Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda - 11-20-2017 - 6-d - Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan Preferred Option – Public Comment Period
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: November 20, 2017 Action Agenda Item No. 6-d SUBJECT: Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan Preferred Option – Public Comment Period DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections ATTACHMENT(S): 1. PowerPoint Presentation 2. Items of Interest in 2045 MTP Preferred Option 3. OUTBoard Comments 4. Draft 2045 MTP Preferred Option INFORMATION CONTACT: (919) Nishith Trivedi, Transportation Planner, 245-2582 Tom Altieri, Comprehensive Planning Supervisor, 245-2579 Craig Benedict, Planning Director, 245- 2592 Theo Letman, OPT Transit Director, 245- 2007 PURPOSE: To receive a presentation on the 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) Preferred Option presentation from Orange County Transportation Planning staff and offer any comments in conjunction with the OUTBoard’s November 15, 2017 comments. BACKGROUND: The Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization, (DCHC MPO) which is responsible for long range transportation planning for Durham County and parts of Orange and Chatham Counties, is updating its MTP. The 2045 MTP is a federally required, financially constrained, plan that recommends major transportation projects, policies and strategies designed to maintain existing transportation systems and address the region’s future travel needs. Projects must be in the 2045 MTP to receive any state and federal transportation funding through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) did not receive a presentation from Orange County Transportation Planning staff at this stage of the 2040 MTP planning process. Staff is providing this presentation now primarily as information but also to find opportunity for Board comments. Any comments received will be communicated to the MPO Board for its consideration. Commissioner Barry Jacobs is Orange County’s representative on the MPO Board with Commissioner Penny Rich as the alternate. On October 3, 2017 the BOCC endorsed the Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard) comments on the Alternatives Analysis and submitted to the DCHC MPO Board. The MPO included these comments along with others and drafted the Preferred Option. The MPO Technical Committee released the 2045 MTP Preferred Option for a 42-day public comment period on October 25, 2017. The MPO Board also conducted a public hearing on the preferred option on November 8, 2017. The preferred option is a 35 page document (Attachment 4). Orange County Transportation Planning Staff has reviewed the Preferred Option and has provided Attachment 2 as a summary of key Orange County information. 1 The OUTBoard provided the following comments (Attachment 3) at its November 15 meeting: 1. The LRT extension from Chapel Hill to Carrboro would better be served if it went along Main Street and into downtown rather than Cameron Avenue. 2. We would like to see a bike and pedestrian path between Hillsborough and Carrboro. 3. Hillsborough station is great and should be used often. Amtrak may provide only two stops a day so it will need to be planned for more frequent use. Next Steps • December 13 – DCHC MPO Board to approve the Preferred Option and release full 2045 MTP report and final Goals/Objectives/Targeted Performance Measures for public comment. • January 10 – DCHC MPO Board to adopt by resolution the 2045 MTP and report. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no immediate financial impact associated with this item. SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT: The following Orange Social Justice Goals are applicable to this agenda item: • GOAL: ENSURE ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY The creation and preservation of infrastructure, policies, programs and funding necessary for residents to provide shelter, food, clothing and medical care for themselves and their dependents. • GOAL: CREATE A SAFE COMMUNITY The reduction of risks from vehicle/traffic accidents, childhood and senior injuries, gang activity, substance abuse and domestic violence. • GOAL: ESTABLISH SUSTAINABLE AND EQUITABLE LAND-USE AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of people of all races, cultures, incomes and educational levels with respect to the development and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, policies, and decisions. Fair treatment means that no group of people should bear a disproportionate share of the negative environmental consequences resulting from industrial, governmental and commercial operations or policies. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board: 1. Receive the presentation (Attachment 1); 2. Discuss as appropriate; and 3. Endorse OUTBoard comments with or without changes. 2 11/P6/2017 Attachment 1 Outline '.'Background O DCHC MPO role and responsibility 2045 Metropolitan °2045 MTP Process ':'Key Aspects of 2045 MTP Preferred Option Transportation Plan O Goals and Objectives Preferred Option O AIMHigh Model Results O Projects 11/20/2017 0 Financial Plan '.'Conclusion O DCHC MPO 2045 MTP Update Schedule +Managers Recommendations DCHC MPO Role and Responsibility Durham-Chapel Hill Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization ■ Responsible for long range transportation planning in °Durham City and County,and Background 0 Parts of Orange County and Chatham County. ■ Federal mandate—MPO must plan and approve use of federal transportation funding ■ Policy Board--Composed mostly of local elected officials from member jurisdictions and counties. Transportation Planning Framework What is the 2045 MTP Process Adopted,— m Coprehen' State requirem Mfor MPOS and RPOS, / Transportation Plan ^ukimodal planet address fu<ure eeds xo+Year MPO 6. Final MTP Dec.2017 Metropolitan 15. Preferred Option Oct.Dec.2017 Transportation Plan 4. Alternatives Analysis a Oct.2017 Pdorifira<ion process-<he ga<eway to the STIP 3. Deficiency Analysis We are Here! into to-Year State f Transportation 2. Socioeconomic Data(Community VIZ pop.8 emp.forecasts) e I Improvement Fu�Med projxts, Includes MPO's TIPS plus rural projxts Program(STIP) Federal Approval of firs<4 Years Goals and Objectives [Firs<S Years-delivery STIP, er 5 Years-developmental STIP] For more on the steps:http://www.dchcmpo.org/programs/transport/zo4smtp.asn 1 11/146/2017 " Goals and Objectives Goals Objectives I.Protect Environment and A. Reduce mobile source emissions,GHG,&energy Minimize Climate Change consumption B. Reduce negative natural&cultural environmental impacts IL Connect People A. Connect people to jobs,education and other important destinations using all modes Key Aspects of B. Ensure transportation needs are met for all populations (especially the aging and youth,economically disadvantaged, 2045 MTP Preferred Option mobility impaired,and minorities) III.Promote Multimodal& A. Enhance transit services,amenities and facilities Affordable Travel Choices B. Improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities C. Increase utilization of affordable non-auto travel modes IV.Manage Congestion& A. Allow people and goods to move with minimal congestion System Reliability and time delay,and greater predictability. B. Promote Travel Demand Management(TDM,carpool, vanpool and park-and-ride) C. Enhance IntelligentTransportation Systems(ITS,dynamic signal phasing and vehicle detection systems) " Goals and Objectives Orange County-Population/Employment Projections Fil; Objectives Po I (Pop Guide Total) Population Projections Steady population V.Improve Infrastructure A. Increase proportion of highways&highway assets in ° - :owth Condition 'Good'condition I ,.94, 7 (2013-2045-400) B. Maintain transit vehicles,facilities&amenities in the best operating condition _"MEE C. Improve the condition of bicycle&pedestrian facilities& amenities I =3SOS7 Employment Projections D. Improve response time to infrastructure repairs 39'i09 Existing Estimates WM ss na .,VIP ;9P VI.Ensure Equity and A. Ensure that transportation investments do not create t m=°`°F'�°` Participation a disproportionate burden for any community _ ° ss a rt B. Enhance public participation among all communities S3,666 (Emp.Guide Total) 69.690 7"• �,rs Employment VII.Promote Safety and Health A. Increase safety of travelers and residents growth outpaces B. Promote public health through transportation choices population growth Existing Estimates (2013—2045-68%) VIII.Stimulate Economic Vitality A. Improve freight movement B. Link land use and transportation C. Target funding to the most cost-effective solutions '° D. Improve project delivery for all modes II Population Projection Employment Projection Square Feet Total Square Square Feet WITMEMMEZEMI so%Single Person per Total Number Single Family zO�5 2045 New per Employee Feet PerYear Famil Unit of Units Units•erYear 139,289 194,867 55,578 27,789 2.75 10,105 337 66,405 107,791 41,386 325 13,450,450 448,348 So%Multi- Person per Total Number Multi-Fami _ Famil Multi-Famil of Units Units•erYea a 27,788 2.15 12,925 431 _.