,162,557) tax;5%of regMration and rental taxp W,'NO ME ORION Z"'NNW' 736,250 673,180 11,409,430 Per County plans —---------------- Expensec Pro-rated based on We date Includes benefits Personnel^ 169,266 568,276 737,542 and employee rellated e)qwnses ConsuttanW 3,206,115 10,763,885 13,970,000 Cann-Kinkations Outreacb(Bus) 20,000 20,000 Capital daklars are remaining local costs after Capital 25,000 97,000 122,000 grants Transit Services Per Orange Plan OPT Is 12%of Orange revenue Orange Pubtic Transit(OPT) 88,350 88,350 ayaRaWo for bus Per Orange plan CHT Is 64"6 of Orange revonoe Chapel 1111ITramft(01T) 471,200 471,200 for bus Durham county 33,658 33,658 Durharn Area Transit Authority(DATA) 451,300 451,300 Per(1-angL Plan TTA is 24%of Orange Trionoe Trafl$ftr AothOtky(TTA) 176,700 118,620 295,320 revenue avallabte for bus Total Bus Svc Expenses: 736,2 50 603,578 11)39,828 Bus Revenue AvaNaNe 73(8,250 VIAQ 1.109A34, Remaining a 69,602 69,602 Total Expenims(incl Admin cwt4--........................ -21,I",,6,3"I 1-2,"l—27,73,9'—1 9 0 t Total Revenue 2,31Z_06 31 22 8 3 22 8 31 $3, !� Balance.Remaining 3,105,435 11,678,009 14,783,�4441 Remaining(unre5med) (88,047) 708,933 620'a86 Reserve(Operating and Capital) _3j 123A82 10x969.075 14.162 557 3 105 435 111 678,0CD9 14,7834 44 Ught Rall expenses spilt by cattnty: Durham 77,05% GranSp 22.95% 20 Attachment 5, Exhibit 3 1 NT L IMPLENFUTATION AGREEMENT FOR ORANGE COUNIY S AND RAIL S E I ` PLAN TW InterloCal AVeMent dated 2012 i en Into . .. .. . �ss aaaatiati� by and among an olunit , fit°" „,. " e'or,Nor (arolina ('01ra"W), the tt atim the reglonal trjosportatimi p1dinning agerKy tot,the am map , i, dff , oo urban area pursuant toy t 5 DOT regulabon CFR part 450 and 49 Pad,513('DC47),an 'the Rewrch T'riangte RegkmW Pubtic Transportation th a " i„ a regional public transportation ;auftft on er NtNCGS 160A(*TTAO' . e, D04C. and'TTA may bye refeffed to individuaDy as *P' aind colleaiveIV artai .This Affeernwit, made pursumt,to Article 20 of,chapwr 16OAofthe North Carofina ti., ali.. , u Parties each dew to proW&for t1refiture, transportation needs of Orange County and urro n�din , re " ,n,understanding that enhanced mobility options will ill soup quAW of life,strengthen ecmxxtuc development,strengthen hum humn services transportation, support air quality goals,and eMance suitainabi*)r, and In accord withi NCGS 105-500 et scxl.,("Inane if Acr),rm developed a financW Owt denoted a t1w, Orange County Bus and RM Investmerd,Plan w�� l to wt foith certain trap immwestments over the next my-three ars. This hm, been rewm` and approved the Orange County Board of County Ti mm e. C subject,to tlbe approval by the 8(XC of asathfactoiry Intedocal kriplementation ;ent,approwd in a similar fashion bly theTTA Ortard of°Trustees,andii approved in concept subject to a satisfactaty irnpiernentatim t 4,Ow Durham Chapel Hill Carrboro Metropokan Plannilig ° a it "on order In to prWdr, effective „ tt " n ofthe Plan,the parties hereby agmeto the fiAovAng Finns and pr e res L The Orainge Couoty s and R,ad lovestnenit Man is incorporated inuto this Agremnent in iN and as it maV be amended led to time by refermce. Except as otherwise provided in is nt the Plan shall govern dw Mocawo of tmn in cvst parameters an timetA*s,for de4ivery of o j and transit services,and the resped1w,rates o f t* Partles transit agemies in Provision of the, its and serAces card for dwrein.. 2� ftmulant to the n °pit Saks..tm Agreement between Orange and.Tt. dated May,29, t 2,TTA` TA reaffiffns its convnitment not to kNy the rent transit,sales s tai until the Orange a re-Aution re es ft'Tt ,to taike suclw action., I Orange, Durham Count (' ),and t previously executed an 21 agreement dated May 15,2012 which allocates the shares of capital and operating expenses for the LRT rail project set forth in the Plan,and that Cost Sharing agreement is incorporated into this Agreement in full and as it may be amended from time to time by reference., 4. TTA agrees to provide reports to Orange and DCHC on the progress achieved toward implementation of the Plan and any substantial developments in revenues received, project or service cost experienced,or other pertinent factors under the Plan on an annual basis on or before November 1"of each year and as otherwise reasonably requested. S. TTA shall work with the Chapel Hill Transit(CHT),Orange Public Transit("OPT ), and any other Orange County bus transit service provider named in the Plan to develop the process for distribution of funds for bus services each year on a quarterly basis or as otherwise agreed. For purposes of this Agreement the term'bus services"shall include both-fixed route and demand response services. As is consistent with the revenues received and the other transit priorities under the Plan,TTA will provide estimated quarterly payments to the bus service providers for service provided with a reconciliation based upon actual expenses incurred by each provider on a subsequent quarterly basis or as otherwise agreed to. 6. All bus service providers receiving funding under the Plan will provide an annual financial report on existing bus services,their recommendations for new or continuing service priorities,their actual or expected costs and ridership information as reasonably requested to TTA on an annual basis or as otherwise agreed to. It shall be the responsibility of TTA to provide oversight of the new,enhanced or sustained bus services under the Plan to insure compliance with the Intermodal Act requirements. All other legal requirements under federal and state law shall be the responsibility of the respective bus service provider. TTA shall include a full descriptive report on bus services delivered under the Plan as a part of its annual reports to Orange and DCHC. 7. The Plan provides that all funding for bus services will be appropriated on the basis of the-following percentages: 64%of such funds to CHL 24%of such funds to TTA,and 12%of such-funds to OPT. The use of these bus service funds shall be limited to support of new bus services above and beyond the existing transit system services in place at the time of the adoption of the local option%cent sales tax in November,2012. However,CHT and OPT may use a portion of the bus service funds provided in the Plan to pay for the increased cost of existing bus services during the duration of this Agreement in the manner described below. The"CHT Share shall be a percentage derived by dividing the CHT local expenditures for bus services each year by the total of local expenditures for bus services by both CHT and OPT in that year. The"OPT Share"shall be a percentage derived by dividing the OPT local expenditures for bus services each year by the total of local expenditures for bus services by both CHT and OPT in that year. The respective CHT and OPT local expenditures for bus services in any year shall be based initially upon the audited financial statements for the fiscal year ending June 30,2011. Local bus services expenditures shall include assigned overhead without any consideration of federal or state financial assistance. The determination of the CHT Share Page 12 22 and OPT Share will be made each year thereafter based upon the most recent audited annual local expenditures for bus service by both. CHT may use a portion of the bus services funds provided in the Plan up to a maximum amount that equals the CHT Share percentage of the prior year total receipts from the Orange County local vehicle registration fee of$7.00 permitted by Article 52 of NCGS 105. OPT may use a portion of the bus services funds provided in the Plan up to a maximum amount that equals the OPT Share percentage of the prior year total receipts from the Orange County local vehicle registration-fee of$7.00 permitted by Article 52 of NCGS 105. 8. Any change in use of bus service funds in the Plan from support of new services to support of existing services may be made on a temporary or permanent basis and must be agreed to by all the Parties and comply with state law. 9. Every four years in a manner that coordinates with DCHCs preparation of a new Metropolitan Transportation Plan,and more frequently as reasonably requested by a Party,the full Plan shall be reviewed in detail and assessed for any significant changes to the estimated revenues,to the estimated project or service delivery costs,to project or service priorities therein,to state or federal transit programs or regulations,to success in securing state and federal financial support for the rail and bus projects in the Plan,or any other significant change of circumstance impacting the Plan. This review which shall be conducted as set forth below, and recommended changes to the Plan may be advanced as deemed necessary. 10.The Parties agree to develop appropriate benchmarks and timeline to evaluate progress in gaining federal and state financial support for the LRT project in the Plan during the -four years following execution of this Agreement and to incorporate-these benchmarks and timeline into the Plan during the first four year review and to use these benchmarks and timeline in the reviews set out in paragraph 9 above and in paragraph 13 below. 11. In preparation for the full Plan review set out in paragraph 9 above,TTA Well convene a Staff Working Group("SWG")made up of a voting member and an alternate member from each of the three Parties- The Orange County Manager shall designate the member and alternate from Orange,the Planning Manager of DCHC shall designate the member and alternate from DCHC, and the TTA General Manager shall designate the member and alternate from TTA. These SWG members and alternates shall work collaboratively in developing and preparing the respective report to the Parties. The SWG may also meet from time to time as they deem useful to discuss developments and status of the various transit projects and services under the Plan and to give TTA comments and feedback on the draft annual reports referenced in paragraph 4 above. 12. If any meeting of the SWG has local urban, rural or regionallibus service inibrange County as a part of its agenda,then representatives from CHT,OPT,other bus transit providers in Orange County,and from the towns of Hillsborough and Mebane shall be invited to participate in the meeting. The SWG members shall work openly and collaboratively with these Page 13 23 other parties in considering the status and impacts of possible bus service changes to the Plan. The SWG members and the other parties shall strive to reach consensus recommendations for any changes in bus services provided under the Plan in light of their shared interest in maximizing the effective use of scarce transit funding 13. Eight years after the date of execution of this Agreement,the Parties agree to assess if the New Starts application for the LRT project in the Plan is still in the federal pipeline for New Starts rail projects and making reasonable progress to receive federal-funding and whether the LRT project remains under consideration for state funding. If either funding opportunity is no longer available the Parties agree to work collaboratively to develop an Alternative Bus and Rail Investment Plan which reflects this fact and sets out revised funding for transit projects and services. 14. Recommendations for change to the Plan may be made by a Party to this Agreement or by any Orange County resident,group or organization. Recommendations for a change or revision shall be submitted to the General Manager of TTA,who shall forward the recommendation to the SWG for its review,consideration and advice. The SWG shall fully consider any recommendation for change in the Plan and report back to the Parties. The report of the SWG shall include its opinion on the recommended change along with the recommendation itself. In the event that the three SWG voting members cannot agree on a shared opinion of any recommended change,then both majority and minority perspectives on the recommended change may be provided to the Parties. Additionally,any citizen or group may submit its opinion on the recommended change to the Parties as well. 15.Any proposed material change to the Plan shall be effective only upon its approval by each and every Party to this Agreement,namely the Orange BOCC,the DCHC,and TTA. 16.Any proposed change to the Plan shall be deemed non-material unless it involves one of the following: (A) An annual increase or decrease in total revenues from the Plan revenues (sales tax revenues,vehicle registration fee revenues,and rental vehicle tax revenues)of 5% or more;or (B) An annual increase or decrease in the project capital cost(including financing)of the LRT project in the Plan of 10%or more prior to entering final design and 5%or more thereafter;or (C) An annual increase or decrease in the overall project operating costs of the LRT project in the Plan of over 5%or more; or (D)An annual increase or decrease in the overall funds provided for bus service in the Plan of 5%or more; or (E) An annual increase or decrease in the funds provided to Orange,the Chapel Hill/Carrboro/UNC Partnership,or TTA for bus service of more than 5%of the amount provided in the Plan or more than$300,000,whichever is greater. Page 14 24 A proposed elimination or addition of any fixed guideway capital project shall be considered a material change to the Plan. 17.Any proposed change to the Plan that is deemed non-material shall be effective only upon its approval by the Orange County Manager,the Planning Manager of DCHC, and the General Manager of TTA. Any change whether material or non-material must be evidenced by a written document signed by all Parties. 18.The term of this Agreement shall be from the date first above recorded to and including June 30, 2035. Upon its expiration the Agreement may be renewed upon mutual agreement of the Parties. The Agreement may be modified as needed upon mutual agreement of the Parties and may be terminated upon mutual agreement of the Parties or by either of the Parties upon a material breach by the other Party. Any modification must be in the-form of a written agreement signed by all Parties. [SIGNATURE PAGE TO FOLLOMa Page 15 25 Understood and agreed to and effective as of the date written above, by: Orange County Chair, Board of Commissioners p � 97 Attest: Durham-Chapel Hill-Caerboro Metropolitan(Planning Organization By: Chair Attest: IY Research Triangle Regional Public Transportation Authority, c By: Alu ,L.4 . David Kind,Gen al Manager Attest: V** ukdut "Xf 6l ddf i ru Aporov d as to legal form: Vib`Gulley,Genera Council Page 16 Attachment 5, Exhibit 4 Total Bus Operations an Maintenance a «i .. ©.. ©,, -© J,, .I. © ■.= a * :_i* <t * < Bus Hours 9,000 < :, 24,750 34,650 34,650 » 45! 34,650 34 S Cost (S ° thousands) « »<v 8 3,702 $ .» <« . $4,183 ° 26 <+- 34,650 34,650 34,650 Year nn ° ;; <« 2l= Local :! :! 2a 203 264 2035 Bus Hours 34,650 34,650 < <■ 34,650 34,650 34,650 34,650 34,650 34,650 34,650 40,950 Cost » *< thousands) $< _ :: 5 5,024 $ 5,180 $5,341 <?» < ,67 $ 5,953 $ 6,034 < *2 $ "14 S 7,815 : 106,782,735 Federal 8,9% State A% Local 77.6% Fares 3.5% Page 6 of Appendix B of the OCBR P 27 ATTACHMENT 6 ORANGE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION BUS ROUTE SERVICE OPTIONS FOR OUTREACH Orange County Planning Department's review of bus route service options for public outreach follows. Calculations are also provided regarding available Orange Bus and Rail Investment Plan (OCBRIP) funding for FY 13-14 and FY 14-15. The calculations for FY13-14 acknowledge only 75% funding on $7 Orange County Tag Fee. OPT 12% Share for FY 13-14 includes monies for existing service, new service and enhanced service. ORANGE COUNTY OCBRIP APPORTIONMENT CALCULATIONS FY 13— 14 OPT Apportionment FY 13 - 14 Calculation (July 1, 2013 —June 30, 2014 Total Costs per $905,000 OCBRIP Total Costs per OCBRIP as revised by $850,000 TT Administrative Cost $75,000 5% Reserve $38,750 OPT 12% Share $88,350 Existing Services FY 13 - 14 Calculation (July 1, 2013 —June 30, 2014 Total Revenue from $7 Tag Fee $591,000 OPT Share 8% Maximum Existing $47,280 Services Funds New/Enhanced FY 13 - 14 Services Calculation (July 1, 2013 —June 30, 2014 OPT 12% Share $88,350 Less Maximum Existing Services $47,280 Funds Resulting Minimum New/Enhanced $41,070 Services Funds Per the Interlocal Implementation Agreement for the OCBRIP, OPT's share of existing services is calculated as a ratio of total out-of-pocket expenditures for CHT and OPT local bus expenditures, which is 8% for FY 13-14. TT and OPT Share Options for FY13-14 bus service scenarios are provided in Sections A and B of this Attachment, and a detailed description of new, enhanced and existing bus service options follows in Sections C and D. Estimated funding and bus service calculations through FY 16 — 17 are provided in Section E. Section F provides information on regional commuting patterns. In advance of the proposed TT 4-year implementation time line, Orange County could feasibly implement local rural services for existing, new or enhanced (expanded) routes. 28 A. Orange Public Transportation Share Options FY13-14 1st Combination 2 nd Combination 3 rd Combination 4 th Combination of Options of Options of Options of Options New Northern Human New Northern Human `New' Hillsborough Mebane to Efland to New Services Center Peak Services Center Peak Circulator at a reduced Hillsborough using US Services Hour Shuttle along Hwy Hour Shuttle along Hwy 1040 service hours 70 (1/2 route), 86N 86N x $43.09/hr. = $44,850 contracted to OPT, 5.5 hrs./day x 5 days M-F 5.5 hrs./day x 5 days M- This would be a Peak-hour service x 25 wks. = 687.5 hrs. x F x 25 wks. = 687.5 hrs. reduction in service from 8-hr/day M-F x 25 wks. $43.09 = $29,625 x $43.09 = $29,625 10 hrs/day to 4+ hrs/day = 1,000 service hours 1/01/2014-6/30/2014 1/01/2014-6/30/2014 Assumes 25% CMAQ X 43.09/hr .= $43,090 funds and includes HBO 1/01/2014-6-30/2014 contribution of$23,000 10/1/2013-06/06/2014 New Northern Human N/A N/A N/A Peak Hour Services Shuttle along Hwy 86N 5.5 hrs./day x 5 days M- F x 25 wks. = 687.5 hrs. x$43.09 = $29,625 1/01/2013-6/30/2014 Enhanced (Expanded) Enhanced N/A 420 Mid-day HBO to N/A N/A (Expanded) Chapel Hill Services 3 additional hrs/day x 187 days= 561 new hrs. X $58 = $32,538 10/01/2013-6/30/2014 Existing 420 Mid-day Existing 420 Mid-day Existing Hillsborough to Chapel NA Hillsborough to Chapel N/A Services Hill; 3 existing hrs./day x Hill; 3 existing hrs./day x 5 days M-F x 250 days = 5 days M-F x 250 days = 750 hrs.x$58/hr. 750 hrs.x$58/hr. = $43,500 = $43,500 7/01/2013-06/30/2014 7/01/2013-06/30/2014 Total Funded OPT Share 1,437.5 1,687 1,790 1,914 Service Hours OPT 12% Share $88,350 $88,350 $88,350 $88,350 New& Enhanced Services Min. $41,070 $41,070 $41,070 $41,070 Amount New and Enhanced $29,625 $62,163 $44,850 $72,715 Services Total Cost Existing Services Max.Amount $47,280 $47,280 $47,280 $47,280 Existing Services Total Cost $43,500 $0 $43,500 $0 Residual FY 13- 14 OPT Share $15,225 $26,187 $0 $15,635 FUNDING NOTES: The Hillsborough Circulator route is currently funded via a Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)grant administered by NCDOT. OPT is waiting on an answer from NCDOT regarding whether the CMAQ funding will be available to support the route between 10/1/2013, and 6/06/2014. If this funding will be available until June 2014, OCBRIP revenues should not be necessary to support the existing service through June 2014. However, if this funding will not be available OCBRIP revenues may need to be considered for partial or full funding for the existing Hillsborough Circulator service between 10/1/2013, and 6/30/2014, when new funding sources can be considered. Under the federal transportation authorization (MAP-21), and depending on the location of the selected routes relative to the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Urbanized Area (UZA), OPT is likely eligible for funding of at least 50 percent of the capital/operating/maintenance costs of its operations via federal or state sources. 29 B. Triangle Transit Regional Share Options FY13 -14 TT OPT Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Mebane to Durham Hillsborough to Duke Hillsborough to Duke Hillsborough to Duke Mebane to Efland to Mebane to Efland to Mebane to Efland to Mebane to Efland to Regional Express by TT. by TT. by TT. Hillsborough to Duke Hillsborough to Duke Hillsborough using US Hillsborough using US Route Options 14 -hr/ day M -F 8 -hr /day M -F x 25 14 -hr /day M -F using US, contracted using US 70, 70, contracted to OPT 70, contracted to OPT, Funded by Triangle x 25 weeks weeks x 17 weeks to OPT. contracted to OPT. 14 -hr /day M -F 8 -hr /day M -F Transit (TT) 24% = 1,750 service hours = 1,000 service hours = 1,190 service hours 14 -hr /day M -F 8 -hr /day M -F X 25 weeks X 25 weeks Share x 25 weeks X 25 weeks = 1,750 service hours = 1,000 service hours = 1,750 service hours = 1,000 service hours Type Service Full -day service Peak -hour service Full -day service Full -day service Peak -hour service Full -day service Peak -hour service Route Portion % route % route % route Full route Full route % route % route Route Funding Period 1/01/2014 - 6/30/2014 1/01/2014 - 6/30/2014 3/01/2014 - 6/30/2014 1/01/2014- 6/30/2014 1/01/2014 - 6/30/2014 1/01/2014 - 6/30/2014 1/01/2014 - 6/30/2014 Funded Service Hours 1,750 19000 19190 19750 19000 19750 19000 Route Option Cost 1,750 x $107 /hr. 1,000 x $107 /hr. 19190 X $107 /hr. = 1,750 x $43.09/hr. = 1,000 x $43.09/hr. 1,750 x $43.09/hr. = 1,000 x $43.09/hr. = $1879250 =2 = $1079000 = 2 $1279330-2 $759407.50 = 2 = $439090 = 2 $759408 = $439090 = $939625 = $539500 = $639665 = $379704 = $219545 (1/2 could be paid by (1/2 could be paid by (1/2 could be paid by (1/2 could be paid (1/2 could be paid by DATA DATA ) DATA ) by DATA DATA TT Proposed Funding $679000 $679000 $679000 $679000 $679000 $679000 $679000 TT Residual for Route Option -$269626 $139500 $39335 $299296 $459455 -$89407 $239910 FUNDING NOTES: TT materials dated April 29, 2013 propose a dollar allocation of $67,000 (of its 24% regional share option) for the OCBRIP #2 ranked Mebane to Durham regional express route. Details were not provided about how the funds would be spent, i.e. period of route design, performance, service hours, and times of day. Options 1 -7 in the table above outline various combinations of full -day and peak -hour service by both TT and OPT, and provide the maximum approximate service hours that could be achieved in each scenario. If TT only does a partial route from Hillsborough to Durham, staff calculates the $67,000 proposed may only provide 1,190 TT full -day service hours (14 hrs /day) or 1,000 TT peak -hour service hours (8 hrs /day) from March 1 to June 30, 2014. The $67,000 that TT proposes spending could be utilized by OPT to contractually support a full route from Mebane to Efland to Hillsborough to Durham /Duke (14 hrs /day) from January 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014. OPT's costs to service this route would be considerably less at $43.09 per service hour, and 50% of any route option that crosses into Durham could be paid by the Durham Area Transit Authority (DATA). 30 ATTACHMENT 6 C. New Service Options 1. New Northern Human Services Shuttle along Hwy 86 N. a. Rationale: There has been public interest through forums for a route designed with connectivity to the 420 Hillsborough-to-Chapel Hill Route b. Type: Peak-hour service C. Service Times/Hours: Monday thru Friday from 5:30 a.m.-8:30 a.m., and from 4:00 p.m.-6:30 p.m. = 1375 hours d. Funding- OCBRIP OPT 12% Share e. Annual Route Option Service and Cost: 5 '/2 hours x 250 days x $43.09/hr. _ $59,248.75 for 1375 hrs. for a full year Northern Human Services Shuttle Nch1herm IHuman,,Services I r Maxaray� 7 ' ., Vii 11IIIIII0000101 Northern Holman Semvices Shuttle HAllsbarough T .W,!Mri 416 rvWp q mAb Cle {tl5u' l:i 31 ATTACHMENT 6 2. New Regional Mebane-Orange-Durham Express (MODE) Route a. Rationale: The County Commissioners have voiced an interest for a west-east route that will service the county from Mebane to Efland to Hillsborough to Durham/Duke (along the US 70 corridor). Transit, including a park-and-ride lot is also supported by the adopted Efland-Mebane Small Area Plan and adopted Eno Small Area Plan. The Efland-Mebane Small Area Plan specifically states that the county should work cooperatively with Triangle Transit Authority (TTA) to provide bus service in the area. b. Type: Regional express service C. Service Options: 14-hr. full-day; or 8-hr. mid-day d. Route Variations: i. MODE Route operated under contract by OPT, with stops in Mebane, Efland, Hillsborough, and Durham/Duke (utilizing US 70 for the majority of the route) ii. MODE Route operated under contract by OPT, with stops in Mebane, Hillsborough and Durham/Duke (utilizing 1-85 for the majority of the route) iii. Partial MODE Route from Hillsborough to Durham/Duke operated by TTA (utilizing 1-85 for the majority of the route) iv. Partial MODE Route from Mebane to Efland to Hillsborough operated by OPT (utilizing US 70) e. Route Variation Note: TTA proposes that this route not stop in Efland and utilize 1-85 for the majority of the route to meet its criteria for a regional express route. Orange County's preference is that this route utilize US 70 for the majority of the route. Staff has reviewed the existing TTA Durham Station to Chapel Hill Route 405 and Chapel Hill to Raleigh Express Route (CRX) regional express routes referenced in the OCBRIP. By comparison with the 405 and the CRX, the MODE route, as proposed by Orange County has the shortest run time, fewer overall stops, and time periods between stops that are well within the range of these other TTA regional express routes. Therefore, the MODE route, with the included stop in Efland, appears to be consistent with the regional express route concept and criteria as intended in the OCBRIP. e. Associated Capital Expenditures: OPT will need a new 27- passenger bus for this route, or two new buses or two new buses to run the full route with more frequent runs. f. Funding- By TTA with its 24% share per OCBRIP g. Annual Route Option Service Costs (Note: Same cost but fewer runs on full route vs. half route): i. OPT's annual estimated costs for operating the full Mebane- Efland-Hillsborough-Durham/Duke full MODE Route is estimated as follows: 32 ATTACHMENT 6 - Total route full-day (14-hr.) service cost Monday thru Friday, 250 days/year is estimated to be $150,815 with half proposed to be paid by Durham Area Transit Authority (DATA), leaving a cost of$75,407 (3,500 operational hours at $43.09/hr.) - Total route peak-hour (8-hr.) service cost Monday thru Friday, 250 days/year is estimated to be $86,180 with half proposed to be paid by DATA, leaving a cost of$43,090 (2,000 operational hours at $43.09/hr.) ii. TT's annual estimated costs for operating the Hillsborough to Duke (half-route) portion of the MODE Route is estimated as follows: - Total full-day (14-hr.) service cost Monday thru Friday, 250 days/year is estimated to be $381,500 for 3,500 operational hours ($109/hr.) Total peak-hour (8-hr.) service cost Monday thru Friday, 250 days/year is estimated to be $218,000 for 2,000 operational hours ($109/hr.) iii. OPT's annual estimated costs for operating the Mebane to Efland (half-route) portion of the MODE Route is estimated as follows: Total route full-day (14-hr.) service cost Monday thru Friday, 250 days/year is estimated to be $150,815 with half proposed to be paid by DATA, leaving a cost of$75,407 (3,500 operational hours at $43.09/hr.) Total route peak-hour (8-hr.) service cost Monday thru Friday, 250 days/year is estimated to be $86,180 with half that could be paid by DATA, leaving a cost of$43,090 (2,000 operational hours at $43.09/hr.) TT materials dated April 29, 2013 propose a dollar allocation of $67,000 (of its 24% regional share option) for the OCBRIP #2 ranked Mebane to Durham regional express route. Details were not provided about how the funds would be spent, i.e. period of route design, performance, service hours, and times of day. If TT only does a partial route from Hillsborough to Durham, staff calculates the $67,000 proposed may only provide 1,190 TT full- day service hours (14 hrs/day) or 1,000 TT peak-hour service hours (8 hrs/day) from March 1 to June 30, 2014. The $67,000 that TT proposes spending could be utilized by OPT to contractually support a full route from Mebane to Efland to Hillsborough to Durham/Duke (14 hrs/day) from January 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014. OPT's costs to service this route would be considerably less at $43.09 per service hour, and 50% of any route option that crosses into Durham could be paid by the Durham Area Transit Authority (DATA). 33 ATTACHMENT 6 Efl�rrd � � is] Pa7AG al��Ride' � � 'lu�axv7�yr' Tangor ` 70 040 a�xm 'o"..„.0 Durham 70 ``m".„..,„, � .,, ,....^•.,•• nauv�m�mwurmxirvnwmm llln'141PIiMAWn Alamance �i 501 Duke Hospft Proposed Bus Route INDUSTRIAL 1e5 Park&Ride mimouuuuuumm ARROWHEAD OIAUTAIYeIGOi„HiUCKHORNDURHAM FREEWAY II�IIP VII"�����m EkVelin 15 r mmmm wn.t7An<N/mOD 1D570 PUILTOM rvuuuim mim"MATTRESS FACTORY PI Pr�.iaased 'Souim ...RIP Appendix B Fags 1 asn=v mm c.