HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 10-23-2007-6eORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: October 23, 2007
Action Agenda
Item No.
SUBJECT: Resolution Endorsing Comments to the DCHC MPO TAC Regarding the Regional
Priority List for the 2009-2015 MTIP
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (YIN) C-~
ATTACHMENT(S):
Draft Resolution of Endorsement
OUTBoard Comments
Draft Regional Priority Lists (Highway;
Bicycle and Pedestrian; and Transit)
Methodology and Criteria for Ranking Projects
Orange County's Priority List for the 2009-2015 MTIP
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karen Lincoln, 245-2594
Craig Benedict, 245-2592
__
PURPOSE: To consider a resolution endorsing comments to the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro
(DCHC) Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC)
regarding the Draft DCHC MPO Regional Priority List for the 2009-2015 Metropolitan Transportation
Improvement Program (MTIP).
BACKGROUND: The DCHC MPO TAC, at its meeting on September 12, 2007, released a Draft
Regional Priority List for a minimum 21-day public comment period. The draft Priority List is made
up of all priority lists submitted to the MPO by local jurisdictions. (The Orange County Board of
Commissioners approved Orange County's Priority List for the 2009-2015 MTIP -see Attachment
5, pages 26-28 of this abstract - on June 12, 2007.) The TAC held a public hearing on October 10,
2007 to accept comments regarding the Draft Priority List, and plans to adopt the Regional Priority
List for the 2009-2015 MTIP at its meeting on November 14, 2007, with recognition that the priority
list may be amended after input from the local jurisdictions.
The Draft DCHC MPO Regional Priority List (Attachment 3, pages 6-14) reflects each project's
priority with respect to priority projects submitted by all jurisdictions in the MPO, based on the
MPO's endorsed ranking system and methodology. The ranking methodology (Attachment 4,
pages 15-25) is only one tool used to produce the final regional priority list. The TAC will consider
other criteria, i.e. local government project priorities, public comments and the long-range
trancnnrtatinn elan in c~PVPlnnina the final regional oriority list. Proiects of note include:
Draft DCHC
Regional Rank of Project as Submitted by
Local Jurisdiction
Priority List
Rank Project Orange
Count Hillsborough Carrboro Chapel
Hill
5 S. Churton St. Im rovements 3 2
6 Oran a Grove Rd. Extension 9
8 Eno Mtn. Rd/Mayo St. at Orange
Grove Rd. Reali nment 5 4
11 Elizabeth Brad Rd. Extension 2 1 4 4
13 Homestead Rd. Im rovements
2
The Orange Unified Transportation Board reviewed the Draft DCHC MPO Regional Priority List at
its meeting on September 19, 2007, and has submitted comments in Attachment 2, pages 4 - 5, for
the BOCC consideration.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no direct financial impact associated with this item.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board approve the Resolution
Endorsing Comments Regarding the Draft Regional Priority List for the 2009-2015 Metropolitan
Transportation Improvement Program.
Attachment 1
DG3/1G~~1
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
3
A RESOLUTION TO SUBMIT COMMENTS TO THE TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
(TAC) OF THE DURHAM-CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO (DCHC) METROPOLITAN PLANNING
ORGANIZATION (MPO) CONCERNING ORANGE COUNTY'S TRANSPORTATION PRIORITIES
FOR THE REGIONAL PRIORITY LIST FOR THE 2009 - 2015 TRANSPORTATION
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the North Carolina Board of Transportation, every two years, prepares a
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) that identifies transportation projects scheduled for State
and Federal funding over the next seven years; and
WHEREAS, the North Carolina Board of Transportation solicits input for identifying
transportation projects of local and regional importance to be included in the FY 2009-2015
Transportation Improvement Program; and
WHEREAS, the TAC of the DCHC MPO has adopted, in compliance with federal
requirements, a methodology for ranking TIP projects based on local and metropolitan goals
addressing mobility, environment and air quality; and
WHEREAS, Orange County has submitted to the DCHC MPO a prioritized list of
transportation projects representing transportation needs in the County, and
WHEREAS, the quantitative ranking methodology for bicycle and pedestrian projects does not
adequately address the importance of connectivity between longer distance destinations, such as
between municipalities, nor does the ranking methodology take into consideration
connectivity of bicycle projects that would provide connections between other planned bicycle
facilities; and
WHEREAS, the quantitative ranking methodology cannot adequately represent the importance
of the priority established by local jurisdictions for all proposed projects for the 2009 - 2015TIP;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Orange County Board of Commissioners that
the Board is concerned that the methodology used to rank local projects, specifically that
used for ranking bicycle and pedestrian projects, does not accurately reflect the importance
of all connectivity issues, and staff should revise future quantitative priority ranking
methodology to better address how criteria points are awarded for connectivity.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Orange County Board of Commissioners that Orange
County's projects in the Regional Priority List should reflect the priority of those projects in the
local priority list.
Attachment 1 ~ 3a
DG3GaG~
Upon motion of Commissioner ,seconded by Commissioner ,
the foregoing resolution was adopted this the day of , 2007
I, Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, DO
HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said Board at a
meeting held on October 23, 2007, as relates in any way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said
proceedings are recorded in the minutes of said Board.
WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day of , 2007.
Clerk to the Board of Commissioners
4
°~~o Orange Unified Transportation ~oar~
w=
PO Box 8T81
Hillsborough, NC 27278
,~ ~,,,
Memorandum
Date: September 19, 2007
7`0: Orange County Board of County Commissioners
From: Robert Peterson, Chair
Orange Unified Transportation Board
Subject: Comments Regarding the Draft 2009-2015 DCHC
Regional Priority List for the 2009-2015 MTIP
At its meeting on September 19, 2007, the Orange Unified Transportation Board
(OUTBoard) reviewed and discussed the Draft Regional Priority List for the 2009-2015
Transportation Improvement Program that the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro (DCHC)
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC),
at it meeting on September 12, released for public comment. The OUTBoard approved
the attached comments to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners include
in comments to the TAC regarding the Draft Regional Priority List for the 2009-2015
MTIP.
5
ORANGE COUNTY UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION BOARD
COMMENTS REGARDING THE
DCHC MPO REGIONAL PRIORITY LIST FOR THE
2009 -2015 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
The Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard) realizes that the ranking
methodology is only one tool for comparing merits of projects submitted by all
jurisdictions. However, the board is concerned that the methodology used is flawed in
accurately reflecting the merits the projects, especially for bicycle and pedestrian
projects.
For example, bicycle and pedestrian project travel demand points are awarded for
proximity to travel destinations, and connectivity points are awarded for connectivity to
other bicycle or pedestrian facilities, and not for connectivity between desired
destinations. This process leaves out points that would indicate the need and priority
for connectivity between longer distance destinations, such as between municipalities or
for phased bicycle or pedestrian facilities that would ultimately connect with other
planned bicycle or pedestrian facilities.
Orange County's number 1 priority, TIP Project E-4980 to construct a pedestrian bridge
on Orange Grove Road over I-40, should also receive travel demand points as a bicycle
project since the bridge will be used by both pedestrians and bicyclists. This bridge
connects to the Orange Grove Road Elementary School but is not connected by an
existing bike bath at the present because any bike path would currently dead end at I-
40 The distance between the proposed bridge and the school is minimal and would
certainly be covered by a bike path.
Orange County's projects in the Regional Priority List should reflect the priority of those
projects in the local priority list.
(~}}a~ m~n-1- 3
W N N O 1D W V D) 171 A W N O W W V Q) N A W N - +
x
m o ~z
(~ o C
m m c m m
-`~'+
d`c a y
a O
s'
do• z
`510
S z -_o
0 ~ -=
~ o gam
ru'r m
~-
~' -w
3 ro
am 5,,, Z
n
a SOm
ro =
~o -i
_.
m O
~n~ "d7
~
~i
w ~'~
=n~ - ~ ~
,~,~..~
~ m
m~ =x
< ~
mtDO ~
~
Z
~
roro
=a
a~
<
~o
_
~
ro
=~J''
~
cn ro
a~<
< ~
a
<~n T.
a
ro~
~ m
=
rno'
a~
<m
ro~
3o' m
-=
~m~
=
lo
==
rnm O
as
<c
M
m =
~
~~
D
ro ~~
ro
~
v
~.~ a•0•-~
a~~ i
~3 = ro
'°`=• ro D
a~• =
.
~a =o
~.a J
~ ro ~
3~ ro
3w
o
'
=g ro
a~ ~ -`
~~
~c~~ ro
~
~c~ ro
a~ =
d
~~
o
C
3•
m d O
~O
O •TI = =
(a~:i1
ro C d .
N
= ro
o
m ~ ro
~
/'o'
? 0
m n•
~ 7 =
h7~.
= 7 n•
GT'~
N _
~ Q1
°~
`< = _,
FiTo
~ ?
N
ro = a ~
•'NO
~ m
~ a
m =
Ftr O
=
N _' m
~
~D
=
~
y
~,
_
~1
m
~ . .
ro o ''~ o ~ a -+ o
~' ~ . _
V ~ 07 A A W W Ol J A N -~ N J J (p A W O) N J j J r
N
D
V '
D D
0) 0
C•) D
A 0
= D
W D
W 0 0
S 00
S 0
N S (~ D
O S 0
W 0
n S D
J '
0 '
D O
° N t1t N J N =
'
O
0 0 O
0 O
0 O
O D
0 1
0 D
0 = D
0 n O
0 p D
0 D o
D.~'
0 0 0 0 ~
O
~
W
~ O J
O _ J J
CJ O
O1 O
(D O
(O J
0 J O
W J
O O
(O
"'
(A
p O
~ O
~ J
.
P, O) FJ f0
J
V
V
W
(O
tW
V
N
A
W
W
W
A ~
~.
