Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOUTBoard agenda 092017 AGENDA Orange Unified Transportation Board September 20, 2017 6:30 p.m. You can bring your laptops/tablets if you would like to use them. Conference Room 004 (Lower Floor) Orange County West Campus 131 West Margaret Lane, Hillsborough Time Item Title 6:30 6:35 6:40 6:45 7:30 1. 2. 3. 4. 4.a. 5. 5.a. Call to Order and Determination of Quorum Approval of Minutes from August 16, 2017 Consideration of Additions to the Agenda Special Presentations Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization (DCHC MPO) 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) Alternative Analysis (Andy Henry, DCHC MPO) OUTBoard Action: Receive the presentation and provide any comments the Board might have. Regular OUTBoard Agenda (Action Items) Bicycle Safety Implementation Subcommittee Report (Art Menius, Abigaile Pittman) OUTBoard Action: Receive information and provide any comments or direction that the Board might have. 8:00 8:25 8:30 6. 7. 7.a. 7.b. 8. 9. Informational Items Staff Updates Staff update on the concept of a project to include bicycle safety improvements on Old NC 86, including the intersection of Old NC 86 and Homestead Road/Dairyland Road (aka Calvander) (Abigaile Pittman) Staff update on the Orange County Process to Submit Projects to MPOs/RPOs (Abigaile Pittman) OUTBoard Action: Receive information and provide any comments that the Board might have. Board Comments Adjournment – The next regularly scheduled meeting date is October 18, 2017. 1 Charge of the OUTBoard (from Section I, Part C of the adopted Rules and Procedures) 1. The OUT Board is charged with advising the Board of County Commissioners on the planning and programming of transportation infrastructure improvements and other County transportation planning initiatives, as directed by the Board. 2. From time to time the OUT Board may be directed to provide input on regulations on which the Planning Board has primary statutory and local ordinance advisory duties. In such instances, the OUT Board shall serve in an advisory capacity to the Planning Board. Meetings (from Section IV, Part C of the adopted Rules and Procedures) C. Date, Time, and Location of Regular Meetings 3. Regular meetings of the OUT Board shall be held as needed to address items that require Board action consistent with its Charge and Duties identified herein. Meetings are held on the third Wednesday of the month. The start time and location of the meeting shall be included on the agenda and shall typically be 6:30 p.m. at the Orange County West Campus Office Building located at 131 West Margaret Lane, Hillsborough. The OUT Board Chair, in consultation with staff, shall have the authority to change the start time and location of a regular meeting to meet any special circumstances, provided the information is included on the distributed agenda. 2 DRAFT MINUTES 1 ORANGE COUNTY OUTBOARD 2 AUGUST 16, 2017 3 REGULAR MEETING 4 5 6 MEMBERS PRESENT: Heidi Perry (Chair), At-Large Representative; Art Menius, At-Large Representative; David 7 Laudicina, Cheeks Township Representative; Alex Castro (Vice-Chair), Bingham Township Representative; Ted 8 Triebel, Little River Township Representative; Alyson West, At-Large; Jenn Sykes, At-Large; Erle Smith, Chapel Hill 9 Township Representative; Donna Musson, Eno Township Representative; Ed Vaughn, Cedar Grove Township 10 Representative; 11 12 MEMBERS ABSENT: Jeff Charles, At-Large Representative; Brantley Wells, Hillsborough Township Representative; 13 Gary Saunders, At-Large Representative; Justin Miller, At- Large Representative. 14 15 TRANSIT ADVISORY SERVICES MEMBERS PRESENT: Janet Sparks, Child Support Director; Janice Tyler, Aging Director; 16 Lisa Berley, Transportation Specialist; Serena McPherson, Administrative Services Supervisor (DSS). 17 18 STAFF PRESENT: Abigaile Pittman, Transportation/Land Use Planner; Peter Murphy, Transportation Administrator; 19 Theo Letman, Transit Director; Meredith Kern, Administrative Assistant. 20 21 OTHERS PRESENT FOR TRANSIT ADVISORY SERVICES: Rachel McCook, Minutes Preparer. 22 23 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 24 25 Heidi Perry called the meeting to order. 26 27 Ms. Perry asked the Board and Staff to introduce themselves. 28 29 AGENDA ITEM 2: APPROVAL OF MINUTES 30 JUNE 21, 2017 MEETING 31 32 Art Menius pointed out a misspelling on line 127. 33 34 MOTION by Heidi Perry to approve the June 21, 2017 OUTBoard Minutes with the correction. Seconded by Alex 35 Castro 36 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 37 38 AGENDA ITEM 3: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA 39 40 Heidi Perry noted two additions to the agenda. She requested that members of the Bicycle Safety Implementation 41 Subcommittee decide on a good meeting time (Item 6.a.). She also added a discussion item on lowering the speed 42 limit under item 7.d., in regards to Orange County bridge improvements. 43 44 AGENDA ITEM 4: SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 45 46 Abigaile Pittman said that Staff had no Special Presentations. 47 48 AGENDA ITEM 5. TRANSIT SERVICES/ORANGE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION (OPT) 49 50 AGENDA ITEM 5A. OPT QUARTERLY OPERATIONAL UPDATES (THEO LETMAN, PETER MURPHY) 51 52 Peter Murphy began the presentation. He reviewed the Quarterly Operational Update which corresponded with a 53 presentation projected onto the screen in the room. Mr. Murphy explained that Staff had collected more ridership 54 3 data over the past six months, since the last quarterly update, showing a comparison from last year’s ridership 55 numbers. The total ridership last year was 55,413 riders. Ridership grew to 61,297 riders this year, even with fewer 56 hours on the fixed routes of the Hillsborough Circulator and the Hill-to-Hill Shuttle. There was growth in ridership on 57 both of these routes in FY2016-2017. The major 2015 change in the Hill-to-Hill route increased the hours from 3 58 hours/day to 12 hours/day, which changed the tracking. However, Staff tracked passengers in a “per hour served” to 59 maintain a proper comparison. The Circulator has 8 to 9 passengers per hour compared to peer counties, which see 60 a ratio of 3.6 passengers per hour. The Hill-to Hill-is less than that but is still growing, especially once the “Go Pass” 61 was added in September 2016, resulting in increased passengers (over 2 passengers per hour). Staff expects these 62 numbers to grow. Mr. Murphy said that due to consolidations, fixed route transit services are running fewer hours with 63 more passengers per hour during operation. Mr. Murphy went through various graphs and charts on passenger data. 64 65 Art Menius said that he was curious about the big spike in passengers on the Circulator in February and wondered 66 if Peter Murphy knew why this happened. 67 68 Peter Murphy responded that he has not looked into it yet. 69 70 Art Menius replied that he hoped there would be a spike again. 71 72 Peter Murphy said that the department had planned more services for a long time but not all of them have been 73 implemented. As an update, Staff is interviewing drivers now. They plan to roll out services in the order presented 74 on the slide in the presentation (Efland Hillsborough Commuter Loop, Orange Alamance Connector (mid-day US-70 75 service), and Rural Zonal routes). 76 77 Abigaile Pittman asked if everyone remembered the Rural Zonal routes. 78 79 Alex Castro asked Staff how they are marketing the routes and how they are alerting the public online that new 80 routes are coming. 81 82 Peter Murphy answered that once they have a set date, the information will be publicized. He said that Staff would 83 discuss media, marketing, and the new logo later in the presentation. 84 85 Jenn Sykes asked for more information on the Rural Zonal routes. 86 87 Peter Murphy said that Rural Zonal routes are deviated fixed routes set to go 2 days a week into different sections 88 of the County (northeast, northwest, southern zones, etc.) on certain days of the week. Riders can also call and 89 schedule a ride 2 days in advance for a discounted rate. This is adding more services to rural areas that do not 90 currently get service, except for rural residents that use transit to make medical trips. 91 92 Peter Murphy continued the presentation by turning it over to Theo Letman. 93 94 Theo Letman presented staffing information. He said the department was able to get more staff positions approved 95 through this year’s budget. Now there are 5 full time bus driver positions added to the total operator roster. Staff is 96 continuing to interview candidates and plans to finish hiring new drivers by the end of the month. New drivers are 97 going through orientation and training for the new routes and regular service. Mr. Letman said that when he first 98 came to Orange County, he noticed that there was no official Transit Dispatcher position. Instead, there were 99 drivers that were assigned to do dispatching work, which causes internal conflict. The Board of County 100 Commissioners (BOCC) just approved a Transit Dispatcher position, classified as a supervisor level position 101 dedicated to operations. Additionally, through a transit-demand grant, Brennan Bouma secured funding for a Transit 102 Demand Coordinator position. The person in this role will provide transit options to the public by educating the 103 community and marketing the department’s services. It will be housed out of the Orange Public Transportation 104 Department. The Transit Demand Coordinator position is common in most transit departments and is often funded 105 through a Federal Transit Administration (FTA) grant. 106 107 Heidi Perry asked if they had trouble filling the bus driver positions. 108 4 109 Theo Letman said they have had no trouble filling the positions. There were actually more applications received 110 than in recent periods. They were able to screen-out people who did not have CDLs. Mr. Letman explained that one 111 of his plans includes reducing the size of the vehicle they purchase in the future so that the department can hire 112 people who do not have CDLs. He explained that finding good bus drivers with CDLs is a nationwide problem. If 113 there is a candidate with a good driving record but does not have a CDL, they can train them. Good drivers tend to 114 stay where they are. 115 116 Heidi Perry asked if the other two positions had been filled already. 117 118 Theo Letman responded that the Transit Dispatcher position will be filled in the next couple of weeks. The Transit 119 Demand Coordinator position has been posted and the application period is still open. 120 121 Alex Castro asked if Mr. Letman now has the software needed for dispatch and other functions. 122 123 Theo Letman answered that Staff is reviewing 2 software packages. Peter Murphy has helped get the CTS software 124 update through procurement. It’s used for scheduling. Staff will also be getting tablets to increase efficiency and to 125 use for GPS for navigation. The other software package is being finalized with the Legal Department and focuses 126 on transit planning. It will be used for the deviated routes, like the Rural Zonal routes. The software will tell the 127 department where their passengers are and where they want to go, using relevant data. This useful tool not only 128 helps plan routes but it also can help determine where riders would be. 129 130 Alex Castro said that the existing system is labor intensive and the software will give better information without 131 burdening the drivers. 132 133 Theo Letman agreed that the software will help with data collection, heavy paperwork, and analysis. 134 135 Peter Murphy continued the presentation and discussed vehicle replacement. The department got 3 new buses. It 136 is taking some time to get them on the road because of a few minor problems. These buses will be used under the 137 fixed routes, based on the grants tied to them. The plan is for them to be on the Hill-to-Hill shuttle and Hillsborough 138 Circulator. He echoed Mr. Letman’s recommendation of buying smaller vehicles, that are easier to maneuver on dirt 139 roads and driven by an operator without a CDL. If a driver is handling a vehicle for less than 14 riders, the driver 140 does not need a CDL. If the driver later needs a CDL, the department can assist with the training and upgrade. 141 142 Alex Castro asked if the smaller vehicles would still be handicap accessible. 143 144 Theo Letman answered that it is a requirement by the FTA for all of their vehicles to be handicap accessible. 145 146 Peter Murphy elaborated that the smaller vehicle would still be a true transit vehicle; they have the layout like a 147 larger bus and are less expensive. 148 149 Heidi Perry asked about the size of these smaller buses. 150 151 Peter Murphy answered that the smaller vehicle would be able to accommodate 10 to 14 passengers, like a Ford 152 transit vehicle or similar to a utility vehicle. They will have ramps or lifts for passengers using wheelchairs or others 153 needing assistance to get onboard the vehicle. 154 155 Theo Letman added that smaller vehicles tend to be easier to work on (maintenance). 156 157 Peter Murphy continued the presentation. He said that Staff will be working on the CTS software upgrade. It took a 158 long time for sign-offs on the software review but everything has been approved. This upgrade includes the addition 159 of a Medicaid batch-filling module which goes along with EMT Medicaid billing and will cut down on steps. Staff put 160 in for a grant to cover the cost of this module, which NCDOT awarded to the department at 100 percent. The 161 department will begin doing its billing through NC Tracks. 162 5 163 Ted Triebel asked who submitted the grant. 164 165 Peter Murphy answered that Staff submitted the grant application. 166 167 Ted Triebel said that the department ought to be commended for that. Good job. 168 169 Peter Murphy thanked him. 170 171 Jenn Sykes asked if there is still funding in the budget for part time help with Medicaid billing and the software. 172 173 Theo Letman answered that no, they are going to work on it with the staff they have but hope to have assistance 174 next year. 175 176 Alex Castro asked about maintenance and if the department works within other Orange County departments on 177 mechanic issues. How does this work? 178 179 Theo Letman answered that Orange County Motor Pool maintains their vehicles. They are in-line with EMS vehicles 180 and Sheriff’s Department vehicles. This is a limited service. The department also does outside service repair. Many 181 of their vehicles are still under warranty or towards the end of the warranty period, so these vehicles are often 182 serviced by dealerships and other maintenance shops. 183 184 Alex Castro asked if the department has enough spare vehicles to help maintain operations if there is a major 185 maintenance issue. 186 187 Theo Letman answered that they have a slight spare ratio for keeping the maximum amount of vehicles on the 188 road, but it is challenging, especially during the summer when air conditioning has to run all the time, causing 189 vehicles to go down more frequently. The department is working with NCDOT to have more reliable vehicles and to 190 replace more vehicles on schedule. Mr. Letman has noticed that on average, vehicles are 7 years-old. There were 191 some misunderstandings about when replacement should happened, based only on mileage. However, the 192 regulations say that replacement should be based on number of years or mileage a vehicle is in service. Mr. 193 Letman is trying to get vehicles maintained faster by basing replacement on years in service. 