�a�snuuis Orange County Preferred MODE Route 34 ATTACHMENT 6 3. `New' Hillsborough Circulator Route a. Rationale: This route was developed to address air quality compliance in and around Hillsborough. The route provides service to social, medical, and educational destinations in the Hillsborough area. b. Type: Fixed route C. Route Classification Note: Orange County considers the Hillsborough Circulator Route to be a new route based on the July 1, 2009 effective date of the state Mobility Bill. The route classified in the OCBRIP as an enhanced route (Appendix B page 3) d. Funding- Initial funding for this route was provided by a 3-year Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) grant for federal fiscal years 2011, 2012, and 2013 (October 1, 2010 — September 30, 2013). A CMAQ grant such as this one is meant to test the viability of continuing a public transit fixed route. The route was not initiated until June 2011, which created eight months of possible unobligated CMAQ funds for this route. The Town of Hillsborough has contributed a $23,000 (20%+/-) as its local match. e. Funding Issue: There is a question that there may not be sufficient CMAQ funding for the route for the full three years (until June 2014). Since the initiation of the route was delayed until June 2011 but grant eligibility began in October 2010, the eight months of funding, from October 1, 2013 through May 30, 2014 is currently under discussion with NCDOT. If funding cannot be extended through this time period, the BOCC may wish to consider expending OCBRIP funds in FY 14 on the continuation of the Hillsborough Circulator Route. The Town of Hillsborough has budgeted $23,000 for its FY 2013-2014 and has $15,000 remaining contributions for FY 2012-2013. Staff is awaiting a reply from NCDOT to clarify this issue. f. Annual Route Option Service Hours and Costs- i. Current circulator service hours and costs: 8 hours per day, Monday thru Friday, 250 days per year, 8:00 a.m. — 12:00 p.m. and 1:00 p.m. — 5:00 p.m. at a cost per hour of$43.09 = 2000 operational hours at an annual cost of$86,180. ii. Additional circulator service hours and costs: 2 hours per day additional, Monday thru Friday, 250 days per year, 7:00 a.m. — 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. — 6:00 p.m. at a cost per hour of$43.09 = 500 additional operational hours at an annual cost of$21,545. iii. Total new expanded service hours and costs: 10 hours per day, Monday thru Friday, 250 days per year, 7:00 a.m. — 12:00 p.m. and 1:00 p.m. — 6:00 p.m. at a cost per hour of$43.09 = 2500 operational hours at an annual cost of$107,725. 35 ATTACHMENT 6 1- Ntmvlv 6-KinE Hi I I A vcnw- � 11-Gmc�wi�,A i).wimen 1 16-Iood Li(m 2- ftaifwv'lIeet 7 �iowh Nadi and Ualvia`4Iivvu 12 I'Lmiel Boone(ar0i(pw,,awa) 17-WV,Dojm,I(molmd joop� 3- 1 8,Libr4ry 13.Socid 18-Fol";,I pAveqf -I- Whilk'd FON'O 9-'Hinix-i,Mobile flomv Park 14-UNC Fdgnih,Pnioicv I')_'1'o�j,QJJL "Ie 1,- WVest @ 1M A vech u114, W-Coachwood Apamlmqlta I I)"dwKI'I o0l('am plu, 20-CourdwiFe , L. r-0 LU DA PA INNICK 00 N N 0 0 im CHAP A 0 F us INE QU E TRY hJ y . f ............. ................................. .......... .............. 1/5 185 0401V 3: 10 ORKMAN U) OLD so 'r spar m JACOBS III.RVIII RFPY VVATERSTON Hillsborough Circulator Route 36 ATTACHMENT 6 D. Existing and Enhanced Service Options 1. 420 Route from Hillsborough to Chapel Hill a. Existing 420 Route from Hillsborough to Chapel Hill i. Rationale. public route serves downtown Hillsborough Triangle SportsPlex, Chapel Hill North Shopping Center, downtown Chapel Hill, and UNC Hospital. ii. Type: Mid-day service iii. Funding- OPT 12% Share iv. Annual Existing Service and Cost by OPT: 3 hours/day, Monday thru Friday, 250 days per year, hours of operation from 10:00 a.m.-11:30 a.m. and 1:00 p.m.-2:30 p.m. at a cost of$43,500 (750 operational hours at $58/hr.) (3 hours x 250 days x $58/hr. _ $43,500) OR b. Enhanced (Expanded) 420 Route from Hillsborough to Chapel Hill i. Rationale: To supplement the two current route times that we have in order to accommodate a greater number of riders more frequently. ii. Type: Mid-day service iii. Funding- OPT 12% Share iv. Annual Enhanced (Expanded) Route Option Service and Cost by OPT: Service hours would be expanded to add an additional two round trips, 3 hours of service/day, from 8:30 a.m. — 10:00 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. — 4:00 p.m. The expanded route hours would provide a more continuous service along the 420 route, with TTA providing peak hours service from 6:00 a.m. — 8:30 a.m. and 4:25 p.m. — 6:25 p.m. (3 hours x 250 days x $58/r. _ $43,500) 37 ATTACHMENT 6 wl,I 'pl py r,g�r.Y,z urns lra �'h"s. � I Uih 4i I� � hwri � ru rr �r illp c r YI ru�N'u;l ^r up r,ulrc lY lrz�:.. orl' Nmu C*1 14C 10 l r; �t kw � Pll' 0"M NC Rwy 09 l f. NMdhMll� k!$1 d"u,y ay'(Ntaow .............. r,/ .____, ....n•„ 'Iwlf jiP� ' is" NO5"t n�ror,°�Ikflgi�Yl�;l �IF`kablara lik Macon Farm Rte Clear Ent Ratlltb'a g li. rd- �' 1� r r ��''IIIIII((IIIII((IIII{IIWWIIr�r�mc��mm���ir({��IIIII i��/ulrlui�� PIP I �I�I �o� AII� U� � 'AI �Illi rH�PI" I(I' ,r'rr(„ I wk F„r.,, r� liIHl,Ut> VrnG fir%h mfal ,rr,'a, «,' Ili J aw V ” Q Major t. r 1,1 Bars TrEwis er Cen/t,er blw ,,,• "N w. �ou4„I w 4 r.N,¢.riYnr/, U� Vjl r 5 ICI!! fur oma�uuyia Up"," e< 38 ATTACHMENT 6 wl,I 'pl py r,g�r.Y,z urns lra �'h"s. � I Uih 4i I� � hwri � ru rr �r illp c r YI ru�N'u;l ^r up r,ulrc lY lrz�:.. orl' Nmu C*1 14C 10 l r; �t kw � Pll' 0"M NC Rwy 09 l f. NMdhMll� k!$1 d"u,y ay'(Ntaow .............. r,/ .____, ....n•„ 'Iwlf jiP� ' is" NO5"t n�ror,°�Ikflgi�Yl�;l �IF`kablara lik Macon Farm Rte Clear Ent Ratlltb'a g li. rd- �' 1� r r ��''IIIIII((IIIII((IIII{IIWWIIr�r�mc��mm���ir({��IIIII i��/ulrlui�� PIP I �I�I �o� AII� U� � 'AI �Illi rH�PI" I(I' ,r'rr(„ I wk F„r.,, r� liIHl,Ut> VrnG fir%h mfal ,rr,'a, «,' Ili J aw V ” Q Major t. r 1,1 Bars TrEwis er Cen/t,er blw ,,,• "N w. �ou4„I w 4 r.N,¢.riYnr/, U� Vjl r 5 ICI!! fur oma�uuyia Up"," e< ATTACHMENT 6 E. OCBRIP Funding Calculations and Bus Service Hours for Orange County FY13 -14 THROUGH FY16 -17 Apportionment FY 13 -14 FY 14 -15 FY 15 -16 FY 16 -17 Calculation Total Costs per OCBRIP $905,000 $1,608,000 $2,565,000 $3,702,000 Total Costs per OCBRIP as revised by TTA $850,000 N/A N/A N/A Administrative Cost $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 5% Reserve $38,750 $76,650 $128,250 $185,100 Post Admin and 5% Reserve Dollars Available for Bus $736,250 $1,456,350 $2,361,750 $3,442,000 Hours Total OPT Funded Bus Hours 1,523 2,981 4,784 6,887 BRIP Estimated Cost /Hour $58 $58.62 $59.24 $59.97 OPT 12% Share $88,350 $174,762 $283,410 $413,040 Annual Uncommitted New $88,350 $86,412 $108,648 $129,630 Monies w/o residuals TTA 24% Share2 $176,700 $349,524 $566,820 $826,080 CHT 64% Share $471,200 $932,064 $1,511,520 $2,202,880 Existing Services FY 13 -FY 14 FY 14 -FY 15 FY 15 -FY 16 FY 16 -FY 17 Calculation Total Revenue from $7 Tag Fee $591,000 75% r. $788,000 $788,000 $788,000 Total Revenue from $3 Vehicle Tag Fee N/A N/A N/A N/A OPT total annual bus hours 4 25,000 26,458 28,261 30,364 OPT Share 8% 8% 8% 8% TTA Share N/A N/A N/A N/A CHT Share 92% 92% 92% 92% Maximum Existing Services $47,280 $63,040 $63,040 $63,040 Fund S5 OPT New /Enhanced FY 13 -FY 14 FY 14 -FY 15 FY 15 -FY 16 FY 16 -FY 17 Services Calculation OPT 12% Share $88,350 $174,762 $283,410 $413,040 Less Maximum Existing Services Funds5 $47,280 $63,040 $63,040 $63,040 Resulting Minimum New /Enhanced Services $41,070 $111,722 $220,370 $350,000 Fund S5 'Total OPT Bus Hours estimated based on OCBRIP assumptions although many existing routes are or can be operated by OPT at a lower cost per hour. 2OPT, TTA and CHT Shares estimated based on estimated post admin and 5% reserve dollars available for bus hours. 3 $3 Vehicle Tag Fee has not yet been approved by the Legislature. 4 FY 13 -14 total annual bus hours for OPT based on actual documentation. FY 13 -14 through FY 16 -17 annual bus hours estimated based on the incremental increase in newly funded bus hours 5 FY 14 -15 through FY 16 -17 Services Funds based percentages for OPT FY 13 -14 Provider Shares percentage. NOTE: Under the federal transportation authorization (MAP -21), and depending on the location of selected routes relative to the Durham - Chapel Hill - Carrboro Urbanized Area (LIZA), OPT is likely eligible for funding of at least 50 percent of the capital /operating /maintenance costs of its operations via federal or state sources. 39 .I Annual Uncommitted Portion of OPT 12% Share 41 ATTACHMENT 6 F. Commuting Patterns Maps are provided on the following pages depicting the following regional commuting patterns- 1. Duke Hospital Employees by Home Address Zip Code 2. UNC & UNC Hospital Employees by Home Address Zip Code 3. American Community Survey Data from 2007-2011 on residents working outside of their county of residence (for Orange County and Alamance County This data is available for use in the analysis of OPT bus service options. 42 Duke Hospital Employees by Home Address Zip Code 27314 27583 (30) 27541 (354) (171) 27244 27572 (39) 0), 27217 27231 (97) (68) 27249 27503 (25) (2) a t Mebane 27278 r 8 (1259) q1 27712 r 70 27302 xi'(1816)(d Burimgton (700) Hillsborough q" e2b 27201 Gr � aham` 27243 27215 (�) ; (155) 2705 rig b f� '� (,156) (6073) 27258 ��Durliam`r a 27253 (184) 27514 27340 Carrboror (g) bra, 't 27516x27510 27349 (1137) (271 Chapel 27298 275,1r7 p% (742) 27312 (170) N 1 in=7 miles Zip Codes 0 1 2 OMiles Town/City Boundary orange county Planning and Inspections Brian Carson(6/4/2013) 43 UNC & UNC Hospital Employees by Home Address Zip Code 27314 27583 (.14) (29) (9) (26) 27541 ,27244 (31) 27572 (3*) 1 (24) (31) (16) 27217 (25) (91) 27231 (225) (23) (30) 27249 27503 (22) (15) (22) 27278 (16) Mebane (369) 27712 q+ Burlin ton rye" iw y. Hillsborough 70 (375) vr 27201 ) Granamf 27258` 27243 27215 (:) ,ao � (i16 ) (0) )�� (79) (74) 27705 � °(,140) (80) (69) (493) 27253 (202 Durham +�+° (409) 27514 i ; t�" (298) 27340 �a «(�2/?a,) 27707 (26) S, (9) 27516 2�7510 (463) (2,149)' 27349 ( ) 792 Chapel 27298 I37 (3$9) r E (31) ( ) (73) q G (18) a u „ z751z f �` (1'736) (555) ' 27312 (523) (397) UNC employees (xx) UNC Hospital Employees (xx) N 1 in=7 miles Zip Codes � o , z OMiles Town/City Bounds Orange County Planning and Inspections ,,, y ry Brian Carson(6/4/2013) Worked Outside of • of - •_ _ (American • mmunity Survey 2007-20 Guilford Co. Caswell Co. Alamance Co. 213 212.01 219.02 212.06 , 220.02 111.02 \ \ 109.02 112.03 Person Co. 112.04 is Durham Co. I N 1 inch= 4.25 miles Chatham Co. 0 s Miles Orange County Planning and Inspections Department GIS Map Prepared by Brian Carson. 6/4/2013 45 Attachment 7 Bus Route Service Implementation Suaaest Revision /Compression of Schedule for Public Involvement/Input and Preparina and Finalizina Implementation Plan draft: *S - off° Ugge ed Changes - Schedule mghl -gh ed _ -tinge Date Eve' (s) Stakeholders Involved Date Event(s) T Stakeholders Involved Creation of survey tools and public meeting Triangle Transit planning staff, OPT staff, OC May 2013 materials, selection of public meeting locations, planning staff, Hillsborough planning staff, May 2013 No change evaluation of current conditions Fred Fravel (KFH) June -July Public meetings, customer surveys, OUTBoard All three planning staffs, OPT staff, OPT Three outreach meetings (Mebane,,Efland/Cheeks and Hillsbprough) . .and`custornersurveyexercise, OUTBoard presentation, meet with 2013 presentation, meetings with BOCC and other customers, Orange County citizens, tune - August 21113 BOCC and other s#akehotde€s; Begin preparation of Implemen#atron stakeholders OUTBoard, Orange County BOCC Planitlraft,,Busca tTaL roectsdiscussion August 2013 Complete Implementation Plan draft from results of,June�- August events August 2013 Preparation of first draft of Implementation Plan All three planning staffs, OPT staff Late- RUgust 2013 Present to other associated boards if board schedules allow and if, (necessary; °ep#ember 5, 2013' Draft of Implementation Plan presented to Orange County BOCC ands continue bus capital projects discussion No change September 11, 2013. Draft of Plan presented to OUTBoard to solicit comments, Orange County BOCC, Triangle Transit Board September- First draft of Implementation Plan presented to of Trustees, Orange County Manager Final draft of'Plampresented to BOCC w#h�any OUTBoard comments . September 17, 2013 October associated Boards. Second round of public Durham County BOCC, Mebane City Council and finalize Plan, 2013 involvement events. Bus capital projects discussion. Hillsborough Town Council, Chapel Hill Carrbor UNC, same stakeholders as 1� Share Implementation Plan draft as information item to other associated . September 2013 r round of public meetings boards if not done in August e r early September � October 1 2€113' Begin implementation of any route enhancements/ex,pansions depending on public involvement January 1 2014 Begin�implementation of any new routes depending on public' involvement November 2013 Preparation of final draft Both planning staffs, OPT staff These events compressed to before October 2013 or January 2014 December Presentation of Final draft of Implementation Plan to Same stakeholders as first draft of 2013 associated boards for approval Implementation Plan ? ?? Implementation of first services /bus capital projects OPT, Triangle Transit *S - off° Ugge ed Changes - Schedule mghl -gh ed _ -tinge 46 BUUBDI N FOU 9 tra FY14 Durham/Orange Bus and Rail Investment Plan Overview Total Collections $31.1M (Orange - $7.3M; Durham $23.8M) Total Expenditures $16.46M (Orange -$4.33M; $12.13M) - Orange County expenses include $116K for Hillsborough Train Station using funding from reserves Reserve Funds are maintained to fund an operating reserve and support future capital needs Revenue Available for Bus Services (per County Plans): Orange $736K Durham $673K Revenue includes 1/2 Cent Sales Tax, Vehicle Rental Tax and Vehicle Registration Tax, Grants Expenditures include Administration, Personnel, Consultants, Capital and Transit Services FY14 Proposed Budget meets criteria in County Plans and Implementation A ree aent,s Durham Orange Bus and Rail Investment Plan 06/13/13 47 M 4 Draft Budget - Durham/Orange Bus and Rail Investment Plan FY14 Forecast(July 1,2013-June 30,2014) Orange Durham Total Revenue: (Received July 1,2013-June 30,2014) FY14 Fcst based on FY13 yr end estimate-4% 1/2 Cent Sales Tax 6,283,620 21,730,640 28,014,259 increase in Orange;3%in Durham 7Te-ceived July June , o of total collections=$4.5M Orange-10.1%;Durham-20.7%based on 2012 census data;FY14 assumed at 2%growth over Rental Tax 456,375 935,343 1,391,719 FY13 yr end estimate (Received October 1,2013-June 30,2014); FY14 assumed at 2.0%growth in Orange and $7 County Registration Tax 577,071 1,139,764 1,716,835 2.5%in Durham over FY13 year end estimate $3 Regional Registration Tax increase 0 0 0 Pending legislative action Grants/Other 0 0 0 To be identified Total Collections 7,317,066 23,805,747 31,122,813 Operating and capital reserve(50%of sales Administrative Costs q5,000) q5,000) Q150,000) tax;5%of registration and rental tax) Operating and capital reserve(50%of sales Reserve�p ppgppppp ryry p Q3,193,412) Q10,969,075) Q14,162,557) tax;5%of registration and rental tax) Revenue Available for Bus Svcs 736,250 673,180 1,409,430 Per County plans Expenses: Pro-rated based on hire date includes benefits Personnel and employee related expenses Finance(1) in Admin costs in Admin costs In Admin costs Capital Development(5)` 114,870 385,651 500,521 C£tPA (1)` 16,008 53,742 69,750 Legal(3)* 38,389 128,882 167,271 Consultants` URS 3,190,050 10,709,950 13,900,000 Scope of work attached Legal 16,065 53,935 70,000 Communications Outreach(Bus) 20,000 20,000 Capital dollars are remaining local costs after Capital grants Park and Rides/Bus Projects 10,000 82,000 92,000 Park and Rides/Bus Projects(TTA) 15,000 15,000 30,000 Hillsborough Train Station 116,000 0 116,000 Funded using reserves Transit Services Per Orange Plan OPT is 12%of Orange revenue Orange Public Transit(OPT) 88,350 0 88,350 available for bus Per Orange Plan CHT is 64%of Orange revenue Chapel Hill Transit(CHT) 471,200 0 471,200 for bus Durham County 33,658 33,658 Durham Area Transit Authority(DATA) 451,300 451,300 Per Orange Plan TTA is 24%of Orange Triangle Transit Authority(TTA) 176,700 118,620 295,320 revenue available for bus Total Bus Svc Expenses: 736,250 603,578 1,339,828 Bus Revenue Available 736,25 673,18 1,409,430 Remaining 0 69,602 69,602 Total Expenses(incl Admin costs) 4,327,631 12,127,739 16,455,370 Total Revenue 7_317,066 23 805 747 31,122,813 Balance Remaining 2,989,435 11,678,009 14,667,444 Remaining(unreserved) (88,047) 708,933 620,886 Reserve(Operating and Capital) 3,077,482 10,969,075 14,046,557 2,989,435 1 11,678,009 14,667,444 Light Rail expenses split by county: Durham 77.05% Orange 22.95% Durham Orange Bus and Rail Investment Plan 06/13/13 48 FY14 Staffing Plan - Durham/Orange Bus and Rail Investment Plan Position Title Salary Ranpe Hire Date 1 Sr. Financial Analyst $65,000-$75,000 6/15/2013 2 Manager - Design &t Engineering $90,000- $110,000 7/1/2013 3 Project Controls &t Budget Manager $55,000- $65,000 12/1/2013 4 Environmental Planner $55,000- $65,000 8/1/2013 5 Transit Planner (GIS) $40,000- $50,000 10/1/2013 6 Project Engineer $75,000- $85,000 8/1/2013 7 Agreement Coordinator $60,000- $70,000 9/1/2013 8 Para Legal $40,000- $50,000 11/1/2013 9 Real Estate (RE) Specialist $55,000- $65,000 4/1/2014 10 Communications Specialist $50,000- $60,000 10/1/2013 Durham Orange Bus snd Pail Investment Ran 06/13/13 49 FF Elm= uuu1 �� � �a Durharn-Orainge I igIht Raill Transit r ° Ot ° Tr ia a.� . Regional " our transit,tilti'll"VI June 2013 50 �^ [mv,"';t Project ��eveU��prnen� Scope ��f �����k our uonu�futr ~ TabI(-,:-! (:)f Contents 1.0 Project Management................ ......... .............. ...... ......... .................................1-1 1.1 Project Management CODtnD|.............................................. ................................ ...1~1 1.2 Project Schedule............. ................... ........ ._...............-.. ...~.^....... ....^-...^.~.^..1-1 1.3 Document Control ..................................................................................................1-2 1/4 Cost Estimating.......................................................................~...~.~'~^ ...................1-2 2.0 Environmental Management and Coordination..........................................................~2-1 2.1 Draft Environmental Impact Si8teRl9[t (C>E|5) Management @nd Coordination..........2-1 2.1.1 C)E|S Technical Studies and Documentation ....................................................2-1 21.2 Coordination with Regulatory Agencies ........................... .......~.........~.._..-9-1 2.1.3 Coordination with Municipal and County Governments........._.~-...................2-1 2.1.4 Coordination with FTA......................................................................---^......2'2 2.2 FE|S Management and Coordination..................~.....................................^ .............2-2 2.21 FE|STechDical Studies and Documentation.....................................................2-2 2.2.2 Coordination with Regulatory Am8nCi8G ....................... .... ....---...... ........ .2~2 2.2.3 Coordination with K8UOicip8| and County Governments......................... ...........2-3 2.2/4 Coordination with FTA........-.~--.._.........~...~...................-.............. ....2-3 3.0 PUBLIC |NVOLVEK8ENT_....... .... .... .........----. ...................... ^...~..~^.~^^....... ......3- 31 Pngp8n3 Public Involvement Plan.............................................................................~3-1 3.2 Broad Based Constituency Development Strategy.................. ...^.~.,~~ .......... ........3~ � 3.3 Project V8b8it8Coordination..................................................-....~-...-...'....~ .. ...3-2 � 3.4 Project Nevv88tt8nG. Fact Sheets. and Presentation Materials............ .........~.......3-2 8.5 Develop Database/Project K88i|iOgUst----_.............~~..............-........-._.^3-2 3.6 Public Involvement Meetings and Minutes.......... ...................._ ...............................3-3 3.7 Conduct Public Hearing(s) and Responses 0J COnnnn8ntS...............~~................3~3 3.8 Report on Public Involvement................................... ........ ........_. .............. ........3-4 3.9 Visualizations and Graphics for Public |Ov0|we[D8nt.........-~._~....-~......................3'4 0.9.1 Graphics and Boards for Presentations........~...................~........................3-4 3.9.2 Station Photo Simulations.................................................................................3-4 3.9L3 Corridor Animation............................... ^.............. .......................~.................,3~5 8.9/4 Special H8Dd8nDg8 ...................... . ...................................._................_.....3-5 8.9i5 Special Animations........................................................................,.........~....^ 4.0 C)E|S Studies....................................................... ......... ... ....................................~...^4- 4.1 Refine/Update the Statement Of Purpose and Need........ ....................... ................4-1 4.2 Alternatives Considered ....................................................._._............................4-1 4`8 Transportation, Traffic and Parking ..........................................................................4-1 4.3.1 Traffic Planning and Analysis.... ...~.~-....._..~...._.............................._—,4~ 4.3.2 |OtehOl Year Model Development................................................................ .....4~4 4.8.3 Future Year K8Od8| Development.................,...~.......................................4-6 4.3.4 Prepare Traffic Operations F\88ult8 Report.......................................................4-7 4.3.5 Transportation Impacts.................................... ...~..~_._.......,....~_.~....~4~8 4.8.6 Parking Impacts................................................................................................4.8 4.4 Affected Environment and Environmental Impact Asses,smenit...,..._......................4-8 4.4.1 Land Use and COnln0UOitv Facilities........................................... ....... ..............4-8 4.4.2 Socioeconomic Conditions.................~..........................................................4-8 4.4.8 Neighborhoods, Community Services and Environmental Justice.....................4-9 4.4.4 Displacements and Relocations......................................................................4- 0 4.4.5 Visual and Aesthetics .....................................................................................4-10 ID u r[-i a ni Orange 0Ight 1:1afl I ransit l3roject | June 2013 J i URAl:::`F` 51 r o~e ct I)eveUop im e int Sco pe of Wo irk 4.4.6 CUltUrd, His1Oric, and Archeological ....~.......~...... ......................___...........4'1O 4.4.7 Park Lands ........................................................................~..~_,.............^_....4-13 4.4.8 Section 4(f) Involvement............................................~.......................^.......4-13 4.4.9 Safety and Security ........................................................................................4-13 4.4.10 Analysis Of Natural Resources.............^..........................................................4-13 4.4.11 Water Resources............................... ............................................................4-15 4.4.12 Floodplains................................................................ .~.................................4'15 4/4.13 Soils and Farmlands................._....,..........._ .................. .~--------..4'1G 4/4.14 Air Quality............................................................... ......... .............................4-18 4/415 Noise and Vibration .......................................... ...., ......................^..............4-16 4.4.16 Hazardous and Contaminated Materials............................................... ........4-17 4.417 ED9[gV..........-..~.~.....-...................,.........................................................4-18 44.18 Construction Impacts....................._..^............................................ .............4-1S 4.4.19 Freight Rail Operations....... .........._................... .........................................4-19 4.4.20 Financial Planning ..................~..................................._.............. ..,_..-~._4'19 4.4.21 Secondary and Cumulative |nnoaota Assessment....................................... ...4-2O 4.4.22 Climate Change Adaptation Planning .............................................................4'20 4.4.23 EvG|Uatk]O Of Alternatives ...................................................................~ ......4-21 4.4.24 Environmental |nmD@Ct Mitigation K88@su[RS .~.....-....~...-....^.-......—....-../4-2T 5.0 Prepare C)E|G Document................................................. ............. ..............................5-1 5.1 Prepare Preliminary OBS ................................................................~.........~...........5-1 5.2 Prepare Final Draft Environmental Impact Statement...............................................5-1 5.3 Prepare PUh|iC Notice of Availability /NO4\..................... .~.......... ......................5~1 5.4 []E|S QA/QC............................................................~-~~~^....~.~.~................_^~....-.5-1 GLOStation Area Planning ....................................................~............................................6-1 6L1 LRT Station Concept Design Development.......................................--.....~........6-1 6.1.1 Review OfPast Studies.................. .............~,..~..........................................6-1 8.1.2 Study Area Base Maps,,.,~~~,~,~,~,~,.,~_~_^.^^.,,,_,'~,,^^,~~~,._.~,..~,~,~.,~~,6~ 6.13 Study Area Inventory....................................................... ................................6-1 61.4 General Forces/Issues Analysis .................... ....... ...._.......,........................G'2 61.5 StatioD'C)esigD Parameters..............._..............................................................S'2 6.1.6 Station Location and Site Selection .................-..~,.~...-....~......~....... .........8'3 6.1.7 Station Concept Site Plans and Sections....^.....................................................6-3 6L1.8 Station Design SUnnnn8ry Report ......................................-..................~....8-3 6.1.9 Meetings and Public Involvement ......................~.................... .......................6-4 6.2 Visual Renderings OfLRT Stations..........................................................................G'4 6.2.1 Station Site Photos.....................................................~...... ......___............6'4 8.2.2 Selection Of Computer Imaging Viewpoints----_....^.^.._-...__....-^.......G'4 6.2.3 Preparation Of Computer Images.......................................,^..........................6'4 6.2.4 Station Site Photos........ .................,......................................................... ...G-4 6.2.5 Preparation Of Computer Images......................................................... ...........G-4 G.@ Station Area Bicycle and Pedestrian ACC8SG....~..... ....~- ............ ........................8'5 6.31 Inventory Of Existing Path Conditions ................. ....._...~..............................6'5 6.8.2 Path System Concept Plans........................................... ...... .........................G'5 Ei3.3 Path System Improvement Technical Memorandum....................^.................8'5 6.4 Station Area Transit-Oriented Development (TO[]) COOoeota ~..~....-.^.........—~,,'6-5 6.4.1 Identification Of Potential T[}C) Sites ........................................ ......... -..... .....6-5 6.4.2 PreliDliD8ryTC]C) Concept Plans............................................. .........................8-6 8.4.8 TOOTeChnic2| Memorandum............................................................ ...........6-G 6.5 Assessment of Secondary/Joint C>8v9|Opnm8nt Potential... ...... ................................6-S Durhaiiiii Ught Irtaill Transit Project U June 203.3 Aii DRAF1 52 ° ' F.mr-o`ect DeveUoprnent Scope of Wo�rk 6.6 Station Area Workshops................................................................................ ........~6~6 7.0 PP8p@n3 Final EIS (FE]S) @nd Record OfDecision (ROC)L—... ..... ................._.........7-1 71 Prepare FE|S ............................................................................. .^.........',...............7-1 7.1.1 Review Public and Agency Comments ......................... ...................~..............7-1 7.1.2 Reevaluate Impacts Per Design Changes Since C)E|S ............. .......... .. ........7-1 7.13 Prepare FE|S Errata Sheets......................................,~-..................................7-1 7.1/4 P[ep@[gFE|S Document............................-.....,...._..........-.........................7-1 7.2 Record Of Decision...................................................................................................7-2 8.0 FTA New Starts.................... ._..........-..-..-.,~._..............-......................................8-1 8.1 Project Management..........................................................................................~.~.~8-1 8.2 FY 2015 New Starts Submittal........................ .............................. ....... ............~—.8-1 8.3 FY2D18 New Starts Submittal.................................................................