O <
ro
4 O J J O J O O O O 0
A f0 A O
J
J FJ (O J O V W /D O V W G7 W o
.i>•
A
A
A
O
N
N
W
W
A
O
W
O
W
N
J
A
A
N
A D
A d
[3'
W
m
t0 N
Ol N
fO
V
O V
O
O
O•
N
i
W~
O
V
W
~
O
~
N
~
N N
~
V m~
~
N V
~ 171 Q •P ' tD W
N tD t0 W ..
.pp~ W ,jy
N ~ f0 ~ ~ ~
N 1
0 V N (Jl 07 W m m V W N ~ Ol ~ (Jj t
O W ~ ro ro
~7Y N
~
0)
m
V V
O A
0 07
~ p0p~~i
W A
O) g (O W
~
N ~ W
V ~
W ro m
N
•(
0
O = ~ = N }a •1
71 A
Al = _ = 1
,7 10
N 1D W
O ~
A ~ •p
N D1
O /0
i ~ '~ o 'n
Oi O O N Of O) W O O O N i
O N i
O O
/ ~ Oi /
D l
p l
p ro ro V
N
O
O
A
W
W
N
o
0
O
A
N
W
A
J
A
N
A
W
A A .n
~
_
S S ~
m 1-
QQ o 0 o x
~ v
0 v
0 r
0 x v
0 r v
0 ~ v
0 r
0 r
C} -o
0 0 v '
0 o
3
p?
N N D N N ~ N ~ D K G N ~ < N 4 z < N N G ~ K ~ ~
to to l
la to a ro ° l
ro ro ro m ° ro m ro ro ro m to ro ro m .
. 3 S.
'O m a
~~
O O N W W A W O W A A W O A W A J A W W A A A ~
~• ~.
~ -
>y
ro r r
o r
o y
ro -p
o y
ro r
o
~ -o
0 '0
0 r
} ~
ro •p
o ~
ro g
ro r
o
< •p
0 •V
o ">y
ro -p '
o 0 D '
0 0
~
= Z Z Z = Cti d N.
~ N •~ d N
m d d c N N d N N
m N
m
~ E
~ A
~ fo co ~ ~ ~ rp ro ~ m co ~ m ~ to m m ~ l
n • 3
~ ro ~ m
'~ Ei =
W W W A N W W A A W A N N W A A -~ A A A ~ .~'
o z
m
• z
c
m• Z
m 3.
ro 'o
o S z
m z
m
C v
~ v
o
N• r
o
'{ z
ro
C v
o
N• z
m
C v
o
N Z
ro
C 'o
o
N~ v
O
N ~
m
d •v
o o
N• fA vv
p
N
t
•O
w
G
_
q
OS p
p~ p
;
< Z
to ,~ ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ~ ro ro ro
~_
N
W
W
W
A
O
W
W
A
A
N
W
A
W
A
W
A ~
A
J
A A
A 'O
~• m ~
~ ~.
C
_
' C
_
~
' C
_
' C
~ C
_
"~' C
_
' C
_
''
' C
_
' C
_
' C
_
'"'
' C
_
' C
_
' N
° C
_ C
_
"l
' C
_
am' N
~ C
_
" C
_ N
~ C C
_ _
" C
_
- ~~
= ro rn
..
2
_
d c
_
d 2
_
d
_
d c
_
d 2
_
d c
_
d 2
_
d ~
_
d c
_
d 2
_
d 2
_
d ~
+ cT
_
d c
_
d c
_
d o
+ c
"
_
d 2'
_
d o
+ c' Z
_ _
d d ' c
=
d " m ~
m• =
.... rn
c
_
ro
d ro
d ro
d ro
d ro
d ro
d ro
d ro
d ro
d ro
d ro
d ro
d ro
d ro
d ro
d ro
d ro
d ro ro
d d ro
d d
a
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
A
O
O
O
A
O
O
A
O O
O '0
=• 0
~
!~ N
2
~ ~ V
O
d l y
' a i
- ~ ~ W
S' _
`
W W O W N W W J W N W W W W N W N N W N A y O
~
O ~ O
_
~
W W O W N W W J W N W W W W N W N N N W N A ~ +•
.
~ O~ O U'
Ci
N W W W W W A A A O1 171 W O) 07 V V V (O (O (O 11
O I ~~
V A ~ ~'
FiT -
n
i~
CD
r
m
O b ~ O (] _
v ~ v ~
a
m p
c c
m O
~ w
~ n
a
~,
m
~
3
"
~ o
a v
~
~ _
~
g
,~ pv~
°'
" p'9
°'s p~
~,a p°
d= 1
o
a a~ a a~
m
m a
m
m ~
o
~ N A N o
A A W N O
~
a" a:~
a aa
~ a~
m a
~~
0
O
`° 'o ~
(N~
.P :V
fW7t A
tOO W
O
O
A A W N O
'o r ~ ~
N
`
"
z
m ~
A W N O
O O ~ ~ _
f°
m
~ ~
~ a
Z n
Z Z
f°
~
m m
to
0
A W N O
Z r' ~ S
m
~ ~ Z
m o o ~
A W N O
N
cn O W
0 'fl
0 C
~
+ ~'
~
m ~
°
w ~
o•
A W N O
A w N O
A W N O
~ ~:
p•ONi ~:
a. ONi
CNiI
A ~
~
x
~n Z
~f~ Z
~ ~ ~
m~C' C
~ Z
3
~ ~ ~ rn ~ ~ ~
obi o ~ ~ W
~ ~ ~ a ~ ~
N ~ ~. ~ N "f
O ~ ~
~ ~
C O. ~
O
Ot W W N W Or
n 0 n i g
n n n i, -o
°
~
n o'
n
0 0 0 0 -~ '.'
N c00 W
<
n ~
N
0 0 0
O O p
((
.P O W ^~ p~j
O O O N
0
0.
~! A
S ~
.~ 2 w
° Z w
o v
m m c,~ v
.Z7 N
m
~ ~ m
W m
O
~
~
m
0 W
W
O W
O ~
y
O
y
W
O
O '0
~
~ ~ y ~ ~ v w
z g
z
= °'
m
da
~~
w A w o ~.
r "'y
~
~
A
c
m Z
m °•
Z ro ~ ~
~ ~
~n ~
m
~
~
A
W
W
W o
~ ~
.~'
~ ~
p to tO f0 n
~ m
3 ~
W
N
N
N o ~, m
~.
C > ~ W
7 ~ 7 > a
-
~ a. a c. a. ~' ,~.
. ~
m a. o. n o. °'
rn
•D
0 N
0 0 0 0 0
N
GS
-emu
~ ~
~ ~ V
~
dip
W~ -{p ~ ~
~~
O O O N n~
~' O tD
.0 =O »' CryL ~
O O O N ~ O Q ~ b*
!~i
tD
fD
tD
tO O 1
= ~.
l~
O tD W V W CTi A W N O W W, V W CT1 A W N ~
7C
Wz
w
a. n c~f~
?o
w ~
o
c OO
ro
~+ m OZ
w
3 w go^o
~-
~ o a m-n
o
? a ~m
c ~. Gin
ro
ro v -~x
A=
'~ m CG'>
~i
~. ~ i"n
3cn
t7 xc
o°
~' ~D
ro<
ro o Z~ao
rooo
d z~n
row
N •< vg
~u. ~ xz
oo
w v~~
ro
a t~ z
w
g
~~ ~°~ ~ ao ~~ =°~ ,
~~ ~'~ o Wd ~N" mod « ~,d ~~~ =~ ~ ~~ ~~ "
f~~ 2- 3 ao~ ~' O•rnro y3 Go ~
~cc mco Wo~ 3m ~.2' Scm ~cwc3 ap5. .<a,~, m-
o?i3.
v a =w
:Oa
~ ~G
~. ~i'p
_'s,.: ~ml~u
a~5. ?^.
c~ ~o.
...., ~~
o w =~
a° m3>
w ~'
~" >x
~- ~o
v~' wC
o ~' m~`~c°
~
° ° ~m
~ rn
n ~f~
g ? 2~
=o
m o
ao=n a.
oo nai w
o.::
n -n
...w
~~ °
o m
o ~ W o
m y
~w
ro m °. a.
m ~ w
-pa
a= o
an>
'D0'^ >
Fd ~ro
ro" aro
m A m
ao,~
m m~ ~ °:
an °
a a7g
Scw 'n¢
.a
xo
roa ~
52
m~ a
47 mc
ao• aro
~~ o°,
~a m~
°c w
o
~ a
~ do
rn ro~.~
ao ~
ro ~w ao
~' a.~~
w ~°
c o ro~
~
' W~
S
°~
a3 as ~ g ~~ ~ o~ .
° ~ a a o a
~~ a ~.'` .~ ~ ; ~ c
ro °
~ S ~ S ~ a , ~ a° ~
¢ n aS ~ _
w = ,z. ~ o
a a g ~ ~ ° a ~
W -~+ 0 o W N ~ v V N -~~ A A W A N W -• -• W
O O O D x ~ Q Q O
V D
N Q = 0 ~ ~ 2 0 = ~ O -
x ~ x x x i i D
o v ~ ' ~ o ~ ~ o ~ 2`
~ ~ ~ ~ ~.
~ ~ ~ n
o n
o
~ ~ n
o
~
~ va
_.~ ~
ro ~
g ~
ro
ro
ro ~
01
n
o.
w o.
w o.
w o.
m ~
, ~
q
., o.
w o.
w _
ro
° _
ro
° o.
w ~
~~ o.
w o.
w - - o.
w °.
w o.
w o.
w ~ m j
- ~ b - - o o - ro - - - - - - ~ w
~~
g
W
W
W
W
N
N
W
W
N
N
W
~
W
W
-+
W
W
W
W v
~• ~
~
(A Cn fn
~1 fn
~ fA
~ M
~ Cn
~ W
~ fA
~ z W
ro ~ z f/1
~ ~ 'D D
~ ro Cn
~3 V1
~ W !n
~ ~! z fA
ro 3 (n
~t fn
3! !n
~ D
~•
N
Q, ~, ° n ° ° n
' ~ ro ~ ro Ej' a n, 4
' ~2. ° ~ ro 4. ~. ~. m D ,Z1
ro
> so
> ro
> ro
> m
> m
o m
o co
~ ro
° a °, ~
ro m
> m
> ro m
> > o, ro
> ro
> ro
o _o, ~ ra
.?