° .. ]t.. 72. zfonner Blue 'f' Cross/Blue Shield Single (now SECU) Family buildings per year Multi- Units per - family Year • — -Y units per - 44% year _ 56% r 2 11/6/2017 Scenario Planning Household Distribution _ W /. The 2045 MTP uses Connect zo45Triangle model called -Community Visualization(CommViz),two land use 6; scenarios were generated based on the above + Hillsborough and South of • population and employment guide totals. chapel Hill , West Orange County north of t, ``� '��1• • Community Plan-based on local comprehensive - + Between Hillsborough and - L..y plans and land use policies. NC-54 t '.. n + Between Hillsborough and• AIM-High-This scenario uses the Community Plan Chapel Hill/Carrboro scenarios as a base but increases the land use density I Sprawl' a ---.� •1 and mix around the future light rail.It is based on i draft data from an ongoing regional study on rail •• ---'"∎`"- station development potential,and though it pushes -, the limits it is still market possible. { -• ' Employment Distribution Highway Projects --__. _ - 2045-8 Orange County Projects R e 2025-10 projects East of Mebane along 1-85/I-4o .. •i% -.7.1 • 2o35-22 projects i West of Durham along-85 �� + North of Hillsborough,along • STI Bike-Ped and Transit •NC-57 '-_ + Alon MLK Blvd in Chapel " ' funding restrictions g P el Hill !r ' f • Federally mandated . , -s1 Financially Constrained MTP f t,,�-- 1� -C1^3 1 - . a ir,1 • w co-* — •1 'C • - iL.- , ---•- "-- 0 LRTStations ./ ' w•7••"° II Transit Projects. . Bicycle, Pedestrian and Multiuse Projects 77 woke f - _ . ca.Exr��„�o„ Y- ._ --•• — • CTPWeb site:http://blt.ly/DCHCMPO-Adopted-CTP(References Orange County Bicycle Plan) ! / • Carrboro Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan(2009)-- j http://bit.Iv/1PeRnsi ,f� • Chapel Hill Bike Plan(2010--http://bit.IvhuGbDZc -. - a_._. •- [� • Chatham County Bicycle Plan(zou)--http://bit.!vhTShcuv rf • Durham City and County Comprehensive Bicycle Plan(2006)-- __- http://bit.IVhUCSIDz • Hillsborough Community Connectivity Plan(2009)--httr://bit.IvhuanavO • Chapel Hill Bicycle and Pedestrian Action Plan(2004)--http://bit.IV/z8obvgi • — • Durham Walks!Pedestrian Plan(2006)-http://bit.Ivhv66mfG ��� ��F•—_f L �M1 • Durham Bike+Walk Implementation Plan(2017)--http://bit.IV/zprvHls .- • Hillsborough Community Connectivity Plan(2009)--http://bit.Iv/1UaroVO --- - — A M■ 3 11/6/2017 °° ' Financial Plan - Revenue " Financial Plan -Costs s o ' •Funding for New/ExpandedTransit Total MTP Costs by Mode i —I 44,5° — Services .,I it ■Continued Transit Funding to Support Blkq ped�T�M $G0 _ Existing Services 3% •CMAQ Funding(division) - _ $3, _ •Private Funds(division) S3, ■Local Funding(roadway)(division) Roadway $;sO° •Local Funding(bicycle/pedestrian) Transit Improvements JJJ (division) 39% 29% ■ $;aoo •Toll Revenue(statewide) I 55 500 •Maintenance(all) It is difficult to increase Roadway transit bicycle,pedestrian ■STI(division) Maintenance andT nsportation 2 Demand Management 45\ i •STI(regional) Demand due Ma State Transportation Investment So •STI(statewide) (S77)funding restrictions. 2035 2045 ■10■1.WeAll " Financial Plan-Investment by Mode 2045 MTP Schedule 19D% . - 0% 10 . - % -Bike/Ped/T0M 6. Final MTP Dec.2017 60 • - 60% 5. Preferred Option oet.-Dec.zo,7 60 ■Transit 4. Alternatives Analysis n9.O` t 2017 so% . We are Here! 3. Deficiency Analysis 4D% ■Roadway Maintenance 2. Socioeconomic Data(population and employment forecasts) I 30% . Goals and Objectives ■Roadway J 20% Im pro�ements 10% • w. For more on these steps:http://wwdchcmpo.org/programs/transport/zoosmtp.use o% 2025 2035 2045 Manager Recommendations ■ Discussasappropriate;and • Endorse OUT Board comments with or without changes. 4 Attachment 2 7 Guide to Items of Orange County Interest in the DCHC MPO 2045 MTP Preferred Option • Orange County Base-line Data Used as Guide Totals: Guide Totals The numbers and headings in parentheses show the data used in the 2040 MTP Data Type 2013 2045 Growth % Increase Annual (2010) (2040) Rate Population 139,289 197,867 55,578 40% 1.3% (134,325) (197,675) (63,350) (47%) (1.1%) Employment 64,212 107,791 43,579 68% 1.8% (70,491) (119,787) (49,296) (70%) (1.8%) Sources: State Office of Budget and Management for population and Woods and Poole Economics for employment. • Goals and Objectives Goals Objectives I. Protect Environment A. Reduce mobile source emissions, GHG, and energy consumption and Minimize Climate B. Reduce the negative impacts on the natural and cultural Change environment II. Connect People A. Connect people to jobs, education and other important destinations using all modes B. Ensure transportation needs are met for all populations (especially the aging and youth, economically disadvantaged, mobility impaired, and minorities) III. Promote Multimodal A. Enhance transit services, amenities and facilities and Affordable Travel B. Improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities Choices C. Increase utilization of affordable non-auto travel modes IV. Manage Congestion & A. Allow people and goods to move with minimal congestion and time System Reliability delay, and greater predictability. B. Promote Travel Demand Management (TDM, such as carpool, vanpool and park-and-ride) C. Enhance Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS, such as ramp metering, dynamic signal phasing and vehicle detection systems) V. Improve Infrastructure A. Increase proportion of highways and highway assets in 'Good' Condition condition B. Maintain transit vehicles, facilities and amenities in the best operating condition. C. Improve the condition of bicycle and pedestrian facilities and amenities D. Improve response time to infrastructure repairs VI. Ensure Equity and A. Ensure that transportation investments do not create a Participation disproportionate burden for any community B. Enhance public participation among all communities VII. Promote Safety and A. Increase safety of travelers and residents Health B. Promote public health through transportation choices VIII. A. Improve freight movement Stimulate Economic B. Link land use and transportation Vitality C. Target funding to the most cost-effective solutions D. Improve project delivery for all modes 1 8 • Scenarios The 2045 MTP uses Connect 2045 Triangle model called Community Visualization (CommViz), two land use scenarios were generated based on the above population and employment guide totals. • Community Plan —based on local comprehensive plans and land use policies. • AIM-High—This scenario uses the Community Plan scenarios as a base but increases the land use density and mix around the future light rail. It is based on draft data from an ongoing regional study on rail station development potential, and though it pushes the limits it is still market possible. 2045 MTP Preferred option uses the AIM-High because it is "within the market possibilities of rail station development and it proved to have desired, positive impacts on the performance measures such as reduced overall congestion and delay." • Maps showing Orange County Description of Maps Orange County Maps: New Household Density: Indicates following areas See pages 8-11 increasing in household density: • Hillsborough and South of Chapel Hill • West Orange County north of 1-85/1-40 • Between Hillsborough and NC-54 • Between Hillsborough and Chapel Hill/Carrboro New Employment Distribution: Indicates following areas See pages 12-15 increasing in employment: • East of Mebane along 1-85/1-40 • North of Hillsborough, along NC-57 • Along MLK Blvd in Chapel Hill 2 9 Figure 1:Orange County Highway Projects L70 „iz �# Enb Fbfarr � ' nand S - aew gS HiI rsborcugh r 4 = I ■' 1 r 4 II ... - 4 4 i t •4 F ..i .1 4* LI N. , . . ix 1 t r { 4 f 1a fee 0I U3 rp OR • -!--11 a Y- e r c 10=1 - I. r i�L5rry�..c., AZ gfr 1 de ti ' r 1 T r wa.r« r a$ To II '* U r 1 a. ".•••■••drilli ..4.4. vs,. •..sr ■lnsl IMpv rI ti M F c Tf q' ..■ SILL FoN657 {`.. .' .tY.W.I..frs tJ`7F Hill .4. ■ C rrb ccp Cr.■, • I i 9-33 *E..{ Zfr OA it Is - - 4 C New/Upgraded Interchange n b ` -•-•-1 Expressway Conversion - - Freeway Conversion Modernization New Location Widening 3 4 Highway Projects of Orange County Interest Included in MTP Preferred Option Table 1: 2025 MTP Highway Project From To Existing Lanes Proposed Lanes Improvement Type Length (miles) Estimated Cost STI Funding Source Fordham Blvd (US 15- 501) I-40 Franklin St 4 4 Modernizatio n 1.6 2,052,000 St State/Fed Freeland Memorial Extension S Churton St New Collector Rd - 2 New Location 0.5 3,203,000 Div Private Legion Rd Ext Legion Rd Fordham Blvd - 2 New Location 0.1 1,500,000 Div Private New Collector Rd Orange Grove Rd Ext Becketts Ridge Rd - 2 New Location 0.8 7,232,000 Div State/Fed/ Private Orange Grove Connector Orange Grove Rd US 70 - 2 New Location 0.4 5,299,000 Div State/Fed Purefoy Rd Ext Sandberg Ln Weaver Dairy Rd - 2 New Location 0.6 3,777,000 Div Private S Elliot Rd Ext Fordham Blvd Ephesus Church Rd - 2 New Location 0.3 4,230,000 Div State/Fed/ Private I-40/NC 86 Interchange - - Upgrade N/A 16,500,000 St State/Fed Eubanks Rd MLK Blvd (NC 86) Millhouse Rd 2 4 Widening 0.8 7,487,000 Div State/Fed NC 54 Old Fayetteville Rd MPO Boundary 2 3 Widening 2.9 58,400,000 Reg State/Fed 10 5 Table 2: 2035 MTP Highway Project From To Existing Lanes Proposed Lanes Improvement Type Length (miles) Estimated Cost STI Funding Source Fordham Blvd (US 15- 501) NC 54 Franklin Street 4 4 Modernization 2.1 45,498,000 St State/Fed Fordham Blvd (US 15- 501) NC 54 US 15-501 4 4 Modernization 2.2 49,832,000 St State/Fed Fordham Blvd/Raleigh Rd Interchange - - Upgrade N/A 14,800,000 St State/Fed Fordham Blvd/S Columbia St Interchange - - Upgrade N/A 35,000,000 St State/Fed Homestead Rd Old NC 86 Rogers Rd 2 2 Modernization 2.1 10,234,000 Div