~ ....... ~...8-1 8.4 FY 2O15 Update Project MaDagerDentP|8Oand8ubobaDs-------------.8'2 8.4.1 Update Bus and Rail Transit Plans..........................................................-......8'4 8.4.2 Update Operating and Maintenance Cost E8bnn@t8G .................... ...................8'4 8.4.3 Update Safety and Security K8@Oage[D9nt Plan.................. ......................... ....8'4 8.4.4 UDd@i8 Document Control Plan ............................................~.....................8'4 8.5 PY2016 Update Project Management Plan and SU ......................... .......,.....8'5 8.51 Rail Transit Operating and Maintenance Procedures (T[}K8p) Report-.'..........8-5 8.5.2 Update Rail Fleet Maintenance Plan....................................................^.........G'5 8.5.3 Update Document Control Plan ........................................................................8'5 8.6 Travel Forecasting (FY 2015 New Starts Sub[DisGiOn/DBS) .................. .._..... ....G-8 8.61 K8Od8| Platform/Data UDd@t8/V@|id@1iOn.. .........................................................8-G � 8.6L2 Evaluation of Alternatives ........ .....................................................................8-6 8.7 T[@v9| Forecasting Activities (Entrance into EDgiDe8hno/FE|8).....---_................G-7 8.7.1 Tool Updates/Uncertainty and SeDGitivit«AO@|yGi8 ----.-......-..—..^..-...~8-7 8.7.2 Final Alternative Evaluation ......................................................... ....................8-7 87.8 Preparation Df New Starts Submittal..................................~^............... ...........8'7 8.8 Work Plan for Before and After Study....................... .................... ........................'.EF8 8.9 Prepare Request tO Enter Engineering...............................................~..-............_8'8 8.91 Update Financial PlaO. ................. .......~ .........................................................8'G 9.0 Preliminary Engineering Design .........................^._ ....................................... ..........S-1 91 QA/QC Program ...................... ....................---......................................... ........S-1 9.2 Design Management and CoO[diD@tkJO -------~..-..._-....._.---.~~.—...9'1 9.3 Design Criteria Development........................................ .....--....... ..........---.........9-1 9.4 Cost Estimating - Quantities ....................................................................................9'2 9.5 New Risk Analysis....................................................... ................ .._............~......9'2 E\6 Civil Engineering- LRT Corridor.......................................... ...................................9'2 9.61 General Drawings............................................... ................................ ......~...S'2 9.6.2 Alignment Plan and Profi|8, Sections and C)8t8i|G ... ......._ ............................9-2 9.6.3 Grading, Retaining Wall and Fencing Plans......... ...............................-. .........9-3 9.64 Drainage Plans and Hydraulic GtUdi8G~............. .......... ............... _............S-@ Field and Office Data CO||8C1k}n: A field reconnaissance visit tO the project viUbe conducted 1O verify existing drainage structures and features, identify land use, and define surface drainage flow patterns. During this visit each drainage outfall will be located, described, and evaluated for any stability, and O[capacity concerns. ..............................9'4 9.6.5 Erosion Control Plans.......................................................................................9-5 Erosion control concepts will b8 developed and documented On plan sheets tOdetermine additional temporary construction easement needs and to determine estimation of . quantities. ................... ........ ........ .----........__............. .......... .............. .....................S-5 D0rharn-Orange Ligi-it llafl "riransUt Project U June 2033Uffl l'.)RAF IF 53 Triangle Pr O j e c t DeveIloIlpirneiit Scope O f WO r° our trans'it fia we 9.6.6 Corridor Utilities Relocation Plans and Profiles (as needed).............................9-5 9.6.7 Demolition Plans...............................................................................................9-5 9.6.8 Minimum Right-of-Way Needs Plans ................................................................9-6 9.7 Roadway Grade Crossing and Roadway Reconstruction Plans................................9-6 9.8 Station Platform, Canopies, Bus Canopies and informational Kiosk.........................9-7 9.9 Park and Ride Lots and Off Street Bus Bays............................................................9-8 9.9.1 Pedestrian Bridges ...........................................................................................9-8 9.10 Structural Engineering-- ........ ...-9-8 9.10.1 Parking Structures............. ......... ......... .................., ........ .................. .........9-8 9.10.2 LRT Corridor Retaining Walls................................„.......,..................................9-9 9.10.3 Pedestrian Bridges ............ .......... ........ ......... ......... ......... .,................. .........9-9 9.11 Systems Engineering ..............................................................„..... ..,......„„...............9-9 9.11.1 Traction Power.................. ......... ......... .,....... ......... ......... .................. .........9-9 9.11.2 OCS Plans...........,.... ....,.......... ......... .............. ..„.............„.....................9-9 9.11.3 Signaling..............................................„..................................................,...........9-9 9.11.4 Communication and Central Control.......... „...................................................9-10 9.11.5 Corrosion Control and Stray Current Design...................................................9-10 9.11.6 Train Control...................................................................................................9-10 9.12 Rail Operations and Maintenance Facility ........................................„.......„..............9-11 9.12.1 Programming of the Facility.............................................................„.....„........9-11 9.12.2 Maintenance Building Architectural and Engineering Plans..„.........................9-11 9.12.3 Train Wash Facility...... .... ... ......... .,....., ........,..............9-11 9.12.4 Maintenance of Way Building .........................................................................9-11 9.12.5 Maintenance Storage Yard.................................................. ............................9-11 9.13 Support Services.............................. .......................„..,...„............... „....................9-12 9.13.1 Surveying ........................................................ ..............................................9-12 9.13.2 Subsurface Utility Engineering........................................................................9-14 9.13.3 Geotechnical ..... .......................................................................................9-15 9.13.4 Engineering Special Studies...........................................................................9-17 9.13.5 Agreement with Third Parties................................„.......---...........................9-17 9.14 Items Being Deferred to Next Phase ... ......... ......... ......... ........ ..........................9-18 Liii 't of I able Table8-1 Appendices List................. ......... ......... ......... .......... ........ ......... ......... .................. 8-3 11 ur]hmani-Orain e Might I a'H Transit Project D Juir�e 2013 Div DI AFT 54 14angle Re ion,al P r:� lr'310 000 Project I f,,.I IH Ip r nent Scope of Work Section 1 in this document summarizes the Work Plan proposed by the URS team to complete the design work that is essential to successfully construct the Triangle Transit Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit (D-O LRT) Project. ,1.0 Project Management 1.1 Project Management Control The task consists of the following activities: Monitor and manage contract deliverables and project costs. Prepare invoices, including progress reports for both Triangle Transit (monthly) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) quarterly reports. Attend project-related meetings as necessary with Triangle Transit and project stakeholder staff. Provide necessary information to support Project approval processes. Monitor Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) procedures for design effort. Administer design subcontracts and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) utilization. Conduct regular meetings with Triangle Transit and others to discuss project issues and progress. Develop meeting agendas and maintain a log of action items. IN Conduct technical meetings with Cities, NCDOT regulatory agencies, staff, and others as necessary to review basis of design and address specific technical issues. Conduct design review meetings as appropriate after interim design milestones. Conduct regular design coordination meeting with all design discipline leads to review and identify potential design issues, review design status in order to ensure a complete and integrated system design. Monitor progress of design deliverables and quality assurance. Attend public meetings as necessary to support Triangle Transit's efforts to address community issues and public involvement. Deliverables: Invoices, Monthly Progress Reports and progress of deliverables, and contract budgets Agendas, Meeting Minutes or Notes, Support Material, Action Item Logs 1.2 I?roject Scllhe 'ule Monitoring near term action times is the preferred method of tracking schedule and progress, which will include noting any required interfaces (predecessors and successors). When appropriate, develop a design and environmental baseline schedule of the project with the focus on those activities that will impact the critical path. um A construction schedule will also be developed near the conclusion of the engineering effort in support of the New Starts application. Durlhaur -Oi ange l,,,igl-t IR uIV T rarm it IPiroject I June 2013 �1-1 11..)RA,F l" 55 Project 11)evelopnient Scope of Work Deliverables: Weekly action item lists with due dates and interfaces Detailed project schedules when appropriate Construction schedule .3 Document Contr6l Maintain a file structure for all correspondence per the project's Document Control Management Plan. Also, maintain a file system for pertinent email correspondence. IN Develop and distribute standard formats for technical reports and memoranda. Identify and document design issues and track action items and resolution efforts. Update the project Document Control Management Plan as needed to reflect the management procedures being used. Update and maintain a project SharePoint site for transferring files and for document management that will include updates. Place project documents on a project SharePoint site consistent with the project document control log. Deliverables: File system and tracking log Project report style guide Update of the Document Control Management Plan as needed to reflect any update to the procedures actually taken Update and maintain project SharePoint site Cost Estirnatiin Develop capital cost estimate based on the 30% preliminary engineering set of documents making use of quantities performed by the various disciplines Organize the capital cost estimates to comply with FTA Standard Cost Categories (SCC) Document sources of pricing information and assumptions/inclusions in the identified pay-items Construction cost estimating software will be used indicating labor, materials, and equipment envisioned for the project Deliverable: Cost estimate presented in a bound volume complete with all documentation Duuuflham- garage Il,,,iglht Ir ad Traunsit Project � June 2033 J 1-2 DR AF 56 Nangl�eRegional Project DevelopmeIrit Scope of Work aur f mw i� 2,.0 Envlr nirn ntA Mainagenrien't and 'oordin tfor-I 2.,n J., Draft IEinv'iiroinim eini4l Impact Statement (D1!;.'iS) Mairnagement and ('.'ooirdiinafilon 111. DHS'Technical Studies and IDocumentafloin The URS team will provide management and oversight of the DEIS tasks including preparation of technical studies and documents and preparation of the DEIS as well as public involvement activities. This effort also includes coordination of internal project team environmental and National Environmental Policy Act(NEPA) compliance efforts through regular meetings as well as telephone and electronic communication. It covers quality control of environmental technical reports and NEPA documents, as well as coordination with other project disciplines such as project/program management, document control, engineering, station planning and design, New Starts application updates, and transit operations planning. Coordination elements includes preparation, attendance, and documentation of meetings and electronic and oral communication Deliverable: Meeting agendas and documentation 2,1.2 Coordination with Regulatory Agencies A streamlined project development process requires frequent coordination with regulatory agencies. Therefore, regular federal and state interagency meetings will be held to coincide with EIS milestones such as: project kick-off, identification of environmental baseline conditions, identification of environmental impact results and proposed mitigation activities. The purpose of these meetings is to keep the resource and regulatory agencies informed about the project and to receive input from them regarding existing conditions and evaluation of project impacts and mitigation. The URS team will arrange for meeting places and prepare meeting agendas, presentation aids, and handouts to facilitate the meetings and assist Triangle Transit in staffing the meetings and making presentations. In addition, a record of issues discussed and comments received will be created. URS will maintain an agency contact list. This effort does not include agency coordination with respect to specific subject matter (e.g., wetlands),which is addressed in other sections of this scope of work. Deliverables: Preparation of presentation materials and assistance in conducting agency meetings and preparation of meeting minutes Meeting logistics 2 1.3 Coordlination with IMo,.nic'ilpall aind County Governments Numerous coordination meetings are anticipated with municipal and county government throughout project development. URS will arrange for meeting places and prepare meeting agendas, presentation aids, and handouts to facilitate the meetings and assist Triangle Transit in staffing the meetings and making presentations. URS will maintain a contact list and a record of issues discussed and comments received will be created and maintained. URS will document each meeting attended. DtAi llhairn-Orange I.Jgll t lRaIIIV "I"iraiG°ms'il: Project � Juin(.,� 20113 DI 24 I')RAF " 57 Triangle e gicona �'� ���u,'P''���r�Sri��,r�d�u'? �� 1„)r o f c t Developrnent Scope of Work Deliverables: Preparation of presentation materials and assistance in conducting meetings and preparation of meeting minutes Meeting logistics 11-4 Coordination with IF"'rA The purpose of this task is to ensure that the decision-making process for the Durham-Orange Corridor encourages the FTA to support the project and thereby reduce the potential for delays. Although scoping is an early formal interface with FTA regarding NEPA compliance, coordination with FTA began during the Alternatives Analysis (AA) to ensure that FTA is in agreement and approves of the methodologies being used, the data that was collected, the evaluation and assessment analysis, and the process for the selection of the locally preferred alternative (LPA). URS will advise Triangle Transit on the effects of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) on the NEPA process. Revisions to rules and procedures will likely be refined by FTA during the course of the project. Thus, the URS team will advise Triangle Transit on forthcoming new rules and processes. Close coordination with FTA will also be required for the signing of the DEIS and selection of a preferred alternative. Triangle Transit and URS will collaborate on a strategy for FTA involvement and the URS team will be prepared to participate in and provide materials for FTA quarterly meetings as directed by Triangle Transit. Deliverable: Meeting materials and minutes 2�2 FUIS IMarmgeuryieint and Coordination 211 FH,S Technical Studies and IDocuuneintation The URS team will provide management and oversight of the Final EIS (FEIS) phase of project development including additional technical studies and documents required from comments on the DEIS, preparation of errata sheets for the FEIS, as well as public involvement activities. This effort also includes coordination of internal project team environmental and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance efforts through regular meetings as well as telephone and electronic communication. It covers quality control of environmental technical reports and NEPA documents, as well as coordination with other project disciplines such as project/program management, document control, engineering, station planning and design, New Starts application updates, and transit operations planning. Coordination elements include preparation, attendance, and documentation of meetings and electronic and oral communication related to completion of the FEIS. Deliverable: Meeting agendas and documentation 2.21 Coordination with Regulatory Agencies Coordination with regulatory agencies during the FEIS phase will be consistent with the procedures established during the DEIS phase with continued regular federal and state interagency meetings being held to coincide with EIS milestones such as selection of the preferred alternative, review of public comments, and mitigation commitments. The purpose of these meetings is to keep the resource and regulatory agencies informed about the project, and to receive input from them regarding existing (Durhanru Orarige Light IRalilll Transit IRroject � June 2013 12-2 II)IRAFT 58 . ��ea�d�a°ana r roject E e `el �� ent Scope or-�� r� �� conditions and evaluation of project impacts and mitigation. The URS team will arrange for meeting places and prepare meeting agendas, presentation aids, and handouts to facilitate the meetings and assist Triangle Transit in staffing the meetings and making presentations. In addition, a record of issues discussed and comments received will be created. URS will maintain an agency contact list. Deliverables: FAIR Preparation of presentation materials and assistance in conducting Agency Meetings and preparation of meeting minutes Meeting logistics 123 Cooirdinaflon with Municipal and County Governments Numerous coordination meetings with municipal and county government are anticipated throughout project development. URS will arrange for meeting places and prepare meeting agendas, presentation aids, and handouts to facilitate the meetings and will assist Triangle Transit in staffing the meetings and making presentations. URS will create and maintain a contact list and a record of issues discussed and comments received. URS will document each meeting attended. Deliverables: Preparation of presentation materials and assistance in conducting meetings and preparation of meeting minutes Meeting logistics 21.4 Coordinations vyitlh IF11'A Close coordination with FTA will be required during the FEIS and Record of Decision (ROD) phase of project development. URS will aid Triangle Transit in coordination of FTA's review of comments received on the DEIS, and in preparation of responses. FTA coordination will also include review of technical studies and documents required from comments on the DEIS, and preparation of errata sheets for the FEIS. URS will collaborate on a strategy for FTA involvement and the URS team will be prepared to participate in, and provide materials for, FTA quarterly meetings as directed by Triangle Transit. Deliverable: Meeting materials and minutes Durlharn-Orarige lE„'lght Rail Transit Project � June 2013 �2-3 IDRAF:'1” 59 60 triangie Regional firry/ Plo,gr,I'W , Project eveIII pre nt Scope of Work our ule 3.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 3.1 Prepare IP ulWic linvoWernent Nan In addition to updating the Program Public Involvement Plan, URS will formulate a Public Involvement Plan (PIP) that focuses on the D-0 LRT project. The Corridor PIP will be used to supplement and update the PIP for the existing "programmatic" Triangle Regional Transit Program (TRTP). URS will take advantage of any existing corridor committees and structures already in place including the Durham, Chapel Hill, Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization (DCHC MPO), County and City elected leaders and planning staff, and the local chambers of commerce. The Public Involvement effort will be conducted in accordance with the NEPA process and will satisfy expectations expressed in the new MAP- 21 legislation, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and Executive Order 12898 on Environmental Justice. Public engagement will be inclusive of people with Limited English Proficiency(LEP). A preliminary Public Involvement strategy with formal and informal public involvement strategies will be developed in conjunction with activities of Preliminary Engineering (PE) and the DEIS and FEIS. The Plan will have three goals: (1) educate/disseminate information about the project, (2) foster community relations and develop constituents for the project, and (3)create multi-media methods for public input. The PIP will be a living document which identifies and maintains constituent groups, interested parties, and agencies early on and throughout the project; provides the D-0 LRT project contacts database; details formal interagency session(s) and public hearing(s) and comment and review period requirements; specifies a schedule of outreach opportunities; recommends mechanisms for soliciting, responding to, and documenting public input; describes the role of public involvement in the decision- making process; details how public/user awareness of project progress will be generated; details how this program will be coordinated with others affecting the program area and/or constituencies; identify procedures for integrating public/user input and accommodating diverse and possibly conflicting priorities; and establishes parameters to identify and prioritize critical issues and concerns.The plan will also address media involvement, information, and communications. Deliverable: Public Involvement Plan (Draft and Final) 3.2 Broad Based Constltuericy Developnneint: Strategy URS will plan and execute a broad based Public Education/Constituency Development strategy in support of the PIP. In collaboration with Triangle Transit staff, URS will identify groups and organizations in order to educate individuals and organizations with regard to light rail technology in the corridor. Key community leaders and civic leagues will be contacted for the opportunity to present the LRT project to their members at regularly scheduled meetings. Additionally, announcements will be sent to civic groups for inclusion in their respective newsletters, websites, and social media. A calendar of events for the project will be set up and maintained regarding community activities for participation or sponsorship (e.g., International Festival, Durham Earth Day Festival, UNC or Duke University campus celebrations). Durham-Orange Liiglllit Rail "Transit Project I Juuine 2013 13-1 II1.XII11tAII:::°F 61 Wangle Regional Project IDevelo Irneint Scope f Work Deliverable: IN Broad-based Constituency Development Strategy for Public Involvement 3.3 Project W61bsite Coordination URS will continue to maintain the current project website, www.ourtransitfuture.com, as a constant source of project information with maps, drawings, draft and final documents, and news clips. URS will work with Triangle Transit staff to provide and place new text, graphics, and other applicable information on the site. URS will introduce cost-effective information technology (IT) tools on the website to improve public engagement and understanding, and provide periodic reports of web usage. The web page address will appear on all project information such as fact sheets, meeting notices, the telephone hotline and press releases. Deliverable: 110 Project-specific website input 3A Project I Newsletters, Fact Sheets, and Presentation Mlateriak URS will prepare a series of quarterly newsletters (on topics to be agreed to by Triangle Transit) as a means to disseminate project information and educate the public about regional and local transit and transportation issues beyond the D-O LRT project. Newsletters will be both in print and digital format. The newsletter is designed to disseminate information in a different medium, complement the website posts, and generally aid in constituency development. Each newsletter will also be translated into Spanish. In order to reach nontraditional constituencies URS will place notices/advertisements in special interest media; provide multi-lingual information and translation at meetings; and schedule meetings with sensitivity to ethnic observances. Up to three (3) fact sheets will be developed on topics to be agreed upon with Triangle Transit. Other narrative and graphic information materials ("infographics") will be developed to supplement the newsletters. These will focus on specific issues of concern to individual groups or localities or provide brief status reports on the overall project. URS will create and maintain a slide presentation about the D-O LRT project and provide updates at least once per quarter for presentations made to specific audiences such as businesses, elected officials, and the DEIS partner agencies. Video, visualization, and other animated graphics may be developed if additional resources are allocated. Deliverable: Project newsletter,fact sheets, and presentation materials 15 Develop Database Project MaKing Dist URS will review the existing project mailing list(s) at the start of the project and gather additional names specific to the corridor based on property owner lists and businesses along the corridor, etc. These lists l:'urlharn_ irange I1,,,igip-a Ra'd "Frains'it Project I J uine 2013 J 3-2 I11'.) FT' 62 Project De v III IIN rn i t Scope of Work will be updated throughout the study process. In addition, visitors to the project website are able to add their contact information to the database. It is expected that the mailing list will include elected officials; transportation, environmental, civic, and business organizations; county, city, state, regional, and federal agencies; residents and property owners; transportation providers; the media; and other interested groups and individuals. To provide additional information dissemination, newsletters and fact sheets will be available at meetings and information repositories and could be distributed as seat drops and at stations. URS will work with Triangle Transit to develop and maintain a comprehensive database mailing list. URS will sort the master database for targeted mailings to a variety of groups including the corridor committees, elected and appointed federal, state, county, and local officials and the general public. Deliverable: Project database and mailing list input .6 Pulkihc lirivollvernent Meetings and Minutes A series of formal public meetings and hearing(s) will be conducted during the course of preliminary engineering phase and the DEIS and FEIS phases to offer opportunities to present project findings, discuss all alternatives considered during the process, and receive further public comment. The NEPA process sets forth clear requirements for public hearings, notice, and review/comment periods consistent with federal, state, and local requirements. Alternate public meeting formats, such as an open house format, will provide structured opportunities for informal interaction between the public and the project team at key points in project development. Public meetings can also leverage innovative and interactive technologies such as Twitter and Esri online to engage the public and aid in better understanding of the project. Such technologies will also allow for "24/7 public involvement" meaning that project understanding and comment can occur online outside of physical meetings. Three DEIS public workshops and two DEIS public hearings (one in Chapel Hill and one in Durham) as well as four station development workshops will be held in accordance with the project schedule publicized in the project scoping information booklet(May 2012). The URS team will prepare minutes for public, station workshop, and community outreach meetings, summarize all public comment, and have a court reporter to record and transcribe Public Hearings, including public input and response, for approval and distribution by Triangle Transit, attendance and preparation of meeting materials for the public hearings. Deliverable: M Agendas, meeting minutes of public meetings, hearings, open houses, and station workshops .7 Conduct IlR bUc Heaurliing(s) and Responses to Crou°nnrrients The URS team will assist Triangle Transit in preparing for the public hearing(s)for the DEIS. URS will work with Triangle Transit in making arrangements for the provision of the required court stenographer, securing the meeting room, and producing public hearing advertisements. The URS team activities will include assistance in the