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
N
N
~
W
W
W W
N
W
W
W v
~•
ry
• ~• K
O ~
~
N
>
+
0
0 ~ ~ C W
N
N W O Vt
t0 W W
O O W
W W
V7 A
W N
W _ ..pp
CJ W
W fD (JI
W W V
Vt N O W ~' ~
N N N -+ O W W W W W W W N W W W W N ~ ~
Ei
'S
ro ~
ro x
(n' x
~ 'S
ro~ 'S
ro 'S
ro 'S
ro 'S
ro 'S
ro =
r O C 'S
ro ~
ro x x
o
m x
~ ?~
ro x
~ x
m ~ ?
a
v a
v ?
v ?,
v a
v a
v a
v a
v a
v a
v n
?
v Sro
t~ a a
v a
v c
? ?
-
o -o ?
'v a
v ?
v ?
-o w m
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N pp
N
N
N
N
N
f°// pp
y N
N p
p
N
N
N ~ _
~ S.
'~ l~
N
N
W
W
N
N
N
N
N
N
W
N
N
N
W W
W
N
W
W O
= ~
~,
x x x x 2 x x 2 x x x 'O D x x x x x x x x
~
f0
?
'O (D
?
'O t0
?
'0 t0
?
'D t0
7
'D fO
?
'17 (D
?
"0 f0
?
'0 f0
?
'0 f0
?
"0 t~
?
"0 ~ ~ ~
~
GT ~ (O
?
'0 f0
?
'
D f0 fO
? ?
'O ~ (O
S
'
0 f0
?
'0 f0
?
'0 f0
?
'
0
p~
f
~ [JI
!
1
N N N (°// N N N N N N N ro N p
N N V°i p
N N N p
N „
, y
3 ~+
~
W
W
W
W,
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
0
W
W
W W
W
W
W
W
~• ~
,~
0 0 ~
ro x
rp x
c'
' x
co 2
co x
o ~
ro o ~
ro 'DD
g < S
ro y
ro ~ x
ro
o x
rn 2
m' x
'n x
~n ~ W
..
b v 'a0 '?0 a
'?0 '?0 '?0 ~
'?D 'a0 b b ~ (~ ~ 'aD 'a0 c
v '?0 b V '?0 b n ~
N RI
cr
"
°
N
°
N
0
N
0
N
0
N
0
N
0
N
0
N
0
N
0
N
o
(~
ro
ro,
0
N
0
N
0
N N
N
N
N
N .
J
ro
a
3 ~
N
W
W
W
W
W
N
N
~
N
N
N W
W
W
W
W ~
~ w m
~•
33
N' ~,
z
~ 3
o, ~
..
ro
o c
W A N N A W A W tW0 O W W A W s O CT1 N M ~
W W W W W N W W W N W W W W W
O
Gi'
C
> C
> C
> C
> N
tli
O C
> G
> C
>
O C '0 D
o < C
7 C
~ N C
Vt > C
> C
7 C
~ N
o ~' '0
~ ro
+ + ~ _S N m
~
a a
a >
a >
s >
a >
a >
a t
a 6S 0
co >
a >
a t ~
a >
s >
a >
a t
a~ C
ro
a
ro
a
ro
a
chi
ro
a
ro
a
ro
a
ro
a
ro
ro
a
ro
a
ro
a
ro
s
ro
a
ro
a , ~
a
=
m
O
O
O
O
W
N
O
O
O
N
O
~
O
O
W O
O
O
O
W '~
~ ~
~~•
N
V
V
V
V
V
V
W
W
W
W
W
~
tp
tD
tD (O
O
O
-N+
W O ~
~ °~•
v m W ~ w ni ~'~ o cNO wN ~ rn w NP o
~i ~
o i ~
c
ii . • . x
v~g
tU ~p m
d m•n
O
p
a c>-n
N O
a AG)-n
~~ ~m
N
pJ
a' 'n
O
a wz
C n
N v-
lD •b
d O -o~~
N p~
d O ~ao
O
~ gn
O
i0 C wc~
~ _•
~p ID vgx
(U O
d C'O c'~c~c>•o
S S S O
C C N 'O xO
O
~•
~ m
~
O•
~ gx z
- O Oi
N-
a
'
ss
~_ ~~ ~
.~ ~=
=~
~ sr~ ~ ~
~, ~
yo a,~
= ~=
_ ~,_ ~
~, ~m ~~
as
1D „z N
m ~.s
~
A c_n~ s~ ' = m °
g ~. ~ W
~ 5nl
=O ra
~• m ~
m m~ aA
b <nm
cnm ~a
.o
d= ~'~
rn a ~
~
d
m m =' tn= ~`cO ?m ~ _.~ ~ :l7 RodO m =• n d
~~ ~c-c m~• w~ ~~ 5 Foa ma ~~ ~ am m ~o m~~O my ~ ~...
r
°
~~ m
n m o
om. ~' ° n
~~ ~ 0
~^ w
= ~
C m
~ ~
W~• n
~ m d
m (n ~ .
~~ ~ m c
~ ~n ~. 3• d O
o.c ~
'~v~'=
~ ~
a p,X = z •~ W m
d ~ VJ x ~co x ~ ~ dN m ~
" ~~ -pO
~ 'f1
s
~
= o"(~
fD ~
N ~M
d 0 ~
it7 a
N =~'
d d N a a
.p O ~
w V -+ m^ng'w w N -~ w oc)mrn
~ v, cn -~
G 2 Q Q m w. o Q
~
~ Q
x O
n O .Q Q D D
o a
0
'~S Q Q
2 O
.
~ x 2 ~
-•~ W n T x O= 0
O O ~
~• , GO x O n W m
~ Q ~°
O
n n _
po ~k
m
- - - - - - - - -
-. m
~
N
W
W
W
N
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W o
W ~ o
_
W VI (n Z V7 fp Z ~ (n W V7 fA fn (n N fn [/) W Z (n ~ N
4 S n ~ n n n n n ~ ~ m pi D~
m 'm m m
o, m co
°• .
m .
m ,
m m m m 'm' 'm co' m °• Q. ~
~` v' b
O
W W W N W W W W W W W W W W W N N
'0 O -i
O N
..a
..~ =dm OW
O
N W
O
V
W O
V N
t0
V tD
W N
A O1
N W
O t71 W
W W
W
W O•
'
3
~
N O o N N O O N N W O 0
O O d N
Ei
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2 2 ~ 'S ~ ~ x ~ S' _ ~ A
"0 '0 '0 '0 'D 'D 'O O 'D
N
~
f°!1
N
N
(°/1
N
0
y
0
N
0
N
~
o
N
o
N
o
y
o
N
~
o ~
y _
3~
~, a
'.~ ~ ~
N N N .N N N N W W N N N N W N N W ~• ~•
x
O x
n x x x S x S x 2 x x
~
N
~
(
S f
?
' ~
_' fO
_'
' f0
? fn
? f0
_' f0
_' f0
_' f0
? f0
? f0
_' l
D
d
' (p
S
d
• (p
S D ~
t
d
' OI
~
O
N .
D
O
N ~
O
N 0
O
N '0
O
N •0
O 'D
O 'D
O •0
O b
O 'O
O '0
O 0
O
N •D
O O
O
N 'p
pp O
O ~
N
CI
N N f~ N (~ N N N y 3
'o ~,
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
N
W
N
W
N ~
~ ~
`~
o
• ~
d x
(~ g
(D r
,~ x
t`p' x
(O x
f0 S
f0 ~
N x
f~ S
~ o
r r
~ y
N y
N 2 ~
(O ' ~
L ..
v'
~
0 a d
0
0 ~ _• _• ? d
0 =• _• i
0 d
0 d
0 O
a ~
" c m
a
~°
,
N 0
N
N
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N
N 0
N 0
N
N ~
N
N 0 :
~
y~ ',
3 =
N
W
N
W
W
W
W
N
W
W
N
N ~
W ~ N ~
~ ~,
O C
~ ~
°• V
(D
_ '"` _
N N N A O W N A A W A A A N m
W
O
N
W
W
N
W
W
0
W c
5.
Ci'
C
_ C
_ C
_ C
_ C
_ C
_ C
_ C
_ C
_ C
_ C
_ C
_ C
_ C
_ C
_ C
_ G 2' •0
= m p~
2' 2' 2' ~' ~c• 2' 2' 2` 2' 2' mac` 2' 2` 2' 'TC' E"
d
m d
m d
m d
m d
m d
m d
m n
m d
m d
m d
m d
m d
m d
m•. d'
m d
m n d~
m ~
d
d
d
a
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d,
d
d
d d
O
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 'D
0
0 W
/~1 N
U ~ ..~
•
A A OII 1 N Oi t71 OI Of O) Q7 Q) OJ Q7 W N 0) ~
ET
Gt -
~o
;e
x ~~
v o~
v 0
o ~p
O
v t~ Z
o,
m
~ c O
~ m
~•
?
~
a
"
a d
a x
o s
~
~• ~ -
W N
(~ Zf/~
tD O Z~
(D C DO
d
.°c. a a ~
W N O
N
flt ~
t7~ ~
O~i
W N O
_
f0 ~
a o Z
~°
~ O
y ~
N N m
W N O
_ ~ r Z
fQ
~
a
~
o m
~
y y N ~
W N O
rn ~'
a. O
~ Z
'p
N 'U 17
~
N N
w N o
A N
in
O
W N O
0 0 '0 C
o ~.. ~'
+ + ~ O
a
O
N Q.