194 195 Peter Murphy spoke about REMIX Software. Staff can put a route into the system and the software will report how 196 many people are within certain distance to the route (similar style to Google Maps), their economic background, 197 how many households are without a vehicle, and other such data that has been merged from a number of sources, 198 including Census data. This is a good tool for route-building. 199 200 AGENDA ITEM 5A. REBRANDING AND MARKETING EFFORT (THEO LETMAN) 201 202 Theo Letman reviewed the Rebranding item. He said that Staff is looking forward to the re-marketing and rebranding 203 of service and the transit fleet. The goal is to create more identity for the County’s transit services and to address 204 feedback from BOCC members and community members requesting more information on the extensive services. 205 The department collaborated with the County’s Community Relations Department and came-up with a new logo 206 (shown in presentation). The acronym of “OPT” is proposed to be replaced with “Orange County Public 207 Transportation.” Mr. Letman explained that the department will be rolling-out the new logo with the new buses. 208 209 Alex Castro asked about how Orange County, NC, sets itself apart from other “Orange Counties” all over the 210 country. Is there a need to protect this with a copyright? 211 212 Theo Letman explained that NCDOT requires that “public transit” is explicitly labeled on all public transit vehicles. 213 Orange County Public Transportation will also have the label “public transit” on the vehicle, and Mr. Letman does 214 not think that there will be any confusion about the vehicles being from Orange County, NC. 215 216 6 Heidi Perry said that Chapel Hill’s buses are labeled “Chapel Hill Transit.” 217 218 Peter Murphy added that the buses just have to be labeled in such a way that it implies that they are for the public. 219 220 Heidi Perry commented that the bus is not just used as one community’s bus. 221 222 Theo Letman agreed and said that making the “public” part clear is a NCDOT regulation. 223 224 Art Menius said that he liked how the department was proposing to make it “Orange County Public Transportation” 225 instead of continuing the acronym. 226 227 Theo Letman said that the department is changing the uniforms and other gear to reflect the new name. 228 229 Alex Castro asked for clarification regarding the new name – is it Orange Public Transit or Orange County Public 230 Transportation? 231 232 Theo Letman said that the new name is proposed to be “Orange County Public Transportation” but “Public Transit” 233 will be put on the side of the vehicles. 234 235 Jenn Sykes asked about if painting the buses orange for branding would be financially feasible. 236 237 Peter Murphy said that the department had one orange bus, but there were lots of ideas kicked around with the 238 media department staff about what would work the best for the rebranding. NCDOT provides white buses and they 239 will pay up to $500 for the lettering on the buses. NCDOT has specific requirements about what has to be on the 240 bus: the phone number has to be on both sides of the bus and the name has to be clearly written (no acronym). 241 Painting the buses would be out of the County’s budget. 242 243 Heidi Perry said that it took Chapel Hill a long time to get its website address www.chtransit.com. Is there a quick 244 timeline for Orange County Public Transportation’s website? 245 246 Theo Letman responded that Staff has been working with Jim Northrup in IT. It is going to be an easier web 247 address and the site will include places for public comment, scheduling information and other important 248 components. 249 250 Alex Castro asked if Orange Public Transit can connect electronically to Chapel Hill Transit or Go Triangle and if 251 the County is going to be a part of that consortium. 252 253 Peter Murphy answered that the consortium to which he is referencing is tied to a call center, and the County’s 254 transit services are not part of that. Since the bulk of the County’s calls are not for fixed-route transit, the call center 255 model does not fit with most callers’ needs at this point in time. Many calls from Orange County riders are for 256 medical transportation services, which take more detailed knowledge and time and are handled by County staff. As 257 fixed route transit grows in the County, the call center system may be considered. Currently, Orange County bus 258 routes are on Google Maps, which will also show Chapel Hill Transit and Go Triangle routes, and shows how to 259 connect to a stop, including the walking distance. Orange County is also tied into Go Triangle’s mapping system 260 and is continuing to work with their partners. 261 262 Theo Letman added that he has been talking with partners at MPO meetings about connectivity and how it is hard 263 for riders to navigate to Durham and Raleigh and other local destinations, and how everyone should work together 264 to do a better job at connecting and helping with the commutes for riders. Mr. Letman shifted the discussion to a 265 new brochure (see presentation) and drew attention to efforts over the next month-and-a-half to market the 266 rebranding with the help of the media department, radio, public television, and other outlets. 267 268 Alex Castro requested large font size on their advertising. 269 270 7 Alyson West asked if the department was connected to any app services. 271 272 Theo Letman answered that as the department expands its resources in the future, Staff hopes to include apps 273 (subscription packages). 274 275 Ted Triebel asked if along with the new roll-out, if Staff set any specific goals for new ridership? 276 277 Theo Letman said that they want more riders. 278 279 Ted Triebel elaborated and asked if the department was setting-out objectives and timelines to help figure out 280 where they are headed. He urged the department to have some concrete goals. 281 282 Theo Letman said that he hesitated to answer the question because there must be an order to things; first, the 283 department needs to understand where it is, in this point in time, to know where it is going. Because the department 284 has been using more old-school methods to collect data, it appears that much of its data is not accurate. Staff is 285 scrubbing the data now and is implementing new methods for data gathering. There are also requirements from the 286 FTA that track what the department is doing, like ridership numbers, mileage and other related indicators. Once the 287 department establishes this baseline, they will establish targets for the future. Mr. Letman said that this is a fluid 288 process, especially when they are adding new service and that they do plan to expand ridership, but that he could 289 not say what that would look like right now. 290 291 Erle Smith questioned if goal setting is dependent on the department’s current numbers. He suggested that the 292 department could look at similar systems in similar situations (i.e. percentage coverage by particular area) and base 293 goals on that. By looking at current numbers and similar systems, two goal-setting measures could operate 294 simultaneously. 295 296 Theo Letman responded that if the department had a good comparable service, perhaps those measures could be 297 considered, but Orange County is unique; this is a huge rural area. Orange County cannot compare to Durham or 298 Raleigh. Orange County is just coming into fixed routes. Alamance County is just starting its service but with 299 Burlington they have an even larger urbanized area than Orange County. It is a hard comparison. 300 301 Erle Smith suggested that if Staff opened the aperture and examined the flyover states, they may find some areas 302 that are common with the situation here. 303 304 Theo Letman responded that he thought that could be possible. 305 306 Erle Smith said that he agrees with Ted Triebel about the importance of goal-setting and that if the department does 307 not yet know where it’s going, and how it get there. 308 309 Peter Murphy revisited the slide presentation on passenger count comparisons. Passengers-per-hour is compared 310 with similar peer counties (about 15 counties out of 100 counties statewide), a grouping by NCDOT. The 311 department does compare there and based on this, the target for passengers is 3.6 per hour. The County is above 312 that across the board. Staff wants the Hill-to-Hill route to be at 3.6 passengers per hour. It will take a couple of 313 years for the department to get to this goal. 314 315 Heidi Perry asked about the passengers-per-hour average and goal. She commented that Orange County is right 316 below the 3.6 goal at 1.6 or so. 317 318 Peter Murphy said that on the Circulator, they have 8 passengers-per-hour; on the Chapel Hill route, they are 319 regularly at 2 passengers-per-hour, except during the summer when passengers drop below 2 per hour due to 320 students and workers not using transit services when the university is not in full session. On this route, the 321 department has still watched this passenger-per-hour number grow from 1.29 to 2 passengers-per-hour, hovering 322 over 2 passengers-per-hour at the end of this past school year, getting closer to the 3.6 target. When the 323 department looks at its entire service, they are higher than the 3.6 as a whole, when averaged. NCDOT’s 324 8 comparisons with the other 14 counties put Orange County over the average of 3.6 passengers-per-hour but the 325 County is still working to make things better where applicable. 326 327 Alex Castro asked if OPT has a way to connect passengers to a common bus stop. He said that the Maxway 328 Center used to be used as a place to connect OPT passengers with Go Triangle or Mebane. Alex Castro asked if 329 the County has connectivity with other service providers at this point, and if there is a common bus stop or a 330 common point where someone coming in on the County’s system can get on to another system’s transit services. 331 332 Peter Murphy said that the loss of the Maxway Center did hurt OPT services. Since then, the department has 333 revamped its timing so that it will correspond with others services. Some new services will meet-up at Durham Tech 334 Community College so that riders can transfer to another bus. 335 336 Theo Letman said that there are some bus stop improvements on US 70 with park and ride services. 337 338 Alyson West said that she thought it made sense to not set goals unless the department has the data it is putting 339 together. She also noted that the use of the ReMIX software will help show patterns that Staff may not have 340 expected, and then when the department is ready to set goals, they will be able to focus their resources and use 341 them wisely to get to where they want to go, instead of setting them in the abstract. 342 343 Jenn Sykes added that goal-setting is not just the total ridership count or the like, but that if a lot of the use is 344 around ensuring that people get to medical services, making sure the alternatives for that reduce the amount so 345 citizen rides can go down and bus rides can go up. There are more people engaging with the systems at UNC or 346 Duke. The metric may not come out as the total number of riders but in other changes like people calling Social 347 Services to come out to their houses. 348 349 Theo Letman said that there are a number of quality performance indicators (QPIs) that Staff considers to best 350 match riders with the County’s resources. 351 352 Jenn Sykes said that it is important to look outside just the transit point of view to determine advocacy for services. 353 354 Theo Letman showed an example of a regional bus stop with the new logo on the bus stop sign. 355 356 Peter Murphy added that the bus stop sign example shows how Go Triangle is adding the County’s new logo and 357 phone number to the information on the shared bus stop sign, so that coordinating the transit services are centered 358 on one bus stop sign instead of 3 different ones. 359 360 Alex Castro asked if the bus stop signs could show arrivals times for buses. 361 362 Theo Letman said that the bus stop schedules are in new bus stop sign holders at the stops. 363 364 Heidi Perry asked that sign holders at bus stops be placed at more accessible heights. 365 366 David Laudicina spoke about his recent experience riding the bus with his wife. He said that he was impressed with 367 the service and that the bus driver was very personable, professional, and answered all of their questions. He 368 explained that he and his wife hoped to use the bus to get to doctors’ appointments at UNC since parking there can 369 be so difficult. 370 371 Theo Letman spoke about the Simme Seat for bus stops (see slide in presentation for an image). He explained 372 that he was first introduced to these seats while working at the Georgia Department of Transportation which 373 received grant funding for these seats. The Orange County Department on Aging submitted a grant application to 374 AARP to fund these seats for the County, and AARP awarded the grant. Thanks to this funding, about 15 of these 375 seats will go up by November for folks to use while waiting for the bus. 376 377 9 Peter Murphy said that Staff needs feedback on the new logo. He noted that Staff will be taking the logo to the 378 BOCC but first, he would like feedback on the logo from the Board, and asked that the Board support and make a 379 recommendation for the logo change. 380 381 Jenn Sykes commented that the logo kind of looks like a wheel. 382 383 Peter Murphy noted that the colors are the same as the County’s new colors. 384 385 Theo Letman said that the bus drivers voted on the logo. 386 387 Heidi Perry said that the logo looks fine but that the font in the logo should be clearer between different sizes. 388 389 Theo Letman responded that the graphic designers working on the logo will ensure that the final logos are easy to 390 read at different sizes. 391 392 Art Menius asked if there is a way to standardize to Orange County Public Transit, instead of Orange County Public 393 Transportation when talking about buses. 394 395 Alex Castro said that even smaller vehicles are part of transit operations, technically operating only transit services. 396 397 Ted Triebel asked if they needed a motion to support the logo. 398 399 Heidi Perry asked if the vote would just be on the logo. 400 401 Peter Murphy answered that yes. He said that the department is looking to rebrand older buses with the new logo 402 too. There is a number of buses that need to be rebranded. 403 404 Donna Musson asked about cost of changing to new logo. 405 406 Peter Murphy said that they have received quotes. 407 408 Theo Letman said that the quotes were for about $20,000. 409 410 Peter Murphy said that about a third of the $20,000 is for labeling buses that are blank right now. 411 412 Theo Letman said that the phone number for folks to call and get service and the Orange County Public 413 Transportation logo will be labeled on the buses. He showed a mock-up of the labels on a bus (see image in 414 presentation). 415 416 Alex Castro asked about the re-branding materials and process. 417 418 Peter Murphy said that the labels are just applied straight to the vehicle. 419 420 Jenn Sykes asked if any of the buses that are being retrofitted are also close to retirement. Would it be possible to 421 not label certain buses close to retirement? 