identification of meeting locations, meeting times, and other required logistics; preparation of handout and presentation materials for the public hearing(s); preparation of script for Durltiaim Orange ILigllhmt Dl allll Transit (Project � June 2.0111,' 1' - DRAFT 63 °m rrmngle Regional P/Q(p'an'n Project Developinent Scope e f Work presentation by Triangle Transit Project Team members; and draft language for advertising hearing(s). It is estimated that two hearings will be held in the study corridor. The URS team will organize the comments received into a matrix listing the response categories by topic, required type of response, and responsible party. This matrix of comments received will assist Triangle Transit in tracking the completion of this task. The URS team will prepare draft responses to all comments for review by Triangle Transit. Deliverables: Comment/ Response Matrix 1111H Public Hearing presentation materials and Public Hearing logistics Public Hearing staffing Preparation of responses to comments recorded at public hearing(s) in a matrix format using Microsoft Access database 3.8 Rellpo�rt on, Public iinvolveiunent At the completion of the DEIS, the URS team will submit a report documenting all public methods, outreach activities, and input. The report will include hard copies of all public outreach materials (e.g., fact sheets, notices, public comments, correspondence) and supporting materials from all meetings and hearings. The report will include an executive summary, overview of the project and outreach process, and provide recommendations from the public and any conclusions drawn. Deliverable: N Report on Public Involvement (Draft and Final) 3.9 Visualizations and Graphics for Pubhc Illnvolvernent 3.9.1 Graphics and Boards for Presentations URS will prepare graphics and display boards in support of the stakeholder involvement effort for workshops, small-group, and agency meetings. Deliverable: Presentation Boards 3 9,2 Station Photo Siir nulat6orns The URS team will prepare a computer-generated image for each of the 17 LRT Stations. The images will be either ground-level or aerial views of the station sites and will illustrate the general characteristics and appearance of each of the transit stations. Artistic renderings of the station area and the transit oriented development (TOD) concepts plans will also be provided. Deliverable: High-resolution JPEG computer-generated images Duurhaur - nrran e Uglht IlRaill Trainsit Project 0 tune 2013 13-4 UR I:7 64 0 Project e l i-n t Scople of Work 3.9,E Corridor Ainiiu°nation A virtual animation of the full corridor showing LRT function and interaction at grade crossings will be prepared and used to educate and facilitate an understanding of the project among stakeholders Deliverable: IN Video Animations 3.9,4 p�ecW IReuadeidngs It is anticipated the several renderings of special project elements will be required during the course of the project development phase. Rendering of unique project features will be developed from hand sketches and/or computed generated graphics. Deliverable: M Artistic Renderings 1M SpecW Anlirnations It is anticipated that virtual animations of special project elements will be required during the course of the project development phase. Animations of unique project features will be developed from computer generated graphics or from other visualizations prepared under other subtasks such as the full Corridor Animation. Deliverable: To be determined Durllliam-Oi°ange l,.iglht Rail ,I raurns'iit II".1roject � June 2013 �3-5 DII AFIIC° 65 ,• •. ° 6ar,igle Rr gicon l l Na"w Pr o , �,��;W�� ��� 1"roject II;, III p im e t Scope of Work our O'rrsrsit ftltrnt? The URS team will make full use of the extensive data gathering and analysis conducted during the Alternatives Analysis. These analyses should only be updated or refined for the DEIS, unless conditions or alignments change affecting DEIS chapters that contain a discussion on Purpose and Need, Alternatives, and Affected Environment. The DEIS effort will consist of updating and refining descriptions of existing conditions, the assessment of potential impacts, and composition of the document. FTA and resource agency coordination will also be a part of this task effort. Project scoping and the Notice of Intent were completed under the AA process and were covered under the previous Scope of Work and further efforts are not included in this current Scope of Work. 4. 1. Refiine /Update the Statemer-A of Purpose and feed The purpose of this task is to refine the draft Statement of Purpose and Need (developed during the AA). The URS Team will create the first draft of DEIS Chapter 1 based on the public and agency comments received during the Scoping process. Triangle Transit, committees and others will review the Chapter and it will be revised accordingly. Deliverable: Revised DEIS Chapter on Statement of Purpose and Need (DEIS Chapter 1) (Draft and Final). .2 Aiternatives Corisiidered The URS Team will also develop the definition of alternatives to be carried forward into the DEIS process for detailed analysis. At a minimum, the alternatives defined will be the No -Build and the Build Alternative based upon the LPA recommendation. This will include alignment options in the vicinity of the New Hope Creek area and US 15 -501 and may include a refinement of alignment based upon engineering, environmental, and public involvement activities. Using the results of the AA and the LPA report, the URS team will develop the first draft of Chapter 2 of the DEIS- Alternatives Considered. The Chapter will be reviewed by Triangle Transit, committees, and others (may include FTA) as deemed necessary. Deliverable: 0 DEIS Chapter on Alternatives Considered (Chapter 2) (Draft and Final). 3 Transportation, Traffic and Parking 4.3.1. "traffic Piarrirnfng and Ana, ysis Base Year Micro - Simulation Model Development The first step in this process is the creation of the base year micro - simulation models. All subsequent steps in the study are predicated on this task. The process for this task is described in detail below. It is anticipated that up to six separate micro - simulation models will need to be set up. These models generally coincide with the sub -areas identified in the Draft Traffic Analysis Technical Report. These models include the following: IDurh�ann- Orange l.. „ight Rail °'i °ransit Project � .iuine 20:13 J ...1 IIDRAF 1” 67 Triangle Regional o's F'r of e c 11'.)eveloIxii-neint Scope of Work Downtown Durham — Focused along Pettigrew Street from Ninth Street/NC 147 to Alston Avenue. Erwin Road—Along Erwin Road from Fifteenth Street to Cameron Boulevard. South Square/University Drive—Starting at the Cornwallis Road Crossing and continuing through the University Drive area. It is anticipated that only the D3 alternative will be examined as it was selected as the LPA in an earlier phase. Gateway/Patterson Place Area — Beginning with the crossing of Garrett Road and continuing through Leigh Village. NC 54/Meadowmont Village Area — This sub-area will begin west of Leigh Village and continue through the Hamilton Station/Finley Golf Course Road crossing. It is assumed that two build scenarios will need to be developed; one for Alternative C1 and one for Alternative C2. Manning/UNC Chapel Hill Area —This will begin with the crossing of Old Mason Farm Road and continue through to the UNC Hospitals station. Base Year Model Data Collection The project team will collect data necessary to develop the VisSim micro-simulation models. This data will include, but is not necessarily limited to the following: * Aerial photography Contour data Traffic signal plans Relevant coordination plans All existing and relevant traffic counts Initial Base Year VisSim Model Data Development Coding of the VisSim model along appropriate sections of the corridor will begin by creating a base network over relevant aerial photography and contour data. The network will be verified initially and will be refined for what will be needed for the micro-simulation. This will include, but is not necessarily limited to the following: Coding of lanes and geometry Adding contour data Adding in traffic signals and subsequent timing and coordination plans Developing and coding measures of effectiveness (MOE's) Preforming a QA/QC check to ensure that data accurately matches base field conditions Once completed a geometrically accurate base year micro-simulation model will have been created.This model will at this point have no traffic data. Durlhaiuru-Or-ain e ll,,,'[glnt IRaH °I°uransiit Project O June 2013 J 4-2 DRAFT 68 `n Project De v III Ip iir ne iirt t Scope of r III( aur traan"'d' l'ud oar Traffic Data Collection The project team will review and assess the existing volume data. As base year and projected volumes exist for a number of locations, every effort will be taken to utilize existing data. No new count locations will be needed or are scoped as part of this process. As part of this process the project team will work with local stakeholders to determine what vehicle classification data is currently available and what additional data is needed. The project team will then work to create a data collection plan for finalizing any data needs during the field data collection phase. Assumptions for pedestrian flows and parking conditions identified in section 3.3.3 will be made at this point in time. Pedestrian flow information will be most critical in the downtown Durham area as within that location pedestrian interaction with vehicles could have the greatest impact on simulation results. Field Data Collection To complete the data collection process the project team, in coordination with the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), will begin the process of collecting field data. This will include the following: 1110 A field visit Verification of geometry and signal plans Filming corridors for comparison to micro-simulation model runs Collecting and verifying speed limit data Collecting travel time data utilizing float car methodology for model validation Review of pedestrian and parking assumptions from previous step Collection of any further data identified in previous step This will complete the data collection phase of the project. No additional data needs are foreseen past this point. Process Data The first step in processing the volume data will be the revision of AM and PM peak hours volumes from any additional count locations that may have been collected by others such as NCDOT or DCHC MPO. Any new data will be processed similar to the forecasts created for the Draft Traffic Analysis Technical Report. The data will also be examined to determine the speed distributions seen at various places within the study area. Individual speeds will be categorized to determine how the traffic speeds vary. Data will also be analyzed to determine heavy vehicle percentages and vehicle fleet distribution.This data will then be compared against other similar data and finally entered into the VisSim models. Travel time data will be processed for use in validation of the micro-simulation models, Lastly, pedestrian and parking data gathered in the field will be reviewed against the assumptions made and adjustments will be made as needed. Durharn Orange Lliglht Rail rransit Project � June 2013 �4-3 IC RA11:1,. 69 Triangle Regional Project E) v l lien e lin t Sc O p lir k. Final Base Year VisSim Model Development The first step in this task will be to use the traffic forecast developed previously to develop a base-year trip table matrix for each of the simulated areas for both the AM and the PM peak hours.The trip tables will be path-based, as opposed to dynamic-routing based. In addition to this step, the trip table for the downtown Durham area will have to be augmented to include parking sinks and sources. Once all data is analyzed and all matrices are created this data will be added to the base year VisSim model.This data will include the following: 0-D matrices Speed distribution data Heavy vehicle data Speed limits Additional field data as needed Once all data is entered the individual models will be run and checked visually. This visual check will ensure that vehicles are behaving similarly to field checks and recorded data. Typically this check will examine traffic flow and queue lengths to ensure they match observed conditions. MOE data will not be collected at this time. The project team will meet with Triangle Transit during the final portion of this step to complete visual verification and make any final changes necessary. Once complete the project team will have reached the key decision point. Once visual validation has been completed and the key decision point is reached the models will be run and the MOE's will be extracted. At this point a spreadsheet based tool will be created to assist in the analysis of the output. The output will then be compared to field data. The models will then be revised and updated in an iterative manner until validation is achieved.The number of model runs necessary for validation will be determined based on the variance of output and guidelines. When validation is achieved all measures needed to reach that point will be documented. The completion of this step will yield calibrated base year micro-simulation models. Deliverables: A series of micro-simulation models for each of the areas as needed. The simulation analysis and results will be prepared. oil Maps showing the design hour traffic and measures of effectiveness. Traffic Operations Results recap. 4.12 interim Year Model Developirment Interim Year No-Build Model Development Once base year models are complete the project will look to analyze an interim year no-build condition. A copy of the base year VisSim model will be created and to it any roadway projects within the network Duorlhham-Orarm e Ill,,,ui lhit ball Transit Project p June 2013 J 44 DRAFT 70 lihingle i l ' 0'4'? uu0# Project � � l o� e rs t c O p e of Work lo � a � V uIC will be added. This network will then be reviewed to ensure that the proposed geometries match the best assumptions available. MOEs and traffic signal timings will be updated and added to the model. As with the base year no-build scenario, the previously created forecast data will be utilized as the starting point for developing the trip table for the two peak hours for each of the models. As with the base year no-build scenario,the trip tables will be set up in a path-based manner. The peak hour matrices will be imported into the updated interim year no-build model. The model will be run as many times as the base year was needed to achieve statistically significant calibration. Data from the simulation will be output and analyzed using an augmented form of the previously created spreadsheet tool. Deliverables: A series of micro-simulation models for each of the areas as needed for the interim year no- build scenario The simulation analysis and results will be prepared Maps showing the design hour traffic and measures of effectiveness IN Traffic Operations Results recap Interim Year Build Model Development A copy of the interim year build VisSim model will be created and to it all LRT projects will be added. This network will then be reviewed to ensure that the proposed geometries match the best assumptions available. MOEs and traffic signal timings will be updated and added to the model. As with the other scenarios, the previously created forecast data will be utilized as the starting point for developing the trip table for the two peak hours for each of the models. As with the other scenarios, the trip tables will be set up in a path based manner. The peak hour matrices will be imported into the updated future interim year build model. The model will be run as many times as the base year was needed to achieve statistically significant calibration. Data from the simulation will be output and analyzed using an augmented form of the previously created spreadsheet tool. Deliverables: A series of micro-simulation models for each of the areas as needed for the future year build scenario The simulation analysis and results will be prepared Maps showing the design hour traffic and measures of effectiveness Traffic Operations Results recap E. urlhar -Orainge L,iglht Ra 111 "Irainsiit Project I Jllurue 2013 �4-5 DRAi"'T 71 Tiiangie R i na l fjfi'h�ll 1 roject DeveloIlment Scope of Work ow t o°au?"'d`fta'tvw:' 4.3.3 s=uture Year Model Devegopirrneirnt Future Year No-Build Model Development Once a base year models are complete the project will look to analyze a future year no-build condition, A copy of the base year VisSim model will be created and to it any roadway projects within the network will be added. This network will then be reviewed to ensure that the proposed geometries match the best assumptions available. MOEs and traffic signal timings will be updated and added to the model. As with the base year no-build scenario, the previously created forecast data will be utilized as the starting point for developing the trip table for the two peak hours for each of the models. As with the base year no-build, the trip tables will be set up in a path based manner. The peak hour matrices will be imported into the updated future year no-build model. The model will be run as many times as the base year was needed to achieve statistically significant calibration. Data from the simulation will be output and analyzed using an augmented form of the previously created spreadsheet tool. Deliverable: A series of micro-simulation models for each of the areas as needed for the future year no-build scenario The simulation analysis and results will be prepared Maps showing the design hour traffic and measures of effectiveness Traffic Operations Results recap Future Year Build Model Development A copy of the future year build VisSim model will be created and to it all LRT projects will be added. This network will then be reviewed to ensure that the proposed geometries match the best assumptions available. MOEs and traffic signal timings will be updated and added to the model, As with the other scenarios, the previously created forecast data will be utilized as the starting point for developing the trip table for the two peak hours for each of the models. As with the other scenarios, the trip tables will be set up in a path based manner. The peak hour matrices will be imported in to the updated future year build model. The model will be run as many times as the base year was needed to achieve statistically significant calibration. Data from the simulation will be output and analyzed using an augmented form of the previously created spreadsheet tool. Deliverables: A series of micro-simulation models for each of the areas as needed for the future year build scenario Durham-Orange L.iglbht (Rail Trainsit Project I .launr:�e 2013 14.,.6 DRAFT 72 frirrrrgle Regional 7 lom,,,a Pio,q�")M 0 Project [ e e I I rn ii � pl Of Work ow urit �d r"01 The simulation analysis and results will be prepared Maps showing the design hour traffic and measures of effectiveness Traffic Operations Results recap Grade Separation Analysis Complete a grade separation analysis for the existing year and future year proposed rail transit crossings for each of the major arterials using the results of the future year TRTDM travel demand model for the Baseline and Build alternatives. Analysis from the Draft Traffic Analysis Technical Report as well as results from the traffic simulations will be utilized to develop a list of locations. Analysis is expected to include: Two scenarios for each crossing; an at-grade scenario and a grade-separated scenario MOEs for each scenario including travel time and queue lengths Definition of basic benefits of each as well as negative impacts Compare and contrast each scenario w Basic cost difference between each alternative Deliverable: Grade Separation Analysis Technical Memorandum 43.4 Prepare Traffic Operations IResWts Report URS will prepare a traffic operations report based upon technical memorandums written as part of each sub-task that will document all work completed for this task. The report will include a review of existing conditions, data collected, traffic analysis in the existing and future years for the alternatives, the grade separation analysis, LRT simulation analysis, recommended traffic control devices for each crossing, recommended traffic plan for each station area, proposed improvements and conclusions, and general recommendations. Deliverables: A series of Technical Memoranda on the following: n Baseline Corridor Transportation and Traffic Conditions Forecast year intersection-turning movements Results of the traffic analysis for the alternatives suitable for inclusion in the Transportation Impacts section of the DEIS The simulation analysis and results will be prepared Maps showing the design hour traffic, existing year and future year, major intersection LOS for the AM and PM peak hours, for the Baseline and Build Alternatives Traffic Operations Results Report L urlhas -Or°ainge Light IRaH Trainsit Iliroject � .im,wine 203.3 J ..T IDRA11" 73 � g ar project � ' l 0 ll Iirri III t 'f r. r a���r�an �aaaa�a 4143.5 "riranspoirtation pmpacts The URS Team will also evaluate the project's effect on regional transportation patterns as well as modes of transportation other than vehicular traffic. Other modes to be evaluated include public transportation, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. Using information from the AA, travel patterns and the overall transportation network within the project study area and the project effects will be described. Effects on existing and planned bicycle and pedestrian facilities will be assessed. Broad-based effects on the public transportation system will also be documented. Deliverable: is Section of the DIES (Draft and Final) 4.3.6 Pairkfing Ilun l,.)acts An analysis of available parking and parking impacts will be conducted by the project team.This will also include evaluation of the need for and location of park and ride lots at station locations throughout the project corridor. The parking requirements at stations will be evaluated based on outputs from the Traffic Data Model (TDM) and verified through coordination with local municipalities and county agencies and with the station area design and TOD team. Potential joint opportunities or shared parking opportunities will be explored and evaluated in parking constrained areas. The analysis will also include an evaluation of parking costs within the project corridor. Deliverable: 1 Section of the DIES (Draft and Final) 4.4 Affected IEnvironirnent and Environmental liarulpact Assessunaent 4. .1 Land Use and Comirnuunity Faciplities The URS team will prepare the existing conditions sections for land use and community facilities. This data will be updated based on data collected for the AA and refined for the New Starts submittal. The data will be analyzed and local area planners and other officials will be contacted as needed to complete the assessment of potential impacts and benefits. Existing and future land use maps delineating residential, commercial, industrial, public, agricultural and undeveloped areas adjacent to the alignment will be revised and impacts identified as necessary. The land use templates will be updated using these results for the Engineering submittal to FTA Deliverable: 9 DEIS Chapter on Land Use and Community Facilities (Draft and Final), 4,41 Socioeconoa°nnpc Conditions Population and Demographics The URS team will collect and map population and demographic data for the project study area that will include one-quarter and one-half mile buffers of the 17 proposed LRT station locations. Data will be collected using the US Census, American Community Study, and Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) data and will be mapped using a geographic information system (GIS). Demographic data will include but not be l)uWurhaiai-Orange I fight bail Transit Project � .luu°ie 201. 14-8 IDRAFT 74 f'tirpiii , ie Regional! P r j e t t E,)e v,e)o Ilp im e u°t t S c o p e o f W o�ir k limited to general population and employment, race, ethnicity, age, income, and zero- and single-car households.Tables,graphs, and maps of the data will be produced. Deliverable: 11 Tables, graphs, and maps and section of the DEIS (Draft and Final) Economic Development Analysis The URS team will examine local economic development plans and the programs of individual developers. Interviews with various local officials, neighborhood and community leaders, real estate developers, financial officials, economic development officials, and others will be undertaken to understand the character, amount, and value of economic impacts both in terms of incremental development under alternative policies, and implications on existing development proximate to the proposed transportation improvements. Potential actions to optimize should include: feasibility of transit; positive land use, economic development, livability, sustainability and environmental benefits; and the amelioration of any potential negative impacts. Time frames evaluated should include design/ development period, construction period, initial five and ten year periods of revenue operation, design year(probably 2035 or 2040), and long term build out . Deliverable: IN Economic Development Analysis Technical Memorandum (Draft and Final). Economic Conditions Assessment The URS team will assess potential impacts on local property value as well as identify development opportunities. The overall implications in terms of level of development, value of development, households, population, employment, payroll,taxes and other impacts will be examined. In addition, the URS team will identify and document urban and suburban development trends within the corridor and identify and evaluate existing and proposed implementation of (re)-development incentives within the corridor, particularly those related to transit-oriented development.The URS team will conduct selected interviews with representatives of the local government and local real estate agents and developers to gain a better understanding of current market trends. Time frames evaluated should include: design/ development period, construction period, initial five and ten year periods of revenue operation, design year(probably 2035 or 2040) and long-term build-out. Deliverable: IS Economic Conditions Assessment Technical Memorandum (Draft and Final). 4A.3 Neighborhoods, C irnirnr.unity Services and Environmental nmeintal Justice This URS team will identify the existing neighborhoods along the corridor and describe the impacts of the LRT alternative and any alignment options alternatives on neighborhoods. Impacts to neighborhoods will include a description of the proposed LRT alignment and stations and the positive and negative impacts associated with the transit stations. Neighborhoods and communities along the alignments will be the focus of this effort. Most notably the Meadowmont community, Downing Creek, Springfield Apartments, Laurel Trace, and Cameron Woods neighborhoods, and those neighborhoods in the vicinity of the project terminus at Alston Avenue in east Durham are communities that may be affected by the proposed project. D uir.I1hi. rn Orange Light: Rafli Transit Project � June 2.0' .3 �4...9 I;11AF1,,, 75 Triiingle Regional Project [)e v e III I rn e n t Scope of Work The DEIS will assess project benefits and impacts on study area neighborhoods and communities, with specific attention paid to minority, low-income, and limited-English proficient populations, such as those already identified in the east Durham section of the project, as well as affordable housing. The URS team will complete the identification and analysis of potential impacts on Environmental Justice populations in accordance with Executive Order No. 12898 entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations. Using the data gathered during the AA and supplemented in the DEIS phase of the project and the public outreach efforts, potential disproportionate impacts on low-income and minority populations will be identified. The approach will be to quantify impacts wherever possible and to identify the types of individual groups most likely to be affected. Deliverables: Neighborhoods and Environmental Justice Technical Memorandum (Draft and Final) DEIS Section on Neighborhoods and Environmental Justice (Draft and Final). 4.4.4 Dislpiacemeints and ROocations The URS Team will assess the potential displacements and relocations of residents and businesses and will calculate the lands to be acquired for the proposed project. Initial assessment will be conducted from a review of the project design mapping. The displacements and relocations will be mapped and quantified. The acreage of land to be acquired will be quantified by land use type. Field reviews of each parcel, business and residence will be conducted. Where possible, minority and low income residents and minority-owned businesses will be identified and reported to URS team members conducting the Environmental Justice analysis. Deliverable: N DEIS Section on Displacements and Relocations(Draft and Final) 4 .5 Vlisuai and Aesthetics The URS Team will assess the potential visual and aesthetic impacts of all proposed alternatives. Visually sensitive areas along the proposed alternative relative to the LRT line, LRT stations, and park-and-ride facilities will be identified. Impacts will be assessed from two points of view: that of the facility user, and the view of the facility. It is anticipated that approximately 10 visualizations will be prepared and included in the visual impact assessment. Deliverable: DEIS Chapter on Visual and Aesthetics (Draft and Final). 