W N O
W V rn ~ A W N A O ~ W
~c
~
~c MO
o.°' W O
m°• ~fn
~+o v n
?t'm
o 3,d!
m W(~ O
m~'a W 0
3~ 4~ W
~~ S'tn
Z'~ W utg
'c°r Z
d
° » Z Z ~~ •o
•
. a.~ 4~
~~ d ~ ~ ~~ ~ X ,
09 ooi s'~ a
'
° m °' ~ = Z m ~ o' '
m ..
ap m a o• j°
m C o ,,,,.. om
m
a m o
~ ~ c
v o 0
as
~~ as
m ~
8' fqa
m D ~ ~c°
~cn c
~
o
' 'p m m n
~ a a 5 m
~ OO a ~ a,e Sc o o• ~ ~ C
5 g m ~• 3 0 `~ O C = W
o. g ° m " Y'
V O N ~ Cil W ~ W A ~ N
n Q ~ O ~ O Q = O O n -
p O o
~ O ~
o ~ ~ s s ~ s s ~ ~
5i m ~ g S3 ~• _ S3 Si ~, ~• ~ n
N •
~1
W
N
W
W
W O
= O
O
lCCA~
~I CW
~ Z ~
O C _CC.A
~ Z fn
m ~ ~0 GW
~ ~CCn
~ Z fn
tD ~ fp
~ fCn
tV
C'i Q ~ ~ L~. ~ N ~.
N n n ~ ID n• 3!
' 1L~.
_ = a = a f~i rt O a _ ~ ~ ~ (O
~ vb
O
W W W N O W W N W W W
~ ~
c v -+
~
7 3
fjJ• = N W
~ ..
o nn~~
N rn avo m ~ w A ~ cODO cn °' '
3
O
O
O
O
N
O
N
'p
O ~
o
i
~ t
a m
N O ~ N N N N N N f~D tip ~
• A
a
v
0 S
'o
0 a
-o
0 a
-o
0 a
•n
0 a
•v
0 a
v a
v
o a
•o
0 n
v
0 a
v
o O
m
S~
_ m
°
N N N (~ N N ~ N N fp N ~ S•
da
. ~ ~
N N N N N N N N N N ~ ~
~• ~,
~ y x ~ ~ x ~ x x x
v
o.
0
N a
o
N ~•
a
N o.
o
N a
0
tll ~•
0
N o.
0
N s
'o
N a
'v
N ~•
•o
N ¢
v
N
n ~'•'
(~
3U
n 3
~ ~
N
N
W
N
N
W
N
W
W
W
N
~• ~_
~
f~
e r
0
~ x
? r
0
@ r
0
f x
~•
~
o
x
a
x
~.
r
o
f
r
0
~
3
rn
~ ..
.
0
W 0
N 0
N 0
N .
o
N a
N .
o
N 0
N 0
N 0
N 0
N ~
2 ~~
~ S
.
N
w
w
N
w
w ~
~
' ° 3
~~,
Ci
e
_ ~
0' V
..
O
O p
~ `^ ~
O O W N N N N N W ~
C!
~ ~
O O N O _
q'
C C C
~ C c C C G C C C ~"O W
2'
O 2'
7 c
'
> 2`
> 0
'F 2'
a 2'
O 2`
O 2'
O ~'
> mac'
> °'
O
C
N
a N
a N
a N
a N
a N
a N
a N
a N
a N
a a •_• 7
°•
0
0
0
o
N
o
0
0
0
0
0 '0
°-c
• W
~
~' N
~ ~
• °
O N N N W W W A A ~
~
~ -
~ ° nD ~k d'. ~ J ?
newox n° saran vet` F ~} ~
2009-2015 TIP-Draft Regional Priority List dike/Pad Projects
r Project Ranking
4B
3" ~ 12
t1 _w m nv 'x~ •~ ~
~ 12 ;,,~ r,l P na
~~
a
( ~~' !
c ~./ ap'v ~~F / B
mn
P
on
N
~ Mee ~
oF~4°
@
• ~ y
}
c
~ A g
&
J d 26 a m•na
S R~ORO ~
' 31 ~~/
pNJ nd
' _
r 7 1
~
d
~ ut xenMp+x 46 ~Vp ~ E
30
!F i. ,
$
~LEFF p1opx ~ mo<
~ 4
~ dd
g
a
'v 6 Ma• 0
2 ~ s 8 ~ ¢¢
~ y 6
R 1B
~nPLE n ~
t3 N`Pp ~ 38 1 2t
21 na a. al
31 Ey
F`
e na d L,
48 ffi Mom( n
i t d.
a
° Rr LUay DNMSM
Eu 'la
~ i ~
6
vE 3 no F
B „°
47 x n c
~5
~' z ~ O
•pk' ~
L
~ ~ 4 ~
g -fyt 11
uaoox 1
4 ~ ep an i. 1 Pod1•
y J•' N
9 qME iE
` ° •ly 1 r
a7 4 _GS { r r
b I1 Q ~ 5
36 nm.
Lmna
d
n
mw
~ ro Eon m
3 p 28 + nd
~ 24
eat on 22 26
~
tB ~
°n
4 ~
n ~ D
eDM
.N
a E
6 34
a r)'
m. m n ~ 1~7' W i
E nd
2B >£ V I ~- ~ Y c 44 n
~
~'d i 27 ~ VIM°M~ PMMI ° V b P D mn M c
'`
43 ¢
ea EI
2B N
t
P tDr
neul a
~ au
p 32
r
MpE Mp
37 ~8
Lo° ~ r.Ma'~ 4 J••
~ RR ~
F
1 N
W
ch• n0r
i g
I _,j,
dl ..~~~
7 !.
, 33 ~ N
a 1 0 i O nP.pe
.` $ 40 +~ ~ ' 6 42
~ 14 S
, rF / y,~ 46
pA
Q
( ` ~
'
~' ~eD
J d
2
'~• D ~
41 y1
Intl s' I
_ Iron ° 36 P.
r ! ~ na < ~
~
R)~
~ NDME n M
OLDIFC tll "p0 ~JS~~D4 if ro S P^ Wpppl
'7
"t to 0
a,
•~ R iN"~
~~ ~
(kj-
.•.
.
~
' Msc
~
~ xiRC°n•.. ° ~ ~ . -
•.... it ~
n
p
],F
@
°a . ' ~ ~ ~ c~R' P~'°
Mnn s nP4n n ~
~1 -
~-' G t
i}{ d
~1
~ ~ F
6
w
• tP 3
a u
1 M 4 F:
• • d ~ n. ti J ,
~ v 3 ,' t.
~ ~ R 4" `-IIJ Iflt
y
S
D 19U 10 ,
9 • W OD ;`~~ fl
. ?~1'.P
~1 ~4
~ Yb '.
~
.
MpanEWe
8fa en0 F
,Jj
.L1 xe F S 1 ~
~L
~
. 1
)
i V $
A
~
p
ENN
E
' ry
x'e
G]
,~
s
i
f1l p ~
1 xLY na Q
_
t
`~
"~ !;~ rip. Pa ~{L. .µfF ~~ r ~rtyyt~f
f.F'D~
t'cli4~ 4`
F
~
~ `
'0 °b mAWUi1R0 Y0~mf ~eTACmoalMmm pb~beAW
e
l
a
~
i+••
~ .
nn15p ,~
C P ~ jl4,,i) x
-
1
~~~ ' I
~ m
pp
ert
pr i;ROel.
~
'~ •~
~. ~
: ~}
~u
iN°'6 1 It7 SU n
,~
}
d ~
~ J~ ~-
~ 1
~ '(
y ~M, MtpmMpmdpplaNhMppn lpbrtdapnmPpmmo
Ntlpa4mnppedhmn NS Leplpvppr0lspwmp.
me CMpi°unvrmummncowrr mum.no m.{aml.
(`
• '~~ '• „
;
Lr
...JJJ
RD ~1;Y~pf kiJ p- VA tlny brenpn ubWLmmNe m6m.pIN41mP.
t •
•
, z ,p
~7f '
6 .
4~Ok IRD
~
~ c9 TB MPO ® t6 Che
ei HUl lntolse
lla
i
l
R
k elh
FD a(E 1
~ p
c
n
mpmvemm
e (
an
)
A
W
ro
~ ! f`~ a '. L ° ~ ...
f
i
~ ••~ Btlco/Ped Pmlect
CeRO
~ M 4
PPD
GOpxn n ~
Y
zo
~,. 1
f l~` IIM
t
d - ~ ~~
a ~ A_~p.
~•7
- ErJsdnp Roadwoy Contadlne
soRl ~ d
15} ~NE Chalhom Ca RoodwayfPad/Blko Plan
o ~aOQxo m
~~'
2
f ~ ~7f`~~ .G~ ~ •~I MPO Boundary N
4 {
I rolm
3 a.
1
'
W j a ~ ~ L ~I C(nptdy Boundary.
re 8 1
rFd I
x
d' $ y~}!-i7Ln, ~ ~':~ 0 0.5 1 2 3 4
en
'M1~~ b V ; b i tt:
~
~i -~ v7 li
~ MII88
.A EP w•
d SU lYlil y
nD _ r~-,~~Y:O~~ ~~
L.. 9 I
~a
~ ~ ~
~ V ONi tNTI A N~7
WN ~ o f0 W V rn Ot A W N ~ ~ W V W Cn A W N -~ ~
cr~ X77
'6 to ,~
t° m ~ 07 'U
vc, c < .Z1
av < ,'0 ;i1
?v `D -i ,Z1
2 v < .Zi
~;v GZ7
?v ZI
/D -i .Zi
~ v < R7
~v`D ~m v 'O
~ ° G ;U ~7
av v f ZI .Z)
D f° .Zl
v ~7
v (A S 'O
~ c
3 ~1
ro 7J '0 Z
ro m m
,
o =
y ~
y _
y '
y _ =
y y 3• o
~~ ~ ~ ~
y
N (gi(pp m
~ (pg(p d m
~ N ~' ~ ~ (m('~~ ~ (m(~~ m
~ ~' m
~ (gi(pp ndn ~ ~ ~
ro
N ~ (m] (m~ (
ro m~ (m~ (m~ (m~ .