422 423 Theo Letman answered that the buses that need to be retrofitted have about 2 years or more left before retirement. 424 The lead time on getting a vehicle from NCDOT is about a year or better. 425 426 Peter Murphy stated that they are looking to do the whole change, to make all buses uniform so that there is no 427 confusion. It the big scheme of things, it is not a huge expense. If there is a bus that happens to be very close to 428 retirement, the department will not spend the money to rebrand it. 429 430 10 Heidi Perry asked if Staff had thought about doing a “GoOrange” campaign, similar to the “Go Chapel Hill” and 431 other similar campaigns in the region. 432 433 Peter Murphy answered that a campaign like that may seem too sports-oriented. 434 435 Motion by Alex Castro to approve the new logo as “Orange County Public Transit” in all situations. Seconded by 436 Art Menius. 437 Vote: Unanimous 438 439 AGENDA ITEM 5C. ACTIVITIES (THEO LETMAN, PETER MURPHY) 440 441 Heidi Perry asked if the Board could review a slide in the presentation on marketing. 442 443 Peter Murphy responded that the slide was on upcoming activities and that they will discuss this now. 444 445 Alex Castro said that it was his understanding that the AARP grant enables the awardee to apply for a federal grant 446 of a greater amount. 447 448 Janice Tyler said that maybe the AARP money could work as a match for another grant. 449 450 Theo Letman responded that as part of a grant application for bus stop improvements, the AARP grant served as a 451 match for a federal grant that was put towards said improvements. 452 453 Alex Castro said that he had heard that the grant was $50,000. 454 455 Janice Tyler asked what was used as the match before. 456 457 Theo Letman said that the local match was out of County funds. 458 459 Peter Murphy confirmed that the County put-up the matching funds. 460 461 Janice Tyler said that total grant awarded was a little over $10,000. 462 463 Peter Murphy said that the money will be put towards the Simme Seats which do not need any approvals to be 464 installed, they just need a local clearance like for a bus stop sign. He said that the next item is an update on OPT’s 465 major activities, milestones, reviews, site visits. In February, there was a Medicaid and EMT site visit and the 466 department was approved through an entire review process. OPT can now be an EMT provider for the County. In 467 March, TJCOG, a regional government council, provided funding for transportation for Councils on Aging to move 468 seniors via free transportation to nutrition programs where some are eligible for a free meal. For a lot of the folks in 469 this program, OPT drivers are like family to the passengers. During the site visit, the department had everything in 470 order and passed the annual assessment. Members of management and other staff attended an annual 471 transportation training conference (Concord, NC) to learn about new products and ideas. In October, the biggest 472 conference and expo for transportation will be held in Atlanta, GA, with staff attending. Finally, the last item is “Try 473 Transit Week,” which Lisa Berley will discuss. In summary, there will be a transit academy leading up to the Week, to 474 educate people on how the bus systems work in Orange County. Many groups have provided assistance, including 475 the Healthy Carolinians. 476 477 Lisa Berley spoke about Try Transit Week. The week focuses on encouraging people to ride the bus, like David did, 478 and as an incentive, the ride will be free of charge. In addition to Orange County Public Transit, Chapel Hill Transit, 479 and Go Triangle will be the participating transit departments. The Healthy Carolinians, a group out of the County 480 Health Department has a subcommittee called “Access to Care” which assists people in accessing health care in the 481 County and region at large. This subcommittee is working with Ms. Berley to hold the first ever Transit Academy in 482 both Hillsborough and Chapel Hill (8:00am – noon) two weeks before the Try Transit Week. The concept is to offer 483 training to care managers and social workers in the medical field, in schools, and in non-profits, to get the low-down 484 11 on what all this transit is that we have in this county. The academy will include presentations, breakout sessions on 485 who qualifies for door-to-door services and how to fill-out the right forms, how to work well with people who have 486 limited English proficiency or English is not their first language, and how to go about setting-up a kiosk of relevant 487 transportation information in your service agency that would be most useful to clients. Throughout the Academy, Staff 488 will be encouraged to get their clients to use transit during Try Transit Week in a variety of ways. During this week, 489 there will be at least 3 places (i.e. Walmart in Hillsborough which also has a bus stop out in front) to talk-up the week 490 with information and a staff person at the table to answer questions. 491 492 Alex Castro added to the list of Try Transit Week publicity locations – gatherings at The Grange (meets the first 493 Tuesday of the month) and Table Top (last Friday in September) and other places such as these. 494 495 David Laudicina said Hog Day is coming up on September 15th, a great event for publicize Try Transit Week. 496 497 Alex Castro said that the updates in transit in the County are significant and not enough people know about them, 498 especially not the seniors. Seniors are the ones who would really make use out of this event and of the services. He 499 also suggested the Seymour Center and Passmore Center as good locations for advertising Try Transit Week. 500 501 Ted Triebel asked about advertising in the News of Orange. What media outlets does the department use? 502 503 Lisa Berley said that they will advertise in the News of Orange and that Southern Neighbor (monthly publication) did 504 a piece on transportation for them, but they are still looking into other media outlets. 505 506 Art Menius suggested getting an interview with WCHL, which would put them on for the afternoon news. 507 508 Janice Tyler said that all media and communications go through Todd McGee (Orange County Community Relations 509 Director) for this event. 510 511 Heidi Perry asked where the Transit Academy in Chapel Hill will be located. 512 513 Janice Tyler said that the Academy would be at the Seymour Center. 514 515 Heidi Perry asked if healthcare facilities know about this. 516 517 Lisa Berley explained that the list of contacts (inclusive of care managers and others) have been generated by the 518 subcommittee and by Ms. Berley herself has been collecting contacts for over a year-and-a-half for an event like this. 519 All of these contacts will receive a “Save the Date” and an invitation via email. 520 521 Jenn Sykes said that she works with the head of UNC Care Management and has connections with Duke’s Care 522 Management and will work with them on getting participants to the event. She has already suggested that they reach 523 out to Lisa Berley and the team for more information on this event. 524 525 Lisa Berley said that she would definitely talk to Jenn more about this. 526 527 Heidi Perry asked if outreach is solely focused on health care for the Week. 528 529 Lisa Berley said that no, they are working with a variety of groups, but the Healthy Carolinians’ subcommittee 530 generated mostly health care contacts. She welcomed more ideas for sharing this event with other people and 531 groups. They are reaching out to Head Start programs and programs working with non-English speakers. 532 533 Various Board members chimed in about various groups that should be invited like the Chambers of Commerce, El 534 Centro Hispano, and other regional groups. 535 536 Heidi Perry asked if Go Triangle is only giving the free fare to Orange County riders during Try Transit Week. 537 538 12 Lisa Berley confirmed this and said that the only bus routes that are a part of this are the 420 and the ODS. 539 540 Heidi Perry said that she now understood that not all Go Triangle’s buses were a part of this Week. 541 542 Peter Murphy said that there is also a Try Transit Week in September, and for Orange County’s Try Transit Week in 543 October, the department is working with Go Triangle and all Orange County transit services to try and get free fare 544 for anyone going to a destination that touches Orange County, even if the department is making passes available 545 (with an internal charge to keep cost down). 546 547 Heidi Perry suggested that there be a large advertisement at Orange County’s Durham Tech Campus for Orange 548 County Public Transit services. Students may not know that they can take the bus, what the hours are and other 549 important information. Ms. Perry also made a suggestion to encourage organizations to put information on their 550 websites about how to take the bus to their locations. 551 552 Jenn Sykes said that there are concerns about easing access requirements to get into UNC facilities by people using 553 transportation services and by care managers. 554 555 Lisa Berley agreed that big health care systems are very concerned about access and to ensure that people do not 556 miss their appointments. 557 558 Janice Tyler just met with the Senior Health Alliance, the new Medicaid Accountable Care Organization (ACO) at 559 UNC (contact is Eleanor). 560 561 Jenn Sykes said that she referred the head of the Alliance to Ms. Tyler and Ms. Berley. 562 563 Janice Tyler said that the Alliance is involved in a big transportation platform, even encouraging clients to use Uber. 564 565 Jenn Sykes said that it is not ideal to have to pay Uber drivers and that using the public transit system in a County 566 makes better sense. 567 568 Heidi Perry suggested that if there is some buy-in from businesses on Churton Street affected by the construction, 569 these businesses could incentivize patrons for riding the bus with discounts. 570 571 Lisa Berley agreed that that would be a great idea. 572 573 Heidi Perry said that people can get from Hillsborough to Chapel Hill in a timely manner. 574 575 Lisa Berley said that they can use the Hill-to-Hill Connector. 576 577 Jenn Sykes added that if it is possible, it would be good to advertise in the Courthouse. 578 579 Peter Murphy mentioned the new bus stops on Churton Street are dedicated for buses. There will be one in front of 580 the police station in Hillsborough and one by the Courthouse (the cut-out) across from Weaver Street. 581 582 Heidi Perry mentioned people going to the Courthouse will be able to get there via bus which could cut-down on 583 parking problems. 584 585 Theo Letman spoke about the history of the Courthouse and that he had heard from Durham Tech that originally, the 586 transportation department was a part of the plan, and the parking for the Courthouse was going to be at Durham 587 Tech. 588 589 Heidi Perry said that as the County sends out notices to people coming to the Courthouse. They could start noting 590 different ways of getting to the Courthouse, like via public transportation with a link to the website. She also noted 591 that it would be helpful for transportation to run later in the day. 592 13 593 Donna Musson asked if there is outreach to young people to ride the bus. She said that in Chapel Hill they ride the 594 bus a lot. 595 596 Heidi Perry said that this was a great question and commented that transit services go to the Sportsplex. 597 598 Lisa Berley commented that riding the bus helps young people get their freedom. 599 600 Heidi Perry said that the Sportsplex is another place to advertise for riding public transit. 601 602 Motion by Art Menius to recommend to the Board of County Commissioners to support the participation by Orange 603 County Public Transit in “Try Transit Week” and recommend the continuance of their ongoing activities. Seconded 604 by Jenn Sykes 605 Vote: Unanimous 606 607 Peter Murphy said that OPT’s presentation was concluded and that he appreciated the great feedback from the 608 Board. 609 610 Alex Castro thanked and complimented Staff for all their hard work. 611 612 AGENDA ITEM 6: REGULAR OUTBOARD AGENDA (ACTION ITEMS) 613 614 6A. BICYCLE SAFETY TASK FORCE (BSTF) REPORT IMPLEMENTATION SUBCOMMITTEE (ABIGAILE PITTMAN) 615 616 Abigaile Pittman presented. Ms. Pittman reminded the Board that at the last meeting, Staff’s recommendation was to 617 form a subcommittee from the OUTBoard, per the Advisory Board Policies. At this stage, the subcommittee 618 structure, budget, parties involved, and the actions to be taken for the first funding year (FY17-18) need to be 619 reviewed (see Attachment 2, page 23 in the packet). After the Board reviews this, Ms. Pittman recommended that it 620 takes action to form the subcommittee tonight. Once the subcommittee is formed, Ms. Pittman can help set-up a 621 meeting date and develop an agenda with members. She is also getting other Staff lined-up to assist the 622 subcommittee. 623 624 Heidi Perry asked Abigaile Pittman if she had the list of people who said that they would sign-up as subcommittee 625 members. 626 627 Abigaile Pittman said that Alyson West, Art Menius and Heidi Perry had volunteered to serve on the subcommittee. 628 629 Heidi Perry asked if there were any others who signed-up from the previous Bicycle Safety Report Taskforce. 630 631 Abigaile Pittman answered that she had received some emails from folks who volunteered to assist on agenda items 632 as needed. These volunteers may not attend every meeting but could assist as needed, which is appropriate for 633 someone not formally on the subcommittee. She added that County Staff is available from Planning and also Todd 634 McGee from Community Relations and Melissa Blackburn who does graphic design, and perhaps someone from the 635 Visitor’s Center. She said that they can request different County Staff from the appropriate departments as needed. 636 637 Alex Castro asked about the structure of the subcommittee noted in Attachment 2. In referenced to item 6.b. on 638 voting rights on the subcommittee; he asked why those with voting power had to be members of the OUTBoard. 639 640 Abigaile Pittman answered that the advisory policies adopted by the BOCC set the voting rights for OUTBoard 641 subcommittee members. 642 643 Heidi Perry asked why the BOCC would not approve the original members of the Bicycle Safety Report Taskforce to 644 be kept on the subcommittee as well. 645 646 14 Abigaile Pittman answered that for that to be considered, Staff would have to take the request back through the 647 process to the BOCC, which would take several months. 648 649 Heidi Perry said that the members have not officially been dismissed yet. 650 651 Abigaile Pittman responded that the group had been dismissed; it was disbanded once the BOCC accepted the 652 report. Subject to the OUTBoard’s recommendation, the Staff would have to go back to BOCC, get on the agenda, 653 confirm who is willing to serve, and go back through the whole application and appointment process. 654 655 Alex Castro commented that they could tell the BOCC that this is an unworkable arrangement and ask relief from it. 656 He is concerned that a very limited number of people are now going to be tasked with implementing all the work, and 657 people cannot be added as subcommittee members. It seems like an impossible situation. 658 659 Abigaile Pittman said that the subcommittee will still present their work to the OUTBoard monthly, and the OUTBoard 660 will comment and provide direction; there would be that larger involvement from the Board. 