State/Fed Homestead Rd Rogers Rd NC 86 2 2 Modernization 1.3 6,855,000 Div State/Fed I-40 NC 86 I-85 4 6 Widening 7.8 58,784,000 St State/Fed I-40 US 15-501 NC 86 4 6 Widening 3.9 29,316,000 St State/Fed I-40/NC 54 Interchange - - Upgrade N/A 94,100,000 St State/Fed I-40/ NC 54 ramp Farrington Rd. I-40 - 1 New Location 0.2 1,600,000 St State/Fed I-85/NC 86 Interchange - - Upgrade N/A 16,488,000 St State/Fed I-85/S Churton St Interchange - - Upgrade N/A 20,700,000 St State/Fed Jack Bennet Rd/Lystra Rd US 15-501 South Farrington Mill/Point Rd 2 2 Modernization 4.1 20,567,000 Div State/Fed Lake Hogan Farms Rd Eubanks Rd Legends Way - 2 New Location 0.7 4,407,000 Div State/Fed/ Private Marriott Way Friday Center Dr Barbree Chapel Rd - 2 New Location 0.2 682,000 Div State/Fed NC 54 Fordham Blvd (US 15- 501) Barbee Chapel Rd 6 6 Modernization 1.2 32,106,000 Reg State/Fed NC 54 I-40 Interchange NC 751 2 4 Widening 1.2 32,000,000 Reg State/Fed NC 54 NC 751 Rollingwood Dr 2 4 Widening 1.5 21,600,000 Reg State/Fed NC 54 Fayetteville Barbee 2 4 Widening 1.0 46,800,000 Reg State/Fed NC 54 Barbee NC 55 2 4 Widening 1.3 46,400,000 Reg State/Fed NC 54 (widening; superstreet) I-40 Barbee Chapel Rd 4 6 Widening 1.6 9,100,000 Reg State/Fed S Churton St US 70 Business I-40 2 4 Widening 2.4 31,825,000 Div State/Fed 11 6 Table 3: 2045 MTP Highway Project From To Existing Lanes Proposed Lanes Improvement Type Length (miles) Estimated Cost STI Funding Source Eno Mountain Rd realignment Mayo St Eno Mountain Rd - 2 New Location 0.3 2,015,000 Div State/Fed I-85 US 70 I-40 4 6 Widening 7.1 197,378,000 St State/Fed I-85 US 70 Red Mill Rd 4 6 Widening 8.2 215,940,000 St State/Fed I-85 Sparger Rd US 70 4 6 Widening 3.0 39,118,000 St State/Fed Mt Carmel Ch Rd US 15-501 Bennett Rd 2 2 Modernization 0.4 1,997,000 Div State/Fed NC 86 Old NC 10 US 70 Business 2 4 Widening 0.9 7,259,000 Reg State/Fed/ Private Northern Durham Pkwy I 85 North Old Oxford Hwy - 4 New Location 2.7 23,291,000 Div State/Fed US 15-501 Smith Level Rd MPO Boundary 4 4 Modernization 4.9 25,673,000 St State/Fed 12 7 Transit Projects of Orange County Interest Included in MTP Preferred Option Durham County Services Increased bus services for GoTriangle (6,262 annual service hours) and Durham County Access (7,896 annual demand trips) Purchase of new vehicles to support services funded by Durham County Transit Plan Bus facility improvements including park-and-ride lots, new transit centers, and other capital investments Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit (D-O LRT) - 2028 estimated completion LRT from UNC Hospital Chapel Hill to NCCU Durham Wake-Durham Commuter Rail (CRT) - 2035 estimated completion, linking Durham, RPT, Cary, Raleigh and Garner Wake-Durham Commuter Rail Extension (CRT) - 2045 estimated completion, commuter rail extension from West Durham to Hillsborough, assuming legislative restrictions against transit funding will be repealed. Orange County Services Increase bus services for Orange Public Transit (2,387 annual service hours), GoTriangle (1,492 annual service hours), Chapel Hill Transit (6,392 annual service hours) Purchase of new vehicles to support services funded by Durham County Transit Plan Bus facility improvements including park-and-ride lots, transit amenities and access improvements to bus stops Hillsborough Train Station - 2020 completion date, served by two Amtrak passenger routes North-South Bus Rapid Transit (N-S BRT) - 2023 estimated completion, between Eubanks Road and Southern Village park-and-ride facility, with direct service to UNC Hospital Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit (D-O LRT) - 2028 estimated completion LRT from UNC Hospital Chapel Hill to NCCU Durham Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Extension (D-O LRT) - 2045 estimated completion, extension from UNC Hospital to Main Street in Carrboro, assuming legislative restriction against transit funding will be repealed. Wake-Durham Commuter Rail Extension (CRT) - 2045 estimated completion, commuter rail extension from West Durham to Hillsborough, assuming legislative restrictions against transit funding will be repealed. Chatham County Services Express bus services from Pittsboro to UNC and the UNC Hospital will improve in frequency and service hours, including additional bus stops and stations. 13 8 Orange County Bicycle, Pedestrian and Multiuse Included in MTP Preferred Option MPO Policy The MPO bicycle and pedestrian policy basically expects any roadway or other transportation project, whether it is a new or improved facility, to include appropriate pedestrian and bicycle accommodations. That policy provides extensive integration of bicycle and pedestrian needs into the design and construction of new and improved highway and other transportation projects. In addition, the “NCDOT Complete Streets Planning and Design Guidelines” and other related guidelines provide planning and design guidance for use when building new projects or making changes to existing infrastructure. 14 15 Financial Constrained Plan Included in MTP Preferred Option $5,000 $4,500 Funding for New/Expanded Transit Services $4,000 Continued Transit Funding to Support Existing Services CMAQ Funding (division) $3,500 Private Funds(division) $3,000 Local Funding(roadway) (division) $2,500 Local Funding(bicycle/pedestrian) (division) Toll Revenue (statewide) $2,000 Maintenance (all) $1,500 STI (division) $1,000 1 STI (regional) 1 STI (statewide) $500 $0 2025 2035 2045 Figure 2:Revenue by Source 9 16 100% 90% 80% 70% Bike/Ped}TDM 50% Transit 50% 40% • Roadway Maintenance 30% • Roadway 20% Improvements 10% 0% I I 1 2025 2035 2045 Figure 3:MTP Total Investment by Mode Total MTP Costs by Mode Bike/Ped/TDM 396 1 IV Roadway Transit Improvements 39% 29% Roadway Maintenance 29% Figure 4:MTP Cost by Mode It is difficult to increase transit, bicycle, pedestrian and Transportation Demand Management (TDM) due to State Transportation Investment (STI) funding restrictions. 10 Memorandum Date: November 16, 2017 To: Orange County Board of County Commissioners From: Orange Unified Transportation Board Subject: Comments Regarding the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization’s 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan – Preferred Option The Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard) met Wednesday, November 15, 2017 and received a presentation from the Orange County Transportation Planning staff regarding the Preferred Option for the DCHC MPO 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP). The following comments are conveyed: 1. The LRT extension from Chapel Hill to Carrboro would better be served if it went along Main Street and into downtown rather than Cameron Avenue. 2. We would like to see a bike and pedestrian path between Hillsborough and Carrboro. 3. Hillsborough station is great and should be used often. Amtrak may provide only two stops a day so it will need to be planned for more frequent use. Orange Unified Transportation Board Attachment 3 17 Page 1 2045 MTP – Draft Preferred Option Table of Contents Section Page 1. Goals and Objectives a. Background 3 b. 2045 MTP Support of the Goals 3 2. Land Use (Socioeconomic Data) a. Background 6 b. Guide Totals 6 c. Scenarios 7 d. Land Use Maps 8 3. Highways a. Background 16 b. Highway Map 17 c. Highway Project Table 18 4. Public Transportation a. Summary 22 b. Durham County Services 22 c. Orange County Services 23 d. Chatham County Services 25 e. Fixed‐Guideway Maps 26 5. Bicycle and Pedestrian a. Local Plans 29 b. MPO Policy 29 (Continued, next page) www.bit.ly/DCHC‐MTP ATTACHMENT 4 18 www.bit.ly/DCHC-MTP Financial Plan c. Background and Assumptions 31 d. Financial Plan Table 33 e. Graphs 35 Performance Measures a. (To be completed) xx Contact: Andy Henry Planner, Durham-Chapel Hill Carrboro MPO andrew.henry@durhamnc.gov (919) 560-4366, ext. 36419 Page 2 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 19 Goals and Objectives Background The MPO Goals and Objectives are notable for three reasons: Development process -- The Goals and Objectives were developed using an extensive public input process that included a public workshop, an MPO Board workshop, a public hearing and an online survey that received more than 800 responses. The following 2045 MTP Web page has detailed information on the development process: http://bit.ly/DCHC-MTP-Goals Alignment -- The Goals and Objectives will be aligned with a set of performance measures and targets. For example, a performance measure such as “mobile energy consumption per capita” might be aligned with Objective 1A Reduce mobile source emissions. This alignment will make it easier to evaluate how the 2045 MTP meets the Goals and Objectives. Regional coordination – The DCHC MPO and Capital Area MPO (Raleigh area) have had a joint 2045 MTP development process and final plan for almost a decade. However, the Goals and Objectives have been separate. In this long-range update, the two MPOs will have the same Goals and Objectives. 