~t~p n s
N (m~ m ~ m
W
~ , ~
ro y
~ y
3~ (D
~ N W
3 N N
3
B
~ y N
3 ~
m ro p t- 1D (
t
X 3 V fD
3 ~ (U
9 (D
~ "- W
ro
~ (D
3
3 y
c > > ~ > >> s "~ ~
V1 -~ ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ~ m m m m m m c
ro y w m m
y W W W W W W y = ro N O . O
O O O O O _ O ~ N W O
O ~
O O 0 ~ N >
~
O gy~pp N ~N~pp ~N~pp i
~ m
pp ryNry ro m 2 S i
N .
i
.
(q ' ~ .
+
(q .
«
(~ .
+
(/) .
G ..
.
N .
.
(d 3 ~ .
.
.
(~ G ...
r.
W W i.
.
W .
.~
Q7 ~ "'n A
O W "~ ro
~' y N Ul f0 y tl1 N ~` ~
"' ~ '~ 'D
N 3 '~ '~ N '~ ~ ... ~ (
V N y N y O
~ y .«
O D .
~ O O / D {
{pp ~pp
g g
~ pp
-+
i N
A N
W -i
V -~ -
W- ~ W
~ n V -+ ~ N
O t 0
W
W
O p
~ W A
~ W
~ W N t
~ , ~7
rn
A V rn -+ -+ t~
i O
~
~
a
x
a
x
o
x
o
x ~
~x
x-• Q
V o
n
x
n n
x x
n
x
n
x
n
x n
x n
x n
s o
w ~ o
x x ~~
~~
sx
~
s o
= v
o' ~
= g
~
a -o
W ~ (D Ot A W N . .. V i ~ ^.
N
A N
W -+
V -+ -
rn- + ~
+ O .N.. N
o w
m
w
o O
~rn
A O O
n (7 n C7 n n n (~ n ~ C7 ~ `G
l~ f~ O p O N Q Q 0 0 O ~ QQ n 4k
rn
N O
~
-~
N
rn A
V
rn A
'V
rn A
V
rn A
V
rn AA
V V
rnrn -~
dD
rn t0
W ~~...
N 1C cam.
N Ol Cam.
O! C''.
N 2.,
N Cam.
N ~G,
N ~~..
d 1C,
N ~, cam,
d• N Cam. Z
NN Z
N Z
N ~.
N ~C,
d s. a
C,
d ~.O„
O~
N,
N
A
A
A
A
A A
N
A
O
O o
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O 0
0 0
0
0
0
0 O
0 ~ ~ N
m p
7
~ o N
O ~
W
N
N
N
N
N
A
N
N
N N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N N
N N
N
N
N
N
W y ro
¢ 'O'
O G ~
W N N N N N N A N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N A
>
0 >
0 >
0 >
0 > 7
0 0 7
0 7
0 ~
O `C
~ `G
N N `G
N~ `~Gp
y '{Gp
N `G
N (p
y `G
N `G
N `G `G `G
N N N `G
N `(Gq
y (p
N '(Gp K
(A
N `G
N j
W
Z ~
O ~ y
N
0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W ~ ~'
N
~
,Z1 Z A
o;. ro c
f 3
~
~
~
~ ~
oZi aZi aZi m a2i o2 i m a~i w oZi m d w m m ai o2i m m d
m
2 m d m m m m ~ o ~
i
a ~
'~ 3
0
0
0
0
00
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o Oo
o.
o
o
0
0
0 ~ .
~'p
~
c c c c cc c c c C C c c c c C c c c c cc c c c c c c 2'v cn
>
2'
> >
2'
> o
"'c'
O >
mac'
O > ^
2' 2
7 7 o
' 2'
> >
cT
> >
2'
7 ^
~'
O > >
2' c"°
7 O ~
2`
> ~
2'
> >
~'
7 >
mac'
> >
2'
> >
2'
> >
yc` > > o
c"^ c'^ 2 ~
' 2' a
2` >
~' > >
2' . c
T > > ro
c'T' ¢
ro ..
C
o. n a n nn a a n n ~
a n a n a a s n >
a 7 > >
o. an >
a >
n >
n 7 7
n a O
s nom ~
ro
n N
n ro
n N
n ro ro
nn ro
n ro
n ro
n ro
n ro ro
n n ro
n ro
n N
n ro
a ro
n ro
n ro
o. ro ro ro
a nn ro
a ro
n ro
n N ro
a a ,
ro
n q
~
0
~ y
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O ~•
A' y
_
~ _
~ _
0 _
0 __
0 _ _ _ ~' TS 'ST ~ ~ 'S ~S ~S ~ ~ 'S '~ = = = 5 = _
t
~ f
a f
~ f
s t
fO
sa f0
a (O
a fO
m (D
a N N ro
n nn ro
a ro
n ro
a N
o ro
n ro
a N ro (p
n n ~ (p (p f~ ~ m ro b
a 01
"0 '0 'O '0 '0 ' D '0 'D '0 '0 'D 'O V 'D b 'O .
'U 'D '0 a
'O '0 'p ~
'p a
'~ a
'p s s
b ' 0 ~ N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 `~
y y y y In N N fl! N y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y
'$.
~, a
~o ~
A A A A' A A A A A W W W W W W W W W W W W A A A A A A W O 7
S S
0
~ S
n S
~ T S 2 T S S 2 S S S S S S S S 2 2 S T S 2 2 2 2 ~
f
t
v' ~ f
~
s ~ fD
s a t0
a f~ f
~ 0
~ ~ t
a 0 (O (O
~ a s (O f
s Q
a t0 (
~ O f
~ 0
a (O
~ f0 f0 f0
~ ~ a ~D (
s O f
~ ~
a t0 ~
a ~ t0
~ w
y
v'o '0 v vv v v v v v -o 'v 'o v v v v -v v v-o v v v v ' nv ~
0 0
y y
0
y
0
V1
0 0
y y
0
y
0
y
0
y
0
y
0 0 0
y N N
0
y
0
y
0
y
0
y
0
y
0
y
0 0 0
y N y
0
y
0
N
0
V1
0 0
y y ,
0
N
3 0
N
~
A A
A
A
A A
A
A
A
A
A A A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A A A
A
A
A
A A b
A = O
~'
Gr'
O ~
W A A A A A A A ~P •J y rI V V V ~ V V V V V V W W W W W O C cD ~~
I~
W V W fWJI A W N W O tN0 5
g•o8 v
ww c
.
-~ ~'
y
~ tnw
•c
~ N (n<v
wc
w N f~' w ~nv
~ w
~' p~ 7~V' v
m
i~ <
w
pl '~O Sx
m
~ ~ vx
?m
Vwi O ~
~iSi
O a I v
w
w 01 z
w
j
t
7
7 C w tlf ~ N O w ~ fn ~ ~ N O w -1 ~> > > N
y
c ~w w ~,2' m o, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w -~ o ~ ~
~ a cn ~' of o .•
~ n ~
.. to 5
~ ~ o ~ ~
N•
n.. _ m n
t7~ Cn A N N W N N ~ A
o D ~' _ ~ A D ^' n D v
01
n n N
n n ~.
~
n ~
obi
ni
w
obi
oZi
~
o2i
m
m
w m o
w
~ a
„h'•
o
O
O
N
O
p
-+
O
N
N O
-~
• N ~ N
fO p
~
O
~
m o N
c: ~ ,'0
O
N
N
O
O
U1
N
N
W
tl1 ~
w m ~
•O
O w
O N N O O A N N W A
O O o O o o O O p O m
N
W
o m m
3.y
v tD
~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~, •
L3
~1 Z
dwc
w S ~ A
o
~
m
co
co
m
o
m
m
m '
`~ ~~
~~
o
w
o
A
A
o
N
o
0
0
~ ~•
~ o
M
c ~
> C
> C
> C
> C
> C
> C
> C
> C C
~ ~' 'O
~ m cn
2' 2' 2' E" yc` cam' 2' c'" ~ c"" a
~
0
a 0
n ^
a o
a ~
n >
a >
a o
a v
a ^
a m
a
a.
v.
a.
a
a
n
o,
o.
a.
o. ~, ~
°'
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
O
o
o ~
~• y
6fi
N
~
a x
~• ~
a x
~ s
~ ~
o x
~ x
~ x
~ x
~ 3
.o
rn
'0
W -p
N 'D
N •
'0
N •
'0
y .
•pU
N •
•p
N -
-p
N •
-p
N •
-p
N w
~
~ 5
/~/
W A W A A W A A A A ~
~• ~
~
fly
x
D x x x x x x x x x ~
(
(
S
" ~ f
?
' 0 f
?
' 0 (
?
' ~
? ~ f
? 0 f
? ~ (
? O (
? 0
?
~
w
V
0
f~f) U
N D
N 17
N 'D
N '0
N '0
N '0
N bp
N 'D
N i
c _
3 ~'
w ~
~
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A ~
~ ~_
~
~I
O ~
O N N N N N W W ~~
~~
Attachment 4
15
DURHAM-CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO MPO
METHODOLOGY FOR RANKING
METROPOLITAN TRANSPORATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
PRIORITY PROJECT REQUESTS (F'Y 2009-2015)
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the Regional Priority List is to facilitate determination of the region's project priorities to
be used in development of a fiscally constrained Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).
SAFETEA-LU calls for a TIP development process that documents a methodology for ranking project
requests, reflects local and metropolitan goals, and addresses mobility, environmental and air quality
goals.