4�.4.6 Cultural, i,,,M'istoric, and Aircheoiogicai The URS Team will conduct studies to identify cultural resources that are listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), and to identify the effects to such resources, pursuant to 36CFR800. These studies will be phased in coordination with the NEPA corridor assessment process. Separate scoping sections for archaeology and architectural history are provided below. E)t.Arhatn-Orange Ught: Haul Torainsit Project � June 2013 � -10 DRAFT 76 Triangle Regional if ilr)SJ Project e 11 pm n p of Work our^trrar,•ru:fta'fwcr Terrestrial Archaeology Background Research A records search will be conducted to locate all previously recorded archaeological sites within the Study Area. Background research will be undertaken at the State Historic Preservation Office and the Office of State Archaeology in Raleigh, NC. These facilities maintain records on the number, location, and characteristics of archaeological sites, cemeteries, standing structures, and other cultural features found within the state. In addition, they have collections of cultural resource studies that indicate the level, results, and scope of previously conducted surveys in the vicinity of the project. Next, other repositories will be consulted in order to identify primary and secondary sources of information on the history, development, and known cultural resources found within the Project Study Area, such as Sanborn Fire Insurance maps, historic USGS quadrangle maps, aerial photographs, and historic maps. Examples of additional repositories include the North Carolina State Archives; libraries at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill and North Carolina State University, and relevant public libraries and courthouses. In addition, environmental data collected will include available data on soils, water courses, geological base mapping, USGS 7.5 minute quadrangles, geomorphological data, digital ortho quarter quads, and other available relevant information, much of which is already digitized and incorporated into the master project database. Field Survey and Reporting Fieldwork will begin with a pedestrian reconnaissance to evaluate the terrain, examine environmental features such as soils, ground cover and drainage, and identify potential areas of previous disturbance. The reconnaissance will provide the basis for making a final assessment of the relative archaeological and historical sensitivity of the project area, and this will then be followed by an intensive survey where needed. The final strategy for the intensive field surveys will be determined by the results of the early agency consultation and will be developed in compliance with North Carolina state guidelines, but it will likely encompass systematic surface inspection combined with the use of systematic shovel test pit transects, with test pits spaced no more than 30 meters apart, when deemed necessary by the cultural resources field crew. After the Phase I field survey studies are completed, a Phase I Survey Report will be prepared to present the results of the literature search and field survey. The report will describe all known sites associated with the project's Area of Potential Effect (APE). If the appropriate agencies agree that the results in the Phase I Survey Report are sufficient to demonstrate that the project will not affect any significant historic properties, then no additional fieldwork will be required. If there are potentially any significant cultural resources that cannot be avoided, the Phase I Survey Report will provide provisional recommendations for avoidance or further evaluation. A summary of this report will also be incorporated into the DEIS. Future Field Studies Following completion of the Phase I field survey to identify the presence/absence of archaeological sites, Phase II evaluation studies may be needed to determine which of the archaeological resources are eligible for the NRHP. Since the number of sites needing evaluation is currently unknown, the scope of these evaluation studies will be defined in future task orders. No time is being included for this task in this Task Order. DUrl'iam- irainge II ight Rail 'rir nslt r3roject J Juine 2013 �4mm11. DRAFT 77 ut ug lc Architectural History Earlier studies have conducted extensive historic architectural surveys for portions of Durham and Orange counties. The first task will be to conduct a comprehensive review of the existing studies to ensure effective use of previously gathered data. URS will then conduct additional field surveys within those portions of the APE that have not been previously investigated, in order to identify any resources that are listed in or potentially eligible for listing in the NHRP. Where needed, URS will conduct an intensive-level architectural field survey which includes determining the APE and identifying, analyzing, and evaluating all properties greater than fifty years of age in the APE (or properties less than fifty years of age that could qualify for the National Register under Criterion Consideration G). URS will photograph the principle building on each site and will also document auxiliary buildings, structures, landscape features, setting issues, integrity issues, and representative streetscapes. Photographs will be captured in a digital format and will be labeled according to guidelines set forth by the North Carolina Historic Preservation Office (HPO). URS will also develop historic and architectural contexts and eligibility requirements, complete evaluations of National Register eligibility, and recommend carefully delineated and justified National Register boundaries. URS will identify any locally-designated properties or districts in the APE and provide contact names and numbers for those with jurisdiction in these areas. First URS will submit photos and a building inventory for all properties over fifty years of age in the APE. URS will follow the State of North Carolina's guidelines "Presenting a Historic Resources Inventory" and will provide concise integrity and eligibility statements for each property for discussion during the review of the building inventory with the State HPO. The location of each property identified in the survey will be keyed to a GIS-based map that also includes the limits of the APE. County PIN's or 911 addresses are required for each property. A brief justification of the APE will be included as a part of the building inventory.These properties will be shown to the HPO during a photo review session. Only those properties which are listed on the National Register, listed on the State Study List, and those requested for further evaluation by the HPO during the photo review session will be evaluated in-depth in a subsequent survey report. (If there are no properties within the APE that require extensive analysis, then URS will submit the photos, building inventory, and survey site forms to the Historic Architecture Supervisor and the studies are complete.) URS will combine the existing information and any field data collected into a comprehensive analysis of the effects on all historic architecture resources listed in or determined eligible for listing in the NRHP. The results will be presented in a report documenting the results of the background and field research and summarizing the historic architecture resources in the project APE. A summary of this report will also be provided and incorporated into the DEIS. Deliverables: " Phase I Cultural Resources Survey Report (Draft and Final) to be used to create the cultural resources Chapter of the DEIS(Draft and Final) Phase II Cultural Resources Effects Report(Draft and Final) Archeological Report (Draft and Final) Durharn...Orainge Light Fail °II�'nraiinsuit Project J June 2013 1I 4.42 DRAFT 78 P r j(.c t (.„ Il O urri ion t Scope of O ir.�I� 4®4.7 Park I ands This task will identify all federal, state and city-owned parklands along the corridor and describe any impacts of the proposed alternatives on parklands. The description of parks will use the data gathered during the AA and will identify ownership, the types of recreation, and the park location in relation to the proposed alternatives. Any impacts to parklands, as a result of the project construction or service, will be documented. Where parkland resources are impacted, mitigation measures will be identified. If the project has the potential to use parklands, as defined by Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966, a Section 4(f)Statement would be prepared. Deliverable: DEIS Chapter on Parklands (Draft and Final) 4.4u8 Section 4(f) IIrri oa vemeint The URS team will determine the Section 4(f) applicability of properties affected by the project alternatives including historic and archaeological sites, parks and recreation facilities and other areas, and if they determine that 4(f) resources are impacted, the URS team will evaluate the impacts to the Section 4(f) property. A Determination of Applicability (DOA) will be prepared for these sites for review approval by FTA. For the purposes of defining the scope of services, it is assumed that no 4(f) properties will be identified in the analysis. Deliverable: DEIS Chapter on Section 4(f) Involvement(Draft and Final). Section 4(f) Statement (contingent upon identifying impacts). 4.4n9 Safety and Security The URS team will provide an assessment of the potential impacts of the proposed project on the safety and security of the human environment, in support of the preparation of the DEIS. The task will describe the existing safety and security conditions at the proposed LRT station sites, identify any potential areas of concern for residents and transit patrons, and describe the proposed station area personal safety and security measures and pedestrian safety design techniques in and around the stations. Deliverable: DEIS Chapter on Safety and Security(Draft and Final). 4.4,10 Anallysis of Natura9 Resources This task will describe the environmental analyses necessary to conduct the preliminary evaluation of project alternatives. Physical Resources The Physical Resources section will be based on GIS data. The project study area physiographic region and topography will be described. Soil information will be based on SSURGO, and Prime Farmlands will be based on the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soil surveys for Orange and Durham Counties. The project study area US Geological Survey (USGS) 8- digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) and NCDWQ sub-basin will be identified. Durha:mrn Orainge Ill,,,ight IRaill Transit Project � June 201.3 J 4„,,1 DI RAF.”I. 79 Project Biotic Resources Biotic Resources will be evaluations from available data and field studies. These evaluations will include published resource information of the project study area including: USGS 7.5 minute series; US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) mapping, USDA NRCS soil surveys; USDA NRCS Web Soil Survey, aerial photography, Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) lists of protected species and database of uncommon and protected species and unique habitat, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) river basin reports, and Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) proposed critical habitats for aquatic species. In addition, pedestrian field studies will be conducted for each alternative corridor, as described below. Three (3) meetings/field visits with representatives from the local environmental groups to discuss the environmental resources within the project study area. Terrestrial Communities Field investigations will identify the predominant species within the project study area. Plant community descriptions will be based on Classification of plant communities is based loosely on a system used by the NCNHP, Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina. Significant Natural Heritage Areas The NCNHP statewide list of Significant Natural Heritage Areas (SNHA) will be reviewed for the project study area. Terrestrial Wildlife Faunal species within the project study area will be discussed following the community descriptions expected within and around the project study area were determined through review of supporting literature. Field investigation will visually survey for signs of terrestrial wildlife through direct observation and indirect evidence (tracks, scat). Aquatic Communities Aquatic communities will be identified as part of the field delineation of jurisdictional Waters of the US, described below. NCWRC GIS coverage of proposed critical habitats for aquatic species will be reviewed. Water quality classifications and special designations,such as Outstanding Water Resources (OWR), High Quality Waters (HQW), water supply watershed, and 303(d) listed waters will be listed. The most recent Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) will be reviewed to identify floodplains and floodways within the project study. Invasive Species Species identified within the project study area that appear on the NCDOT Invasive Exotic Plant List for North Carolina will be recorded. Endangered Species Act Protected Species Protected species with the federal status of endangered (E), threatened (T), proposed endangered (PE), and proposed threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) will be evaluated within the project study area. The USFWS and NCNHP online databases will be reviewed for federally listed species potentially occurring within the project study area. Suitable habitat for these protected species will be searched for during the field investigations. Dl urharn-Orainge (Light Haii "11"ransit Dl3ro(ect J June 2013 J 4-14 DI (RAF'"r 80 �Ji l3roj ct DevelopIirrsent cof.)e of or Biological conclusions of'No Effect' will be made for those species with no potential to occur within the NRTR Study Area. These conclusions will be based on all of the above steps as well as additional consultation with the USFWS. Biological Conclusions for species with the potential to occur within the NRTR Study Area will only be prepared once the LEDPA/Preferred Alternative has been selected. Deliverables: Baseline Environmental Conditions Results Report(Draft and Final). Natural Resources Technical Report (Draft and Final) Relevant section for DEIS(Draft and Final) Documentation of Agency Coordination 4x.4.13. Water Resources rces Wetlands A field-delineation to identify jurisdictional Waters of the US, including wetlands, within the project study area will be conducted in accordance with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual, as amended. Documentation as part of the delineation will include: USACE Wetland Determination Data forms, USACE Stream Quality Assessment worksheets, NC Wetland Field Assessment Method forms, and NC DWQ Stream Identification forms. Wetland and stream boundaries will be determined with a sub-meter GPS unit for mapping in ArcMap. Representative photographs of wetlands and streams within the project study area will be taken. Two (2) field visits will be held with representatives from the USACE and the NC DWQ to field verify the delineated wetlands and streams. Deliverable: 9 Wetlands Delineation Report (Draft and Final). Water Quality The URS team will develop a discussion of baseline water quality for the project study area and will identify sensitive areas. A review of the NC DWQ riparian buffer rules will be conducted for the project study area. Based upon available design drawings for the project,the URS team will quantify the number of acres of increased impervious surfaces and disturbed soils in order to discuss the potential adverse impacts to water quality.When the project proposes water quality treatment measures,these measures will be evaluated and discussed as beneficial impacts Deliverable: Relevant section for DEIS (Draft and Final) 4.4.12 III'boridpaafins The URS team will compile a narrative description of the affected environment and prepare supporting mapping. The URS team will map and evaluate changes to the base flood elevations, risks to human life and damage to property based upon loss of flood storage, potential to support future development, and impacts to beneficial floodplain values. The impact analysis will include discussions on the placement of structures within the floodplain and affected acreage at each floodplain crossing. Diu irharmI.,,Oirain e Ill,,,ight Ill: @ HI °III"raunsit IRr°o)ect. J Juir:e 2,013 14.1.5 II; IWkFT 81 fig ngle Regional h �1� ,il Project Dev III p iii ri 1„ Scope of Work Deliverable: " DEIS Chapter on Floodplains (Draft and Final). 4.4.1.3 Solils and Farmlands The URS team will make an assessment of Soils Resources. This task describes the potential for identifying impacted soils resources in the study corridor. The assessment will identify the potential impacts of the project alternatives on geological resources, soils, and topography. In accordance with the Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1984, coordination with the Natural Resource Conservation Service will be undertaken to determine if farmlands bordering the corridor are of prime, unique, statewide, or local importance. The area of direct impacts from the project LPA and alignment options, Form AD-1006 can be completed, if these resources exist in the corridor. Deliverable: DEIS Chapter on Soils and Farmlands (Draft and Final). 4.4. 4 Asir Quahty Transportation Conformity- the Durham-Orange Light Rail Project is part of DCHC's long term transportation plan for 2030 and beyond. As such, a separate analysis will not need to be done for this project as the transportation related emissions have already been accounted for in the Triangle Regional Model. A qualitative statement will be included that refers to the adopted conformity determination report and a statement that the project is part of the conforming plan. Hot Spot Analysis—As the project study area is located in a CO Maintenance Area, an intersection hot- spot analysis will be required if the Project adversely impacts intersections with levels of service (LOS) D, E, or F. Using the MOVES model, up to three intersections will be modeled to determine if motor vehicle emissions exceed the national ambient air quality standards. Construction Analysis — Based on conversations with NC DENR, a construction level air quality analysis may be required to show the construction emissions are below the thresholds. As such, a quantitative assessment of construction equipment, durations, material deliveries and construction worker trips will be conducted using the EPA's NONROAD model. Deliverable: DEIS Chapter on Air Quality(Draft and Final). 4.4,15 Noise and Vilbiration This task describes the potential for identifying impacts to noise and vibration sensitive land uses, as a result of noise and vibration from the proposed light rail transit system. Potential sensitive areas include the neighborhoods presented in Task 4.5.1.2, student housing on the UNC campus, Finley Golf Course, Marriott Courtyard Hotel, Duke Medical Center, VA hospital, and the Duke Eye Care Center. Additional properties will be identified in the course of the work. Noise for transit projects is regulated by the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, May 2006. The Durham-Orange Light Rail Project will potentially generate noise from the LRT vehicles, station areas and park and ride lots, "wheel squeal" from curved tracks, [D a llhi a nrn- ra irw 'e ' g Light IlaH 'Transit 113r )ect J June 2013 4,,,16 DI31lAF"T 82 Trungte Reghn u � W , Project Development S c 'l��e Work mul��� �rtJ°4+N n horns or bells, and maintenance facilities.Vibration from the project would be generated by the light rail vehicle only. The study area includes hospitals, churches, residential areas and schools. The EIS will include a quantitative noise analysis that provides sufficient detail to determine impacts and the need for mitigation measures. A general vibration assessment will be conducted that incorporates geologic data, architectural components of vibration sensitive receptors and LRT vehicle and track data. If vibration impacts are anticipated, a detailed vibration analysis would then be conducted to determine the need for mitigation measures. The following steps are required for the noise and vibration analysis: Identify noise and vibration sensitive receptors Measure existing noise levels Develop General Noise Assessment Model Develop Detailed Nose Assessment Model Collect General Vibration data inputs Develop General Vibration Assessment Model Noise &Vibration QA/QC ITR (Acoustical Eng) Prepares Draft and Final Noise and Vibration Technical Memorandum Report/Comments Deliverables: Noise and Vibration Technical Memorandum, in accordance with the FTA 1995 guidance,Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (Draft and Final). DEIS Chapter on Noise and Vibration (Draft and Final). 4.4.1,6 I iazardous and Contary-flnatted IMaterWs This task will describe the potential for discovering contamination/hazardous materials in the Durham- Orange LRT Corridor and subsequent documentation in the EIS. For the LPA and alignment options, at a minimum, the URS team will: Identify Attempt to identify the presence of any known hazardous waste or contamination within areas to be affected by potential construction. For property to be acquired, assess the presence of environmental problems or contamination due to past or current practices or land use. List activities of other industries/commercial areas in the immediate area(s). Conduct searches of known contaminated sites adjacent to or on route of proposed project facility. Identify sites requiring further analysis. The URS team will identify properties along and adjacent to the potential project corridors where contamination may have been caused by past management, use, storage or disposal of hazardous materials. Identification of sites that may have hazardous soils will be completed using available records, Dunrhaii,°i...Orange III ight Rail 111,,.rainsit Project I June 201.3 X4.1. ' DlRAFIll' 83 hriang/e Regional Project DeveIlopmervt Scope of Work documents, maps, aerial photographs, and historical records. Federal, State and local records will be reviewed, evaluated and compiled in a records search report documenting the environmental database search. These properties would include specific portions of properties along the corridor to be acquired comprising the areas affected by construction. As part of the analysis of potential or identified site contamination, additional site evaluations may be required in the baseline analysis. It is anticipated that several properties along the corridor may require an initial full Phase I assessment following ASTM standards. This would include those properties where the baseline analysis has indicated a significant concern, one that would impact corridor route selection. Several properties could potentially become part of an acquisition phase and require full Phase I assessment following ASTM standards. The additional analysis will include title searches, site reconnaissance and interviews with persons knowledgeable of the property in question, its history and possible environmental contamination. The number of properties requiring individual Phase I assessments will be determined based on results from the initial Corridor Assessment and final route alignment. Site reconnaissance visits and interviews would be conducted to validate information obtained through record searches. The site reconnaissance will involve a visual and physical observation of the exterior of the property and the interior of structures on the property. Persons determined to have knowledge of the area will be interviewed (e.g.,fire chief, local property owner or operator, long-time resident, zoning official). If deemed appropriate, owners or users of adjacent facilities will also be interviewed for the same purpose. For properties requiring a full Phase I assessment, a 50-year chain of title search will be conducted for an additional fee to help determine possible past uses of the Property. The search will include information regarding liens, easements, or special deeds and will focus on parcel ownership. The URS team will also incorporate any identification of contamination that can be gleaned from the structural soil boring program, particularly along the freight rail corridor. Deliverables: • Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report (Draft and Final). • DEIS Chapter on Contamination (Draft and Final). 4. ..1 E:'energy The subtask will quantify energy expenditures for the construction of the proposed Build Alternatives and operation of the regional transportation system. The measurement of potential environmental benefits of the proposed project on regional energy consumption will be prepared in accordance with MAP— 21. The measurement of energy requirements will be based on the regional annual vehicle miles traveled (VMT), by vehicle type, within the study area for the horizon year, multiplied by the emission rates of each vehicle type. Construction energy requirements will also be calculated. Deliverable: DEIS Chapter on Energy(Draft and Final). [Durlhanrn-Ourain e g: III,,,°�ghl' Fail I"uransit Project June 2.01. 18 IDAF.,I„ 84 {o. Triangle Regional al h Pi J l � ,i �r tO � t r' � r 4.4,15 Construction Impact In order to assess the potential for construction impacts related to the build alternatives, the URS team will develop a description of a construction scenario for the purposes of assessing these impacts. This subtask will describe the construction activities and basic methods associated with the Build alternatives building on the construction impact Appendix contained in the Alternative Analysis, along with the potential impacts to the socio-economic, physical and natural environments that would be temporary in nature during construction, and the permits and approvals required to initiate construction. Where impacts result, mitigation measures will be identified. Special consideration of freight railroad operating issues will also be part of this subtask. Deliverable: DEIS Chapter on Construction Impacts(Draft and Final). 4.4.1 9 Freight IRail u° pr eraflons The Freight Railroad Operations subtask presents existing and future freight railroad operations, including locations of rail lines and rail yards. This analysis will characterize the railroad operational conditions, growth projections in freight rail activity, any planned improvements to freight rail trackage, and impacts of shared right-of-way with a build project. This information will be incorporated as part of Chapter 4(Transportation,Traffic and Parking). Deliverable: Freight Railroad Operations sub-section of the DEIS Chapter on Transportation, Traffic and Parking. 4.410 1:1naincial Planning The URS Team will update the financial plan developed as part of the Durham-Orange LRT project New Starts submittal to FTA in fall 2012.This update will reflect any changes to the project cost and schedule that are determined as part of the DEIS analysis. Also to be updated as needed are assumptions/timing of the revenue sources that will pay for capital projects. Updates to O&M costs will reflect any modifications to background bus service (see Task xx.) as well as to the project service plan as determined through the more detailed DEIS analysis. The results of this updated model will be documented both in a revised financial plan as well as a section to be included in the DEIS. Any comments received on the DEIS related to the financial plan will be responded to in the Final EIS. Finally, the updated cash flow model and financial plan, along with all required accompanying documentation, will be finalized for submittal to the FTA as part of the request to initiate Engineering on the project. Deliverable: Technical memorandum detailing changes to be made to the financial plan * Revised financial plan * Financial section for inclusion in the DEIS Financial documentation to be submitted in request to initiate Engineering 11.)urliarn-Orainge III,,,'iight Rail III"'ransit Project � June 2.01, �I 4 3.9 DRAFT 85 ota transit ful-fav Ject Development Scope of Work �y o 4.411 Secondary and CuniWative lmmpacts Assessment The URS team will assess the secondary (indirect) effects and cumulative effects of the proposed D-O LRT Project when added to the past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions of related projects in the study area. This effort also includes a discussion of the recommended mitigation measures where necessary. The No-Build Alternative is not included in this assessment, as there would not be any actions likely to result in secondary or cumulative effects. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations (40 CFR Section 1508.8) define "indirect effects" as effects which are caused by the [proposed] action and are later in time or farther removed in distance, but are still reasonably foreseeable. Indirect effects may include growth inducing effects and other effects related to changes in the pattern of land use, population density or growth rate (40 CFR 1508.8 (b)). The region's transportation and land use goals, plans and regulations provide a platform for assessing the projects indirect and cumulative effects. This task will follow the general approach of the CEQ handbook entitled Considering Cumulative Effects under the National Environmental Policy Act, (CEQ 1997). It will identify and assess: 1111H Cumulative impacts that result when the effects of an action are added to or interact with other effects in a particular place and within a particular time. IN The incremental impacts of the proposed project when added to the past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions of related projects in the area. Resources of concern, with specific attention to neighborhoods, historic and archaeological resources,wetlands, and traffic. Deliverable: " DEIS Chapter on Cumulative Impacts (Draft and Final). 