661 662 Alex Castro said that he would defer to Heidi Perry. 663 664 Heidi Perry spoke about how she wishes that they could work out a way that everyone who comes to the meeting 665 could participate and that it is hard that the OUTBoard members’ votes to represent others votes, even though they 666 cannot vote directly. 667 668 Art Menius said that other’s participation in the committee is more important than the voting. He would not see non-669 OUTBoard members as being second class because they cannot vote. The voices are more important. 670 671 Jenn Sykes noted that if the subcommittee members have worked on this in the past and understand processes such 672 as these, they will most likely not be offended by the structure. They will understand it as a structure of the bylaws in 673 the County and they are going to want to make sure that the subcommittee follows-up on their work as a Taskforce. 674 675 Heidi Perry said that there were at least 3 or 4 from the original Taskforce that said they would be interested in 676 attending the subcommittee. 677 678 Art Menius spoke about running the subcommittee on a consensus basis and then have the official subcommittee 679 members’ vote ratify the consensus. 680 681 Jenn Sykes noted that the way the structure is worded does not seem to prohibit the subcommittee from functioning 682 in this suggested way. Abigaile Pittman agreed. 683 684 Alex Castro asked if there would be any impediments to non-OUTBoard members being asked to be members of this 685 group. Is there a formal vetting process? 686 687 Abigaile Pittman answered that the process would be per the County Advisory Board Policies. 688 689 Heidi Perry said that if people become members of the OUTBoard, they would not have to go through the process. 690 691 Abigaile Pittman pointed out that the Board and Taskforce has many years ahead of it in implementing the Bicycle 692 Safety Report, and it could be that there is a good first year start that rolls into something bigger with a 693 recommendation for a BOCC appointed implementation task force (again). She asked if the subcommittee members 694 present had reviewed Attachment 2. If so, she needs an endorsement or approval of the attachment and for there to 695 be a vote on appointing the subcommittee. 696 697 Heidi Perry asked for clarification on the first vote. 698 699 Abigaile Pittman answered that the first vote could be on whether or not to approve Attachment 2. 700 15 701 Art Menius suggested that they roll the approvals all into one vote. 702 703 Motion by Art Menius to approve Attachment 2, Bicycle Safety Taskforce Report Implementation Subcommittee, 704 Fiscal Year 2017-2018, and to appoint Heidi Perry, Alyson West, and Art Menius to the subcommittee. Seconded 705 by Alex Castro 706 707 Heidi Perry asked if there needed to be something said about the additional non-OUTBoard members in the motion. 708 709 Abigaile Pittman replied that this consideration is already in Attachment 2. 710 711 Heidi Perry called for the vote. 712 Vote: Unanimous 713 714 Abigaile Pittman said that she would send out an online poll to members to schedule the subcommittee’s first 715 meeting to be held before the end of the month.. 716 717 7. STAFF UPDATES (ABIGAILE PITTMAN) 718 719 Abigaile Pittman reported that she had a productive meeting with Todd McGee, Melissa Blackburn, and Laurie 720 Paolicelli from the Visitor’s Bureau in Chapel Hill. Since much of the conversation circled back to the topic of a logo 721 for the subcommittee, Ms. Pittman put in a request with Melissa Blackburn for assistance with the logo, and she will 722 attend the upcoming subcommittee meeting to present some initial logo concepts. She learned that the bicycle safety 723 website no longer has to be part of Orange County Planning Department’s webpage. There is a new contract to 724 revise the website, and a freestanding fixed website is now feasible, which the subcommittee can update as 725 necessary, inclusive of direct links to other websites, laws and policies, etc. 726 727 Art Menius said that the a site like Wordpress has a cascade system set-up so that the subcommittee’s website 728 would still be part of the Orange County website but it would have its own web address. 729 730 Abigaile Pittman noted that Mr. McGee and Ms. Paolicelli will help launch a media campaign inclusive of radio, public 731 access television, website banners, newsprint and more (e.g. WCHL radio and Chapelboro.com, WUNC, WHUP, 732 Chapel Hill Public Access TV, Visitor’s Bureau, neighboring towns and Chambers of Commerce, local newspapers, 733 etc.). Once the subcommittee has a concept of who they want to reach and how, they can negotiate for media slots. 734 735 Heidi Perry asked if the subcommittee is keeping the bike safety slogan in the report. 736 737 Abigaile Pittman said the slogan must be used because it was officially approved by the Bicycle Safety Task Force 738 and the OUTBoard. She said that in her meeting with she went over recommended preferred messaging and also 739 unfavorable messaging. Pittman started a brief discussion on best meeting times and subcommittee members gave 740 initial feedback. 741 742 Abigaile Pittman noted that she had raised the Task Force’s concern about not wanting people to use Facebook to 743 make contentious remarks and comments in posts, so the media staff suggested doing a Facebook ad that connects 744 to the subcommittee’s website. She concluded this update. 745 746 7.A. MEBANE TRAFFIC SEPARATION STUDY (TSS) 747 748 Abigaile Pittman reviewed the abstract (see page 27 in the packet). This study is being conducted by the Rail 749 Division of NCDOT, City of Mebane, and Norfolk Southern Rail line. They retained a private consultant to do the 750 study which examines eight highway at-grade railroad crossings, two of which are in Orange County: (1) Mattress 751 Factory Road and (2) Buckhorn Road. The purpose of a traffic separation study purpose is to improve safety. She 752 went over some of the methods described in the abstract and slide presentation. The consultant said that there was 753 nothing that they could recommend for the crossing at Mattress Factory Road because the distance to the nearest 754 16 intersection was too close to get over and back down safely. For Buckhorn Road, the consultant recommended three 755 options (Ms. Pittman passed around a graphic showing the options and then went over the options). Option 1 showed 756 a grade separation at Buckhorn Road in connection with a new road over the railroad to US 70. Option 2 showed a 757 grade separation with a roundabout at Buckhorn Road and Industrial Drive and connection to South Frazier Road. 758 Option 3 showed a grade separation with a roundabout and a new road connecting US 70 not lining-up with Frazier 759 Road. Orange County Transportation Planning Staff was consulted for a courtesy review and comments. Staff 760 preferred Option 2 but did not like the roundabout. Staff supported Option 2 for the following reasons: alignment 761 shown in Option 2 with Frazier Road is consistent with the County’s road alignment concepts through this area as 762 supported by the Buckhorn-Efland-Mebane Access Management Plan; could include traffic lights in concert with the 763 alignment on US 70; and that direct routes around the western side of Efland are important. There is also a big 764 problem around Mount Willing Road and Buckhorn Road with trucks getting off the interstate and going through the 765 area to head towards north or to avoid the weigh station on the highway. The alignment shown in Option 2 is good for 766 moving trucks through here; however, Staff recommended that the Buckhorn Road and Industrial Drive design be a 767 cross intersection with turn lanes, not a roundabout. There is too short of a distance to the interchange ramps to 768 accommodate a roundabout for trucks to go around. 769 770 Jenn Sykes said that a roundabout sounded like a disaster. 771 772 Heidi Perry asked a question if traffic calming would help the situation since vehicles would be getting off the 773 intersection anyway. 774 775 Abigaile Pittman said that Staff thought that these vehicles need to be managed with a light and turn lanes, not 776 directing them straight into a roundabout. With a roundabout, trucks would be backed up to the interchange ramps. 777 778 Heidi Perry asked Ms. Pittman if she could remind her why the intersection is being improved. 779 780 Abigaile Pittman answered that this traffic separation study is in-line with the state’s future goals of doing higher 781 speed trains in the future. Ms. Pittman reminded the Board of work on private crossing closures in the last several 782 years in the eastern part of the County around Old NC 10 (three of them), straightening curves, etc. All of this work is 783 in preparation for higher speed trains coming through the area, thus the state needs to improve safety along the rail 784 line. 785 786 Heidi Perry asked why this could not be done with the arms at railroad crossings. 787 788 Abigaile Pittman answered that in some cases this can be done but they also need to straighten-out some of the 789 curves and allow for trains to continue at higher speeds safely. 790 791 Alex Castro spoke about the very big gas station that truckers use on the west side of Buckhorn Road south of the 792 interstate. Traffic flowing in and out of the station plus the traffic coming down the road would contribute to the snafus 793 of a roundabout concept. 794 795 Abigaile Pittman said that there are also a lot of school bus routes along this road, another reason the roundabout 796 would not be the best option. 797 798 Heidi Perry asked – aren’t roundabouts safer? 799 800 Abigaile Pittman responded that they can, in some situations, but not all. 801 802 Alex Castro said they are not when you are talking about tractor trailers. 803 804 David Laudicina asked about giving extra space for future plans, a future double track in particular for the higher 805 speed line. 806 807 17 Abigaile Pittman answered that the double tracks will not be done as much in Orange County because existing lines 808 will not be as high speed as in other counties and do not carry as much freight as do rail lines in some other counties. 809 However, she was told that rail right-of-way width in certain locations in the County will allow for some double-810 tracking. Traffic Separation Studies (TSS’s) help eliminate as many conflicts as possible and help sort out where 811 curves can be adjusted. 812 813 Donna Musson asked about the rationale of putting a roundabout there as an option. 814 815 Abigaile Pittman said that she had called the consultant to discuss this very question. She told him that the County 816 was submitting its comments in support of Option 2 but did not support the roundabout. Ms. Pittman’s impression 817 was that the consultant did not fully understand current conditions of the intersection and area. The County had its 818 own consultant do a study in the same area for the previously mentioned access management plan, which shows 819 that Buckhorn Road is going to need to be 4 lanes with a median and turn lanes. The roundabout would not suit 820 these future plans. In comparison, Mebane Oaks also only has about 600-650 ft. and this has not proved to be 821 sufficient. 822 823 Heidi Perry asked if the 4 lanes recommended for Buckhorn by the County’s consultant are planned, and if the TSS 824 considered this recommendation. 825 826 Abigaile Pittman said no, these two studies were not performed simultaneously. 827 828 Heidi Perry asked if the proposed roundabout would be a single lane roundabout? 829 830 Abigaile Pittman answered that the consultant did not specify the number of lanes for the roundabout, but the 831 concept appears to be a single lane. 832 833 Heidi Perry said that it would be interesting to know what may be built at that intersection. 834 835 Abigaile Pittman said that the consultant stressed to her that what they presented was “just a concept.” 836 837 Heidi Perry said that it would be hard for her to approve or disapprove a concept. 838 839 Abigaile Pittman said that Staff is not asking the Board to approve anything; that her presentation is just an update on 840 the courtesy review Staff completed on the TSS. 841 842 Heidi Perry asked if there would be any bicycle facilities as a part of this project. 843 844 Abigaile Pittman responded that this was not brought-up; however, there is a Buckhorn Road project to the south that 845 includes bike facilities that is still in the plans. She said that the department is hoping to coordinate with Mebane on 846 these projects on a regular basis. 847 848 7.B. MEBANE COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN (CTP) 849 850 Abigaile Pittman explained that Mebane is working on its CTP with the consultant Ramey Kemp. This plan mostly 851 focuses on transportation improvements for the Mebane area. The plan includes three maps showing an area that 852 expands to Mount Willing Road. Orange County Staff was asked to provide a courtesy review since a portion of the 853 study area is in Orange County. She said that the she and the Planning Director provided comments that the plans 854 should be consistent with the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and Rural Planning Organization (RPO) 855 CTPS, and Orange County’s Access Management Plan. The proposed Mebane CTP is not entirely consistent with 856 these plans and does not include Orange County bike routes or access management routes, and did not 857 acknowledge that there should be consistency with Orange County plans. Mebane’s new Development Director 858 responded to the courtesy review comments by saying that County Staff’s feedback and additions would be 859 incorporated into the Mebane CTP. 860 861 18 7.C. MOUNTAIN-TO-SEA TRAIL (MST) 862 863 Abigaile Pittman provided an update. The Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks and Recreation (DEAPR) 864 will give provide an update at the September 17, 2017 BOCC meeting. Marabeth Carr, DEAPR, said that it had not 865 yet been determined if there would be discussion at this meeting on routes, and that the County Manager would talk 866 to the BOCC to find the best time to discuss the routes. Ms. Pittman will provide any updates on the agenda as she 867 receives them. 868 869 7.D. ORANGE GROVE ROAD BRIDGE FENCING 870 871 Abigaile Pittman reported that $100,000 funding request was referred by the NC DOT Board of Transportation to Mr. 872 Trogden’s desk and was approved, for both sides of the bridge, from Statewide Contingency Funds. They are 873 currently in the design phase, bidding will start in October, and the estimated completion date is December 2017. 874 875 Alex Castro wanted to make a note that there was a letter to the editor in the Chapel Hill News by Amy Cole (former 876 member of Walkabout Hillsborough) about this bridge fence request. He asked if the Board could petition NCDOT to 877 request that they bring out the variable message signs for this project before the time change in November for safety 878 reasons. School children will be walking to and from school in the dark and the signs may help to alert drivers until 879 the fencing goes in. 880 881 Abigaile Pittman said that NCDOT may close down the bridge while the fencing is being installed. She had 882 previously been told that they will also close some lanes on the interstate during installation. 883 884 Alex Castro said that in the interim, the sign may help with safety as a stopgap measure. 