OBJECTIVE
The methodology outlined below is designed to address multi-modal transportation needs and to ensure
regional balance through the use of specific technical criteria. The Technical Coordinating Committee
(TCC) will use the methodology to develop a draft Regional Priority List. This draft Priority List is to be
used as a starting point or a reference base by the Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) for the
approval of a final Regional Priority List.
The TAC may reorder~rojects at its discretion to promote jurisdictional and eeoQraphical balance, or
based upon the TAC members' knowledge of the urban area and the policies of their communities.
Therefore, the TCC will make its technical recommendation on a draft Priority List based on the
methodology described in this document, and the TAC will then be afforded the opportunity to make any
changes it deems appropriate.
METHODOLOGY GOALS
• Produce a program of projects (or project priorities) which satisfies MPO, local and state goals, and
addresses SAFETEA-LU policies of system preservation, operational efficiency in the movement of
people and goods, multi/inter-modalism, and air quality mandates.
• Be simple enough for project-level analysis without requiring unnecessary data collection.
• Be understandable by the general public.
PROCEDURE FOR RANKING PROJECTS
1. Goal Settine For Regional Priority List
Since the Regional Priority List should be a subset of the DCHC MPO Long Range Transportation
Plan (LRTP), the goals for the regional priority list are the same as the DCHC MPO goals and
objectives in the 2030 LRTP.
2. Rankine Criteria
The screening criteria for project ranking fall into four broad groups:
Page 1 of 11
16
a. Regional Goals -How well does the project meet the adopted regional goals? Is the project an
element of the current long-range plan? Does it implement community objectives (for the
intrastate system, does it meet NCDOT mobility objectives)? Does the project have a broad
base of local support?
b. Cost Effectiveness -How much benefit does the project offer compared to the estimated cost?
c. Timing Factor - Is timing a critical element for the project (one-time opportunity)? Will the
opportunity to do the project be lost if it is not in the current priority cycle?
d. Specific Project Merits -How many points does a project receive using scoring criteria?
APPLICATION OF THE METHODOLOGY
1. There are three separate ranking methodologies based on the primary mode of transportation: 1)
highway; 2) bicycle and pedestrian; and 3) transit. ITS, TSM, and TDM projects would be included
in whichever mode best fits the specific project. The three ranking methodologies are independent of
each other. Points for different modes are on different scales and are not comparable.
2. Local jurisdictions may elect to use the ranking methodology to create their local priority lists but are
not required to do so. When the local priority lists are submitted to the MPO, local jurisdictions are
requested to provide project information and, in some cases, award points in categories. Some point
categories can only be applied by the MPO once all projects have been submitted and evaluated.
3. The TCC first examines the consistency in which local jurisdictions have responded to the project
criteria. If the criteria are not applied consistently, the TCC can agree to change some criteria
responses for consistency among all projects.
4. Project criteria points are weighted and totaled for each project request using the three modal ranking
methodologies outlined on pages 7 through 10 of this document.
3. Projects receiving the same number of project criteria points are ordered by the local ranking. If the
local ranking is also the same (for example, Orange-1 vs. Chapel Hill-1), then the project with the
most additional local rankings will be ranked higher. If the projects also have the same number of
additional local rankings, then the project with the highest additional local ranking will be ranked
higher.
4. The draft Regional Priority List will consist of three modal priority lists: 1) highway; 2) bicycle and
pedestrian; and 3) transit. Projects with the highest numbex of project criteria points are selected first
- taking into consideration local priority rankings, geographical balance, and a mixture of project
types.
5. The draft Regional Priority List is then forwarded to the TAC, as the TCC's recommended project
priorities for the urban area.
6. The TAC will use the draft Regional Priority List as a starting point for the creation of the final
Regional Priority List. The TAC may wish to combine the three modal lists into one comprehensive
list. If this is done, it is important to note that the points are not comparable across different modes.
MODAL RANKING METHODOLOGIES IN DETAH.,
Page 2 of 11
17
Hi~hway
All seven point categories are weighted equally. A maximum of four points can be received for each
point category. After roadway projects are ranked, the projects will be sorted by estimated cost into two
lists so that high cost and low cost projects can be considered separately.
1. Travel Demand -This category awards points to projects based on the level of travel demand.
For road projects, travel demand is measured by the volume to capacity (V/C) ratio based on the
2035 socio-economic data on the existing plus committed network. For new road facilities in
which traffic counts are not available, volumes on a parallel existing facility may be used.
Projects must have a V/C ratio of at least 0.80 to receive points. All projects with a V/C greater
than 0.80 will be divided equally into four quartiles based on V/C ratio. Assigning points by
quartile will ensure that points are distributed evenly and that projects are compared relative to
each other. Traffic signal systems, Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), and Transportation
Demand Management (TDM) projects receive four points because these projects reduce
congestion system-wide.
Local jurisdictions are asked to provide the V/C ratio for their local priorities. MPO staff will
divide the projects into quartiles and award points.
Safety (Accidents/100 Million Vehicle Miles) -Safety points are awarded to projects with reported
accident rates significantly greater than statewide averages for urban road segments -the
statewide average is 330 to 370 accidents per 100 million vehicle miles (or, 330-370 ACC/100
MVM). Projects must have an accident rate of at least 300 ACC/100 MVM to receive points. Al]
projects with an accident rate of at least 300 ACC/100 MVM will be divided equally into four
quartiles based on accident rate. Assigning points by quartile will ensure that points are
distributed evenly and that projects are compared relative to each other. Traffic signal systems,
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), and Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
projects receive four points because these projects improve safety system-wide.
Local jurisdictions are asked to provide the accident rate for their local priorities. MPO staff will
divide the projects into quartiles and award points.
3. Environmental bnpacts -natural environment -Points are awarded based on the impact on
wetlands, streams, wildlife habitat, parks, and air quality.
The MPO will provide local jurisdictions a base map of environmental areas. Local jurisdictions
are asked to apply the ranking methodology based on a GIS analysis.
4. Community Impacts -Points are awarded based on the impact on neighborhoods and
communities. '
Local jurisdictions are asked to apply the ranking methodology based on a GIS analysis.
5. E~zvironmental Justice- Points are awarded based on the impact on low-income and minority
populations. This item is designed to penalize projects that may have negative impacts on low
income areas or federally recognized disadvantaged groups.
The MPO will provide local jurisdictions a base map that indicates which Transportation
Analysis Zones have a high percentage of minority and low income populations. Local
jurisdictions are asked to apply the ranking methodology based on a GIS analysis.
Page 3 of 11
1$
6. Funding Status in the Ti°ansportation hnprovement Program (TIP) -Points are awarded to
projects based on the percentage of the total project cost that is funded in the currently adopted
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), or if the project has postyear status in the TIP.
Local jurisdictions are asked to provide funding status and apply the ranking methodology.
7. Benefits to Other Modes of Transportation or Deployment of New TecTznology -Points are
awarded to projects based on how they benefit other modes of transportation and deploy new
technology (carpool, transit, bicycle, pedestrian, ITS, and TDM). For example, a road widening
that adds additional travel lanes, bicycle lanes, and sidewalks on a transit route would benefit 3
other modes.
Local jurisdictions are asked to describe the benefits and apply the ranking methodology.
Bicycle and Pedestrian
All eight point categories are weighted equally. A maximum of three points can be received for each
point category.
1. Street Classification -This category awards points to projects based on the type of road the
bicycle and pedestrian facility is provided on. Off-road greenways are based on the parallel or
alternate roadways. More points are provided for higher classification facilities to reflect the
safety hazard for bicyclists and pedestrians on larger busier roadways. The street classification
should be taken from the Federal Functional Classification maps on the NCDOT website.
Local jurisdictions are asked to provide the street classification and apply the ranking
methodology.
2. Right-of--Way Availability -This category awards points to projects based on the right-of--way
available for the project. Right-of--way should be estimated based on the local jurisdiction's best
knowledge of the area. Extensive research into property deeds is not required.
Local jurisdictions are asked to provide an estimate ofright-of--way and apply the ranking
methodology.
3. Travel Demand -This category awards points to projects based on the proximity to schools,
colleges, major retail centers, transit routes, and major employment centers. The bicycle and
pedestrian project travel demand worksheet will be used to assign interim points for each project.
Projects will be divided equally into four quartiles based on the interim points. Final points will
be assigned by quartile to ensure that points are distributed evenly and that projects are compared
relative to each other.
The interim points are assigned using two different tables for bicycle/mufti-use paths and
pedestrian projects to reflect the different travel times and accessibility of the two modes. The
numbers of land uses or amenities within the specified distance for the project are recorded on the
worksheet. The worksheet multiplies the number of land uses by the appropriate points and total
points are calculated by the worksheet. The land uses considered are schools (public or private
elementary, middle, or high schools), colleges and universities, major retail centers (major as
defined by the local jurisdiction), major employment centers (major as defined by the local
Page 4 of 11
19
jurisdiction), and transit routes. If a project includes both bicycle and pedestrian improvements,
the travel demand points are added together for a total.
Local jurisdictions are asked to provide the number of land uses served by the project in the travel
demand worksheet. MPO staff will divide the projects into quartiles and award final points.
4. Environmental Impacts -natural environment -Points are awarded based on the impact on
wetlands, streams, wildlife habitat, parks, and air quality.
The MPO will provide local jurisdictions a base map of environmental areas. Local jurisdictions
are asked to apply the ranking methodology based on a GIS analysis.
5. Community Impacts -Points are awarded based on the impact on neighborhoods and
communities. Population density should also be considered for the benefits to the community.
The MPO will provide local jurisdictions a map of population density.
Local jurisdictions are asked to apply the ranking methodology based on a GIS analysis.
6. Environmental Justice -Points are awarded based on the impact on low-income and minority
populations. This item is designed to reward projects that may have positive impacts on low
income areas or federally recognized disadvantaged groups. Most bicycle and pedestrian projects
directly benefit neighborhoods by increasing accessibility and safety. If negative impacts are
expected, the project will not receive points.