4.4.22 Chmate Change Adaptation Planning The URS team will address the effects of climate change and how the FTA capital investment in the proposed high-capacity transit system would be protected against extreme weather events, such as flooding and heat waves, that may affect transit infrastructure and passenger comfort. The FTA issued a Policy Statement on Climate Change Adaptation on May 2011, "Integration of Climate Change Adaptation into FTA Planning, Operations, Policies, and Programs." The policy states that the FTA will integrate consideration of climate change impacts and adaptation to the extent practicable into the planning, operations, policies, and programs of the agency in order to ensure proper stewardship of the federal investment in public transportation systems, for the safety of the traveling public, mobility, and to maintain a state of good repair. The DEIS will address climate change adaptation planning. The DEIS will also address the North Carolina Climate Change Adaptation Strategy to the extent it is applicable to the proposed project. Deliverable: DEIS Chapter on Climate Change Adaptation Planning (Draft and Final). Durham-Orange 11..iglht l aH °IIC"ransit Project p, June 203." �4,.10 I) AFT 86 n riangle Regional Pr o j e t 1".)evelollannent Scope of o r k 4.4.23 EvaWation of Xliernataves The URS team will develop the Evaluation of Alternatives Chapter of the DEIS based upon the analysis conducted in the relevant activities of this scope of work and the AA. The purpose of the evaluation process is to bring together the salient facts, both qualitative and quantitative, for each alternative so that their benefits, costs and environmental consequences can be evaluated against the stated goals and objectives for the project. The evaluation methodology compares the effectiveness of the alternatives in meeting the goals and objectives established for the project. All FTA criteria prescribed for major transit capital investment projects will be included. The evaluation also includes an assessment of the environmental justice and equity implications of the alternatives Deliverable: s DEIS Chapter on Evaluation of Alternatives(Draft and Final), 4.4.24 Environmental Impact Mitigation MeaSUres Based on the assessment of environmental impact and coordination with regulatory and resource agencies, mitigation measures will be identified to eliminate or reduce the impacts to an acceptable level. Potential mitigation measures will be identified during the DEIS section of the project. Detailed mitigation measures will be identified in conjunction with Preliminary Engineering. Deliverable: Impact Mitigation Measures Technical Memorandum for input to the DEIS (Draft and Final). Durhann-Orainge lI igkit: lRaH °t°irainslt; Piroject. J June 2.013 �4.-21 DRAFT 88 Project D e III Iljp n iiiv Scope f Work 51.0 Prepare DEIS Do r e rtt o�:3.1 Prepare IPirehinm'iinary DEIS The URS team will refine the various sections of the DEIS that have been produced as a result of relevant scope of work activities and will include preparation of an Executive Summary. These materials will be edited and refined to read as a complete document. Any missing sections, data or analysis will be completed here for inclusion in the revised draft document. The URS team will prepare a Preliminary Draft EIS (PDEIS) for Triangle Transit's review. The PDEIS will be revised as needed to reflect Triangle Transit's review and distributed to FTA for their review and comment. Deliverables: PDEIS for Triangle Transit Review. Revised PDEIS for FTA review and comment. 5.2 Prepare II"iinal Draft Enviironrnentalf Impact Staterent Upon receipt of the FTA comments on the Preliminary Draft EIS, the document will be modified to incorporate appropriate requested changes. A letter to FTA will be drafted that lists all of their comments and how the team responded to those comments. After FTA comments have been incorporated and the PDEIS has been revised to become the Final DEIS, it will be distributed and made available for public review and comment for the required 45-day circulation period. The URS team will assist Triangle Transit in identifying the locations where the document will be available for public review. The URS team will also assist Triangle Transit in identifying the need to distribute the document to review agencies and others. The URS team will conduct document reproduction and will distribute electronic and hard copy versions of the DEIS on behalf of Triangle Transit. Deliverable: In Final Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Vol. 1). 5.3 Prepare Pulbkc Noflce of Ava'ilabfflt (NOA) The Public Notice of Availability (NOA) notifies the public that a Draft EIS has been completed. The URS team will prepare the draft of the NOA and assist Triangle Transit with coordinating the placement of that Notice in the Federal Register with FTA. It is assumed that Triangle Transit will place appropriate advertisements announcing the public hearing(s) in local area newspapers. URS will conduct a QA review of the announcements prior to publications. Deliverable: IN Notice of Availability for the Federal Register and publication in newspapers (Draft and Final), 5.4 IMS CIA Prior to the submittal of the Preliminary DEIS (PDEIS) to Triangle Transit and FTA, the URS team will perform and independent quality review of the PDEIS. Ourhaini- ran ge Il.,.i lht lRail Transit Project � June 0:1.: 15-1 MRAFI„ 90 ri��ngie Regional h a y s'ii/)oq r,�)' d Project OCR e v "III I iai 1rm t Scope of Work. our t:rfa'�°rd fri ur°r .0 Station Area Planning The following is a Work Plan for completing the Station Design Component for the Durham-Orange LRT (Light Rail Transit) Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). The project area for the Durham-Orange LRT corridor extends from Alston Avenue in Downtown Durham to the UNC campus in Chapel Hill. This work for the DEIS will use as a starting point the previously completed Alternatives Analysis (AA) for the corridor.The project is planned to include 17 at- grade or aerial LRT stations. The Work Plan identifies the steps for completing the concept design for the 17 LRT stations and provides a brief description of each task. 6.1 1,,,U T Station C ncelpt Design Develloprrrent 6-1.1 Reviiew Of Past Studies Review the AA documents and any other available studies and background material related to any past transit work and any other studies or design concepts related to the transit station areas. Identify key elements and findings relating to station design, as well as forces and issues that might impact the transit station development. Deliverable: 0 N/A 6.11..2 Study Area Base Maps Prepare study area base maps that can be used for the station area inventory, for identifying alternative corridor and station location options, and for preparing the station concept plans.The base maps will be developed from available aerial photography and other available material. Deliverable: RU Study Area Base Maps .1.3 Study Area lnveintory Conduct a visual and photo inventory of the station areas to document the existing conditions around the potential transit station locations.The inventory will address the following: K Physical characteristics of the existing environment Existing uses Existing traffic and circulation patterns Unique or distinguishing features or elements Deliverable: 10 Illustrative sections and other graphic materials, as requested Duiill°'narn-Oirange Light Rail l°`ransit Piroject: � .June 201„3 �6...1. DR AF i„ 91 Triangle Regional ���ry;�� �:��y+.�,��,W� ���� �, � � � �� r �ec elllul"neint Scope of Work o a r 1,ran"!it. af'HI 6.3-4 Gerneirai II°orces/Ksues Analysis Identify general forces and issues that might impact transit station development in the study area. 'Forces' are currently existing physical or environmental features or conditions that have a bearing on what could or should occur in the project area. 'Issues' are trends, characteristics, or programmatic items which need to be considered in the planning and design process for the LRT stations. Forces and Issues can represent either opportunities or constraints. The Forces/Issues Analysis will take into consideration the following items around the potential station locations: Generalized existing land use Historic structures and districts Existing major developments Planned and potential future developments and public infrastructure improvements Vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation systems Site access Parks,wetlands, and open space Above-ground utilities Topography Major vegetation Any unique features and conditions Deliverable: 0 Forces and Issues Map 6.13 Station Desigin Parameters Identify and establish station design parameters that will help guide and direct the site planning and design of the transit stations, such as: Potential available station sites Feeder bus line locations Bus, drop-off-and-ride, and park-and-ride space requirements Site access and circulation conditions and needs Transit station platform configurations and shelter size and location needs Site amenity requirements, including public art Input from existing area or district plans or design frameworks Deliverable: Station Design Guidelines , Durharn Orange Light Ralilll Transit Project � June 2013 116-2 DRAFT 92 Naa fe R gi,01 n��l° d �� 5" �? 1`�+W,n+���"��� " Project e e IlI p e III t c o��)(.:.! of Work oupfnm""dP 'araaa,n 6.11-6 Stafloin Locat'lorr and Site SeIIect'iore"n Assist in the assessment, identification, and finalization of the LRT route alignment and the potential transit station facility and site locations. Prepare transit station location option maps and recommendations, as required. Deliverable: a Transit Station Location Option Maps &1.7 Station CoinceIcut S'nte Na ins and Sect'iorrs Prepare Concept Site Plans and Sections for each of the 17 proposed LRT station sites to illustrate the following: LRT station site location Conceptual station layout Station shelters and facilities Any required vertical circulation elements Site vehicular access and circulation Site pedestrian and bicyclist circulation Location of feeder bus bays Location of drop-off and pick-up areas Location and configuration of park-and-ride facilities Other special or unique station-related elements or features Deliverable: 1111111 Illustrative Plans for each of the 17 LRT Stations 6.1-8 Station Design Summary Report Prepare the Station Design Summary section for the DEIS Project Report that documents the following: Design Process and Approach Major Forces and Issues Key Design Parameters Recommended Station Concept Plans Station Sections and Other Support Material The text and graphics for the Station Design Summary Section will be provided in Word Document format. Deliverable: Station Design Summary Report DurharT-1-0rainge l,,.ight b all Transit Project � June 2013 1I 6-3 li;; 1RXI:. 93 1'rh ngl eI ional h n,')";h :NO Project 11.)eveloprneint Scope of Work 6.1-9 Meetings and Pulbfic Invopvenwa,int Attend and participate in meetings with the Client, Project Committees, Major Stakeholders, or the Public. Prepare appropriate transit-station-related presentation material for each meeting consisting of one or more of the following: a Illustrative Plans, Illustrative Sections, or other appropriate drawings IN Examples from other transit projects IN PowerPoint presentations Deliverables: N Agendas and Meeting Minutes IN Presentation Materials 1 Visuall Renderings of I,,,IRT Stations 621 Station S'ute Niotos Take ground-level image photos and obtain aerial oblique-view images of each of the 17 LRT station sites. Deliverable: in Station Site Photos 61.2 Sepection of Computer IIrnag'ing Viewpoints In consultation with the Client and other interested parties, select the preferred viewpoints for the computer images. Deliverable: 9 N/A 6 23 Preparations of Computeu~Images Prepare computer-generated images of each of the 17 station sites that illustrate the major features and the general appearance and character of the proposed LRT stations. 6.2.4 Station Site IJDhotos Take ground-level image photos and obtain aerial oblique-view images of each of the 17 LRT station sites. Deliverable: a Station Site Photos 6,2,5 Preparation of Computer Images Prepare computer-generated images of each of the 17 station sites that illustrate the major features and the general appearance and character of the proposed LRT stations. D uurl11aorn Grange Light Rai] "'rranslt Project � June 201. 16-4 DRAFT 94 r o J�qi III„ III III III" O III'" ma,t rasa",°ft aoue Deliverable: VIII A high-resolution JPEG computer-generated image for each of the proposed 17 LRT stations 6.3 Station Area I icyclle and Pedestrian Access In order to provide good pedestrian and bicyclist access to the proposed LRT stations, a comprehensive path system should be developed. The purpose of Task 5.3 will be to prepare concept plans for the LRT station areas, within a %:-mile radius of the proposed stations, to identify potential improvements needed to pedestrian and bicyclist access paths to the LRT stations. The concepts will identify potential improvements such as the need for new paths, replacement of existing broken or damaged path pavement, path system bridges or underpasses, or installation of lighting and other amenities for safety and security.Although these recommended path system improvements may not be directly a part of the LRT system development program, they will provide information to the communities around the LRT stations regarding what needs to be done in order to provide good access to the LRT stations. 6.3.1 lirnventory of Existing Path Conditions Conduct an inventory and assess the availability and the condition of the existing path systems within a -mile radius of the proposed LRT stations. 5m3.:7 Path Sywster n Concept Plans Prepare concept Path System Plans for each of the 17 LRT station areas that identify potential improvements or enhancements. 6.33 Path Systern lmprovement,'lechnlical IMernoirandunrn Summarize the findings and recommendations regarding Path System Improvements and Enhancements in a Technical Memorandum. Deliverables: Technical Memorandum that summarizes the recommendations for the path system improvements and enhancements at each of the 17 LRT stations. 6.4 Station Area Tli°ainsllt°Oriented IDeveiolpmennot (TOD) Concepts Another extremely important feature of successful transit systems is conveniently-located and well- developed TODs. TODs not only locate more users closer to the transit system stations, which makes it convenient for more people to use the transit system, but they also provide conveniences to the transit users. The purpose of Task 5.4 will be to prepare preliminary concept plans or ideas of the potential for TODs around selected LRT stations, in order to start the process by the communities of TOD planning and implementation. Not all LRT stations, especially the ones in totally built-up areas, may lend themselves to TOD implementation. .4.1. Identification of Potential TO[) Slices Using the TOD documents prepared during the AA the URS team will conduct an inventory and assess the availability and potential of sites within a %-mile radius of the LRT stations that may lend themselves to TOD uses. The effort will also determine the type and density of development appropriate at particular stations. Durlharmi-Oiran e Light I ad "dean ft Project � , uine 201.3 li ,,5 DRAFT' 95 h gle Regional�� ,�������fl Sr=i n n �m�I F)r O j e �t D v e III o I Irma e uri t Scope of o ir°k our t?r;��i�rr 6x4,2 PreHminaryTOIID Coincqpt IPlans In consultation with the cities' planning staffs, prepare concept TOD plans for a select number of LRT stations that may be the most likely to accommodate TOD uses. 6.4.3 TOD Technical I ernorandurn Summarize the findings and recommendations regarding potential TODs at selected LRT stations in a Technical Memorandum. Deliverables: Technical Memorandum that summarizes the concepts and ideas regarding potential TODs at selected LRT stations. 6.5 Assessment of Secondary/Joint IIIDevOoprnent iloteintpalll The URS Team will assess potential secondary joint development opportunities by: analyzing the overall market potential for general types of projects suited to joint development; identifying stations with joint development potential; determining opportunities for siting these types of developments at station locations; and evaluating secondary or multiplier impacts of joint development (e.g., jobs, payroll, materials, purchases, etc.). Time frames evaluated should include: design/ development period, construction period, initial five and ten year periods of revenue operation, design year (probably 2035 or 2040)and long term build out . Deliverable: a Joint Development Potential Technical Memorandum (Draft and Final). 6.6 Statlon Area Workshops The URS team will hold two rounds of station area workshops for a total of eight workshops. The first round will be to obtain input from the general public, the development community, and public planning and decision-making agencies to define the general LRT station design parameters, identify site-specific issues, and select the preferred station locations, and layouts. The implications for nearby adjacent neighborhoods both in terms of existing values, the value of transit and future development will also be examined. Public policy incentives to enhance positive transit impacts will be identified. These policies will be shared with the local communities to help formulate transit supportive corridor policies, zoning regulations and implementation tools to support transit-oriented development. The second round of workshops will be to present the station area design and TOD concepts, and visual renderings of the concepts and to receive feedback on the concepts so that final adjustments can be made. The URS team will identify appropriate meeting locations, prepared display and presentation materials provide staff, and document input received at each meeting. dDurlhaurn-Orange Lid,Pit Rad °l°'raunsit Project � June 2013 �6,,.6 ORAF„1,,, 96 Tribugle R,611191 on«� d:��i,.°�i«m �� d���� '�'� s Project D e II I �� S Work Deliverables: Station Area Development Plans. lu Joint Development Technical Memorandum (Draft and Final). Hold and document the input from up to four(4)station area workshops. Durhai mr�-Or nge Light II RaflI Transit, Project I Juine 2013 16-7 DRAFT' 98 IkMi��� 0BD�� �m ��o`ect ��evelop��e�t Scope of Work m�������m� ~ 7.0 Prepare 14r4� EIS (FEIS) arid llecord of Decision (ROD) 7.1. Prepare 1:TVS 7.1.1 Review PubHc and Agency Commnmemts Documentation of comments received from the public and from regulatory and resource agencies will be reviewed and a new chapter will be prepared and included in the FEIS that summarizes and responds to the comment made. DaUwanab|a: In No Deliverable 7.1.2 ReemaWate Impacts 1',lerDes[gmCbamgms SimceDEIS Impacts identified for the DE|S Preferred Alternative will be reevaluated per any design changes and as required from public and agency comments. Deliverable: in No deliverable 7'.I,3 Prepare FE::USErrata Sheets Errata sheets noting each edit to information included in the chapters of the DE|S will be prepared as needed for the FE|S. The errata sheets will address updates/changesto technical data presented in the chapters of the DE|S as required to reflect changes in the DE|3 Preferred Alternative. Resolution of proposed mitigation measures will be also be included in the FE|6. The FE|5 will build upon the work contained in the DEIS, incorporating comments and decisions made during the DE|Sreview. Deliverable: 0 FE|S Errata Sheets 7A.4 Pne�jpaire1PBS Documnemt The URSteamo will compile and edit errata sheets to be included in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FE|S) document and prepare a review copy of FE|S for FTA review. Upon receipt of the FTA comments on the review copy of the FE|S, the document will be modified to incorporate appropriate requested changes. A letter to FTA will be drafted that lists all of their comments and hmm/ the team responded to those comments. After FTA comments have been incorporated and the FE|S has been revised, it will be distributed to agencies and made available to the public. The URS team will assist Triangle Transit in identifying the need to distribute the document to review agencies and others. The URS team will conduct document reproduction and will distribute electronic and hard copy versions of the FE|Son behalf of Triangle Transit and FTA. Deliverable: � FE|S (Draft and Final) �A 00° 99 litr earii,ryl,�Hegiaalnwl 7,")N L'V"f `0(f r o IIU o Ilp Pin e n S c ol l�e 'o,r k ra .2 Recor d of Decision The project team will assist FTA in the preparation of the Record of Decision (ROD). This effort will include preparing draft language to be included in the ROD. Upon receipt of the FTA comments on the draft ROD, the document will be modified to incorporate appropriate requested changes.A letter to FTA will be drafted that lists all of their comments and how the team responded to those comments. After FTA comments have been incorporated and the ROD has been revised, it will be sent to FTA for publication. Deliverable: Record of Decision (Draft and Final) Ou iirIlharn-Oi°an e Light l afllll Tranis'il't Il ur )ec �I J ulne 2013 17.�,.2 DRAFT 100 Triangle Regional 1`Wo+��da�,��"3 �� Nr j ct Developmeint Scope of Ir But X"°rrin it fta NY,re .01 F::"IFA II y, Starts A Project, l0anageinment Provide overall coordination and management for New Starts related tasks. Anticipated Duration: July 2013-June 2015 Deliverable: " N/A 8.21 FYr 2-015 New Starts Subiniit't.alll The URS team will coordinate with Triangle Transit and FTA to determine the content of the FY 2015 submission for the project. As of February 2013, FTA guidance regarding annual reporting requirements (a requirement in MAP-21 to streamline the annual reporting process) are still under development. At this time, it is anticipated that at a minimum Triangle Transit will need to update the financial plan and financial templates to reflect the sales tax referendum that passed in both Durham and Orange Counties in November 2012, and that Triangle Transit has begun collecting the sales tax, (the proceeds of which will fund a significant portion of the local funding for the project). Additional material may need to be included in the FY 2015 New Starts submission if the Durham- Orange Light Rail project experiences other "material changes to the scope or cost of the project" since Triangle Transit formally requested entrance into New Starts in September 2012. The FTA has determined that a "material change to the scope or cost of the project" to be: Design and construction scope of work changes Planning context changes Schedule changes of six months or more Change in a funding source or financing method This determination will be made by Triangle Transit in consultation with the FTA and URS team. Anticipated Duration:July 2013-June 2014 Deliverables: " Updated Financial Template Updated Financial Plan " Monthly updates to FTA " Additional Updated New Starts Templates (if necessary) " Prepare appropriate documentation regarding material changes in scope or cost .3 FY 2016 New Starts Subirnit:ta l The URS team will coordinate with Triangle Transit and FTA to determine the content of the FY 2016 submission for the project. As of February 2013, FTA guidance regarding annual reporting requirements (a requirement in MAP-21 to streamline the annual reporting process) is still under development. The Durlhai m-Orarmge Ill,,.iglht: Rad °If°rainslit project � June 2013 1I8,..1, DRAFT 101 Tri n ie Reyional b,) r s,I 1 �,,r��rrr� � Pro J DeveloIl[xu,neiit ScoIlrje of Work URS team will prepare any New Starts template determined to be appropriate, through discussions with the FTA, for the FY 2016 Annual Report.This will be dependent upon any "material changes to the scope or cost of the project" since Triangle Transit submitted the FY 2015 New Starts Submission. Anticipated Duration:July 2014-June 2015 Deliverables: Monthly updates to FTA °m Updated New Starts Templates (as necessary) 10 Prepare appropriate documentation regarding material changes in scope or cost 8.4 FY 2015 Update Project IManagernem°nt Plian, ainnd SublPians The PMP and subplans/appendices were developed to be living documents which should be reviewed and updated as the project progresses to ensure that the PMP continues to meet the changing needs of the project and accurately reflects how the project is being managed. On an annual basis, the URS team will work with Triangle Transit to review, revise, and update the Durham-Orange Light Rail Project Management Plan (PMP) and its subplans/appendices. The table below reflects the subplans or appendices to the PMP that will be reviewed on an annual basis and updated as necessary: Duirharn Orange Iiglht Il allll Transit Project � June 201 �g-2 III AF.,t 102 rian g/e elliol tal t,,aau);� Pi gpa,m II�)r of c t 11')eveloprnent Scop. e of Work Table 8 App endkes I ist a w I k 2 A 0 Staffing Plan 2 & 18 B 0 Interagency Agreement Permitting Matrix 4&7 C 0 Contracting Plan 5 D 0 Bus Fleet Management Plan 6 & 14 E 0 Risk and Contingency Management Plan 8 F 0 Rail Fleet Management Plan 8 G 0 Transit Operating Plan 9 H 0 Quality Management Plan 13 1 0 Document Control and Management Plan 15 1 0 Real Estate Acquisition and Management Plan 16 K 0 Safety and Security Management Plan 1 L 0 LPA Conceptual Plans and Profile Drawings 1 M 0 Project Design and Construction Schedule 10 To be developed Construction Management Plan during PE 11 To be developed Configuration Management and Change Control Procedures during PE 17 To be developed Rail Activation Plan during PE 18 To be developed List of environmental mitigation measures during the EIS To be further 19 developed during I Communication and Public Involvement Plan PE (Extracted from the PMP revision 0,submitted to the FTA for approval) As of June 2013, FTA guidance regarding requirements PMPs and subplans under MAP-21 at various stages of the project development processes are still under development,as the scope and budget for this task is subject to change pending further direction from the FTA. As previously mentioned all subplans/appendices will be reviewed annually and updated as necessary. However, there are various subplans, listed below that we anticipate will need to be updated. Deliverable: lull FY 2015 Updated PMP (Draft and Final) E.)urllnani Om"alnge I i lhht IFad, Transit Piroject � June 2.013 �8-3 Ip;1RAI:7 „u 103 Project De I i°gy ie t Scope of Work ou a ansir uua � , 6.4„J. Llpd'ate plus and RaH Transit Mans The URS team will refine and update the service plans developed in the AA and refined for the Fall 2012 New Starts Submittal to FTA. We propose to meet with each affected operator and review prior assumptions regarding background bus service improvements and proposed new feeder routes, and possible modifications to those prior assumptions. Based on these discussions, we will update background bus network assumptions for the No-Build and Build Alternatives. Rail operating plans will also be updated using current plan and profile drawings to update station-to- station rail travel times. Operating hours and frequencies by time period will be reviewed with the client and updated as necessary. Typically, rail travel time information is needed in support of NEPA analysis (e.g., train speeds at 100' increments). We will then work closely with the project team's travel demand forecasters to update the transit networks used for ridership forecasting. Initial results will be reviewed and service plans will be refined as necessary. Deliverable: Updated Bus and Rail Transit Plans 8®4.2 Update Operating and I{ apn~otenairnce Cost Estimates The URS team will refine and update work completed as part of the 2012 New Starts submission utilizing operating statistics developed from the operations plans, and ridership forecasts obtained from the travel demand model. The URS team will prepare bus and LRT operations and maintenance (O&M) cost estimates. Ridership results will be reviewed to determine if bus and/or LRT service levels and LRT train consist assumptions need to be modified. Costs will be based on the level of service provided (e.g., peak buses, bus-hours and bus-miles of service). Deliverable: In Updated 0&M Cost Estimates 8,.4.:3 Update Safety and Security Management Plan The URS team will work with Triangle Transit to review and update the Safety and Security Management Plan, which was included in the 2012 New Starts submission. It is anticipated that prior to entrance in to Engineering the FTA will require additional detail regarding safety and security management and procedures be included in the Safety and Security Management Plan. 8.4.4 Update Document Contiroll Man The URS Team will work with Triangle Transit to assess any needed changes to the Document Control Plan Rev 0 (submitted as part of the 2012 New Starts application) and incorporate the changes. URS team will work