2045 MTP Support of the Goals The DCHC MPO strongly supports transit, non-motorized transportation modes such as bicycling and walking, and the transportation needs of low-income families, and endeavors to minimize transportation impacts on the environment. This support is clear in the language of the Goals and Objectives. At the same time, federal rules that guide the development of these long-range plans require that the MTP use reasonable assumptions in the financial plan. This requirement effectively means that the financial plan needs to abide by the current North Carolina Strategic Transportation Investment (STI) law. The STI and the project prioritization methodology that implements the STI do not permit the MPO to completely carry out its Goals and Objectives. The STI, for example: limits state funding for fixed-guideway capital expenses to ten percent of the total project capital; limits non-highway funding to eight percent of total STI funding; and, favors highway projects over transit and other non-highway modes in the prioritization methodology. In the Preferred Option, the MPO has endeavored to the greatest extent possible to make sure that the 2045 MTP transportation projects and budget reflect these Goals and Objectives despite the constraints imposed by the current STI. Page 3 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 20 2045 MTP Goals and Objectives Goals Objectives I. Protect Environment and Minimize Climate Change A. Reduce mobile source emissions, GHG, and energy consumption B. Reduce the negative impacts on the natural and cultural environment II. Connect People A. Connect people to jobs, education and other important destinations using all modes B. Ensure transportation needs are met for all populations (especially the aging and youth, economically disadvantaged, mobility impaired, and minorities) III. Promote Multimodal and Affordable Travel Choices A. Enhance transit services, amenities and facilities B. Improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities C. Increase utilization of affordable non-auto travel modes IV. Manage Congestion & System Reliability A. Allow people and goods to move with minimal congestion and time delay, and greater predictability. B. Promote Travel Demand Management (TDM, such as carpool, vanpool and park-and-ride) C. Enhance Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS, such as ramp metering, dynamic signal phasing and vehicle detection systems) V. Improve Infra- structure Condition A. Increase proportion of highways and highway assets in 'Good' condition B. Maintain transit vehicles, facilities and amenities in the best operating condition. C. Improve the condition of bicycle and pedestrian facilities and amenities D. Improve response time to infrastructure repairs Page 4 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 21 Goals Objectives VI. Ensure Equity and Partici-pation A. Ensure that transportation investments do not create a disproportionate burden for any community B. Enhance public participation among all communities VII. Promote Safety and Health A. Increase safety of travelers and residents B. Promote public health through transportation choices VIII. Stimulate Economic Vitality A. Improve freight movement B. Link land use and transportation C. Target funding to the most cost-effective solutions D. Improve project delivery for all modes Page 5 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 22 Land Use (Socioeconomic Data) Background The MPO forecasts socioeconomic data (SE Data), such as dwelling units, population and employment, to the year 2045 and uses that data as a key input into the travel demand model called the Triangle Regional Model, or TRM). The process starts with the 2045 guide totals, which are county- level population and employment projections for the year 2045, and proceeds to the Community Visualization (CommViz) model that distributes the dwelling units and employment to particular parcels based on land availability and suitability. The following MPO Web page provides detailed information on the methodologies used for the guide totals and CommViz modeling process, as well as maps showing the projected population and employment distribution: http://bit.ly/DCHC-MTP-LandUse Guide Totals The MPO establishes the 2045 county-level population and employment to calculate the growth that the CommViz model process will distribute. The population is based on estimates and projections from the N.C. Office of State Budget and Management, and the employment projection is based on a private service from Woods-and-Poole Economics. The employment current employment estimate is based on employer data from InfoUSA that is verified and updated by local planners. The following table provides the guide totals: Page 6 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 23 Scenarios The 2045 MTP uses the Connect 2045 Triangle area land use modeling process, which is based on a model called Community Visualization (or CommViz). The Connect 2045 team created two land use scenarios with the direct assistance of local land use planners throughout the Triangle area. In these scenarios, the CommViz model distributes the county-level guide totals of population and employment growth to a particular place. Community Plan – This scenario is based on the local comprehensive plans and land use policies, and can be understood as the most likely scenario. AIM-High – This scenario uses the Community Plan scenarios as a base but increases the land use density and mix around the future light rail. It is based on draft data from an ongoing regional study on rail station development potential, and though it pushes the limits it is still market possible. Preferred Option Uses AIM-High The MPO staff proposes using the AIM-High scenario for the Preferred Option. AIM-High is within the market possibilities of rail station development and it proved to have desired, positive impacts on the performance measures such as reduced overall congestion and delay. Maps The maps on the following pages show the distribution of the growth of households and employment from 2013 through 2045 in the Triangle Region and the three counties in the MPO. The set of household maps are presented first, followed by the employment maps. Page 7 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 24 Connect 2045 - Triangle Region Scenario ic�IGbl�Srhltit 1i�25/2017 Item 52 Page AIM High Scenario I • • ' isa 1 A- ¶9 I . I 1 I _6 . in . p . jiiit - - c- ti tit . I •r j" _ t1 ••i �I T. • •L. - r ti 1156 :�• E. ' T F in• '. :' I I �•Mr • r , \ • • i 1 •.• i:� 185' %l ti 4. ,.1 • ▪ OJT•. , '/ �`'� • . �, Q •, . •• •r. ..• • • • 10*-".. . .11,!..1. 5 e- '.-‘, . . .2e\�x M • •{ .11"tir .Sr��. ,r+rr., • . '..•.- ,440_, ?'• A+. rI`}c �♦ .1, CI 97••1 , , ti' :t.- .1 L • i.i ■. � 1.. :4010144.C.,41211 • d'j i;tif I ffi 1 At a- + -'¢fit= `�,. 4 •--'t';. '�f x r+ A.. • to 1111111101••• Si',_. •1 *.r irk r `` n ilk '• .,: :.,,'_:r -: `.'ate+ f aP s ``\w •••••j: 111.4...:13., yj 42 j . ti • �� 'i;i'�,t, NIL=. 7 f' i C' } 't#r.f ilk silitili" ° c- " tt ., r. - trill \ Ilk . ....v;p....• , n Al.-....:•:';4:6'.1,::,: p..._-%15:00,-"-112/"... ii ,-;,i, , Regional Composite Map - New Household Distribution -32-Year Forecast (2013-2045) _ Study Area Boundary(TRM V.6) Interstate IIIM L _ j County Boundary US Hwy 0 Households >200 State Hwy Triangle J Council of Governments See table named "Connect 2045 - AIM High Output by Jurisdiction" Geographic Information Systems 0 2.s s _ for a summary of household and employment data allocated to individual 7.26.17 Miles cities, towns, and counties in the Triangle Region CommunityViz Model. Connect 2045 - Triangle Region ScenarcipicP peingQ 017 Item52 Page 9 AIM High Scenario, Durham County PERS. '_-4—y— r 1 . 11 • oro I ,z. , ■ I1 I 1 ■ • V7 . ! • /06 �5 1 ' - , •1 501 I ■ i • I ■. 56 ■ r • I . • I • I - �� -.-,' r •• I Y •■ ■... • 1 -•1 1 ' �' t ."� • • • • ;_■ � .1010:u ' ■ • 1 • , G C _GRANVILL _ L • v rid 1 - _0111 N. il • • a i dr41. .• • :A: . I . . - 1_4_,/-1---i----._•nai:/ . ._ / 1 ..i. • ;iv - ... . ,Piril Vit • • 1..-ki Ili lir Mik I. 1 ■ ''11.5 1■ •••.•_' •• = ..114 f :. ■ 111k% n •.� -4 _/ • I �y o 540 • • r VII. W l � � tLx � • Y% c� a r l F._.... ...d • 1URHAMI' �' ` r CHATHAM t .• ' • E. • • • /■ I'i' 6 ,,Ii nm I. i. . Regional Composite Map - New Household Distribution - 32-Year Forecast (2013-2045) _ Study Area Boundary(TRM V.6) Interstate L _ j County Boundary US Hwy 0 Households >200 State Hwy Triangle J Council of Governments See table named "Connect 2045 - AIM High Output by Jurisdiction" Geographic Information Systems 1.25 2.5 5 for a summary of household and employment data allocated to individual 7.26.17 Miles cities, towns, and counties in the Triangle Region CommunityViz Model. Connect 2045 - Triangle Region Scena,cipIBb115rhltttjlg25/2017 Item52 Page 10 AIM High Scenario, Orange County V 1 _ _ — _ _ _ CASWELL -- I— —_ L pERS ORANGE — C cc a f • f • • • X571 1 I 1 ■`6 • • J a • 1 • 1- •■ •: - , ■ r %11 • •= le L 1 • F . • ! . !a 1 '■. •■ r 1 - . ;r' o a joi. i WI. • . j. • gir>IF= a • • .11 /1 \ / 5 0_, • • I 1 6.1._ III•mic ...41, ,z loirrik J 1 1 1 ■ r . ■ f_ i , _ _ 1 I • ■ ■ h '-• r r rim I • • ■ ..47 95 ■ . I 1 .in 4 • • 40,4 1 1\______ , 1 ■■ • ■ 1 r f iJn -•gip ME • _alli .54 , _ . .' -i,' 1r .. aF• ■ r= Connect 2045 - Triangle Region Scena,ciplcPtb115 pe 1g,5/2017 Item 528ge 11 AIM High Scenario, Chatham County ■ - 1 '' 1 ■ ■ r- � I( • ti • ■ i■ 1\ . 1 1�- w r 1 •Tx■ t r pr... ______ _____......_• • - - su ■ I ■ sL _ --.:I 11141' • • CHATHAM ALAMANCE • • ■ • % • • ■ • CH HAM = %el • • • ! • • , • • • •: ■ • ■Ira • 1 • • • 4 • • • • .. ;•■ ' 0 ■ • •• ■ ■ ■ •• ■ ■ 07 ■ . r V- - r 1� �� •- ■ • • •• ■ •■•■ _ 1 • • • - ti Ww11•5 -fir'._ = • 1 • , • I• • *0 4111 r r I 41. •ft • r / i • .le • • • • I • ' \ 1111 II ■ ! • 4 •�^ / ■ / \\ / ��P�// \\ ,�r�„. I • / 1 g/ r ) /,-P/&� ` --, 1 ` .zP�e7 1 \ c/ -P 1 / -- / -) /- i ✓ .