885 886 Abigaile Pittman said that she could talk to NCDOT about putting up the sign. 887 888 Heidi Perry said that she wants to ask NCDOT to lower the speed limit in that area. There are School Zone signs on 889 both sides of the bridge but not a lower the speed limit. A lower speed limit could be incorporated with the bridge 890 fencing project. 891 892 Abigaile Pittman said that she will raise this issue with NCDOT again. She did note that there are criteria on how low 893 a speed limit can go on certain types of roads, and the last time she discussed this with NCDOT, there was not a 894 definitive answer, so she will ask again. 895 896 Heidi Perry said that she should talk to Dawn McPherson about this issue. She said that she would like to make a 897 motion to ask NCDOT to lower the speed limit on that School Zone area by the bridge. 898 899 Alex Castro said that he thought the speed limit was 40 miles per hour right now. 900 901 Ted Triebel asked what the speed limit would be lowered to. 902 903 Heidi Perry said that she thought it should be lowered to 30 miles per hour for the bridge, but thought it should match 904 the standard School Zone speed limit, since there are children walking across the bridge. 905 906 Ted Triebel said that School Zone speed limit signs specify the change of speed limit during certain times and days. 907 Does Ms. Perry want a standard speed limit sign, or a school sign? 908 909 Heidi Perry said that the signs stating the certain times would also work. 910 911 Jenn Sykes asked if the bridge is close enough to the school that it fits inside a School Zone. 912 913 Heidi Perry said that there are School Zone signs on either side of the bridge but no lower speed limit. 914 915 19 Alex Castro said that he did not see on-pavement marking associated with a School Zone. 916 917 Jenn Sykes said that the School Zone signs may just be a courtesy but do not indicate that vehicles are entering in a 918 certain distance from a school. 919 920 Heidi Perry said that maybe the speed limit signs she is recommending can be a courtesy too, but all she wants is for 921 the kids to arrive safely. 922 923 Abigaile Pittman said that she will be glad to discuss the matter with Dawn McPherson and will report back in 924 September. Ms. Pittman said that she was not sure if this idea requires a motion since Ms. McPherson may have 925 some other suggestion on how to deal with this issue. 926 927 Ted Triebel said that the bridge fencing is a great example of an important issue being pushed by people in this 928 community when otherwise nothing was going to be done, and now something is being done. Of the four years he 929 has served on this committee, the OUTBoard accomplished something great and he is happy to be a part of it, and it 930 can happen on other things too. 931 932 Alyson West agreed that it was a great accomplishment. 933 934 7.E. ENO EDD SEWER PROJECT, PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, AND ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN 935 936 Abigaile Pittman reviewed the abstract. She said that this Eno Access Management Plan was adopted in 2013 and it 937 is for one of three strategic economic development areas in the County. She showed the different land uses on a 938 map in the presentation and oriented the Board to the area shown on the map (Durham County to the right). Ms. 939 Pittman said that the two main things holding this area back from development have been: (1) no sewer and very little 940 water; and (2) lack of improved road infrastructure. There is an Orange County Capital Improvement Project 941 underway with extending sewer from the City of Durham into the area. There are already some water lines in the 942 area. The Planning Department has also received a development proposal in the area. Residents in the area are 943 working with the County to get connected to the new sewer lines and the water lines, and are also discussing 944 dedicating right-of-way for the future roads that will need to be built. She showed the Board the Eno EDD Access 945 Management Plan and pointed out the proposed extension of Highway 751 north of US 70, which she described as 946 the most important road access component for the Eno EDD. The County does not qualify for the STIP funding with 947 the scoring system because there is no congestion here yet. So, at this point, the County would need to compete for 948 economic development funds. The County has Article 46 quarter-cent sales tax funds and NCDOT has some 949 economic development funds, so the Planning Department is discussing a shared funding strategy. Ms. Pittman 950 showed Board members visually where future right-of-ways would conceptually be located. Some road development 951 will be done by private developers also. When trip generations get high, NCDOT would revise the access point of Old 952 NC 10 and US 70 (shown visually in the presentation). 953 954 Heidi Perry thanked Abigaile for her presentation and asked if there were any questions. 955 956 7.F. NCDOT DIVISION 7 TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS LOCATED IN THE DURHAM-CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO 957 METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (DCHC MPO) AND BURLINGTON-GRAHAM METROPOLITAN PLANNING 958 ORGANIZATION (BG MPO) PLANNING AREAS 959 960 No formal comments. 961 962 Abigaile said that the last three pages of the packet include more project updates, which the Board can review on thie 963 own. 964 965 David Laudicina said that he noticed a sign notifying the public that parts of Arthur Minnis Road will be shut-down for 966 bridge work starting August 28th. 967 968 Abigaile Pittman confirmed this. 969 20 970 AGENDA ITEM 8: BOARD COMMENTS 971 972 Abigaile Pittman made the Board aware of an upcoming public meeting (notice forthcoming) that is a drop-in session 973 for the 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan alternatives analysis. This will be held on September 12, 2017, 5:30-974 7:30pm in this room, DCHC MPO. Andy Henry from the Durham Transportation Department will also be doing a 975 presentation for the OUTBoard’s September 20 meeting. S 976 977 Abigaile Pittman stated that the Clerk’s Office asked her to notify some of the members’ term limits are approaching: 978 Ed Vaughn, Brantley Wells, Art Menius, Jenn Sykes, and Heidi Perry. Ms. Pittman said that she needs to know by 979 Wednesday, September 6 if these members want to serve another term. Ms. Pittman talked about a computer glitch 980 in the Clerk’s Office that caused confusion when some members were asked to re-apply to the OUTBoard. This has 981 been cleared-up. Ms. Pittman received confirmation from Mr. Vaughn, Mr. Menius, Ms. Sykes, and Ms. Perry that 982 they wanted to serve another term. Ms. Pittman said that she would follow-up with Mr. Brantley Wells. 983 984 Heidi Perry asked if Jeff Charles was going to serve another term. 985 986 Abigaile Pittman said that his term is not up yet, and under the circumstances they will wait for Mr. Charles to check-987 in with Staff. 988 989 Ms. Perry shared a brief update on Mr. Charles’ medical condition and said she has not talked to him personally but 990 thought that he was getting better. 991 992 Art Menius asked if Board members with terms expiring on September 30 need to do anything proactive to continue 993 their service on the Board. 994 995 Abigaile Pittman said that if the aforementioned members could send her an email saying that they have an interest 996 in serving an additional term, and she will forward the email to Tom Freeman in the Clerk’s Office. 997 998 Heidi Perry asked about how the Board could take back up the matter of a feasibility study for the possibility of a bike 999 path from Carrboro to Hillsborough. She said that Max Bushell had provided some price quotes on this idea a while 1000 back. 1001 1002 Abigaile Pittman said that she would try and find an answer to this question, but that Mr. Bushell had also provided 1003 background on the concept, how it had been evaluated in the past, and other information. 1004 1005 Heidi Perry said that she could look into the matter as a resident and discuss it with the BOCC. 1006 1007 Abigaile Pittman said that she would consult with others and get back to Ms. Perry about the issue. 1008 1009 AGENDA ITEM 9: ADJOURNMENT 1010 1011 Alex Castro made a motion to adjourn the meeting and Art Menius seconded the motion 1012 OUTBoard meeting was adjourned by consensus. 1013 1014 1015 ____________________________________ Heidi Perry, Chair 21 22 ORANGE COUNTY ORANGE UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION BOARD (OUTBoard) ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: September 20, 2017 Action Agenda Item No. 4.a. SUBJECT: Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan Alternatives Analysis DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections ATTACHMENT(S): 1. PowerPoint Presentation 2. MTP Local Input Meetings 3. OUTBoard 2012 Comments 4. Orange County Highway Projects INFORMATION CONTACT: (919) Andy Henry, MPO Senior Transportation Planner, 560-4366 (x36419) Tom Altieri, Comprehensive Planning Supervisor, 919-245-2579 Craig Benedict, Planning Director, 919-245-2592 PURPOSE: To receive a presentation from Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro (DCHC) Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) staff on the 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) Alternatives Analysis. BACKGROUND: The DCHC MPO is responsible for long range transportation planning for Durham County and parts of Orange and Chatham Counties and is updating its MTP. The MTP, which is required by Federal law, recommends major transportation projects, policies and strategies designed to maintain existing transportation systems and serve the region's future travel needs. The Plan must be fiscally constrained, which means that projected revenues must cover the anticipated costs. Projects must be in the 2045 MTP to receive any state and federal transportation funding through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). Projects are drawn from the MTP and put forward to the State’s prioritization process for inclusion in the STIP, which is a 10-year funding program. Alternatives Analysis An Alternative is a combination of a transportation network, which includes a set of highway, transit and other transportation improvements, and a land use scenario that depicts the distribution of population and employment for the year 2045. These Alternatives are then analyzed using the Triangle Regional Model (TRM) which forecasts future travel statistics based on assumptions concerning the highway network, transit service and other transportation facilities. It is very unlikely that one of the Alternatives in its entirety would be advanced as the Preferred Option. Most likely, the final MTP will be a combination of the various Alternatives. Due to the length and depth of the Alternatives Analysis, staff has prepared a presentation (Attachment 1) that summarizes some key areas of interest to Orange County. Greater detail on the Analysis and other process components can be found on the DCHC MPO website: http://www.dchcmpo.org/programs/transport/2045mtp.asp#tabs7 23 MPO Next Steps The Alternatives Analysis has been released for public comment. Over the next few months, the DCHC MPO Board will use comments collected from the public and local governments to direct the development of a Preferred Option. The Preferred Option is the Draft 2045 MTP which will be released in October 2017. The final 2045 MTP is scheduled to be adopted by the MPO Board December 2017. Attachment 2 provides the full schedule of MTP Local Input meetings on the Alternatives Analysis. OUTBoard Action Staff is seeking local government comments, which at this stage are typically general in nature. Attachment 3 was submitted to the BOCC by the OUTBoard in 2012, as part of the 2040 MTP Alternatives Analysis process. The OUTBoard may choose to use its 2012 comments and update as necessary to forward to the BOCC. Attachment 4 is a list of Orange County (incl. municipal) major highway projects in the Alternatives Analysis. Any specific comments on the list are also welcome at this time and may assist with the selection of highway projects to be included in the Preferred Option (draft 2045 Plan). The projects shown with gray shading have been identified by staff as least likely to be included in the draft 2045 Plan. Transit, bicycle and pedestrian project lists are not yet available from the MPO. However, it is expected that the Orange County transit projects will be taken from the Orange County Transit Plan (2017). FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no immediate financial impact associated with this item. RECOMMENDATION(S): Staff recommends that the OUTBoard: 1. Receive the presentation; 2. Discuss as appropriate; and 3. Identify any comments the Board may have for staff to convey to the Board of County Commissioners. 24 9/6/2017 1 September 20, 2017 Metropolitan Transportation Plan Orange Unified Transportation Board www.dchcmpo.org 1 Understand role of Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Plan Organization (DCHC MPO). Understand role of Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) and how to review it. Provide any feedback to DCHC MPO and Orange County staff. BOCC to receive presentation October 3. 2 Durham-Chapel Hill Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization Responsible for long range transportation planning in ◦Durham City and County, and ◦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. •Barry Jacobs –Member •Penny Rich –Alternate 3 (continued) Most funding designated in cooperation with NCDOT, but some discretionary funding is distributed based on the MPOs policy framework. All urbanized area must be in the MPO planning boundary. 4 State requirement for MPOs and RPOs, multimodal plan to address future  needs Required federally for MPOs only, includes fiscal constraint Funded projects,  Includes MPO’s TIPs plus rural projects Federal Approval of first 4 years Comprehensive Transportation Plan 20+ Year MPO Metropolitan Transportation Plan 10‐Year State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) [First 5 years ‐delivery STIP,  Latter 5 years ‐developmental  STIP] Prioritization process –the gateway  into the STIP Adopted May 2017 5 Lists highway, transitand other transportation projects to address future transportation deficiencies through year 2045. Assumptions–based on future land use, population and employment. Fiscal Constraint –Anticipated revenues must cover anticipated project costs. Funding--Projects must be in MTP to receive state and federal funding (via Transportation Improvement Program –TIP) Used for Planning ◦e.g., In development review, use LRTP to reserve right-of-way for future highway and fixed guideway projects 6 25 9/6/2017 2 1. Goals and Objectives 2. Socioeconomic Data (population and employment forecasts) 3. Deficiency Analysis 4. Alternatives Analysis 5. Preferred Option 6. Final MTP We are Here! Aug.-Oct. 2017 Oct.-Dec. 2017 Dec. 2017 For more on these steps: http://www.dchcmpo.org/programs/transport/2045mtp.asp 7 A combination of a transportation network, which includes a set of highway, transit and other transportation improvements, and a land use scenariothat depicts the distribution of population and employment (2045). Alternatives run in the Triangle Regional Model (TRM) to produce metrics that describe how well Alternatives meet future travel demand. Final 2045 MTP expected to be a combination of projects and policies from the various Alternatives. 