with Triangle Transit to implement a document system for future phases of the project that implements the Document Control Plan and meets FTA requirements.The system would be capable of being expanded to accommodate other future capital projects. Work includes both onsite and offsite work with Triangle Transit and URS team including assessment and discussions of required and available resources—computers, other equipment, space, staffing and training. Anticipated Duration: July 2013 — June 2014 I)urhroarn Orange l,,,iglht Rad "l,,.rauns'it Project � June 2,03.,3 1I g..4. DRAFT 104 Trhmgle Re iom, t t �""fi�7l I����,����"''I�7y � Project e n m :u ro of Work asst O'aan"ol ji�,�anOVO Deliverables: Updated PMP Updated subplans and PMP appendices 85 DI°°Y 2.01.6 Update IPirroject IManageorneiunt Man and Sulbpllans The URS team will work with Triangle Transit to review, revise, and update the Durham-Orange Light Rail Project Management Plan (PMP) and its subplans/appendices. The PMP and subplans/appendices were developed to be living documents which should be reviewed and updated as the project progresses to ensure that the PMP continues to meet the changing needs of the project and accurately reflects how the project is being managed. On an annual basis, the URS team and Triangle Transit will review and update as necessary the PMP and subplans. The table above reflects the subplans or appendices to the PMP that will be reviewed on an annual basis and updated as necessary. Deliverable: FY 2016 Updated PMP (Draft and Final) 8.5.1 RaH Transit Operating and Maintenance Procedures (TOMP) IReport As the project progresses, it is appropriate to begin to define anticipated rail operations and maintenance procedures. The Transit Operations and Maintenance Procedures (TOMP) Report will identify those procedures. The TOMP will be a living document which will be updated as the project progresses through Engineering and into construction. Deliverable: TOMP (Draft and Final) 8.1.5.2 Update Raill Flleet Maintenance Nain FTA requires all agencies to have fleet maintenance plans (FMP) in place. An initial Rail FMP was prepared in the fall 2012. This plan will require updating based on revised service plan assumptions resulting from the above tasks. Deliverable: N Updated Rail Fleet Maintenance Plan 8,53 Upadate Docuirneint Control Man URS Team will also perform an annual review of the document control system in FY 2015 and incorporate changes to the Document Control Plan and Document Control procedures as required. Anticipated Duration:July 2014—June 2015 Deliverables: Updated PMP Updated subplans and PMP appendices Durrlll°iaurn Orange il,,,iglht Rail Transit Project I June 2013 �g,,.'5 IDII II1::T 105 x�^ :'m F'ro^ect Deve�lopnieint Scope of Work 8,6 Trave� I::oirecasthmg (�Y 20.1.5 New Stairts SmbryflsS[on/DHS) &6A. Mod6| Matfornn/Data Update/VaBdatfon The platform for modeling will be migrated from Triangle Regional Model Version 4E2 to Version S. The migration will permit usage of data and socioeconomic forecasts that have previously been prepared for regional modeling activities and obviate the need to translate these data into input files for use with the TRM Version 4E2. It is advisable to confirm this migration plan with FTA prior to full commencement to ensure there are no unforeseen concernsz Activities under this task include: 1D Review 2010 model output against the latest available observed traffic counts and ridership information (e.g., surveys and counts),with an emphasis on the study area. * Define and confirm analysis district system for reporting New Starts, DE|S, and HIS results. w Perform trip table comparisons (compare to latest 5-year ACS/[TPP).Prepare travel time analyses and comparisons (average speeds, travel times, comparisons with mode[ differences by time of day, transit and highway estimates).Confirm/ad]ust existing and regional plan bus network coding asnecessary. � Notify on significant deficiencies that would require additional resources to be addressed. Make minor adjustments in the model, if necessary and subject to resource limitations, to improve the match between estimated and observed travel patterns for major travel flows and between estimated and observed ridership for major transit markets. � URS team will prepare validation and methodology report suitable for inclusion with the New Starts and DE|Sdocumentation. � One person trip to North Carolina has been assumed for this effort. In addition, an allowance for preparation and attendance at regular teleconferences on review of the model, data, and model validation are provided for; in-person meetings with FTA can be held as needed. Deliverable: IN Model Platform/ Data Update /Va|idation 8.6,2 Eva|uation of A8ternatiwes The alternatives to be reviewed will be drawn from the Alternatives Analysis and prior effort preparing New Starts submission to enter Project Development, including No-Build and Build scenarios. * An allowance to address up to four Build scenarios is included in the estimate. w Transit ridership will be reported, including station level boardinQs. ~ Analysis years will be 2010\ 2025, and 2040. /For New Starts submission interpolation will be necessary to address FTA1U, 3O horizon year requirements. In the event this migration plan is not ultimately deemed as advisable,there will then be a need to migrate the TRIVI Version 5 data and socioeconomic forecasts to the TRM Version 4E2 platform to permit use of a 2010 validation year and ZO4U horizon year. Duirhamn-Orange Light UO Transit Project | June 2013 U8-6 DRAF r 106 Triangle, Regional 1 mrir ;�,,n �� �f r o j e c De III m i.I t Scope of Work owir t.�a n si, , irat ure For each scenario, URS team will code inputs, apply the model, and supply the raw forecast trip tables and loaded networks to URS for post-processing to traffic impacts. URS team will prepare tabulations of raw model outputs and necessary modeling-related text submissions for use in the assembly of the DEIS. URS team has made allowance to attend weekly project teleconferences with the project team. Deliverables: Tabulation of ridership estimates for each alternative. " Ridership Results technical memo in support of DEIS. 8.7 travel 1--orecastiin ctiivuiti s (Entrance into Engiirieeriwuig IIC EIS) 53.1 °I`oox l i.a1lad :es/Ulriceirt ldnty and Sensith4ty An°4�yMs Comments received on the DEIS, including from FTA, will be considered in making adjustments to the project forecasting tool and to inform further uncertainty and sensitivity analyses. As part of this task, URS Team will run the STOPS "national model" to provide reference forecast information that may be used in the New Starts submittal. Deliverable: in Documentation suitable for informing project stakeholders and inclusion in FEIS documents will be prepared. 8.71 Finai Mternativ:n II',;;.vallu:.tia um To the extent that changed forecasts are required, this task provides an allowance to make updates to the DEIS work in the FEIS. The budget does not provide for a complete repeat of the DEIS analysis, but does provide for two or three additional model runs to enable preparation of the final EIS documents. For each scenario so analyzed, CS will code inputs, apply the model, and supply the raw forecast trip tables and loaded networks to URS for post-processing to traffic impacts as with the DEIS evaluation subtask. CS will prepare tabulations of raw model outputs for use in the assembly of the FEIS. CS will update validation and methodology reporting and documentation as necessary based on Subtask 1.2.1. Deliverable: Final Alternatives Evaluation 8.7.3 Preparatloin of New Starrts Sulburniittal In this task, URS Team will assemble the required inputs to the New Starts submittal requesting entry into Engineering. It is assumed that supplemental ad hoc reporting will be developed from the model to inform the development of the submission. This task provides resources to permit the STOPS "national model" results or the HIS analysis results to be used in preparing the submission. Deliverables: Tabulation of ridership estimates for each alternative. Ridership results technical memo in support of New Starts submission„ D u urlhar n Orange ILiglht lRaill "'Frrairnsit Ilirour ject �I .Juirie 2013 J 8-7 IIDFIAII F 107 °a it le Regional �l,�J1�'_���N,��� �°�r�l r �� Project Deve( mn n Sc o III le of Work 8.8 Work Khan for Il3efore and After Study The URS team will prepare a detailed work plan that describes the required steps for completion of the required FTA "Before and After Study". Working with Triangle Transit the URS team will prepare a detailed plan that describes the steps that will be taken to assemble the required information and conduct assessments of actual impacts of the Durham-Orange Light Rail project and the accuracy of predictions of those impacts.The plan will be submitted to the FTA for review and approval. As of February 2013, FTA guidance regarding requirements Before and After Study work plans under MAP-21 at various stages of the project development processes are still under development, as the scope and budget for this task is subject to change pending further direction from the FTA. Anticipated Duration:July 2014—June 2015 Deliverable: " Work Plan for the Before and After Study 8.9 Prepare Request to Enter, Engineeirimg As of February 2013, it is unclear what the exact reporting requirements will be for a request to enter Engineering under MAP-21. However, the URS team anticipates that a request to enter Engineering will require submitting FTA templates for each of the six Project Justification measures, Financial template, Standard Cost Categories (SCC) workbook, updated PMP and associated subplans, updated financial plan, updated work plan for the Before and After Study, documentation of completion of NEPA, and a formal request to enter Engineering. The URS team will prepare the various FTA New Starts templates, SCC workbook, updated PMP and associated subplans, updated financial plan, updated work plan for the Before and After Study, and a draft letter requesting entry into Engineering. The URS team will also prepare other materials as required by the FTA, pending guidance regarding requirements to enter Engineering. The URS Team will organize the various materials included in the request to enter Engineering into a consolidated organized package ready for submission to FTA. Deliverable: " Request to Enter Engineering 8,9.1 Update FinaincW Pllan The URS team prepared a Financial Plan as part of the 2012 New Starts submission and will update this plan as part of the DEIS. However, financial planning is an essential element for a successful New Starts project and we anticipate the need to update the Financial Plan as part of the New Starts effort prior to entrance into Engineering. Deliverables: FTA New Starts templates SCC workbook ilia Updated PMP and associated subplans • Updated Financial Plan • Updated work plan for the Before and After Study Durham Orange [ight IRallltl T'iransit Project � June 2013 �gg DRAFT 108 full lllrr/lll iNr,,(frclll�r,',Pd it li ly ' ,lI""fj t j P Dev(,,,IopIIIment Scope of Work • Draft letter requesting entry into Engineering • Additional materials required by FTA to enter Engineering • Assistance in preparation of the application of a request to enter Engineering D rh iu - range (Light gay fl ' 'ransit Project ec I rie 2013 18-.9 DRAFT 110 N F PrOri'wgle� ' ! "�� rW "i'�'"S� 1 ,�rr� P�Y o� ;; m t Developi-rient Scope Ilf 9.0 F)iirehrninairy I ngiiiirmeering IDesiign URS's Work Plan is to complete the preliminary engineering designs for all appropriate design elements to successfully baseline the definition of the Triangle Transit D-O LRT Project and to advance cost estimating accuracy for budgeting purposes. 9a1„ QAJ'C C Prograin,i Prepare QA/QC project management plan for the URS Team of consultants derived from URS' Quality Management System (URS QMS)which conforms to the requirements of ISO 9001:2008. Assure the completeness and accuracy of contract deliverables through three primary checks: • Detail Check • Discipline Coordination Review • Independent Technical Review • Document quality reviews and compliance with corrective actions. Conduct internal audits to assure adherence to the quality procedures. Deliverables: 1111111 Quality Management Plan IN Documented QA/QC Reviews and Audits of compliance (upon request) 9.2 Design Managemerit and Co ri: inafllori Provide direction to the design discipline team, Attend project coordination and project progress meetings, Participate in design review meetings at major design submittal milestone. Participate in follow-up meetings as necessary to resolve outstanding design issues. Track design review comments and the disposition of the response by the responsible designers. Incorporate appropriate comments into design documents as appropriate. As appropriate, conduct meetings to review basis of design assumptions in advance of design submittals in effort to streamline the review process. Perform special studies as needed. Deliverables: Design Action Item logs per Design Progress Meetings IN Design review comment tracking list(s) Special Studies as needed 9.3 Design Criteria [DevelVopirrment The URS Team will develop a Light Rail Design Criteria for the project.These criteria will be applicable for future light rail projects and extensions. The URS Team will make use of published up to date criteria Di.uurltia°urn Orange Ligllnt: RaH Tra, inslit Project � June 2013 J 9-1 DRAF1,,, 111 Wangle flr io al f � Project Dev loprnerit Scope Work ir(�P from other agencies and customize to the Durham-Orange Project and to the policies and practices of Triangle Transit. Deliverable: III Draft and LRT Final Design Criteria 9.4 Cost Estimating Quantities Each design discipline will be responsible to assemble material quantities based on the preliminary designs. These quantities will be developed using standard anticipated pay items for the unit involved. Back-up calculations will be developed and checked. Deliverables: Quantities for cost estimating purposes Back up calculations 9.5 New Risk, AnMysls The URS team will perform a new risk analysis near the end of the preliminary engineering for input into the updated new starts application for the request to enter the engineering phase. The URS team will update the Risk Management Control Plan as necessary to reflect the added detail associated with preliminary engineering. Deliverables: Risk Analysis Management Control Plan Update New Risk Analysis 9.6 Civd, Engineering, HIT Corridor The product for all of the engineering disciplines (sections 9.6 through 9.11) that follow will include the drawings as discussed and will not be repeated under the deliverables for the sake of duplication. Special reports will be noted. 9.6.1 General Drawings General drawings will be prepared including drawing indexes, project location plan, key sheet indexes, survey control monumentation plans. As part of this effort, a Regulatory Review and Permit Report will be prepared. Deliverable: III Regulatory Review and Permit Report 9.602 Mgnrnent If1ain and (Profile, Sections and Details The URS Team will: Finalize the alignment scenarios for the US 15-501 study area working with local stakeholders for definition of up to two alternatives. Durham-Orange E.igllnt Rad Transit (Project M June 2013 �9- , DRAFT 112 Diangl Ro'gioll'a l Project De l 0 Ip m In t Scope of Work Complete final alignment and profiles will be developed for the NEPA LPA at a scale of 1" = 40' horizontal and 1"=10' vertical using MicroStation software on a sheet size of 22"xc34". Conceptual plan and profiles will be developed for the New Hope Creek and Sandy Creek alternatives for use in evaluating the environmental impacts. Up to two alternatives are envisioned for the New Hope Creek and Sandy Creek alternatives. IN Coordinate of track design with other project design elements, especially grade crossing designs and station layouts. Develop rail and guideway sections for ballast and direct fixation track. The intent is for the typical sections to address the varying conditions along the alignment and hence will be indicated with stationing limits for each. Optimization track profile for cut and fill sections and coordinate roadway re-grading limits. Coordinate profile and special trackwork with proposed drainage and utility relocations designs and with the operation plan of the system Develop special trackwork details including emergency guard rail, turnouts, crossovers and end of line bumping posts. " Track design details for corrosion control and stray current control measures " Prepare alignment data sheets based on state plane coordinates or use of a local coordinate system,whichever is deemed most appropriate. Prepare of site specific cross sections @ 500' minimum and at places of critical changes in profile or conditions. IN Prepare track Charts showing a graphical representation of plan, profile, maximum speed limits, special trackwork, and signal locations 9.643 Grading, Retaining Wal1l1 and Fenchng IIDlans Using the same plan window as the plan and profile drawings, grading plans will be prepared showing cut and fill limits. Earthwork quantities will be placed directly on the drawings. The grading plans will include the station areas and parking area depicting the integration of the facilities into a cohesive set of plans. Corridor fencing will be shown on these plans as well based on Triangle Transit policies that will be discussed and developed during the design. It is anticipated that fencing will be limited to areas where it is likely that corridor control is necessary to prevent unwanted crossing of the tracks. In street running sections, a decorative type of fencing between the tracks will be used to channel pedestrians to crosswalks and to deter jaywalking across the tracks. Retaining walls will also be shown on these plans denoting their limits. The placement of retaining walls will be based on the track grading and will be coordinated with the site specific cross sections. 9.6.4 Dirainage Mans and Hydraullic Studies The work will include the collection of drainage data (both field and office); development of general project drainage schemes; design studies to detail drainage features with regard to location, type, size, material; and documentation of the design process and features through plans, profiles and reports. Il uurllhaurn- rar ge III,,,ig lht IlRaill Traurnsit Project � June 20:13 J -3 DIR IF„f 113 Hangle egi na ��n��������'���P„������� �� Project IIC v O0pIin iin Scope of Work Field and Office Data Collection: A field reconnaissance visit to the project will be conducted to verify existing drainage structures and features, identify land use, and define surface drainage flow patterns. During this visit each drainage outfall will be located, described, and evaluated for any stability, and or capacity concerns. As appropriate for the project, local resident and/or DOT and City maintenance personnel will be interviewed to determine the presence of recurring drainage problems, and to determine historical high water information. Potential environmental impacts, such as fill in wetlands or stream relocation, will be noted. For major drainage structures that exist within the project limits, research will be conducted to obtain previous bridge/culvert survey reports, bridge inspection reports and scour studies. Flood zone status will be determined and stream gage data will be obtained if applicable. Bridge and Box Culvert Size Structures: Preliminary review indicates that there will be approximately fourteen bridge or box culvert (structures with a conveyance greater than a 72' pipe) size crossings. Hydrologic and Hydraulic analysis of these structures will be performed to determine size, location and hydraulic performance. Bridge scour analysis will be performed on the bridge structures for use in determining foundation cost. Designs will be documented in plan and profile and in the detailed drainage report. Nine of these sites are located in FEMA Designated Flood Hazard Zones. Existing FEMA models will be obtained from the North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program (NCFMP). These existing models will be used to insure designs meet FEMA regulations and to determine the possible FEMA approvals that will need to be obtained prior to construction. This information will be documented in the detailed drainage report. The following Streams are located in FEMA Designated Flood Hazard Zones: Stream Name AA Plan Sheet Approx. Station Potential Structure Study Type/DFIRM Meeting of the Water B-02 65+00 Culv. Extension Limited Detailed 9788 Chapel Creek B-03 96+00 Culv. Extension Limited Detailed 9798 Little Creek C1-04 120+00 Bridge Limited Detailed 708 New Hope Creek D-06 357+00 Bridge Redelinated 800 Sandy Creek D-07 363+00 Bridge Redelinated 800 Sandy Creek D-08 380+00&384+00 Bridge Redelinated 800 Sandy Creek E-01 113+00 to 133+00 Culvert Redelinated 811 Sandy Creek Trib E-01 122+00 RT Culvert Redelinated 811 Sandy Creek E-02 172+00 Culvert(? ) Redelinated 811 Un-named Trib. C1-01 40+50 Culvert No Study Un-named Trib. D-02 231+00 Culvert No Study Un-named Trib. D-03 242+00 Culvert No Study Un-named Trib. D3-03 95+25 Culvert No Study Un-named Trib. E-04 191+50 Culvert No Study Pipes,Storm Drain Ditches and Stormwater Management Various analyses will be performed and will include cross pipe analysis and design, closed storm drainage system design modifications to existing systems, underdrain design, ditch and channel capacity analysis and stability recommendations, outlet energy dissipater design, and stormwater best management practice (BMP) design. Appropriate output files and reports will be generated and included in the Detailed Drainage Report. Conceptual drainage designs will also be provided for the Yard & Site, and provisions will be made for the drainage for the eight park and ride lots. All proposed drainage design will be documented in plan sheets and profiles Durlhnarn Orange I,,.ligllhnt Il ailll Transit (Project � June 2013. �9..4 DIRAF.F 114 our tf l� t 1,, r oJ e c t D e v e II o Ip irn e in t S c o,p'e of VV'o Ir k where necessary in order to provide an estimation of drainage quantities. Quantities will be indicated directly on the plans. The watershed and classification of all streams will be determined and verified on environmental- sensitivity base maps, and the applicability of any stormwater regulations will be determined. The potential for impact will be determined by considering the proximity of the discharge point to the receiving stream, and the ratio of new impervious surface area to total watershed area. Recommendations for potential BMP preventive and control measures to minimize the impacts will be documented. These measures may include, grassed swales, vegetative filter strips, preformed scour holes, infiltration basins, detention and/or retention basins. Deliverable: Drainage and Hydrology Report 9,6.5 Erosion Contr6l Plans Erosion control concepts will be developed and documented on plan sheets to determine additional temporary construction easement needs and to determine estimation of quantities. .6.6 Corer°idor UtHitlies IR&Iocation IINans and Piroffts (as needed) The URS Team will: Prepare a formal list of utility contacts. Coordinate with surveyor and utility owners to identify existing utilities within the affected ROW and to establish a composite utility base map for the project. Meet with utility representatives to establish utility relocation guidelines. le Identify those utilities that need to be relocated or modified in place. Identify those utilities that will be relocated or modified in place by others. Identify any reasonable solutions to resolve potential utility conflicts with protective measures. Develop preliminary designs for public water and sanitary sewer utility relocations and/or modifications. Develop preliminary plans showing the limits of private utility relocations and/or modifications to be designed by others. Deliverables: Utility relocation report documenting the affected utilities, ownership and disposition in addition to the plans set. IN Preliminary utility drawings as described above. .63 11 emoHdon 1Plans Demolition plans will be prepared to show the intended extent of the required demolition and to serve for cost estimating purposes. Durllhmarn-Orange ll i lht Ilfla 111 Tirarns'it Project � June e ,D .3 � -5 Dl°Al,1" 115 a f a .gion pa')q f� n 0 Project N III c I° n t Scope � Work oily h n" l fw 9.6,.8 Minimum Right-of--Way Needs Il-)llairns Minimum right-of-way needs plans will be prepared. All properties will be numbered and a table will be produced indicating parcel number; owner; type of property (residential, commercial or government entity), acreage, type of structure, and assessed value based on current data available. Plans sheets will be developed showing the minimum amount of right-of-way needed. URS will work with Triangle Transit to ascertain full versus partial takes for estimating purposes.These right-of-way needs may be shown on the demolition plans or on a separate set of plans.This is to be determined. These plans will also show proposed easements for drainage, utilities, and construction. Deliverable: a Right-of-way data matrices as described above 9.7 Roadway Grade Crossing and Roadway Reconstruction Plans There are 38 at-grade crossings for the project not including the New Hope Creek and Sandy Creek alternatives. It will be important to lay out the grade crossings with gates, flashers, signal bungalows, and traffic signals (as needed) to ensure the facilities are properly placed at the intersections and also to determine the track locations needed to fit into the physical arrangement of the intersections. From these layouts, the plan and profile of the tracks can be finalized. In addition to the at-grade crossings, plans showing the reconstruction of the following roadways will also be presented: The reconfiguration of Carmichael Street along Fordham Blvd. will be shown due to the impact of the aerial columns. Reconfiguration of the UNC Finley golf course cart path. Impact mitigation plans will also be prepared. Plans will also be developed for Meadowmont Lane to present the roadway configurations for the C1 alignment. Roadway crossings for the C2 alignment will also be produced. For the New Hope Creek and Sandy Creek alternatives, the frontage road system will also be affected. The frontage road and business access driveways will most likely be presented on the track plan and profiles for public involvement presentation purposes so that a complete alteration of the area is shown. An alternative alignment from Westgate Drive to Shannon Road may be pursued with the LRT track running in the center of University Avenue. A complete plan set will be presented for the entire length of Erwin Road including all cross street reconfigurations. In addition, the intersection of Trent Drive and Elba Street will also be included as a possible mitigation to the reconfiguration of the westbound drop-right lane to a combined right turn and through lane. There are also a number of plans identified on the task and drawing control log for roadway rework along Pettigrew Street integrating Pettigrew Street with the perpendicular cross streets that will be reconfigured with the introduction of light rail. In addition,the following activities will be performed: Preparation of roadway pavement sections based on current roadway pavement sections (assuming as-built information is available). Durhaar ... range I iglllit Rail Transit (Project � June 2013 � -8 I11'.) l:rr 116 iiauPr� te Regional hvlasii�,Pdo F'roject Developrnent Scope of Work IN Coordinate roadway re-grading design in coordination with track profile. Identify proposed drainage improvements associated with the roadway modifications and reconstruction. Complete all necessary civil modifications including sidewalks, ADA upgrades and curb-return modifications in addition to the placement of all fixed facilities. Review road grading designs with each authority having jurisdiction. 