` ^� \ / \ / -----14\ / / / 1 / Regional Composite Map - New Household Distribution - 32-Year Forecast (2013.2045) _ Study Area Boundary(TRM V.6) Interstate L _ j County Boundary US Hwy 0 Households >200 State Hwy Triangle J Council of Governments See table named "Connect 2045 - AIM High Output by Jurisdiction" Geographic Information Systems � 1.25 2.5 5 for a summary of household and employment data allocated to individual 7.26.17 Miles cities, towns, and counties in the Triangle Region CommunityViz Model. Connect 2045 - Triangle Region Scena,rio;�� , g25/2017 Item529ge12 AIM High Scenario, 5.1.17 f )010tift: 01° f ,� t 4ara _ yh f II %,. l• y. ,. a '.. 1 ."16111C :;::. . ,1 1. .• iirk —411111#4, / VIVI°. '''..}. ' "7—"../.': :'—. •• .. V 1/ 4 C' .T:'is if / r / �' 1 Vv • Iii !\!!sm, , t Regional Composite Map - New Employment Distribution - 32-Year Forecast (2013-2045) � County Boundaries Interstates/Freeways US Highways 0 Employees >1000 NC Highways See table named "Connect 2045 - AIM High Output by Jurisdiction" Triangle J Council of Governments ® " for a summary of household and employment data allocated to individual wes Geographic Information Systems cities, towns, and counties in the Triangle Region CommunityViz Model. Connect 2045 - Triangle Region ScenarcipicP peingQ 017 Item53POage13 AIM High Scenario, Durham County PERSS._______________,r ,,,,, gip, I 7 I ./I 1,1 5�1 1 :•,56 • • 06 f • I , I fr'i () • • ■■ -■1 . • iik r _ 1 4 , -.. • 4 ., -,....... 111\ i , rill.• 1 , 'b. 4 . r r :• JP I A .1k. Mil • i lov■ ...p_ r L IL 4' , , . %• >` ■ • 11 �" �,. -.4•1 4 I•J�.. / . I •� r, 540•• r • 1 s ` I i J 7 - . • Iii - }� • 0L°-��-- ---- 7 CHATHAM ti J 1.71— o■■ 1 .• ' — ■ -. , - ■17 /• 440 _ Regional Composite Map - New Employment Distribution - 32-Year Forecast (2013-2045) _ Study Area Boundary(TRM V.6) Interstate L _ j County Boundary US Hwy 0 Employees >1,000 State Hwy Triangle J Council of Governments See table named "Connect 2045 - AIM High Output by Jurisdiction" Geographic Information Systems i.zs z.5 5 for a summary of household and employment data allocated to individual 7.26.17 Miles cities, towns, and counties in the Triangle Region CommunityViz Model. Connect 2045 - Triangle Region ScenarcipicP ,peipli 7 Item53 Page 14 AIM High Scenario, Orange County 1 1 _ — — CASWELL — — — -- — _ — , — I PERS, , ORANGE --------- a 1 1 aCZ I oro 1 49 1 J i j ,6 r al r / i 1 r l r 1 r MIL ... 15 r 1 r'■ ' • I r • 1 - 1 �r1 I a o w w a z .. ` • 2 a a r a 0 R J I :\ •• 47 .: I I w - ®�! 40, 1 I . . •• I I 4 4 L • la r . I FP . 1111) ien tit � 3- ilk n r~ �� g1f .•I 1 �� ` — _y °L°_------ _—-- J + -WA CHATHAM 1 ' ALAMANCE • 7 CH HAM ;3 /■ 'j-; Regional Composite Map - New Employment Distribution - 32-Year Forecast (2013-2045) _ Study Area Boundary(TRM V.6) Interstate al iliol L - County Boundary US Hwy 0 Employees >1,000 State Hwy Triangle J Council of Governments See table named "Connect 2045 - AIM High Output by Jurisdiction" 0 Geographic Information Systems 1.25 2.5 5 for a summary of household and employment data allocated to individual 7.26.17 Miles cities, towns, and counties in the Triangle Region CommunityViz Model. Connect 2045 - Triangle Region Scena,ciplcPtb115 pL 1g,5/2017 Item 532 15 AIM High Scenario, Chatham County I • -11136-! - . • f ti t wI \ T gilt - - CH HAM---- ----11 ALAMANCE r r r CH HAM s I 5C / // n r r I / • .f / ml . / ilkk r �• / 1• , • ---'114— 141* — 1 •• ' z /I • / . 1 ito ~ / ■ / • • I 74i \ • C3 f / J-• I 1' • --'� / // \\ / ,•z" \■ �ir��. I c ,. wgK / 1 g/---- 4, ---- r ) /,-/k, ` --— 1 ` .zP/e� 1 \ c/ -P 1 1 i�f \ / �--i5 / ✓ e2 • N. \ / ------\ / 1 / Regional Composite Map - New Employment Distribution - 32-Year Forecast (2013-2045) _ Study Area Boundary(TRM V.6) Interstate L _ j County Boundary US Hwy 0 Employees >1,000 State Hwy Triangle J Council of Governments See table named "Connect 2045 - AIM High Output by Jurisdiction" Geographic Information Systems 1.zs 2.5 5 for a summary of household and employment data allocated to individual 7.26.17 Miles cities, towns, and counties in the Triangle Region CommunityViz Model. Highways Background The highway and interchange projects to be included in the Preferred Option are shown in the maps and tables below. Projects were selected based on their ability to promote the MPO’s draft Goals and Objectives and the expected availability of funding. The MTP designates and funds the highway projects by the decade in which the project will be completed for operation, i.e., current to 2025, 2026 to 2035 and 2036 to 2045. This designation helps demonstrate that the MTP is accountable to the federal fiscal constraint requirement. The North Carolina Strategic Transportation Investments (STI) funding tiers, i.e., St = statewide, Reg = regional or Div = division, are identified to abide by the current state funding process. For the most part, new and upgraded interchanges are assumed to be part of the highway projects that are listed and therefore are not commonly listed separately. However, the fiscal year 2018-2027 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) has listed eight new or upgraded interchanges as separate projects from the highway project. The 2045 MTP highway map and table show these as separate projects, as well. Highway Map The highway map on the next page shows the proposed highway improvements for the 2045 MTP. An interactive online map is also available at the Preferred tab on the 2045 MTP Web page: www.bit.ly/DCHC-MTP The DCHC MPO adopted a multimodal Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) in May 2017, which contains a larger set of proposed projects because the CTP is not fiscally-constrained. See the interactive online map called Highways and Intersections at the following link to view the CTP highways that were considered for possible inclusion in the 2045 MTP: www.bit.ly/DCHCMPO-Adopted-CTP Highway Table The highway table breaks the projects into the three funding decades, i.e., 2025, 2035 and 2045, and then lists them alphabetically. Page 16 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 33 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) 34 Preferred Option Highways Technical Committee 10/25/201PdgartlS -- land Eno River a t State Park + Falls Lake Hillsborough n r urnstend Ra • ii i'� �r°� •` Hebron Rd •♦ ! - P ♦• �� ood qd I a t7 Q ♦♦ ...—. peg • .. �G r : I _ Cary er St Old NCgp ? - LS JO.g Croas.i Ile v � oro ♦•♦ tt R ' Country a a Club a Club Bwd fer r°`Q Cheek Q`b z as m = a' a »► r` w Club m �" � N Mt Srn:v,p m Duke 0��3. Pa Ci eta ! Durham 4rbi ur do aS= z a Falls•d rlla•r �O r E Pa • '1�r�rFi eld CiJ ? _¢._.-t.'=- -_ �rto L.rwssn St � r Craaia ......�.r Oa/r • • m s S Rd ° Riddle . o ci `sv a 2V J9IV D �. • 1 .:,ttP •. .,do mo L �a •� o T Ca • z a Nona N Esr. _ ^.o - •s 04'9h 3 9 TY,j ql ex ander Or 2 �vMa".s/ Chapel Hill • �� '� / a �..... .. / Brier Creek ° -. Caflbor0 u'_ • ♦ - •`♦•.. / Country C lub 7^ ago / a 7z �• oa r ' • / Ra Q-b l \qa a StagACn94 R 'C Shows only interchange projects that re independent`;pfthe highway projec m° Q New/Upgraded Interchange Goeerners ,ild Expressway Conversion Club �halhm yCh�u°I'?. v w Freeway Conversion Lsna a 1V Modernization New Location Sources: Esri, HERE, Del-orme, USGS, Intermap,increment ....... (Hong Kong), Esri(Thailand),TomTom, Mapmylndia,©Open Widening H°� Community 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) Preferred Option -- Highway Project List Highway Project From To Existing Lanes Proposed Lanes Improvement Type Length (miles) Estimated Cost STI Funding Source 2025 MTP Brier Creek Pkwy Extension T.W. Alexander Dr Andrew's Chapel Rd - 4 New Location 0.4 3,990,000 Div Private Carver St Ext*Armfield St Old Oxford Rd - 4 New Location 1.0 8,185,000 Div State/Fed East End Connector (EEC)*NC 147 US 70 - 4 New Location 3.6 140,700,000 St State/Fed Eubanks Rd MLK Blvd (NC 86)Millhouse Rd 2 4 Widening 0.8 7,487,000 Div State/Fed Fayetteville Rd Barbee Rd Cornwallis Rd 2 4 Widening 1.0 3,374,000 Div State/Fed Fayetteville Rd Woodcroft Pkwy Barbee Rd 2 4 Widening 1.3 4,661,000 Div State/Fed Fordham Blvd (US 15-501)I-40 Franklin St 4 4 Modernization 1.6 2,052,000 St State/Fed Freeland Memorial Extension S Churton St New Collector Rd - 2 New Location 0.5 3,203,000 Div Private I-40/NC 86 Interchange - - Upgrade N/A 16,500,000 St State/Fed I-40 (westbound auxiliary lane)NC 147 NC 55 6 7 Widening 1.2 3,850,000 St State/Fed Legion Rd Ext Legion Rd Fordham Blvd - 2 New Location 0.1 1,500,000 Div Private Lynn Rd/Pleasant Dr Connector Lynn Rd Pleasant Dr - 2 New Location 0.6 3,651,000 Div Private NC 147 (Operational Improvements)Briggs Ave W Chapel Hill St 4 4 To Be Determined 1.7 58,400,000 St State/Fed NC 147 (possible Managed Lanes)East End Conn I-40 4 8 Widening 4.9 179,248,000 St State/Fed NC 54 Old Fayetteville Rd MPO Boundary 2 3 Widening 2.9 14,457,000 Reg State/Fed NC 55 (Alston Ave)*NC 147 Main St 2 4 Widening 0.4 13,934,000 Reg State/Fed NC 55 (Alston Ave)*Main St NC 98 2 2 Modernization 0.5 17,252,000 Reg State/Fed New Collector Rd Orange Grove Rd Ext Becketts Ridge Rd - 2 New Location 0.8 7,232,000 Div State/Fed/ Private Orange Grove Connector Orange Grove Rd US 70 - 2 New Location 0.4 5,299,000 Div State/Fed Purefoy Rd Ext Sandberg Ln Weaver Dairy Rd - 2 New Location 0.6 3,777,000 Div Private S Elliot Rd Ext Fordham Blvd Ephesus Church Rd - 2 New Location 0.3 4,230,000 Div State/Fed/ Private US 70 (freeway