The MPO will provide local jurisdictions a base map that indicates which Transportation
Analysis Zones have a high percentage of minority and low income populations. Local
jurisdictions are asked to apply the ranking methodology based on a GIS analysis.
7. Connectivity to Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities -Points are awarded based on if
projects connect to existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities. This will reward projects that
extend the existing bicycle and pedestrian network. Projects will be divided equally into four
quartiles based on the number of connections. Final points will be assigned by quartile to ensure
that points are distributed evenly and that projects are compared relative to each other.
Local jurisdictions are asked to provide a list of facilities that the project will connect. MPO staff
will divide the projects into quartiles and award final points.
8. Funding Status in the Transpor°tatiora Improvement Program (TIP) -Points are awarded to
projects based on the percentage of the total project cost that is funded in the currently adopted
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), or if the project has postyear status in the TIP.
Local jurisdictions are asked to provide funding status and apply the ranking methodology.
Transit
Transit projects are awarded points based on seven categories. A maximum of four points can be
received for each point category. Essential services is weighted double the other point categories. Most
projects will not receive points in every category because transit projects often have specific purposes.
Page 5 of 11
20
After transit projects are ranked, the projects will be sorted into two lists for short- and long-term needs.
These lists should correspond to what is shown as funded (short-term) and unfunded (long-term) in the
TIP. .
Expansion ofExistirag Routes -Projects that expand existing routes are awarded points based on
travel demand on the existing route as is measured by the vehicle crowding or load factor. The
load factor used will be the average daily riders divided by the product of the peak vehicle pullout
and the average vehicle capacity. The load factor is calculated separately for bus and paratransit
vehicles. Projects will be divided equally into four quartiles based on the load factor. Final
points will be assigned by quartile to ensure that points are distributed evenly and that projects
are compared relative to each other.
Local jurisdictions are asked to provide the load factor. MPO staff will divide the projects into
quartiles and award points.
2. Regional Connectivity -Projects receive points based on the number of connections to other
transit systems. The transit systems considered are: DATA, Chapel Hill Transit, TTA, Orange
Public Transit, Duke University Transit, Chatham Transit Network (must connect in Chatham
County), and Capital Area Transit (CAT). These are the fixed route systems in the MPO with the
exception of the Chatham Transit Network because Chatham County does not have a fixed route
service.
Local jurisdictions are asked,to apply the ranking methodology.
3. Essential Services -Projects receive points based on if the project provides funds to maintain the
current level of transit service. This category will award points for maintenance projects and
replacement vehicles. This point category is weighted double to reflect the irriportance of
maintaining the existing system.
Local jurisdictions are asked to apply the ranking methodology.
4. E~ahancement of Existing Service of New Service -Projects receive points based on the estimated
increase in new riders. For new service, this should be based on surveys or other market research.
For enhancements of existing service (bus shelters, ITS projects, etc.), this should be based on
studies of similar projects. Jurisdictions are expected to document and justify their estimates.
Projects will be divided equally into four quartiles based on the number of new riders. Final
points will be assigned by quartile to ensure that points are distributed evenly and that projects
are compared relative to each other.
Local jurisdictions are asked to provide the number of new riders anticipated. MPO staff will
divide the projects into quartiles and award points.
5. Funding Status in the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) -Points are awarded to
projects based on the percentage of the total project cost that is funded in the currently adopted
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), or if the project has post year status in the TIP.
Local jurisdictions are asked to provide funding status and apply the ranking methodology.
Environmentallmpacts -natural e~zvironment -Points are awarded based on the impact on
wetlands, streams, wildlife habitat, parks, and air quality.
Page 6 of 11
.21
The MPO will provide local jurisdictions a base map of environmental areas. Local jurisdictions.
are asked to apply the ranking methodology based on a GIS analysis:
Community Impacts -Points are awarded based on the impact on neighborhoods and
communities.
Local jurisdictions are asked to apply the ranking methodology based on a GIS analysis.
OBSERVATIONS
The order of transit priorities could vary significantly from year to year if anticipated funding sources are
reduced or eliminated by Congress.
• Mandates (e.g., the American's with Disabilities Act) may take precedence when programming
projects from the Regional Priority List in the TIP.
• The fiscal constraints of programming projects in the TIP may result in the programming of less
expensive, lower ranked projects.
• Some lower ranking projects maybe implemented earlier than a higher ranked, large project due to ,
the time constraints associated with a more complex project (i.e., major investment studies, preparing
environmental documents, designing the project, right-of way acquisition, etc.).
• The significance of ranking more than 25 projects is minimal, at best due, to the availability of project
funds.
Page 7 of 11
ROADWAY
RANKLNG CRITERIA (MEASURES) SCORE
(points) Category
Weight
1 Travel Demand 1
2035 volume to ca aci ratio v/c on existin or arallel roadwa
Traffic Si al S stem, TDM, ITS Pro'ects 4
First uartile of ranked ro'ects, v/c >0.80 4
Second uartile of ranked ro'ects, v/c >0.80 3
Third uartile ofranked ro'ects, v/c>0.80 2
Fourth uartile of ranked ro'ects, v/c >0.80 1
v/c <= 0.80 0
2 Safety. 1
Accident rate accidents/100 million
Traffic Si al S stem, TDM, ITS Pro'ects 4
First uartile of ranked ro'ects, Accident Rate >300 accidents/100 million VMT 4
Second uartile ofranked ro'ects, Accident Rate >300 accidents/100 million VMT 3
Third uartile of ranked ro'ects, Accident Rate >300 accidents/100 million VMT 2
Fourth uartile of ranked ro'ects, Accident Rate >300 accidents/100 million VMT 1
Accident Rate <=300 accidents/100 million VMT 0
3 Enviro~:mentallmpacts -natural environment ~ 1
Based air quality impacts and GIS analysis including wetlands, stream crossings,
wildlife habitat, arks, etc.
No ne alive or adverse im acts or ositive im act 4
Low ne alive or adverse im acts 3
Medium ne alive or adverse im acts 2
Medium-Hi h ne alive or adverse irn acts 1
Hi h ne alive or adverse im acts no rniti ation 0
4 Community Impacts 1
Based on GIS anal sis includin roximi to nei hborhoods
No ne alive or adverse im acts or ositive im act 4
Low ne afive or adverse im acts 3
Medium ne alive or adverse im acts 2
Medium-Hi h ne alive or adverse im acts 1
Hi h ne alive or adverse im acts no miti ation 0
5 Environmental Justice 1
Based on GIS anal sis oflow-income and minori areas (TAZ
Positive im act 4
No ne alive or adverse im acts 3'
Low ne alive or adverse im acts 2
Medium ne alive or adverse im acts 1
Hi h ne alive or adverse im acts 0
5 Funding Status in TIP 1
Partiall funded in current TIP c cleat least 25% of total cost construction & RO 4
Partiall funded in current TII' c cle at least ]0% of total cost construction & RO 3
Partiall funded in current TIP c cleat least 5% of total cost construction & RO 2
Partiall funded in ost ear construction & RO 1
Not ro rammed in TIP 0
7 Beneftts to Other Modes of Transportation or Deployment of New Technology 1
An 4 or more modes Ca ool, transit, bike, edestrian, ITS, TD 4
An 3 modes Ca ool, transit, bike, edestrian, ITS, TD 3
An 2 modes C ool, transit, bike, edestrian, ITS, TD 2
An 1 mode Ca o01, transit, bike, edestrian, ITS, TD 1
No other modes 0
22
Page 8 of 11
23
BIKE/PED
RANKING CRITERIA (MEASURES) SCORE
(points) Category
Weight
] Street Classification of Roadway or Parallel Roadway for Off-Road
Facilities
]
Arterial 3
Collector 2
Local 1
2 Rig1:t-of--Way Availability ]
Ade uate ri ht-of-wa available 3
Some ri ht-of-wa available 2
Much ri ht-of-wa needed t
Ma'or barriers to ri ht-of-wa ac uisition 0
3 Travel De»:and 1
Based on proximity to schools, colleges, parks, major retail centers, transit, and major
em to meat centers (see attached worksheet
First uartileofranked ro'ects 3
Second uartileofranked ro'ects 2
Third uartile of ranked ro'ects 1
Fourth uartileofranked ro'ects 0
4 Environn:entallu:pacts -natural environnsent ]
Based air quality impacts and GIS analysis including wetlands, stream crossings,
wildlife habitat, arks, etc.
Hi h ositive im act 3
Medium ositive im act 2
Low ositive im act ]
Ne ative im act 0
g Conununity Irr:pacts 1
Based on GIS anal sis includin roximi to nei hborhoods
Hi h ositive im act 3
Medium ositive im act 2
Low ositive im act 1
Ne ative im act 0
6 Environmental Justice 1
Based on GIS anal sis of low-income and minori areas TAZ
Hi h ositive im act 3
Medium ositive im act 2
Low ositive im act 1
Ne ative im act 0
~ Co~:r:ectivity to Existing Bicycle ar:d Pedestrian Facilities 1
First uartileofranked ro'ects 3
Second uartileofranked ro'ects 2
Third uartile of ranked ro'ects 1
Fourth uartileofranked ro'ects 0
g Fundi-:g Status in TIP i
Partial] funded in current TIP c cleat least 25% of total cost construction & RO 3
Partial] funded in current TIP c cIe at least 10% of total cost construction & RO 2
Partial] funded in ost ear conshuction & RO 1
Not ro ammed in TIP 0
Page 9 of 11
24
BIKE/PED TRAVEL DEMAND WORKSHEET
For Bicycle Projects or Multi-Use Trails
A project will receive points based on its proximity to the following land uses:
Proxi mity
# within 1 mile 2 points per # # within 2 miles 1 point per #
Schools 0 0
Colleges 0 0 ,~
N Parks 0 0 c
~ Major Retail Centers 0 0 ~-
c Major Employment Centers 0 0 .;°
,~ Transit Routes 0 0 to-
Total 0 + 0 0
For Pedestrian Projects
A project will receive points based on its proximity to the following land uses:
Proximity
# within 1/4 mile 2 points per # # within 1/2 mile 1 point per #
Schools 0 0
Colleges 0 0 ,~
N Parks 0 0 c
~ Major Retail Centers 0 0 n-
c Major Employment Centers 0 0 ,;°
~ Transit Routes 0 0 ~-°
Total 0 + 0 0
Projects will be ranked by total points and categorized into quartiles.