8 2045 Land Use Scenario Transportation Network Alternative CommPlan: based on comprehensive land use plan and policies. AIM High: More density and mixed use at future rail station areas. Highway (no fiscal constraint) Transit (no fiscal constraint) Moderate: hybrid of highway and transit Four different Alternatives being reviewed. Final planwill be hybrid of the Alternatives www.bit.ly/DCHC-MTP-Alternatives 9 Land Use SE Data Guide Totals* County 201320452013‐45 % change Chatham*41,543        72,11030,56774% Durham286,210      475,091188,88166% Orange139,289      194,86755,57840% Total467,042     742,068    275,026     59% County 201320452013‐45 % change Chatham*9,339          17,718       8,379           90% Durham192,877      342,910     150,033      78% Orange64,212        107,791     43,579        68% Total266,428     468,419    201,991     76% * Only includes portion of Chatham County in the modeling area. Population Employment Steady population growth. Employment growth outpaces population growth. 10 Triangle Regional Model Output Performance Measures Travel  Isochrones Travel  Time Congestion Maps (V/C) Performance Measures ‐‐ DCHC MPO SE Data 201020402040 Transportation Network 2010E+C2035 1 Performance Measures  1.1.1Total Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT‐daily)13,217,550 20,368,697 20,581,822      1.1.1aTotal Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT‐per capita 33               32               33                     1.2.1Total Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT‐daily)312,669      581,776      536,746        1.2.1aTotal Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT‐per capita 0.77            0.92            0.85              1.3 Average Speed by Facility (miles/hour)    1.3.1   ‐ Freeway63               57               61                   1.3.2   ‐ Arterial 42               38               39                   1.3.3   ‐ All Facility 51               47               50                11 Map shows 2045 population and employment on the current transportation network. 2045 No-Build – Congestion Map •Most major commute corridors at 120% of capacity or higher (I-40, I-85, US 15-501, NC 54) •Many arterial roadway segments over 120%. 12 26 9/6/2017 3 •Orange County will continue to experience population and employment growth •Orange County employers will continue to attract commuters from outlying counties •Alternatives show significant improvements in travel time over the no-build scenario •Travel times will increase even with roadway improvements that are beyond the budget •Light rail and other transit investments significantly increase non-motorized modes in those corridors •Higher density and mixed land uses in rail station areas increases non-motorized modes and improves travel time Demographics Congestion Rail and Land Use 13 I-40: widening and interchange improvements I-85: widening and interchange improvements US 15-501: widening, super streets and intersection/interchange improvements NC 54: superstreet and intersection improvements S Churton St: widening Red Line = key projects Blue line = chance of being in 2045 MTP Black line = not good chance of being in 2045 MTP Highways 14 Based on the Orange County Transit Plan (adopted in 2014 and updated in 2017).  Transit Durham‐Orange Light Rail Transit(D‐O LRT) between  Chapel Hill and Durham. Bus Rapid Transit(BRT) North‐Southcorridor in  Chapel Hill. Expanded fixed‐route and express busservice. Funding for vehicle and bus facilities. Funding for park‐and‐ride lots, transit centers, bus  stop improvements, and transit emphasis corridor. Chapel Hill Bus Rapid Transit: North‐South Corridor 15 Any questions or comments? Thank you. Contact: •Andy Henry, DCHC MPO, 919-560-4366 ext. 36419, andrew.henry@durhamnc.gov •Tom Altieri, Orange County Planning, 919-245- 2579, taltieri@orangecountync.gov www.bit.ly/DCHC-MTP 16 27 Project Web site: www.bit.ly/DCHC-MTP Last updated 08/23/17 Page 1 MTP Local Input (September-October 2017) Organization/Date Location Participation MPO MPO Board September 13 (Wed), 9am Committee Room (Durham City Hall) 101 City Hall Plaza, Durham, NC Public Hearing: citizens can directly address the Board MPO Board 2nd Wednesday of each month, 9am Committee Room (Durham City Hall) 101 City Hall Plaza, Durham, NC Board will address 2045 MTP at monthly meetings from September through December. Board typically allows citizens to address the Board Durham County Durham City Council September 21 (Thu), 1pm Committee Room (Durham City Hall) 101 City Hall Plaza, Durham, NC Presentation to City Council. Council typically allows citizens to address them on work session agenda items Durham Board of County Commissioners October 2 (Mon), 9am Durham County Courthouse 200 E. Main St. Presentation to BOCC, who typically allow citizens to address them on work session agenda items Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission (to be determined) Committee Room (Durham City Hall) BPAC usually provide detailed comments on long-range plans Planning Commission October 10 (Tue), 5:30pm Council Chambers (Durham City Hall) 101 City Hall Plaza, Durham, NC Planning Commission usually receives presentation but does not submit official comments Durham Station Transportation Center August 29 (Tue), 4-7pm 515 Pettigrew St., Downtown Durham, NC 27701 Drop-in workshops for citizens Orange County Orange BOCC October 3 (Tue), 7PM Richard Whitted Meeting Facility 300 West Tryon Street Hillsborough, NC 27278 Presentation at Orange BOCC, who typically allow citizens to address them on the agenda item OUTBoard September 20, 6:30PM Orange County West Campus Office Building, Conference Room 004 (Lower Floor) 131 West Margaret Ln, Hillsborough Presentation to OUTBoard Orange County Workshop September 12, 5:30- 7:30pm Orange County Office Building 131 W Margaret Ln Lower Level Conference Room, #204 Hillsborough, NC 27278 Citizens can drop-in to discuss the MTP and provide comments Chapel Hill Town Council October presentation related to MTP’s Preferred Option Carrboro Bd of Aldermen September 19 (Tue), 7:30pm Carrboro Town Hall 301 W. Main St., Carrboro, NC 27510 Presentation at Town Board, who typically allow citizens to address them on the agenda items 28 Project Web site: www.bit.ly/DCHC-MTP Last updated 08/23/17 Page 2 Organization/Date Location Participation Carrboro TAB and Chapel Hill Trans. and Connectivity Bd. September 19 (Tue), 4- 6:30pm Carrboro Town Hall 301 W. Main St., Carrboro, NC 27510 Drop-in session before the Board of Aldermen meeting, including 5pm presentation Hillsborough Town Board Whitted Human Services Center 300 West Tryon Street Hillsborough, NC 27278 Planning Director will update the Town Board Chatham County Chatham BOCC September 18 (Mon), 1pm Historic Courthouse Park at Planning office Presentation at Chatham BOCC work session, who typically allow citizens to address them on the agenda item Chatham workshop September 13, 4-7pm Chatham Community Library Holmes Meeting Room 197 NC 87, Pittsboro, NC 27312 Drop-in workshop for citizens Contact: Andy Henry, DCHC MPO, 919-560-4366 ext. 36419, andrew.henry@durhamnc.gov 29 Memorandum Date: September 20th, 2012 To: Orange County Board of County Commissioners From: Orange Unified Transportation Board Subject: Comments Regarding the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization’s 2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan and Comprehensive Transportation Plan The Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard) met Wednesday, September 19th, 2012 to receive a presentation from the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization regarding the Alternatives Analysis for the DCHC MPO 2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan and Comprehensive Transportation Plan and provide the following comments regarding the Alternatives Analysis: There should be a focus on building a sustainable, economical and workable system that builds upon itself with capital investments to lay the groundwork for future innovation. Encourage the consideration of the larger effects of this plan and that there will be great economic benefits to some elements such as the public transportation projects. The plan should include provisions for staggering implementation of services such that bus ridership can help build future rail ridership once the rail project is completed. Support of ongoing coordination between municipalities within the county and with other jurisdictions in the region on all elements of the regional efforts. Suggest choosing a Preferred Option that provides a comprehensive multi-modal system which operates efficiently in the long term and provides the most significant economic and societal benefits to the County and the region. Orange Unified Transportation Board PO Box 8181 Hillsborough, NC 27278 Attachment 3 30 Project Name From To Existing LaneProposed La Improvement Est. Cost ModAQYr Eno Mountain Rd realignmen Mayo St Eno Mountain Rd 0 2 New Location 2,015,000 2060 Erwin Rd NC 751 US 15-501 2 4 Widening 25,084,000 2055 Erwin Rd Whitfield Rd US 15-501 2 2 Modernization 15,025,000 2055 Estes Dr NC 86 Seawell School Rd 2 4 Widening 5,976,000 2055 Estes Dr Seawell School Rd Greensboro Rd 2 2 Modernization 5,128,000 2055 Eubanks Rd MLK Blvd (NC 86)Rogers Rd 2 4 Widening 14,974,000 2045 Fordham Blvd (superstreet)Sage Rd E Lakeview Dr 4 4 Superstreet 2,052,000 2026 Fordham Blvd (US 15-501)I-40 Franklin St 4 4 Modernization 2,052,000 2026 Fordham Blvd (US 15-501)NC 54 Franklin Street 4 6 Widening 45,498,000 2026 Fordham Blvd (US 15-501)NC 54 US 15-501 4 6 Widening 49,832,000 2026 Freeland Memorial Extension S Churton St New Collector Rd 0 2 New Location 3,203,000 2060 Hillsborough Rd Old NC 86 Estes Dr 2 2 Modernization 10,796,000 2055 Homestead Rd Old NC 86 Rogers Rd 2 2 Modernization 10,234,000 2035 Homestead Rd Rogers Rd NC 86 2 2 Modernization 6,855,000 2035 I-40 NC 86 I-85 4 6 Widening 58,784,000 2035 I-40 US 15-501 NC 86 4 6 Widening 29,316,000 2035 I-40 Managed Lanes US 15-501 NC 86 6 8 Widening 156,227,000 2055 I-40 Managed Lanes NC 86 I-85 6 8 Widening 238,906,000 2060 I-85 US 70 I-40 4 6 Widening 197,378,000 2045 I-85 Sparger Rd US 70 4 6 Widening 39,118,000 2045 Lake Hogan Farms Rd Eubanks Rd Legends Way 0 2 New Location 4,407,000 2035 Legion Rd Ext Legion Rd Fordham Blvd 0 2 New Location 613,000 2025 Mt Carmel Ch Rd US 15-501 Old Lystra Rd 2 4 Widening 2,871,000 2045 Mt Carmel Church Rd Bennett Rd Old Farrington Rd 2 3 Widening 18,033,000 2060 Mt Willig Rd I-40/I-85 US 70 2 2 Modernization 3,577,000 2060 N Greensboro St Estes Dr E Main St 2 2 Modernization 3,131,000 2055 NC 54 Fordham Blvd (US 15Barbee Chapel Rd 6 6 Modernization 32,106,000 2027 NC 54 Old Fayetteville Rd MPO Boundary 2 3 Widening 14,457,000 2023 NC 86 Old NC 10 US 70 Business 2 4 Widening 7,259,000 2055 NC 86 Cornelius St (US 70 B NC 57 2 4 Widening 2,742,000 2055 New Collector Rd Orange Grove Rd Ext Becketts Ridge Rd 0 2 New Location 7,232,000 2060 New Hope Commons Dr Exte Eastowne Dr New Hope Common 0 2 New Location 4,588,000 2060 Old NC 86 I-40 Hillsborough Rd 2 2 Modernization 41,491,000 2060 31 Project Name From To Existing LaneProposed La Improvement Est. Cost ModAQYr Old NC 86 I-40 I-85 2 4 Widening 24,375,000 2045 Orange Grove Connector Orange Grove Rd US 70 0 2 New Location 5,299,000 2023 Purefoy Rd Ext Sandberg Ln Weaver Dairy Rd 0 2 New Location 3,777,000 2025 S Churton St US 70 Business I-85 2 4 Widening 7,450,000 2045 S Elliot Rd Ext Fordham Blvd Ephesus Church Rd 0 2 New Location 1,908,000 2025 S Greensboro St E Main St NC 54 2 2 Modernization 3,401,000 2055 US 70 NC 86 I-85 (exit 170)2 4 Widening 48,232,000 2060 US 70 I-85/US 70 Connecto NC 86 2 4 Widening 21,616,000 2060 32 ORANGE COUNTY ORANGE UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION BOARD (OUTBoard) ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: September 20, 2017 Action Agenda Item No. 5.a. SUBJECT: Bicycle Safety Implementation Subcommittee Report DEPARTMENT: Planning ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: 1. August 23, 2017 Meeting Agenda, Notes and Attachments 2. September 11, 2017 Meeting Agenda and Attachments Abigaile Pittman, Transportation/ Land Use Planner, 919-245-2567 PURPOSE: Receive report from the OUTBoard’s Bicycle Safety Implementation Subcommittee. Meeting materials from the Bicycle Safety Implementation Subcommittee meetings of August 23 and Septembers 11, 2017 are attached. The materials will be reviewed by Subcommittee Chair Art Menius and Abigaile Pittman at the OUTBoard meeting. RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends the OUTBoard: 1. Receive information on the update and provide any comments that the Board might have. 33 OUTBOARD BICYCLE SAFETY IMPLEMENTATION SUBCOMMITTEE AUGUST 23, 2017 MEETING NOTES ROOM 204, PLANNING DEPARTMENT WEST CAMPUS OFFICE BUILDING 131 WEST MARGARET LANE, HILLSBORUGH, NC 27278 SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS ATTENDING: Heidi Perry, Art Menius, Alyson West OTHER CITIZENS ATTENDING: Peter Leousis (member of the former BSTF) PLANNING STAFF ATTENDING: Abigaile Pittman, Transportation/Land Use Planner COMMUNITY RELATIONS STAFF ATTENDING: Todd McGee, Director, and Melissa Blackburn, Graphic Designer/Assistant Webmaster A. Administrative Issues – Meeting convened around 2:45 p.m. 1. Review of OUTBoard Bicycle Safety Implementation Subcommittee structure, budget, and parties involved. The group did a quick review of the OUTBoard approved Bicycle Safety Implementation Subcommittee structure, budget, and parties involved (attached to Notes for reference). Abigaile Pittman passed out a Subcommittee membership list, and for reference, a list of the prior members of the Bicycle Safety Task Force (BSTF) (both lists attached to Notes for reference). 2. Election of Subcommittee Chair. Heidi Perry made a motion to elect Art Menius Chair of the Bicycle Safety Implementation Subcommittee. The motion was seconded by Alyson West. The motion passed unanimously with a vote of 3-0. 3. Meeting notes. Abigaile Pittman stated that she would take Subcommittee notes. There was discussion about how to handle the taking of notes if Abigaile was not able to attend a meeting. The subcommittee members stated that in such a case they would request that another staff member attend and take notes, or that the meeting be rescheduled. 