conversion)Pleasant Dr S Miami Blvd 4 6 Freeway 1.6 111,020,000 St State/Fed Woodcroft Pkwy Ext Garrett Rd Hope Valley Rd - 2 New Location 0.2 2,219,000 Div State/Fed US 15-501/Garrett Rd Interchange - - New Interchange N/A 71,200,000 St State/Fed US 70/Miami Bvld Interchange - - New Interchange N/A 46,621,000 St State/Fed STI roadway tier: St = statewide; Reg = regional; Div = division Page 18 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 35 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) Preferred Option -- Highway Project List Highway Project From To Existing Lanes Proposed Lanes Improvement Type Length (miles) Estimated Cost STI Funding Source 2035 MTP Danziger Dr Extension Mt Moriah Rd E Lakewood Dr - 2 New Location 0.4 5,127,000 Div State/Fed Erwin Rd Cameron Blvd W Main St 4 4 Modernization 1.8 12,025,000 Div Private Falconbridge Rd Connector Falconbridge Rd Farrington Rd - 2 New Location 0.2 1,227,000 Div State/Fed Falconbridge Rd Extension Farrington Rd NC 54 - 4 New Location 0.9 16,685,000 Div State/Fed/ Private Farrington to I-40 eastbound slip ramp Farrington Rd I-40 - 1 New Location 0.1 1,600,000 Div State/Fed Fordham Blvd (US 15-501)NC 54 Franklin Street 4 4 Modernization 2.1 45,498,000 St State/Fed Fordham Blvd (US 15-501)NC 54 US 15-501 4 4 Modernization 2.2 49,832,000 St State/Fed Fordham Blvd/Raleigh Rd Interchange - - Upgrade N/A 14,800,000 St State/Fed Fordham Blvd/S Columbia St Interchange - - Upgrade N/A 35,000,000 St State/Fed Garrett Rd NC 751 Old Durham Rd 2 4 Widening 2.1 16,064,000 Div State/Fed Homestead Rd Old NC 86 Rogers Rd 2 2 Modernization 2.1 10,234,000 Div State/Fed Homestead Rd Rogers Rd NC 86 2 2 Modernization 1.3 6,855,000 Div State/Fed Hope Valley Rd (NC 751)S Roxboro St Woodcroft Parkway 2 4 Widening 0.3 2,716,000 Reg State/Fed Hopson Rd Davis Dr S Miami Blvd (NC 54) 2 4 Widening 0.7 5,200,000 Div State/Fed I-40 NC 86 I-85 4 6 Widening 7.8 58,784,000 St State/Fed I-40 US 15-501 NC 86 4 6 Widening 3.9 29,316,000 St State/Fed I-40 Managed Lanes Wake County Line NC 147 8 10 Widening 7.0 446,464,000 St State/Fed I-40/NC 54 Interchange - - Upgrade N/A 94,100,000 St State/Fed I-40/ NC 54 ramp Farrington Rd.I-40 - 1 New Location 0.2 1,600,000 St State/Fed I-85/NC 86 Interchange - - Upgrade N/A 16,488,000 St State/Fed I-85/S Churton St Interchange - - Upgrade N/A 20,700,000 St State/Fed Jack Bennet Rd/Lystra Rd US 15-501 South Farrington Mill/Point Rd 2 2 Modernization 4.1 20,567,000 Div State/Fed Lake Hogan Farms Rd Eubanks Rd Legends Way - 2 New Location 0.7 4,407,000 Div State/Fed/ Private Marriott Way Friday Center Dr Barbree Chapel Rd - 2 New Location 0.2 682,000 Div State/Fed NC 54 Fordham Blvd (US 15- 501)Barbee Chapel Rd 6 6 Modernization 1.2 32,106,000 Reg State/Fed NC 54 I-40 Interchange NC 751 2 4 Widening 1.2 32,000,000 Reg State/Fed NC 54 NC 751 Rollingwood Dr 2 4 Widening 1.5 21,600,000 Reg State/Fed STI roadway tier: St = statewide; Reg = regional; Div = division Page 19 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 36 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) Preferred Option -- Highway Project List Highway Project From To Existing Lanes Proposed Lanes Improvement Type Length (miles) Estimated Cost STI Funding Source NC 54 Fayetteville Barbee 2 4 Widening 1.0 46,800,000 Reg State/Fed NC 54 Barbee NC 55 2 4 Widening 1.3 46,400,000 Reg State/Fed NC 54 (widening; superstreet)I-40 Barbee Chapel Rd 4 6 Widening 1.6 9,100,000 Reg State/Fed NC 55 (Alston Ave)Main St NC 98 2 4 Modernization 0.5 1,000 Reg State/Fed New Hope Commons Dr Extension Eastowne Dr New Hope Commons Dr - 2 New Location 0.4 4,588,000 Div State/Fed Roxboro St Cornwallis Rd MLK Pkwy - 4 New Location 1.2 12,063,000 Div State/Fed S Churton St US 70 Business I-40 2 4 Widening 2.4 31,825,000 Div State/Fed Southwest Durham Dr NC 54 I-40 - 2 New Location 2.0 12,402,000 Div State/Fed University Dr MLK Parkway Shannon Rd 5 4 Modernization 0.5 768,000 Div Private US 70 (freeway conversion)S Miami Blvd Northern Durham Parkway 4 6 Freeway 2.5 173,469,000 St State/Fed 2045 MTP Angier Av Ext US 70 Leesville Rd - 2 New Location 0.8 4,784,000 Div State/Fed Angier/Glover Connector Ellis Rd Glover Rd - 2 New Location 1.4 8,625,000 Div State/Fed Crown Pkwy/Roche Dr Page Rd T.W. Alexander Dr - 2 New Location 2.7 11,041,000 Div State/Fed Eno Mountain Rd realignment Mayo St Eno Mountain Rd - 2 New Location 0.3 2,015,000 Div State/Fed Garrett Rd Old Durham Rd US 15-501 2 4 Widening 1.0 7,761,000 Div State/Fed Glover Rd Angier US 70 - 2 New Location 0.6 3,714,000 Div State/Fed Hebron Rd Extension Hebron Rd Roxboro Rd (501 N) - 2 New Location 0.5 3,612,000 Div State/Fed/ Private Holloway St (NC 98)Miami Blvd Nichols Farm Dr 4 4 Modernization 3.3 17,705,000 Reg State/Fed Hopson Rd Louis Stephens Dr Davis Dr 2 4 Widening 1.1 9,195,000 Div State/Fed I-40 Managed Lane NC 54 US 15-501 6 8 Widening 2.9 85,621,000 St State/Fed I-40 Managed Lanes NC 147 NC 54 6 10 Widening 6.4 250,290,000 St State/Fed I-85 US 70 I-40 4 6 Widening 7.1 197,378,000 St State/Fed I-85 US 70 Red Mill Rd 4 6 Widening 8.2 215,940,000 St State/Fed I-85 Sparger Rd US 70 4 6 Widening 3.0 39,118,000 St State/Fed Leesville Rd Ext US 70/Page Rd Ext Leesville Rd - 2 New Location 0.4 2,644,000 Div State/Fed Lynn Rd Extension US 70 Existing Lynn Rd - 2 New Location 1.1 6,862,000 Div State/Fed Mt Carmel Ch Rd US 15-501 Bennett Rd 2 2 Modernization 0.4 1,997,000 Div State/Fed N Duke St (501 N)I-85 N Roxboro split 5 4 Modernization 2.5 13,279,000 Reg State/Fed STI roadway tier: St = statewide; Reg = regional; Div = division Page 20 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 37 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) Preferred Option -- Highway Project List Highway Project From To Existing Lanes Proposed Lanes Improvement Type Length (miles) Estimated Cost STI Funding Source NC 751 Renaissance Pkwy O'Kelly Chapel Rd 2 4 Widening 2.7 21,697,000 Reg State/Fed/ Private NC 751 Martha's Chapel Rd O'Kelly Ch. Rd 2 3 Modernization 5.4 9,648,000 Reg State/Fed NC 751 NC 54 Renaissance Pkwy 2 4 Widening 1.2 5,290,000 Reg State/Fed NC 86 Old NC 10 US 70 Business 2 4 Widening 0.9 7,259,000 Reg State/Fed/ Private Northern Durham Pkwy US 70 E Sherron Rd - 4 New Location 2.7 23,500,000 Div State/Fed Northern Durham Pkwy I 85 North Old Oxford Hwy - 4 New Location 2.7 23,291,000 Div State/Fed Patriot Dr Extension S Miami Blvd Page Rd - 2 New Location 1.9 13,086,000 Div State/Fed Roxboro Rd (501 N)Duke St Goodwin Rd 4 4 Modernization 2.7 14,574,000 Reg State/Fed Sherron Rd S Mineral Springs Rd Stallings Rd 2 4 Widening 3.1 25,003,000 Div State/Fed Southwest Durham Dr US 15-501 Business Mt Moriah Rd - 4 New Location 0.4 3,667,000 Div State/Fed/ Private SW Durham Dr Sawyer Dr Old Chapel Hill Rd 2 4 Widening 0.7 5,432,000 Div State/Fed US 15-501 Smith Level Rd MPO Boundary 4 4 Modernization 4.9 25,673,000 St State/Fed US 15-501 (expressway conversion)US 15-501 Bypass I-40 6 6 Expressway 2.2 195,300,000 St State/Fed US 15-501 Bypass MLK Parkway I-85 4 6 Widening 4.8 80,734,000 St State/Fed Wake Forest Hwy (NC 98)Nichols Farm Dr Wake County Line 2 4 Widening 6.0 48,474,000 Reg State/Fed Yates Store Rd Extension Yates Store Rd Wake Rd - 2 New Location 1.4 11,519,000 Div State/Fed/ Private (1) East End Connector costs are $35,175,000, and Alston Ave and Carver St costs are $0 in the financial plan because the funding is before 2018. STI roadway tier: St = statewide; Reg = regional; Div = division Page 21 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 38 Public Transportation Summary As a basis, the 2045 MTP adopts the transit services as approved in the county plans: Durham County Transit Plan, originally approved in 2011 and updated April 28, 2017. The detailed plan is available at http://ourtransitfuture.com/plans/durham/ Orange County Transit Plan, originally approved in 2012 and updated April 28, 2017. The detailed plan is available at http://ourtransitfuture.com/plans/orange/ The plans include major projects such as Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit (D-O LRT) and Wake- Durham Commuter Rail (CRT), but do not include specific programmed bus facility or service projects beyond 2023. The bus services operating in the DCHC MPO in 2045 reflect the MPO’s best predictions of transit services operating at that time. The 2045 MTP makes two notable transit investments that exceed the county transit plans: The Wake-Durham Commuter Rail Transit (CRT) is extended from West Durham to Hillsborough in the 2045 timeframe; and, The Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit (LRT) is extended from Chapel Hill to downtown Carrboro. Durham County Services The program of projects and services in the Durham County Transit Plan include the following: Bus Services Already Implemented Additional Bus Service (including new routes, increases in frequency, etc.) GoTriangle, 7,640 annual service hours GoDurham, 24,350 annual service hours Planned Additional Bus Service GoTriangle, 6,260 annual service hours Durham County Access, 7,896 annual demand responsive trips The Durham County Transit Plan also supports the increased cost of existing GoDurham service – e.g., the increased cost of providing service that GoDurham provided before the transit plan was implemented. About 9,000 existing annual service hours are assisted with Durham County Transit Plan funds. An anticipated 15,000 – 27,500 additional bus service hours may be available following implementation of D-O LRT. These “rail dividend hours” reflect bus service currently Page 22 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 39 operating in the D-O LRT corridor that could be redirected to meet other Durham County transit priorities. Bus Capital Projects The purchase of new vehicles (and subsequent replacement) to support the service funded by the Durham County Transit Plan. Bus facility improvements to facilitate transit access and improve the customer experience, including new park-and-ride lots, stop improvements and other capital investments along transit emphasis corridors, new transit centers, and stop improvements. Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit (D-O LRT) – 2028 estimated completion date Light rail transit service between UNC Hospitals in Chapel Hill and North Carolina Central University (NCCU) in Durham, providing 50,000 hours of transit service. Project includes bicycle, pedestrian and bus infrastructure improvements along the alignment. Wake-Durham Commuter Rail (CRT) – 2035 estimated completion date Commuter rail service linking Durham, RTP, Cary, Raleigh and Garner. The service will be funded in coordination with Wake County. Wake-Durham Commuter Rail Extension (CRT) – 2045 estimated completion date Commuter rail service will be extended from West Durham to Hillsborough, with a station at NC 10/US 70 area and S Churton St/US 70 Business. This extension is not in the Durham County Transit Plan. It will be financed in the last decade of the 2045 MTP by assuming that legislative restrictions that currently restrict funding that can be used for transit will be repealed. Orange County Services The program of projects and services in the Orange County Transit Plan include the following: Bus Services Already Implemented Additional Bus Service (including new routes, increases in frequency, etc.) Orange Public Transit, 4,500 annual service hours GoTriangle, 6,708 annual service hours Chapel Hill Transit, 6,427 annual service hours Planned Additional Bus Service Orange Public Transit, 2,387 annual service hours GoTriangle, 1,492 annual service hours Chapel Hill Transit, 6,392 annual service hours Page 23 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 40 The Orange County Transit Plan also supports the increased cost of existing Orange Public Transit and Chapel Hill Transit services – e.g., the increased cost of providing Orange Public Transit and Chapel Hill Transit service that was provided before the transit plan was implemented. About 9,000 existing annual service hours are assisted with Orange County Transit Plan funds. An anticipated 30,000 – 45,000 additional bus service hours may be available following implementation of D-O LRT. These “rail dividend hours” reflect bus service currently operating in the D-O LRT corridor that could be redirected to meet other Orange County transit priorities. Bus Capital Projects The purchase of new vehicles (and subsequent replacement) to support the service funded by the Orange County Transit Plan. Bus facility improvements to facilitate transit access and improve the customer experience, including new park-and-ride lots, improved transit amenities, and access improvements (e.g. new sidewalks) to bus stops. Hillsborough Train Station – 2020 completion date The station will be served by two Amtrak passenger routes. North-South Bus Rapid Transit (N-S BRT) – 2023 estimated completion date Bus rapid transit service using a mix of dedicated and mixed-traffic lanes between the Eubanks Road and Southern Village park-and-ride facilities, with direct service to UNC Hospitals. Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit (D-O LRT) – 2028 estimated completion date Light rail transit service between UNC Hospitals in Chapel Hill and North Carolina Central University (NCCU) in Durham, providing 50,000 hours of transit service. Project includes bicycle, pedestrian and bus infrastructure improvements along the alignment. Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Extension (D-O LRT) – 2045 est. completion date Light rail transit will be extended from the UNC Hospitals station to a station near Main Street in Carrboro. The route, along S Columbia St and W Cameron Ave, is a conceptual placeholder until further study can be completed. This extension is not in the Orange County Transit Plan. It will be financed in the last decade of the 2045 MTP by assuming that legislative restrictions that currently restrict funding that can be used for transit will be repealed. Wake-Durham Commuter Rail Extension (CRT) – 2045 estimated completion date Commuter rail service will be extended from West Durham to Hillsborough, with a station at NC 10/US 70 area and S Churton St/US 70 Business. This extension is not in Page 24 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 41 the Orange County Transit Plan. It will be financed in the last decade of the 2045 MTP by assuming that legislative restrictions that currently restrict funding that can be used for transit will be repealed. Chatham County Services The express bus services from Pittsboro to UNC and the UNC Hospitals will be improved in frequency and service hours. Bus stops and stations will be increased and improved. Fixed Guideway Maps The following three pages are MPO-level, Durham close-up and Chapel Hill/Carrboro close-up maps of the fixed-guideway services in the Preferred Option. Fixed guideway includes light rail transit, commuter rail transit and bus rapid transit. An interactive, online map is also available at the Fixed-Guideway map tile at the top of the following MTP Web page: www.bit.ly/DCHC-MTP-Preferred Page 25 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 42 re r w ,..0 0 re '411111111111111111( .-.� A� 2 U o m N c r z LJxJ �, w Ern a) w (7 n 0) c L j a;' _.1- - t O c O 5 (n _1 _1 Q_' Q_' Q_' r ,J y = 0 $/1/9 �C� n o N Et I— I— W s661s0 S-fl b. z 0 J O 0 0 O O CO r-. > u' Q = a d E • , I I I 1 I n A o �40 ✓ a Is z Q Co In u;. a a kc�i �' a Co- g .i �^I k- I Q 2 _ ,, �/� U m J � 7)0_ U `? o viii N Q i keStk ay C. �� C N it w O o 1 t Deo,. �P E E VN • L 'DJ.. l�attic A °' m A 0_ z, ' ° ls�a av 5Japu d a a ''-. 4aay u vaa.•PucJIH , N e.1j - a ai E p&dw „ v E p , o O J 0 . ` v 8 I 7 a / C Z w` C in ., "p o U Q- r F- re Q )1::; K $ IA I- .N io ago ` _ � ttRd HaeYal Rd •—a - O Lm, � CO �Q A J 'I D O 2 O c - 2 0018 0144 Co v I— uL _ 1 u,,,,, _,. . 4 % AL d s — -I- Q O O a P - i � -1—• °=o _ F. — _ _N o tii I Ld a"S' SAPs 1.^I a m C�B U > N 2 0 .c 3 R W ptae y Tile " Z r N ! rZ • /+ � PN 82Uei — O o a o Sale (0 CO c 1 �y `� 5 z a . is r = 3 9140 e o o c A 2 01 I° ti ti Z 4 - - N y is 3 d 0) oo co ` a d.Old f aYff a. U a �\\�Sb f"ri ii C co N 0 Z IS ylagezil1 N +� `c, aa) n 1 w c -�= N _ V - a� wD J c w G -`- S ofp9xu N - / Q 71-N o iS U��i�Ue `�N /1/ Q 0 2 LP in U) _1 Et and alepual� wH =ca o in 3 ,:0 �, 0 - v; N Et Et o J U D U U y �N •E 2 N o > -, N 0. w 5 o • a l I o i a r ,o E • z c a qxo 0 o w Y E E is Ialsod o0 u' w z o- Q r 4�w 2 v) is F «uo E= . s ca .'4a14,0 S - c , Ua) ih- 3 t, = p a CL . � iS arinO N iV �� - - fO o c JS 4�nos o 2 ,� Q m o ,1, is uosfiaiJ N � � o '� IS a)111 '—' E i Q (s I 2 r Pnlg ueueihng N m _ = :>4)AV saa�olA \_�� 0 ../.* i>0.1c J� ai i vfj C I 1 _ ryd'b a) iS Peon® f J w - n w c' t •1S 41f p a�b�l��r cr c E vi Y g L.L = z S 2 0)E - U C ++ > 3 Q O O o C co r o L' “i1 a CUlfo il':J ; -' ) v IS saWer 4 ^' N y 1 > _ O d a, 0 Z. a• Q ;ug 0 E > n X s U CO o 0 `off e a '' any euieyely c �'0 . @ rS00414?,,, a) O ^' 0 0 - 4 W Q b C Q 'X °' 4.4) O� a r5 ?s,M O LL m iy .4/NJ ♦L-+ 1 �j. P8 aleput fl ` �r� la��4j Illr' C •1 Lid 0— 1 L a O —0 ca a P8IIaMOOpw N a)4- E . o a) - 1SaNCSeiS „Ls Ao �- 'f•, moo'' 0 is . , I, 4 f V 0co 0 p \may y (O]d J D l� I--. h9orre ° - 'tis - _ ''- - r cr S` a di„ 7.24 i 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) 45 Page 28 Technical Committee 1 /25/2017 Ite 5 Preferred Option -- Fixed Guideway Projects -- Chapel Hill/Carrboro Close-up North-South BRT Stations Oak ft Eubanks Road P&R SVCt`ya • LRT Stations Rd D-0 LRT v D-O LRT Route Extension Greer Weaver Dairy Rd(s) SWeete 'ra • BRT Route S,y„aver Dairy Rd • b s ew Parkside Drive A �-- �d Cedar Falls IV O 1 v pry,pi..• I CC r 1-0, Homestead -9 l ` Rd r3aY�3Wn Rd Q� of in t5'' �,� n 5 ` Q P, Northfield Drive a o °` l ate •y g yr ■ g = - Old Durham Rd F N o C O' m t Q``^ e *c° 42-0,` a --Or cb I rr Piney Mountain Rd s��� �� o �Qc ms Ram ' Estes Drive N Elliott Rd N Estes Or The tiD race Shops at Williams a Airport Library Park Ea stgap Ephesus Church Rd _ .0' 1-' = 1 tStes tc�aY St ' Bur late Wtlloy, e\Or c, p 0 Cir j 5 O G S ”" Hillsborough Street SFSr"So o i °�'°k 1 E .- ,._ IE % JOC r.. w `. dams O rrac t cc3 'r tea• _ � .:+= B O _ i , Cleland Dr 1 o _ `y o Lancaster p ° x a rocis` o o u = I Sf e3 3 L tyosS\ Chapel Hill l Chapel ill l; P µ g o a g ° Country Franklin Street c• o N it,-'o Clot, r a a t >ro Carr:ro Station, Cameron Avenue ° z = r` `l'1 utn Rd 2 s° // m t u c Li Pit ••r• -et/Creclit,U, Carrington Hall z _ '1 g e�Oc"3°\e ta`dte <� Hamilton Road 2 4' Manning/East ',,,, • . Center Drive W.. . ont 5�¢� t UNC HAS. als • 'itSon Circle/Mason Farm rd c° 3 - - a. 41 Mason Fa oad rd�d&Orr Farm Rd fi� a dsO'r Faun R. -- - Finley Y NC 54 Kings Mill Rd r,:" I I .e \ _ , W.