9.8 Station Platforim, Canolpies, Bins Canopies and iriforrnationai Mosk A major assumption of the scope of work is to limit the presentation of station and station platform canopy designs to two basic designs for the at-grade stations. The same will be true for kiosk/information displays. This assumption is based on having a single station layout and design for the stations within the Town of Chapel Hill and another for the stations within the City of Durham, although this could be altered to specific stations regardless of jurisdiction. The elevated stations at UNC and South Square will be presented separately and may have their own unique design given the magnitude of the station and structure. If the Friday Center station is elevated, then it is assumed that it will have the same design as the UNC station design. Side platform or split platform station designs will also have their own unique canopy arrangements. The scope of work includes: Develop a shelter design concept of appropriate scale, materials (maintenance/durability/constructability) and functionality (weather protection, ADA compliance). Coordinate the relocation of existing bus stop amenities as appropriate. Make accommodations for pedestrian and bicycle movements through and around the light rail station and bus stops as necessary. Develop shelter structural and foundation design and preliminary plans and coordinate the integration with civil design. Coordinate with Triangle Transit. City and stakeholders to integrate any unique paving elements into platforms. Ensure integration of all systems required for a fully-functional station (i.e. power, communications, lighting, and fare collection). Coordinate with Triangle Transit and stakeholders to develop/identify stop furnishing elements including railings, windscreens, seating and trash receptacles. Consistency in furnishing layouts at the stations will be inherent in the design. Coordinate with Triangle Transit and stakeholders to develop/identify type, size and location (TSL)of information kiosk/Station ID/real time information display. Deliverable: Graphic architectural designs for use with the Public Involvement Program and meetings. Durlharn-Oranf,e Ugll°it Rail T'rairis'it IV'roject � June 2013 �9-7 DR AF 117 fr angle Regional 11"o""v�N'N Project 0 j e c t e v I 0 i in t Scope o f Work i in i� ft�t ® Park au'-id bide Lots aund Off Stireet !Bus Bays There are nine stations that have park and ride lots associated with them. In addition, it is assumed that that the UNC station and Friday Center station will have unique bus drop-off facilities that will need to be designed. Parking lots will be designed including the preparation of civil site plans, grading plans, lighting and camera plans, landscaping and irrigation plans, and utility service plans.The parking lots will be integrated with the station plans at Gateway Station, MLK Jr. Station, South Square Station, and Ninth street stations. Parking garages at Mason Farm Road Station, Leigh Village Station and Alston Avenue Station will also be shown on the civil site plans. 9.9.1 Pedestrian U ufl dges Two pedestrian bridges are included, one at the Dean Dome and one at the Durham Station. The Durham Station pedestrian bridge was primarily for linking the commuter rail with the light rail. Should the Veterans Administration and Duke Medical require a pedestrian bridge linking the two facilities, then the Durham Station Pedestrian bridge could be reprogrammed to their.Architectural and civil plans will be produced; electrical and mechanical plans are not included because these can be estimated accurately without plans. It is assumed that these structures contain stairs and elevators and no moving walkways or escalators. 9.10 Struct;u4l Engineering There are nine aerial structures and six bridges. At the New Hope Creek and Sandy Creek area there are two aerial structures envisioned for any of the alternatives. One alternative will be designed to the 30% level since the detail of the structure is not needed for evaluating the environmental impacts. The approach for each aerial structure and bridge will be the same consisting of the following: A type, size and location report which will analyze different structure types documenting the best structure type to yield the best value (value engineering of bridges done upfront) Location sketch Plans, elevations and details will be done to the 30% level of engineering Long chord layout of the bridges Approach retaining walls Geotechnical boring indicated on the plans Tables of estimated quantities for each structure or bridge Coordination of designs with NCDOT and FHWA for bridges over their facilities Work will be in conformance with NCDOT standards and the prevailing design codes Deliverable: Type, size, and location report for each bridge .10.11.. Parking Structures Structural plans will be prepared for the three parking structures. A fourth parking structure may be needed at Ninth Street and this is included in the scope of work. Il urhann-Orange Iigll°mt galil Transit (Project I June 2013 19...8 II)R FT 118 iang e Regh mal Project lf', e III o m III° k 9.1.0.2 1R T Corridor IRS*t wining WaHs Structural design of the LRT corridor retaining walls and sound walls will be performed. Sections and tables will be presented. 9.10.3 Ii%edestdan IRiridges The URS team will perform structural design with the 2 pedestrian bridges as discussed in Section 9.9.1. 9.1.1. Systenris Engineering Develop an LRT electrical and communications systems design to meet the operational performance goals. 9.11.1 Traction Powerr It is assumed that pre-packaged substations will be used. If there is an architectural treatment to be applied, it is assumed to be the same for all substations. The architectural design will be handled via graphics. In addition, the URS team will do the following: Perform traction power Load Flow Simulation models for the proposed traction power system. Determine locations and rating of substations and coordinate with site plans. Coordinate with the utility companies to locate and design the electrical service connections. Prepare substation typical equipment layout which will also serve to size the structure. IN Develop site plans showing the arrangement of the substations within its immediate area and in relation to the property being used. Utility service will also be included on the site plans. Single line diagrams will be prepared in accordance with the design criteria. Deliverable: N Traction Power Load Flow Simulation Model/Substation Location Report 9.11.2 OCS Plans It is assumed that dual wire, high and low profile OCS system will be designed except for Erwin Road. Erwin Road will be assumed to be wireless or be a single wire system. Decide on preliminary pole locations and produce OCS layout plans. Coordinate OCS design with traction power substation and appropriate sectioning. Coordinate the OCS and Power System design with consideration of future additional expansion at each terminus 9 11.3 Signalhng The signaling design will be coordinated with the grade crossing designs and traffic signal designs. Single line track/signal layout plans will be produced along with signal cable plans and signal route and aspect plans and schematics.This includes the following: NR': Coordinate with traffic signal designers to establish train-to-wayside communication systems for any necessary train signal integrated into the traffic control design. IDUrlhar -Orarige Il...igll-it IRaill Turainsit I1::)roject � June 203.3 19 9 IIDR Fr 119 Irki rg a Regional 1 l a,hl P Wrr,,vaa� Project D e III Iii n t Scope of Work area transit,114tun' 9.1.1.4 Communication and Cnntrai Con"ntr i The URS Team will compile a basis of design summary to assist Triangle Transit in the selection of the Cable Transmission System (CTS), Train Tracking and Public Information system, CCTV, and related voice and data systems.The URS Team will do the following: Produce system-wide backbone network plans, system-wide line diagrams, and system block diagrams for the various communication systems. Research practices and equipment used by other agencies and develop recommendations for the new Triangle Transit communication systems including Train Performance Calculators (TPC), variable message signs, public address, public and private emergency communications, interface communications with fire and police,train tracking and event logging . Coordinate with station design activities to identify station communication amenities such as next-train information both visual and audio. Give definition to Central Control and the functions to be carried out and space requirements. Establish necessary transmission media used in other transit systems to interconnect various system elements, including the central server, control center(s), trains, passenger stations, and customer service. Prepare facility-interfacing information and develop provisions to accommodate remote surveillance system requirements and review and coordinate with facility designs to ensure system integration. Deliverable: Basis of Communication design report 9.11.5 Corrosion Contr i and Stray Current Design The URS Team will meet with Triangle Transit and utility companies to have a dialogue on stray current protection and corrosion control. Standard industry practice will be described and coordinated. Stray current designs will be shown with emphasis of controlling stray currents at the source. Cathodic protection details will also be drawn. Deliverable: in Report on approach to stray current and corrosion control of utilities 9.11,6 rra'in Coo ntrei The train control system will be coordinated with the alignment, grade crossing, location of stations, interlockings, signal bungalows, location of traffic control devices and utilities, and substation interfaces. A train control technical report will address all of the above and provide a description of the recommended system. Drawings to be produced include the following: o° Crossover interlocking locations Pedestrian and at-grade Crossings Intermediate signal/cut Section locations Deliverable: Dur-hann-Orange Ught Rai@ 111'"rarnsiit. :Project � June 203.3 119-10 IDRAE'„Ili' 120 Ti aikgins egiouaf ,�t'!J ns''a Pir")yrlm Project De 'e Il opIV"f'i e III" t Scope of Work Technical Train Control Report 9.1.2 RalH Operafl ns and Niaintenance Far.'ifty Based on the preferred rail operations and maintenance facility (ROMF), the URS Team will perform the following subtasks: 9.1.2.11. Prograirnu=nnling of fll°we Facility The URS Team will coordinate the facilities and equipment to be provided for in the maintenance building with Triangle Transit regarding the initial build out of the facility versus functions that can be added later. The programming report will determine space requirements and room configurations and will consider best practices of industrial engineering in regards to which areas and rooms are adjacent to which. The report will also address the size and expandability of the facility based on current ridership and potential build-out of the system. Deliverable: Maintenance Building Programming Document 9.12.2 MaMteinance lI3uildiurng nmclhlil:ecfu4 and i:ngiuneering INains Preliminary architectural and engineering plans will be produced based on the programming of the facility and also based on the yard layout. This includes preliminary plans for architectural treatments, floor plans, elevations, sections and enlarged area details; structural plans; mechanical equipment layout plans, plumbing, fire protection plans, and energy calculations; electrical plans including one line diagrams, equipment elevations, grounding plans, lighting, power, luminaire schedules and control diagrams. 9.1123 Train Wash Facwll'ity The URS Team will locate a train wash facility within the maintenance storage yard and identify equipment and the facilities that will be needed to support the facility including water reclamation, oil and water separation facilities, and utility services. Preliminary engineering plans consisting of a plan view, elevation, and sections will be developed. 9,12.4 IINUntenance of Way BuHdiing The URS Team will define size, design and locate a Maintenance of Way building and the functions and equipment that will be assumed to be in the building based on policy discussion with Triangle Transit. The facility is expected to be approximately 10,000 square feet for the initial system. Expandability will be taken into account. Selected preliminary engineering plans, similar to those defined in Section 9.12.2, will be developed. Deliverable: Maintenance of Way Programming Document 9.12.5 Maiirnteriaunce Storage Yard The yard tracks will be designed to accommodate the fleet size and expansion requirements, which will be discussed with Triangle Transit and as yard space allows depending on the ultimate preferred site. E.)ur lharri....f" range Light Ra'ill °f.m"ainsit Project � fw«uine '21.01 � .1.1 D1f AF7 121 J rr xi ngle Regiati i ,,W Project [)evelopment Scope of Work The yard site will include track and OCS layouts, service aisles, cross sections, grading and drainage plans, lighting plans, site provisions for train wash, maintenance of way building, and a traction power substation. To the extent that the yard acreage can accommodate a complete runaround track will be provided to allow for flexibility of yard operations and for turning of vehicles for operations on the mainline. 9�13 Support Services The paragraphs that follow describe the support services that will be performed. 9.1.3.1. Surveying Some of the surveying has already begun on the project including the aerial photography and scanning. The scope is included herein for reference.The surveying tasks consist of the following: Property Owner Notifications The URS Team will utilize the county GIS database to obtain the names and address of all property owners within the survey corridor. The URS Team will prepare a form letter that provides some general information about the project and informs the property owners that during this phase of the project, surveyors, engineers, or other personnel will be accessing their property to perform surveys and other investigations on their property. The URS Team will mail the property owner notification letters to the address obtained via USPS Registered mail with signature acknowledging receipt. The URS Team will attempt to contact by phone or in person those property owners whose notification letters are returned undelivered. Establish a GPS control network along the project corridor. The URS Team will utilize existing NCGS monuments near the project corridor along with strategically placed new monument "pairs" set every mile to mile and a half along the project corridor. GPS observations will be performed on each monument to establish a GPS control network. " The control network will serve as the basis of control for the aerial photography (Item 3) as well as conventional baseline control run between the new"pairs" (Item 5). " The control network will be tied horizontally to the NAD 83(2011) datum and vertically to the NGVD 1988 datum allowing mapping from other sources such as FEMA, county GIS databases, etc.,to be incorporated accurately. Aerial Mapping Control The URS Team will place and or collect the horizontal and vertical location of approximately 100 target panels or photo ID points. The coordinates and elevations of these target panels or photo ID points will be provided to the Aerial Mapping sub-consultant and utilized for controlling and rectifying the aerial imagery. IDurhan -Orange Light IRaH °IFrainsit Project June 2013 19-12 DRAFT w� 122 Tkiangle it o j e c t D e v e N o l,4)iim e in S c o I f Wo r fk Aerial Mapping Establish Baseline Control along Corridor The URS Team will supplement the GPS network (item 2) with additional baseline survey control points surveyed conventionally between the GPS pairs. The Baseline Control will serve as the survey control for all supplemental surveys. Classification of Aerial Mapping The URS Team will perform classification of the aerial mapping obtained. Classification involves the ground verification, identification and labeling of planemetric features included in the aerial mapping. Classification includes obtaining the size, construction material and other information specific to the planimetric features. Following are some examples: N Drives—type of material, concrete, asphalt, gravel or soil. Buildings—number of stories, basements,type of exterior veneer Landscape areas and tree lines IN Signs—location and type Retaining Walls-top and bottom of wall elevations, and material,timber, segmental block, etc. IIIIH Fences—height and material • Water—above ground appurtenances such as valves, meters, and hydrants • Gas—above ground appurtenances such as valves, meters, and vents Telephone—above ground appurtenances such as poles, pedestals, and manholes Power—above ground appurtenances such as poles, pedestals, and manholes Curb and Gutter-size and section, standard, roll-type, median mountable curb, etc. Supplemental Surveys The URS Team will perform supplemental ground surveys. Supplemental surveys include surveys to collect: Obscured Areas- areas too heavily wooded for the aerial firm to accurately determine the ground elevations or the existence of planimetric features. Existing rail alignments and elevations as needed. Pavement dtms of existing roads or highways that the proposed rail lines are crossing. Hydro surveys-all drainage ditches or other channelized stormwater features. Bridge clearances of existing bridges the proposed rail lines are crossing under. • Storm drainage structures, including rim elevations, pipe inverts, pipe sizes, pipe material, driveway pipes and culverts. • Sanitary sewer structures, including rim elevations, pipe inverts, pipe sizes and pipe material. • Utility appurtenances. Any existing planemetric features found that are not shown in the obtained aerial mapping. Du rlh aryi- raunge 1-iig rot Rail "Trainsit PuP°oject I Jlune 2013 � -33 D AF1' 123 fm r Triangle egI,onal Project Developrrient Scope f WO r III a vrg.m o�is i fta, '°u re All supplemental surveys will be incorporated into the project base mapping. Property Surveys Courthouse Records Research The URS Team will perform research of records, plans, deeds and plats of record to obtain all property, easement and right of way descriptions possible. Field Property Ties and Recon The URS Team will field locate property corners and other evidence of boundary lines, easements and rights of way within the corridor. Property Analysis and Computations U The URS Team will map the property lines, easements and rights of way within the corridor utilizing the records and deeds obtained along with the surveyed property corners. Deliverable: in Complete survey base mapping plans presented in layers of information for use by the engineering disciplines. 9.112 Subsurface Utillity Engiineedng SUE—Level B(Designation) The URS Team will field verify and identify underground utilities within the project corridor. The URS Team will then contact and meet with representatives of the utility companies operating facilities within the affected project area and collect copies of utility records. The URS Team will then employ geophysical prospecting techniques to determine the existence and horizontal position of underground utilities. These techniques will include: Electromagnetic Location and Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) scans. Once found the utilities will then be marked on the ground using the universally recognized industry standard system of paint markings at a minimum of 50 foot intervals along the utility and at bends in the line. Once the utilities have been marked the URS Team will locate by field survey methods all paint marks designated in the task above.The URS Team will then map the location of the subsurface utilities and integrate the mapping into the planimetric data. SUE—Pole Data and Classification The URS Team will collect the location and attribute data for 1500 poles. This data will include pole condition, utilities attached to the pole, pole owners and pole stamp information. Once the data has been collected the URS Team will prepare a utility pole matrix that contains all the data and the final locations of each pole. SUE—Level A(Soft Dig—Pot-holing)40 Holes In order to provide three dimensional locations of any areas of conflict identified by the client, the URS Team will obtain horizontal and vertical positions of target utility lines by excavating test holes at specific locations as directed by the client. Any excavation by the URS Team at this level is performed with the use of a nondestructive Vacuum Excavation truck, to eliminate any damage to the utility. Once the target utility has been uncovered, the URS Team will use conventional survey methods to locate the utility and prepare utility test-hole reports for all required test holes. I)urhanrn.,,Orainge Ili,.uight IRad 'III"raunsit Fliroli1ect 1I Juine 2013 �9 14 1DRAF'r 124 Mangle Regional Plo'�11JW ��� Pro���c�; eIIIoI� r ent c l�f.,� f Irk mir irtaisrt r:�ura. Deliverable: Survey of existing utilities data along with compilation of the information obtained onto the base mapping plans. .13 :3 GeotechrflcM The scope of geotechnical services will include field exploratory work, laboratory testing, engineering interpretations and evaluation of exploratory and test data, engineering analysis, and technical recommendations. Field Investigations The geotechnical services are for the preliminary engineering stage and that minimal disruption to certain stakeholders would be appreciated. Therefore, only minimum numbers of borings will be drilled. Additional borings will be needed for the detailed design stage. No borings will be drilled on Erwin Road and on the UNC campus. Borings performed from the prior DMU project will be used in their entirety. For this preliminary scoping and costing effort, boring quantities and average and guideline-based exploration depths have been estimated based upon the conceptual drawings and tem discussions. Final exploration locations and boring depths will need to be developed based upon the 30%design drawings, review/availability of existing data, information learned from field reconnaissance, and local experience. At a minimum, the borings will penetrate fill and unsuitable founding materials (organic soils, soft clays, loose sands, etc.), and terminate in competent residual material. Competent materials are those suitable for support of the foundations being considered. According to the Conceptual Plans and Profile Drawings, some sections of the alignment traverse undeveloped wooded areas and will require some amount of clearing, and many sections cross-over or are close to existing roadways and may require traffic control in some areas. Subsurface conditions will be explored utilizing traditional geotechnical drill rigs and soil sampling methods. Low contact pressure tracked drill carriers or a Swamp Buggy may be needed for drilling test borings within the wetland areas. Standard penetration tests (SPT)will be performed at regular intervals in accordance with applicable American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standards. Water table observation within each boring will be recorded at boring termination and after sufficient time has elapsed for the water table to stabilize (normally after 24 hours). Borings near existing roadways or within developed areas may have to be backfilled immediately after completion due to safety concerns, thereby limiting water table measurement to termination levels only. Other water level observations (relative moistures, artesian pressure or conditions, etc.) should also be recorded. Unless serving as an observation well, each borehole will be backfilled or grouted according to applicable environmental/regulatory guidelines. The URS Team will subcontract the drilling services to AmeriDrill, Mid-Atlantic Drilling, and/or Trigon Exploration, subcontract traffic control services to Traffic Control Safety Services, Inc., and will provide full time engineers/geologists for oversight of the field work and for logging the boreholes. Surveyors will stake all proposed borings in the field prior to mobilizing to the site, and provide conventional survey to locate all the borings(x,y& z) upon completion of the field exploration work. Duriiarn- rainge I iight RaH TrarWt Project � June 2013 �I9 15 DRAFF„ 125 Triangle R:::,�!Ui io iI; T ro,,, j' a � Project DevOoprneiit Scope Work, oup In'lnl or urure Laboratory Testing Representative split-spoon, undisturbed Shelby tube, and bulk samples will be obtained to verify visual field classification and determine soil index and strength properties. Samples will be tested for natural moisture content, Atterberg limits, grain size, moisture density relationship (Proctor), California Bearing Ratio (CBR), and consolidation/strength properties. Unconfined compressive strength testing will be performed on recovered rock cores in order to determine strength properties. For retaining wall soil samples, Corrosion (pH, resistivity, sulfate, and chloride) testing may be required in order determine the corrosive potential characteristics for these structures. Further testing may be warranted depending on site conditions and design/analysis. It should be noted that Triassic Basin soil and rock conditions may require specialized testing and identification for engineering characteristics. If required, slake testing, locating slickenside seams, and defining locations of degradable rock along the project corridor will be performed. The URS Team will subcontract the laboratory testing services to Geotechnics. All tests will be performed in accordance with the latest AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials), ASTM and NCDOT testing procedures, and soils will be classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Engineering Analysis and Recommendations After completion of the field investigation and laboratory testing, we will evaluate the field and laboratory test data, and perform engineering analysis and reporting that will include the following: • Field and laboratory test results, boring logs, and color photographs depicting site conditions. • A discussion of the understanding of the proposed construction including locations, dimensions, bearing elevations, loading conditions, etc. A discussion of the regional and site geology and topography. Subsurface water level elevations and its effect on the proposed design and construction. Engineering interpretations of the field and laboratory data. Preliminary recommendations for foundation type, bearing capacity/factored resistance, point of fixity, minimum tip elevation, etc. Preliminary recommendations for wall type, soil strength parameters, and global stability for retaining and noise walls. �ro Preliminary recommendations of typical pavement sections for the proposed parking facilities. RU Preliminary recommendations for stable slopes for any permanent cuts or fills. Preliminary recommendations for subgrade improvement and site preparation. Preliminary recommendations for backfill materials and placement including on-site availability, recommended index properties, grain size distributions, classifications, and moisture and density compaction criteria. Deliverable: Geotechnical Report(s) and lab results for the structures itemized. Nl urharn-Orange IIL..'ight Rail ..rrainsit: Pr ject: � June 2013 � 16 DRAFT 126 Wangle Regional goo Project DevOopmerit Scope of Work u'or tar° Assumptions The above scoping is predicated upon the following limitations. The URS Team will contact NC One-Call. The URS Team cannot be held responsible for utilities encountered but not marked by ONC One-call. The URS team will assemble existing utility as- builts and will also use the utilities locations obtained from our surveying efforts to ascertain if further utilities should be present than those marked.Timing of the work is critical in this regard should the need for the geotechnical data be earlier than the ability to completely check for un- marked utilities., The limits or heights of the retaining walls/noise walls, the layout of the columns for the aerial structures, and the layout of the components for the LRT stations were not available at the time of this scoping and fee preparation. The scoping and fee estimate was only based upon the conceptual plans and profile drawings, and therefore, is subject to change when more detailed plans are available. It should be noted that sampling and testing requirements are a function of the subsurface conditions encountered. The cost estimate assumes that adequate bearing materials will be encountered within reasonable boring depths, consistent with this area/geologic region and past experience. Should conditions be encountered which require deepening of the borings or additional exploration. Notification will be provided to discuss modifying the outlined scope of services. Reasonable precautions will be taken to minimize damage to the Project Site from URS' activities and use of equipment in the field. The client recognizes that the performance of the services included in this Agreement may cause alteration or damage to the site. Client accepts the fact that this is inherent in the work and will not look to The URS Team for reimbursement or hold The URS Team liable or responsible for any such alteration or damage. .114 Ei n ineeirin $IaecW Stud'ies Special studies will be performed as directed by Triangle Transit pursuant to the allotment of hours indicated on the task and drawing control log.An allowance has been made for both Wake and Durham- Orange special studies. A safety and security review of stations, park and ride lots, TPSS sites, parking garages, and the ROMF will also be a special study undertaken. 9.115 Agreement with TMird Parties The URS Team will assist Triangle Transit with agreements with third parties. A list of third party agreements has been defined in the September 2012 New Starts report application. Durham Orange lI,Jg ht RaH rrarssit; F"Ir ject � .iuine 201 � .,47 DR AF I' °0 V/1 127 Project Development Scope of Wor]k 9.14 �eims Befing Defeiriired to Nex,t ��Pt,lase The following scope items have been deferred to the next phase of engineering and are not considered critical to achieve reliable cost estimate. * Traffic Signal Design except ao defined in the Environment Impact Statement Scope mfWork * Complete traffic signing and pavement markings (some traffic striping will be shown for clarity, i.e. on Erwin Road. * Lighting in other areas other than discussed above. * 6treetscapeE|ennents * Pavement designs * Site Specific Signoge and VVoyfinding * Station access upgrades away from the immediate vicinity mf the station * Landscaping except ao indicated above * Fare Collection equipment specification * Light rail vehicle design and procurement documents � Public art � Phase ||environmental investigations Duirha00~Orange Ught Rail rransit lPr ^ect U June 2013 U9-18 DRAF]"