The final points for this travel demand will be based on the quartile.
Points
First .quartile of ranked projects 3
Second quartile of ranked projects 2
Third quartile of ranked projects 1
Fourth quartile of ranked projects 0
Page 10 of 11
25
TRANSIT
RANKING CRITERIA (MEASURES) SCORE
(points) Category
Weight
1 Expansion of Existing Routes 1
Vehicle crowdin oad factor on a s ecific route dail riders/ eak vehicle ca aci
First uartile of ranked ro'ects 4
Second uartile of ranked ro'ects 3
Third uartile of ranked ro'ects 2
Fourth uartile of ranked ro'ects 1
2 Regior:al Connectivity 1
Connections to other .transit systems
Provides 4 or more connections 4
Provides 3 connections ~ 3
Provides 2 connections 2
Provides 1 connection 1
Does not rovide a connection 0
3 Essential Services (maintenance or replacement vehicles) 2
Provides an essential service to maintain the current level of transit service 4
Does not rovide an essential service 0
4 Enhancement of Existing Service or New Service 1
Estimated number of new riders
First uartile of ranked ro'ects 4
Second uartile of ranked ro'ects 3
Third uartile of ranked ro'ects 2
Fourth uartile of ranked ro'ects 1
5 Funding Status in TIP 1
Partiall funded in current TIP c cle at least 25% of total cost 4
Partiall funded in current TIP c cle at least 10% of total cost 3
Partiall funded in current TIP c cle at least 5% of total cost 2
Partiall funded in ost ear 1
Not ro rammed in TIE' 0
6 Environmental Impacts -natural environment 1
Based air quality impacts and GIS analysis including wetlands, stream crossings,
wildlife habitat, arks, etc. .
Hi h ositive im act 4
Medium ositive im act 3
Low ositive im act 2
Low ne ative im act 1
Hi h Ne ative im act 0
~ Cornmurzity Impacts 1
Based on GIS anal sis includin roximi to nei hborhoods
Hi h ositive im act 4
Medium ositive im act 3
Low ositive im act 2
Low ne ative im act 1
Hi h Ne ative im act 0
Page 11 of 11
Attachment 5 26
ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION PRIORITY LIST WITHIN
THE DURHAM-CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO
METROPOLITAN AREA BOUNDARY
FOR CONSIDERATION OF FUNDING IN
THE 2009 - 2015 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
1. SR 1006, Orange Grove Road, at Interstate 40: Construct a pedestrian bridge over I-
40. New Grady Brown Elementary and newly constructed Cedar Ridge High School
are located on New Grady Brown School Road that has access from Orange Grove
Road south of I-40. The schools are within walking and cycling distance from
residential areas north of I-40. Bicyclists and pedestrian must share the roadway
with motor vehicles crossing the narrow two-lane bridge that carries Orange Grove
Road over Interstate 40. The bridge is too narrow to accommodate a pedestrian
walkway. Lack of an adequate pedestrian crossing presents an unsafe environment
for students to walk to the schools.
2. U-2805, Homestead Road (SR 1777) Improvements: Improve Homestead Road
from SR 1834, High School Road, to NC 86. This project should include bicycle and
pedestrian facilities. There are three schools in the vicinity of Homestead Road:
Ghapel Hill High School, Smith Middle School and Seawell Elementary School.
Many students live within walking distance and cycling distance to Chapel Hill High
School and must walk or cycle along Homestead Road, and cross the road daily.
Provision of sidewalks is of utmost importance for the safety of students and other
pedestrians who use this corridor. Provision of bicycle facilities is, likewise,
necessary for the safety of .students and others.
This project should also include appropriate safety improvements to the intersection
of Homestead Road with High School Road.
3. R-2825, Improvements to South Churton Street: Develop congestion management,
limited access, aesthetic and capacity improvements between US 70 Business and
Interstate 40. The portion between Interstates 40 and 85 will conform to the design
criteria of the Economic Development District Design Manual (4-lane divided section
with bike and pedestrian improvements). The feasibility study completed in
February 2002 recommends a 4-lane divided, with 16-foot median, curb and gutter
cross section for the entire corridor from I-40 to Eno River. Orange County stresses
the need to study improvements within the current right-of-way for the segment north
of Interstate 85. Improved capacity through widening is not the County's first choice
because of significant constraints between Interstate 85 and US 70 Business and
the' proximity of the historic district north of the project limits. Orange County
requests that, where conditions do not prevent the addition of frontage roads, the
feasibility study include the addition of frontage roads with limited access from the
corridor.
Attachment 5 27
ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION PRIORITY LIST WITHIN
THE DURHAM-CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO
METROPOLITAN AREA BOUNDARY
FOR CONSIDERATION OF FUNDING IN
THE 2009 - 2015 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
4. Old NC 86 (SR 1009) Bicycle Lanes: Construct bicycle lanes (4-foot paved
shoulders) from Carrboro (Eubanks Road) to Hillsborough (I-40). This project, from
the Carrboro Transition area (Hickory Forest Road) to Lafayette Drive, is priority 6 of
the primary bicycle routes listed in the Orange County Bicycle Transportation Plan,
and would extend bicycle accommodations requested in TIP Project R-2825 to
Carrboro, where its Transportation Advisory Committee has also established bicycle
routes on Old NC 86 as a transportation priority connection between ,proposed
bicycle facilities along Old Fayetteville Road, Homestead Road and Eubanks Road.
The feasibility study for TIP. Project R-2825, improvements to South Churton Street,
recommends afour-lane divided section for Old NC 86 (S. Churton St.) from I-40 to
Lafayette Drive. That study .also anticipates accommodations for bicycles (wide
outside lanes) from I-40 to I-85. This project would connect bicycle facilities
proposed in the South Churton Street project to Carrboro. Carrboro's Priority List for
the 2006-2012 TIP included two bicycle projects on Old NC 86 that, along with this
request and TIP project R-2825, would complete aHillsborough-Carrboro bicycle
route:
® from Old Fayetteville Road to Homestead Road; and
® from Homestead Road to Eubanks Road.
5. NC 86, Bicycle Lanes: Construct bicycle lanes (4-foot paved shoulders) from Chapel
Hill (Whitfield Road) to .Hillsborough (US 70 Business). This project will extend
bicycle lanes on Airport Road (NC86) in Chapel Hill to US 70 Business in
Hillsborough. Bicycle lanes have recently been completed along NC 86 from UNC
to Whitfield Road (SR 1731) in Orange County. NC 86 from Chapel Hill to
Hillsborough is experiencing increasing numbers of bicyclists using this route and
there are also two schools along this route. This route is listed as priority I of the
primary bicycle routes proposed in the Orange County Bicycle Transportation Plan
adopted April 6, 1999. This project is included in the Bicycle Program as an
incidental need. Orange County requests that bicycle lanes be constructed as an
independent project, and, if necessary, programmed in phases.
Attachment 5 28
`ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION PRIORITY LIST 1IVITHIN
THE DURHAM-CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO.
METROPOLITAN AREA BOUNDARY
FOR CONSIDERATION OF FUNDING IN
THE 2009 - 2015 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
6. NC 86 North of Hillsborough) Improvements: Widen NC 86, from US 70 Bypass
north of Hillsborough to SR 1332, Coleman Loop (Coleman Loop also being the
intersection area of the planned connector between NC 86 and NC 57),'to four lanes
with intersection improvements at US 70 Bypass to include extending the queuing
lane for traffic turning east onto US 70 Bypass from northbound Churton Street/NC
86. NC 86 is the major north-south route
through Orange County. NC 57 converges into US 86 just north. of US 70 Bypass.
The segment of NC 86 between NC 57 and US 70 is congested, rendering a high
accident location at the intersection of US 70 Bypass at NC 86.
7. US 70 Bypass Widening: Widen, from the Orange/Durham County Line to the US
70 - I-85 Connector east of Efland, US 70 Bypass to a four-lane divided section with
bike and pedestrian improvements. This project should be phased to address traffic
counts and existing congestion. Orange County requests that this project be
identified as a need and included in the 2006-2012 STIP.
8. U-3436, SR 1148 (Eno Mountain Road) and SR 1192 (Mayo Street) at SR 1006
(Orange Grove Road): realign intersection and make safety improvements. This
project is listed in the 2004- 2010 TIP as an unfunded project. It was a "first priority
project" in the Town of Hillsborough Thoroughfare Plan for 1989 but the Hillsborough
Town Board removed the realignment from the Hillsborough Transportation Plan in
1997. More recently, Hillsborough Commissioners and Orange County
Commissioners have endorsed the project in two joint studies that included
commissioners from both jurisdictions, the Economic Development District (EDD)
Transportation Work Group and the Joint Orange Grove Road Transportation Group
(JOGRTG). Both the "EDD Transportation Work Group Recommendations" and the
"Access Management and Awareness Project and Report for Orange Grove Road"
recommend this project for improved traffic flow and safety.
9. Extend Orange Grove Road east to US 70 business. The "EDD Transportation
Work Group Recommendations" and the "Access Management and Awareness
Project and Report for Orange Grove Road" recommend this project as an
alternative access to the US 70 Business/NC 86 corridor to alleviate congestion on
Churton Street.