- Off` ed b Cu/toren,Rci , r reth ee cb ../Blur/ op./ q�■ PJ \ I NT Bayberry Or Him ao Oc o .1=1 �� Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap,increment P Corp., NRCAN, Esri So em Village P&R 4-,, Q3`Kei Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri(Thailand),TomTom, Mapmylndia, o • ;;' c�� ' OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community Bicycle, Pedestrian and Multiuse Paths Summary The 2045 MTP does not specifically list the bicycle and pedestrian projects. The local jurisdictions and counties have identified, and in many cases prioritized these projects and have coordinated their interaction in the jurisdiction boundary areas through the DCHC MPO. As a result, the 2045 MTP defers to those local governments. The financial plan provides $225 million to implement these projects; that is $75 million for each decade in the 2045 MTP. Local Plans Bicycle The DCHC MPO adopted a Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) in May 2017 in cooperation with the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT). The CTP lists all the local bicycle projects from the jurisdiction and county plans in the MPO area. CTP Web site: http://bit.ly/DCHCMPO-Adopted-CTP The local plans provide details on the planned facilities at the following links: Carrboro Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan (2009) -- http://bit.ly/1PeRnsI Chapel Hill Bike Plan (2014) -- http://bit.ly/1uGbDZ5 Chatham County Bicycle Plan (2011) -- http://bit.ly/1TSdlUv Durham City and County Comprehensive Bicycle Plan (2006) -- http://bit.ly/1UCSlDz Hillsborough Community Connectivity Plan (2009) -- http://bit.ly/1Uan3VO Pedestrian Local pedestrian plans include: Chapel Hill Bicycle and Pedestrian Action Plan (2004) -- http://bit.ly/28gbvqi Durham Walks! Pedestrian Plan (2006) -- http://bit.ly/1Y66mfG Durham Bike+Walk Implementation Plan (2017) -- http://bit.ly/2p2yHJS Hillsborough Community Connectivity Plan (2009) -- http://bit.ly/1Uan3VO MPO Policy The MPO bicycle and pedestrian policy basically expects any roadway or other transportation project, whether it is a new or improved facility, to include appropriate pedestrian and bicycle accommodations. That policy provides extensive integration of bicycle and pedestrian needs into the design and construction of new and improved highway and other transportation projects. In addition, the “NCDOT Complete Streets Planning and Design Guidelines” and other Page 29 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 46 related guidelines provide planning and design guidance for use when building new projects or making changes to existing infrastructure. Page 30 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 47 Financial Plan Background and Assumptions The MPO created and reviewed three financial projections in the Alternatives Analysis: Constrained; Moderate; and, Optimistic (formerly known as Aspirational). The Preferred Option uses the Optimistic financial projection, and breaks out the Costs and Revenues by the funding decades, i.e., 2025, 2035 and 2045. It is important to note that the financial plan abides by the North Carolina STI (Strategic Transportation Investment) legislation and policy in the first two decades, i.e., 2025 and 2035. In the third decade, 2045, the financial plan assumes that statewide and national policy would relax restrictions on the use of funding for transit projects, and permit the use of some traditional highway funding to be used to extend the Commuter Rail Transit (CRT) and Light Rail Transit (LRT) lines. The text below provides notes for the financial table that follows the text. There are two graphs after the financial table that depict major financial themes. Cost Table Roadways and Alternative Transportation The roadway costs are broken out by the three North Carolina STI (Strategic Transportation Investment) funding tiers to abide by the current state policy. The highway costs mostly use TIP estimates, recent feasibility studies, or the 2016 NCDOT highway cost workbook to calculate the individual project cost. Maintenance costs are based on the STI and NCDOT statewide plan. The estimated alternative transportation costs are shown for Bicycle and Pedestrian, Transportation Demand Management (TDM), Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), and Transportation System Management (TSM). These programs do not have individual projects listed in the 2045 MTP and thus the program cost is a single estimate rather than the sum of the listed projects. The assumed STI tier is also shown in parenthesis in the program title. Transit The transit costs and revenues are based on the Durham County Transit Plan and Orange County Transit Plan that were recently updated in 2017. The costs are broken out by existing and new/expanded services because of the policy of those plans and the funding restrictions of the revenue sources. Page 31 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 48 Additional Transit These are costs that are not included in the county plan transit costs. The transit funding match is a regional cost for the state capital match for the Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit project. The extension of the CRT and LRT are regional funds that the MPO assumes will be available for transit capital and other expenses in the last decade of the 2045 MTP. Currently, the STI regional funds are capped at 10% of the total project cost for transit projects, which would not allow the STI funding to be used for these extensions. However, the MPO assumes that this restriction would be repealed as urban areas like those in the MPO become increasingly reliant on public transportation to provide sustainable transportation. Revenue Table STI/Local/Private The STI revenues are based on the Optimistic financial scenario and abide by the STI requirements and methodology throughout the entire 2045 MTP, or the year 2045. Maintenance revenues match the costs. Local funding are estimates based on the current 2040 MTP and a modest growth rate. CMAQ funding is based on the STI. Private funding is mostly summed from the 2045 MTP highway projects that are expected to be constructed by private concerns. Transit The transit costs and revenues are based on the Durham County Transit Plan and Orange County Transit Plan that were recently updated in 2017. Balance Table This table is a tool to help guide changes in the project lists and financial plan during the public input period of the Preferred Option. It shows the balance (i.e., revenue minus cost) by STI tier and decade. The values in parenthesis are negative, meaning that the costs are greater than the revenues. Page 32 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 49 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan Draft Preferred Option -- Financial Plan COSTS Uses Optimistic Financial Projection (in millions $) Roadways & Alternative Transportation 2025 2035 2045 Total Roadways (statewide)480 1,048 1,090 2,618 Roadways (regional)24 192 138 354 Roadways (division)53 167 209 429 Maintenance (all)874 1,242 1,409 3,525 Bicycle & Pedestrian (division)90 90 90 270 Transportation Demand Management (division)13 13 13 38 Intelligent Transportation Systems (statewide)20 20 20 60 Transportation System Management (all)40 40 40 120 Total Roadway and Alternate 1,592 2,812 3,009 7,414 Transit Continued Transit Funding to Support Existing Services 386 482 482 1,350 Funding for New/Expanded Transit Services 1,261 1,207 471 2,939 Additional Transit Transit funding match, etc. (regional)95 96 - 191 Extend CRT from West Durham to Hillsborough (regional)- - 173 173 Extend LRT from Chapel Hill to Carrboro (regional)75 75 Total Transit 1,742 1,785 1,201 4,728 Total Costs 3,334 4,597 4,210 12,141 REVENUES STI/Local/Private 2025 2035 2045 Total STI (statewide)542 898 981 2,421 STI (regional)132 373 423 928 STI (division)122 228 256 606 Maintenance (all)874 1,242 1,409 3,525 Toll Revenue (statewide)0.1 196 - 196 Local Funding (bicycle/pedestrian) (division)35 20 20 75 Local Funding (roadway) (division)25 25 25 75 Private Funds (division)27 30 24 81 CMAQ Funding (division)17 18 15 49 Total STI/Local/Private 1,773 3,029 3,153 7,956 Page 33 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 50 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan Draft Preferred Option -- Financial Plan Transit Continued Transit Funding to Support Existing Services 386 482 482 1,350 Funding for New/Expanded Transit Services 1,261 1,207 471 2,939 Total Transit 1,647 1,689 953 4,289 Total Revenues 3,420 4,719 4,106 12,244 (parenthesis are negative values) BALANCE 2025 2035 2045 Total Statewide 32 15 (139) (92) Regional (7) 65 17 75 Division 61 41 18 120 Total Balance 86 121 (104) 103 Page 34 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 51 52 Technical Committee 10/25/2017 Item 5 Graphics The bar chart below shows the percent of the total investment by mode for each of the three decades. Transit investments are relatively larger in the first two decades because of the large capital investments in light rail and commuter rail. 100% 90% 80% 70% Bike/Ped/TDM 60% Transit 50% 40% Roadway Maintenance 30% Roadway 20% Improvements 10% 0% i I I 2025 2035 2045 The pie graph below shows the percent of total investment, i.e., 2025, 2035 and 2045, by mode. Roadway improvements and roadway maintenance are the same. The transit, bicycle, pedestrian and TDM investment is less than one-half of the total, 42%. It is difficult to get these investments higher and continue to mostly abide to the STI funding restrictions. Total MTP Costs by Mode Bike/Ped/TDM 3% Roadway Transit Improvements 39% 29% Roadway Maintenance 29% Page 35