4. Budget oversight and administrative process. Abigaile Pittman stated that she would coordinate with administrative staff on how to proceed with securing funding requests for the Subcommittee. The Subcommittee was given $10,000 from the General Fund and $5,000 from the Visitor’s Bureau Occupancy Tax. Note: Follow up information is that any amounts under $500 can be secured with a Purchasing Card (“P-Card”), and any 34 OUTBoard Bicycle Safety Implementation Subcommittee Members Heidi Perry 407 Robert Hunt Drive Carrboro, NC 27410 heidiperov@gmail.com 919-618-8199 Art Menius 4720 Green Riley Road Rougemont, NC 27572 art@artmenius.com 919-675-2787 Alyson West 901 N. Greensboro Apt. D Carrboro, NC 27410 Alyson.west@gmail.com 503-734-5299 35 Bi c y c l e Sa f e t y Ta s k Fo r c e Ro s t e r 05/20/2016  Me m b e r s h i p C a t e g o r y Ap p l i c a n t s La w e n f o r c e m e n t a g e n c i e s ( S h e r i f f ’ s D e p a r t m e n t , H i g h w a y P a t r o l ) De p u t y B r i a n W h i t e h u r s t Sc h o o l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e Sa r a P i t t s , D i r e c t o r f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a l H e a l t h a n d S a f e t y Or a n g e C o u n t y V i s i t o r ’ s B u r e a u An t h o n y C a r e y NC D O T s t a f f Ch u c k E d w a r d s , N C D O T Co u n t y a n d r e g i o n a l p l a n n i n g s t a f f Ma t t D a y , T A R P O Ab i g a i l e P i t t m a n , O r a n g e C o u n t y P l a n n i n g D e p a r t m e n t Co u n t y b u s i n e s s El i B e l z Hi l l s b o r o u g h / O r a n g e C o u n t y C h a m b e r o f C o m m e r c e Ki m T e s o r o Ch a p e l H i l l / C a r r b o r o Ch a m b e r o f C o m m e r c e An t h o n y C a r e y Bi c y c l e a d v o c a c y g r o u p s Al y s o n W e s t To d d J o n e s Wi l l i a m L a n g s t o n Th o s e w h o w o r k w i t h d r i v e r ’ s e d u c a t i o n c l a s s e s a n d t r a f f i c of f e n d e r s Bu d d y H a r t l e y , D r i v e r ’ s e d u c a t i o n t e a c h e r / c o o r d i n a t o r In t e r e s t e d a n d c o n c e r n e d O r a n g e C o u n t y r e s i d e n t s Pe t e r L e o u s i s Cl i f f o r d L e a t h Pe t e r K l o p f e r Bo n n i e H a u s e r                  No t e :    ye l l o w  hi g h l i g h t i n g  in d i c a t e s  th o s e  wh o  ha v e  expressed interest                    in  pr o v i d i n g  in p u t  to  Bi c y c l e  Sa f e t y  Im p l e m e n t a t i o n  Subcommittee as                   a pr i v a t e  ci t i z e n  st a k e h o l d e r .   36 Bicycle Safety Task Force Report Implementation Subcommittee FY 2017-2018 I. Subcommittee Structure, Budget and Parties Involved in Implementation A. OUTBoard Subcommittee structure per Section VIII of Advisory Board Policy 1. Subcommittee may be formed by the OUTBoard to research and make special recommendations on special issues or areas in order to carry out the duties of the OUTBoard (i.e., implementation of the Bicycle Safety Task Force Report). 2. The subcommittee can be formed with the approval of the OUTBoard Chair and majority vote of the OUTBoard. 3. Membership on the subcommittee shall be voluntary. 4. The meeting schedule shall meet be determined by the subcommittee. 5. The subcommittee must have documented goals, deliverables, and a timeline, and cease to meet when these are satisfied. 6. The Subcommittee shall operate by majority vote. 7. Citizens with expertise related to the goals and objectives of the subcommittee may be invited to attend a subcommittee meeting; however, only appointed OUTBoard members can vote. 8. The subcommittee shall operate as directed by the OUTBoard. 9. The subcommittee shall be reviewed by the OUTBoard on an annual basis to determine continued need and realignment with the priorities of the OUTBoard. 10. A member of the subcommittee shall take responsibility for taking Minutes of the meetings and shall report to the OUTBoard regarding the subcommittee’s progress toward its stated objectives, including dissenting viewpoints. 11. The subcommittee shall operate openly as defined by applicable NC State law and local ordinances and policies. B. Budget 1. The subcommittee’s FY budget for the first year of implementation is: a) Staff support from the Planning Department, Visitors’ Bureau, and Community Relations Department; b) $10,000 from the Orange County General Fund; and c) $5,000 from the Visitors’ Bureau Occupancy Tax. i. Allocations from the General Fund may be used for any of the non-free first year implementation items detailed by the BSTF Report, and shall be the preferred funding source if possible before utilizing the funds from the Visitors’ Bureau Occupancy Tax. ii. Allocations from the Visitors’ Bureau Occupancy Tax fund shall be used to provide funding for visitor information and promote County tourism. iii. Possible additional funding and volunteer services from local advocacy groups and nonprofits. C. Lead Staff Support 1. Abigaile Pittman, Transportation/Land Use Planner, Orange County Planning Department shall serve a support function to the subcommittee. 2. Lead staff will attend meetings when available, on a case by case basis. 3. Lead staff will serve as coordinator with other supporting County staff. 37 D. Other Supporting Staff 1. Todd McGee, Director, Department of Community Relations. 2. Melissa Blackburn, Graphic Designer, Department of Community Relations. 3. Laurie Paolicelli, Orange County Visitor’s Bureau. E. Other Partnerships 1. Advocacy groups – to be identified. 2. Nonprofits – to be identified. F. Board of County Commissioners 12. By request, Commissioner Renee Price shall be kept informed by Lead Staff regarding the progress of the subcommittee meetings. 13. Prior to any subsequent budget requests, the OUTBoard and Lead Staff shall report back to the BOCC with a summary of the subcommittee’s progress on first year implementation tasks. II. Subcommittee Actions for FY 2017-18 A. Staff Time Only Actions/Responsible Party(ies) 1. Safety message to listservs/County staff. 2. Create static website with safety information, with links to Chapel Hill and Carrboro/County staff, Chapel Hill staff and Carrboro staff. 3. Social media (Orange County Facebook Events Page)/County staff. Tabling at community events/County staff, volunteers, advisory group members, and cycle clubs. 4. News/media integration (earned media)/County staff. 5. Best safety video contest/County staff. 6. Tabling at community events/County staff, volunteers, advisory group members, and cycle clubs. 7. Signage design and placement of signage at multiple entry point in Count/County staff and NCDOT B. Likely Inexpensive Actions/Responsible Party(ies) 1. Launch campaign kickoff with signs, contests, ads/County staff and volunteers 2. Bumper Stickers and Magnets/County staff. 3. Posters and flyers/County staff. 4. Partner with Community Watch to add Ride Friendly, Drive Friendly to design and place yard signage in rural neighborhoods/County staff and volunteers C. Possible Post-Launch Activities/Responsible Party(ies) 1. School outreach apps/programs/County staff and school officials. 2. Coordination with Transportation Demand Management professionals at the local, county, and university levels (bike counts and data collection) /County staff, etc. 3. Crash reporting enhancements/County staff. 4. Real-time EMT incident reporting/County staff. 38 Notes from August 9, 2017 meeting with Abigaile Pittman, Laurie Paolicelli, Todd McGee and Melissa Blackburn re staff support for Bicycle Safety Implementation Subcommittee  Focus is bicycle safety/education  Campaign slogan: Drive Safely, Ride Safely  Graphic image/logo needed (Melissa Blackburn)  Social Media: (Todd McGee and Melissa Blackburn) o Facebook – should be static, no comments; can be done as an ad with a link to web page o Website – can be done as a separate page, not necessary to be a page inside the Planning Department site. Can have a title indicating Orange County bicycle safety or something similar. Various software programs to consider: Adobe Muse, Word Press. Link to other sites (prepare list with linkages). Must consider ability to occasionally update. Also, there will be web banner capabilities. Orange County is hiring a company to redesign the county website – probably Civic Plus.  Brochure(s) using logo. Different messages for different target audiences?  Bumper stickers using logo and campaign slogan  Media Venues: see attached list; some spots available. Possibly ask them to match spots for bicycle safety campaign.  Video Ideas: UNC Journalism School students can perhaps participate.  Yard signs using logo and campaign slogan. Partner with Community Watch, etc.  Consult with NCDOT re road signage design criteria. Limited number placed first year. More in subsequent years.  Prepare list of possible community events for campaign exposure.  Identify and development other partnerships to assist with implementation. 39 Media venues that the Chapel Hill/Orange County Visitors Bureau has contracts with: Radio WCHL Radio and Chapelboro.com (local southern Orange County) WUNC (public news, civic issues, and cultural and entertainment info.) WCOM (Carrboro non-profit, locally produced, volunteer-driven programming) WHUP (Hillsborough news/public affairs programs, music) TV Town of Chapel Hill’s Public Access channel Website Banners Visitors Bureau Historic Hillsborough.com Orange County Town of Chapel Hill Town of Carrboro Town of Hillsborough Chapel Hill/Carrboro Chamber of Commerce Hillsborough/Orange County Chamber of Commerce Print News of Orange Daily Tar Heel Mebane Enterprise Southern Neighbor Daily Tar Heel Herald Sun 2018 Visitors Guides 40 41 41 amounts $500 or greater will require a Purchase Order. A Purchase Order does not need to be set up prior to the first invoice submission. B. Review of Orange County staff resources available to the subcommittee; and introductions to Todd McGee, Director of the Community Relations Department, and Melissa Blackburn, Graphic Designer/ Assistant Webmaster, Community Relations Department. Notes from Abigaile Pittman’s August 9th meeting with Todd McGee, Melissa Blackburn, and Laurie Paolicelli were provided to the Subcommittee (attached to Notes for reference). C. Discussion, planning and selection of initial implementation activities. There was a discussion of the logo design, and relating to the campaign slogan of “Drive Safely, Ride Safely”. Everyone agreed that the logo should be humanized. Melissa Blackburn stated that she will submit a good number of logo options to the Subcommittee for review. She said that the group could send her examples of logos that they like. Abigaile Pittman passed out a list of media venues that the Community Relations Department and the Visitors Bureau have contracts with (attached to Notes for reference). Todd McGee asked if it was more important to target motorists or cyclists. The subcommittee members agreed that both were important; and that the focus should be on people, mutual respect, and education. There was a general discussion of having a range of graphics beyond the logo, for use in various mediums such as bumper stickers, brochures, yard signs, articles, website, etc. Alyson West stated that they could also take photos to add to articles, the website, and signs. Heidi Perry stated that the Bike Walk NC site has many good examples that can be used for reference. Abigaile Pittman said that she would consult with NCDOT regarding the process for proceeding with a number of roadway entry signs. They will have specific standards. It was suggested that she contact Chuck Edwards or Kevin Lacey. Specific sign costs would need to be determined. Todd McGee and Melissa Blackburn stated that much of the printing could be done online at VistaPrint.com. The group discussed development of a freestanding website for bicycle safety. Todd McGee and Melissa Blackburn stated that this can definitely be done. Melissa would develop the site and the Subcommittee would then maintain it. Art Menius 41 stated that he preferred using Word Press software for the website. There was general agreement from the group. The group discussed creating an ad on Orange County’s Facebook page with a link to the Bicycle Safety website. Todd McGee stated that he thought the cost would be around $50 for 2 weeks. There would be no ability to comment on the Facebook page. The group discussed using the County’s Twitter account to send out information on bicycle safety related events. There are a broad set of followers on Twitter. Art Menius noted that the Sheriff and Police put out a few messages on Twitter and we need to have them send out messages as well. Heidi Perry and Alyson noted that AAA also uses Twitter and they have a magazine that could be utilized for bicycle safety messages. Heidi noted that there is a man named Ken Mills that teaches/taught alert driver classes that could get out bicycle safety messages. The group discussed community events. Some ways to coordinate with community events would be the WCHL community events page, the Visitor’s Bureau, and Hillsborough’s Chamber of Commerce. Todd McGee suggested other partnerships such at the Mountain-to-Sea group, and Orange County Schools. There are also standard yearly events in the area such as Hog Day. The group discussed a bicycle safety video contest. The group mutually agreed on a video contest with County high school students, and that a monetary prize should be offered to the winning group. They could use the prize money for equipment. Amounts ranging from $250-$500 were suggested. Todd McGee stated that WCHL can also do audio PSAs. The group stated that expenditures for initial launch event(s) would include printing costs, food, and giveaways. D. Strategies for Future Subcommittee Meetings 1. Structure of topics, tasks and goals for next several meetings. Follow-up assignments were given to group members:  Heidi Perry said she will look at possible target audiences for the video contest and find good video examples.  Abigaile Pittman said she would determine the process for budget submittals, and speak with NCDOT regarding the process, standards and costs for street signs.  Alyson stated that she would research examples of graphics and materials from other bicycle safety groups. She asked Abigaile Pittman to forward her the materials that were reviewed in the BSTF subcommittee meetings. 42  Art Menius stated that he would research website concepts/contents.  Peter Leousis stated that he would contact the photography and video individuals or groups at the County high schools (Orange High School and Cedar Ridge High School) . 2. Communication and coordination. Abigaile Pittman stated that she would prepare the meeting notes and send them out by email. 3. Meeting frequency and notice; inclusion of citizen stakeholders. The group agreed that a meeting about every three weeks would be appropriate, and that the schedule could be adjusted if needed. It was determined that the next Subcommittee meeting would be September 11, 8:30 a.m. – 10:30 a.m. in the Planning Department Conference Room 204. An invite would be sent to the prior BSTF members. Abigaile would ask the BSTF members to let her know if they no longer wished to receive information and meeting notices for the Bicycle Safety Implementation Subcommittee. The meeting was adjourned at 4:15 p.m. 43 OUTBOARD BICYCLE SAFETY IMPLEMENTATION SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA SEPTEMBER 11, 2017 8:30 A.M. ROOM 204, PLANNING DEPARTMENT WEST CAMPUS OFFICE BUILDING 131 WEST MARGARET LANE, HILLSBORUGH, NC 27278 A. Administrative Issues 1. Review and approval of Meeting Notes from August 23, 2017. B. Review of bicycle safety logo ideas (Melissa Blackburn, Graphic Designer/ Assistant Webmaster, Community Relations Department). C. Brennan Bouma, Orange County Sustainability Coordinator, Asset Management Services, will talk with the Subcommittee regarding: 1. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Coordinator duties - overlaps with Subcommittee objectives and opportunities to assist; 2. Existing products, films, etc. that can be obtained/shared from GoTriangle; and 3. Grant ideas that could overlap with TDM objectives. D. Reports on homework assignments from August 23, 2017 meeting: 1. Discussion of possible target audiences for the video contest and a review of good video examples (Heidi Perry). 2. Information from contact with the photography and video individuals or groups at the Orange High School and Cedar Ridge High School (Peter Leousis). 3. Examples of graphics and materials from other bicycle safety groups (Alyson West). 4. Website concepts/contents (Art Menius). 5. Process for budget submittals, and NCDOT process, standards and costs for street signs (Abigaile Pittman). 44 E. Future grant possibilities (Abigaile Pittman, Heidi Perry, Art Menius) 1. Tarwheels – Once a year, the Carolina Tarwheels Bicycle Club awards grants from the profits of its annual Bikefest ride in Hillsborough to local organizations that support and promote cycling. In the past, we have donated money to a variety of bicycle related organizations and individuals, and for cycling-related causes such as a new parking lot on the American Tobacco Trail, bicycles for children of low income families, and support for organizations like Trip for Kids. The process for this year’s donations has started, and Tarwheels has invited organizations who wish to receive funding to submit a proposal. Proposals can be for any amount up to $5,000. They expect to have as much as $15,000 to award this year. The Tarwheels Board will review the proposals, and may invite a representative from each proposal to present at the October Tarwheels Board meeting. The process requires that applicants send a PDF of no more than two pages and a budget outlining expenses to mark@tarwheels.net. The deadline for Tarwheels grant requests is September 30th, 2017. 2. NCDOT - Something to consider for 2018-19 cycle is the NCDOT bike helmet initiative. The helmets have to go to low income children and we can get up to 100 of them. The County’s existing social programs can provide contact information for low income children. We could perhaps pair this with a Bike Rodeo for them. The following links relate to the current 2017 cycle, but the info is there: https://www.ncdot.gov/bikeped/download/helmet_initiative_overview_guidelines.pdf https://www.ncdot.gov/bikeped/download/bicycle_helmet_initiative_application.pdf 3. State Farm - State Farm has a number of grants they give out each year, a couple of which I think we could apply for. The focus of these grants is on education, safety, and community. I have read the eligibility criteria and I believe Orange County is eligible to apply for either of these grants. 45 a. SF has a Neighbor Safety Grant. The 2018 grant applications will be available beginning this Friday, September 1, 2017 through Tuesday, October 31, 2017. Grant amount requested must be $5,000 or more. https://www.statefarm.com/about-us/community/education- programs/grants-scholarships/company-grants b. SF also has a Neighborhood Assist Grant of $25,000 which is awarded to 40 winners. The 2017 cycle is just finishing up but the 2019 cycle starts next June, 2018. https://www.neighborhoodassist.com/pages/neighborhoodassist2017/rules Art Menius spoke with Kim Conyers who administers State Farm grants programs for North Carolina. For the Good Neighbor grant, she says our project is a fit, but we are extremely unlikely to be awarded a grant for one reason - our project is limited to one county. Almost all the Good Neighbor grants go to projects that have statewide or regional impact. She doesn't see making the application a good use of our time. She strongly encouraged us to pursue the Neighborhood Assist Grant next year. She believes that if we can spread out virally from local bike organizations to those outside our immediate area that we can succeed. F. Homework assignments for next meeting. G. Brief discussion of upcoming report to OUTBoard at its September 20, 2017 Meeting. H. Establish next meeting date. 46 ORANGE COUNTY ORANGE UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION BOARD (OUTBoard) ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: September 20, 2017 Action Agenda Item No. 7.a. SUBJECT: Staff Update on the concept of a project to include bicycle safety improvements on Old NC 86, including the intersection of Old NC 86 and Homestead Road/Dairyland Road (aka Calvander) DEPARTMENT: Planning ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: 1. Old NC 86 Hwy Project with Bicycle Improvements Map Abigaile Pittman, Transportation/ Land Use Planner, 919-245-2567 PURPOSE: Receive information and provide any comments the Board might have. This update is in response to questions from the OUTBoard at its April 19, 2017 and August 16, 2017 meetings regarding a proposed roundabout project at the intersection of Old NC 86 and Homestead Road/Dairyland Road (aka Calvander), and the possibility of a feasibility study on Old NC 86 for bicycle lanes. This update will provide greater detail about a developing project proposal that relates to both of these issues, and the process for generating and adding projects to official project lists. The OUTBoard added the concept of a Calvander roundabout project to its recommended list of proposed projects for the 2020-2029 Draft Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) at its meeting on April 19, 2017. The OUTBoard suggested the roundabout project at Calvander as a means to improve bicycle safety by eliminating left turns at this intersection and approved the inclusion of this project on the preliminary project list unanimously. The southeast, northeast, and northwest quadrants of the Old NC 86 and Homestead Road/Dairyland Road intersection are included in the Carrboro Transition Area, while the southwest quadrant is designated as Rural Buffer. The Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) approved the project list at its meeting on May 2, 2017. A summary of the OUTBoard recommendation, including identification of the Calvander project addition, was included in the BOCC abstract. Then, at its August 16, 2017 meeting, there was request by an OUTBoard member to inquire about the possibility of a feasibility study for a bike path from Carrboro to Hillsborough, which would include the above referenced Calvander roundabout project in the study area. 47 North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization (DCHC MPO), Town of Carrboro, and Orange County response to concerns about bicycle safety on Old NC 86 It is a fairly common practice to submit draft projects along jurisdictional boundaries to the MPO in a preliminary project list. The MPO provides the forum to discuss possible projects at a staff level and allows for discussion, reconciling in cases of project duplication, and other coordination. If possible, advance staff coordination is considered between jurisdictions. However, the timing of project submissions is determined by the MPOs/RPOs, as well as NCDOT, and in the case of the Calvander roundabout concept the coordination did not come in advance of the scheduled MPO subcommittee meetings. The DCHC MPO deadline, initially on April 17, 2017, was extended to allow Orange County to submit its project list (inclusive of the Calvander roundabout) on May 3, 2017. The County’s project list also included the construction of bicycle facilities on Old NC 86 from Farm House Road in Carrboro to Homestead Road. A corresponding discussion has been ongoing with NCDOT, the Town of Carrboro, and the DCHC MPO for a Highway Project inclusive of bicycle safety improvements on Old NC 86 between Homestead Road and Old Fayetteville Road (Attachment 1). At its August 23, 2107 meeting the DCHC MPO Technical Coordinating Committee (TCC) recommended to the MPO Board that rather than submittal of an independent roundabout project at Calvander for SPOT scoring, the MPO should combine any Calvander intersection improvements with a larger project on the Old NC 86 corridor, one that has been previously discussed, for scoring. The Carrboro Board of Aldermen reviewed the revised project description at its September 5 meeting, and recommended a slight revision to change "increase capacity for vehicles" to "improve movement of vehicles". The MPO Board will consider its comprehensive list of projects for SPOT scoring at its September 13 meeting. Following is the new recommended project description for Old NC 86 between Homestead Road and Old Fayetteville Road: “Upgrade roadway corridor and intersection to improve safety of all users. Construct two-lane improvements on Old NC 86 with left turn lanes at appropriate locations, such as John’s Woods Road, and on-road bicycle facilities – paved shoulders and bicycle lane markings; design of roadway and facilities may vary along the corridor. Improve intersection at Calvander (Old NC 86/Homestead/Dairyland (SR 1004/1113/1777)) for all modes: increase capacity for vehicles improve movement of vehicles and provide bicycle and pedestrian facilities to improve safety.” If approved, the revised project will be placed on the NCDOT Strategic Planning Office of Transportation (SPOT) 5.0 Project Submittal List for scoring. Staff’s informal discussions with NCDOT indicate support for the above project as a way to improve bicycle safety on this section of Old NC 86. Support for a feasibility study for a 48 more extensive bike lane project along Old NC 86 to Hillsborough is not indicated at this time due to funding constraints. RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends the OUTBoard: 1. Receive information on the update and provide any comments that the Board might have. 49 HIL L S B O R O U G H R D DAIRYLANDRD H O M ESTEAD RD B R U T O N DR FELLS WAY O L D F A Y E T T E V I L L E R D AIR FIE L D R D RU S S E L L S F O R D R D SU N S E T CREEK C I R SU N S E T CREEKCIRFARMHOUSEDR O L D N C 8 6 D R E W L N JO H N S W O O D S R D HA R D E E L N Old NC 86 Highway Project with Bicycle Improvements Improvement Area (~ 0.8 miles) Parcels ¯Orange County Planning and InspectionsBrian Carson (9/7/2017) 0 200Feet 1 in = 450 feet ORANGE COUNTY ORANGE UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION BOARD (OUTBoard) ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: September 20, 2017 Action Agenda Item No. 7.b. SUBJECT: Staff Update on the Orange County Process to Submit Projects to MPOs/RPOs DEPARTMENT: Planning ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: 1. Draft Project Prioritization 5.0 Schedule Abigaile Pittman, Transportation/ Land Use Planner, 919-245-2567 PURPOSE: The purpose of this update is to review the process for generating projects for official MPO/RPO project lists. Each Metropolitan and Rural Planning Organization (MPO/RPO) works in conjunction with its member jurisdictions (staff and elected officials) to create a project list to submit to the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Strategic Transportation Prioritization (SPOT) process. NCDOT has begun its 5th iteration of this process, which occurs every two years. In Orange County, the DCHC MPO, the Burlington-Graham MPO (B-G MPO), and the Triangle Area RPO (TARPO) each issue a call for projects from member jurisdictions. Through the MPO/RPO process, the lists from each jurisdiction are refined to create an MPO/RPO-wide list of projects to submit to the SPOT process. Each jurisdiction is required to submit projects within the bounds of the schedule determined by each MPO/RPO as well as by NCDOT. Orange County follows a process to generate project lists for submission to the DCHC MPO for possible inclusion in the final MPO-wide list of projects submitted to NCDOT for consideration in the scoring (SPOT) process. It is a fairly common practice to submit draft projects along jurisdictional boundaries to the MPO in a preliminary project list. The MPO provides the forum to discuss possible projects at a staff level and allows for discussion, reconciling in cases of project duplication, and other coordination. If possible, advance staff coordination is considered between jurisdictions. Later, with the benefit of scores, additional coordination among the MPO and member jurisdictions takes place to revisit project priorities and assign local input points. Overall, the primary goal of this process is to ensure that the MPO submits competitive and viable projects, consistent with local priorities and with consideration to geographic equity. This process, which is repeated every two years, includes a series of key elements, outlined below: 51  Staff reviews previous project submissions and prepares a draft list of projects for consideration through the process. Since the process is repeated every two years, the lists submitted to each MPO/RPO will often be similar to lists from previous years.  This preliminary project list is presented to the Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard) for consideration and approval.  The OUTBoard forwards a project list for all MPOs and RPOs in Orange County to the BOCC for approval. The BOCC approves the list as the preliminary list for further consideration and coordination at the MPO and RPO level. The timing of project submissions is determined by the MPOs/RPOs, as well as NCDOT. For reference, NCDOT’s Draft Project Prioritization Schedule for the SPOT 5.0 process is provided in Attachment 1. RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends the OUTBoard: 1. Receive information on this update and provide any comments that the Board might have. 52 At t a c h m e n t 1 - D r a f t P r o j e c t Pr i o r i t i z a t i o n 5 . 0 S c h e d u l e May 23, 2017 2019 Ju n J u l A u g S e p t O c t N o v D e c J a n F e b M a r A p r M a y J u n J u l A u g S e p t O c t N o v D e c J a n BO T ap p r o v e s P5 . 0 Cr i t e r i a & We i g h t s TI P U n i t Pr o g r a m s St a t e w i d e Mo b i l i t y Pr o j e c t s NCDOT releases Draft STIP NCDOT Provides Report to JLTOCMPOs, RPOs, & Divisions assign Division Needs Local Input Points SPOT finalizes Division Needs Scores and TIP Unit programs Division Needs projects 20 1 8 20 1 7 MP O s , R P O s , & D i v i s i o n s a s s i g n Re g i o n a l I m p a c t L o c a l I n p u t Po i n t s ( w i t h o p t i o n t o a s s i g n Di v i s i o n N e e d s L o c a l I n p u t Po i n t s ) SPOT finalizes Regional Impact scores and TIP Unit programs Regional Impact projects MP O s , R P O s , & D i v i s i o n s t e s t , en t e r , a n d s u b m i t p r o j e c t s SP O T R e v i e w s a n d C a l c u l a t e s Q u a n t . S c o r e s f o r A l l Pr o j e c t s ( E x i s t i n g + N e w ) . I n c l u d e s r e v i e w p e r i o d o f a l l da t a & c o s t s t o b e u s e d f o r s c o r i n g ( b y M P O s , R P O s , Di v i s i o n s , a n d D O T s t a f f ) . Ke y D a t e s : Ju n e 2 9 , 2 0 1 7 : BO T a p p r o v e s P 5 . 0 C r i t e r i a & W e i g h t s Ju l y 5 , 2 0 1 7 : SP O T O n ! i n e o p e n s f o r t e s t i n g , e n t e r i n g , a n d s u b m i t t i n g p r o j e c t s ( c l o s e s S e p t . 2 9 t h ) Au g u s t 2 5 , 2 0 1 7 : Ex i s t i n g P r o j e c t D e l e t i o n s d u e f o r r e c e i v i ng e x t r a n e w s u b m i t t a l s ( o n e o u t , o n e i n ) Ex i s t i n g P r o j e c t M o d i f i c a t i o n s d u e Se p t e m b e r 2 9 , 2 0 1 7 : A l t e r n a t e W e i g h t s d u e SP O T O n ! i n e c l o s e s f o r s u b m i t t i n g p r o j e c t s En d o f M a r c h 2 0 1 8 : Qu a n t i t a t i v e s c o r e s f o r a l l p r o j e c t s r e l e a s e d Dr a f t l i s t o f P r o g r a m m e d S t a t e w id e M o b i l i t y p r o j e c t s r e l e a s e d Ap r i l 1 , 2 0 1 8 : Re g i o n a l I m p a c t L o c a l I n p u t P o i n t w i n d o w o p e n s f o r 3 m o n t h s De a d l i n e f o r A p p r o v a l o f L o c a l I n p u t P o i n t A s s i g n m e n t M e t h o d o l o g i e s En d o f A u g u s t 2 0 1 8 : Dr a f t l i s t o f P r o g r a m m e d R e g i o n a l I m p a c t P r o j e c t s r e l e a s e d Se p t e m b e r 1 , 2 0 1 8 : Di v i s i o n N e e d s L o c a l I n p u t P o i n t w i n d o w o p e n s f o r 2 m o n t h s Ja n u a r y 2 0 1 9 : 20 2 0 - 2 0 2 9 D r a f t S T I P r e l e a s e d Notes:Blue Box =Approval of P5.0 Scoring Yellow Box =MPO/RPO/Division Input Green Box = NCDOT Work Tasks 53