The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda - 05-01-2018 6-b - SPOT 5.0 Update and Recommendations on County Transportation Priorities in TARPOORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: May 1, 2018 Action Agenda Item No. 6 -b 1 SUBJECT: SPOT 5.0 Update and Recommendations on County Transportation Priorities in TARPO DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: (919) 1. Orange County Recommendation for Nishith Trivedi, Transportation Planner Ranking Projects within TARPO and 245 -2582 Map Tom Altieri, Planner III, 245 -2579 2. Orange County - Preliminary Scores Craig Benedict, Planning Director, 245- 2575 PURPOSE: To receive an update on Strategic Prioritization Office of Transportation (SPOT) 5.0 activities from Orange County Transportation Planning staff and consider the Orange Unified Transportation Board's (OUTBoard) recommendation for Orange County's priorities within the Triangle Area Rural Planning Organization ( TARPO). BACKGROUND: SPOT 5.0 Update — The North Carolina Department of Transportation ( NCDOT) released its SPOT 5.0 scores on April 3, 2018. Metropolitan and Rural Planning Organizations (MPO /RPO) are limited to the number of transportation projects that can be submitted and scored through the process. Orange County's prioritized transportation projects scored in SPOT 5.0 are now subject to different MPO /RPO adopted — and NCDOT approved — local input point processes. Projects receiving local input points will ultimately score higher than those that do not, which increases likelihood of State funding through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) FY 2020 -2029. Following are some key aspects of the local input assignment methodologies from each of the County's applicable transportation planning organizations: Triangle Area Rural Planning Organization ( TARPO) • Orange County submitted 6 transportation projects to TARPO of which 3 were scored. • Its process for assigning local input points incorporates both quantitative data and briorities from member iurisdictions who must rank their scored aroiects. • The top two ranked projects scored for each member county (Chatham, Lee, Moore, and Orange) in TARPO will be given the full 100 local input points. • Additionally, the 6 next - highest scoring projects within TARPO will also be allocated 100 local input points. These projects will be determined after all counties have submitted their rankings, which are due to TARPO staff by May 15. • TARPO staff will conduct a public drop -in session to present the local input assignments and gather input during late- May /early -June. No BOCC actions are required at this time for the Durham — Chapel Hill — Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization (DCHC MPO) and Burlington- Graham Metropolitan Planning Organization (BG MPO). Following is a brief update on their local input point processes for information. DCHC MPO • Orange County submitted 19 transportation projects to DCHC MPO of which 6 were scored. • DCHC MPO staff is conducting its quantitative based process and will publish the results for a 21 -day public review period running from May 14 through June 4. BG MPO • Orange County submitted 3 transportation projects to BG MPO, none of which were scored through SPOT 5.0 due to BG MPO project ranking and selection processing, which put projects with the highest pre - preliminary scores forward. • Orange County staff is working with BG MPO staff and staff of other member jurisdictions to develop a process for SPOT 6.0 that considers more than just pre - preliminary scores as prerequisite for formal scoring. Additional specifics on the local input point methodologies of the two MPOs and RPO were provided as an Information Item to the BOCC at its January 23, 2018 meeting. OUTBoard Recommendation for Ranking of County Transportation Priorities in TARPO — All counties within TARPO have been asked to rank their scored transportation projects. At its April 18, 2018 meeting, the OUTBoard recommended the following: • Orange County Public Transit Purchase of Two Light- Transit Vehicles be ranked as the County's top project, followed by Old Greensboro Road and Efland -Cedar Grove Road Modernization and 4' paved shoulder (Attachment 1). • NC -54 should not be ranked, as it is not identified as a County priority and completion of the NC 54 Corridor Study remains pending. • NCDOT should include crosswalks, intersection improvements and bike /pedestrian safety modifications when doing modernization projects. • Bridge on Old Greensboro should accommodate pedestrian and vehicular safety. Transportation Planning Staff Comments — It is clear that Orange County's top two ranked projects will receive the maximum (100) local input points from TARPO through its methodology. How many local input points will be allocated to Orange County's third ranked project will not be known until all member counties submit their prioritized rankings to TARPO staff and they are scored through its internal methodology for assignment. It is possible that Orange County's third ranked project may receive less than the maximum amount of local input points. Additional Background Information on SPOT 5.0 - The preliminary results of Orange County prioritized transportation projects are presented in Attachment 2. In accordance with State regulations and in coordination with the NCDOT schedule, MPO /RPO Board approvals of local input point distribution are scheduled for June, following a 21 -day public review period. Transportation planning staff will continue to keep the BOCC informed throughout the SPOT 5.0 process. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no immediate financial impact associated with this item. 3 SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT: The following Orange Social Justice Goals are applicable to this agenda item: • GOAL: ENSURE ECONOMIC SELF - SUFFICIENCY The creation and preservation of infrastructure, policies, programs and funding necessary for residents to provide shelter, food, clothing and medical care for themselves and their dependents. • GOAL: ESTABLISH SUSTAINABLE AND EQUITABLE LAND -USE AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of people of all races, cultures, incomes and educational levels with respect to the development and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, policies, and decisions. Fair treatment means that no group of people should bear a disproportionate share of the negative environmental consequences resulting from industrial, governmental and commercial operations or policies. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board consider the OUTBoard recommendation included in Attachment 1 as the County's ranking for submittal to the TARPO. Attachment 1 Orange County Recommendations for Ranking Projects within TARPO and Map N/A - Not Applicable, as not on the County's list of priority projects. If left unranked by Orange County, no TARPO local input points will be assigned to these NC -54 projects Cost determined by NCDOT Feasibility Studies Unit using their Cost Estimation Tool. 1- Modernization projects typically include: • Improving roadway geometry for motorist (recovery area) and bicyclists (additional room on paved shoulder) safety. • Bringing groadway up to current standards by increasing lane and pavement width without adding additional lanes. • Adding turn lanes at multiple intersections along section of roadway. OUTBoard Map Mode Tier Description Total Cost Submitted By Ranking Construction Cost Right -of -Way Cost Utilities Cost Actual Project Cost Reference (April 18, 2018) 1 Transit Division Orange Public Transit - Purchase two light transit $ 108,400 TARPO 1 $ 108,400 vehicles. SR 1005 (Old Greensboro Rd) from SR 1942 (Jones Ferry 2 Highway Division Rd) to NC 87 in Alamance County - Modernize' and add $ 42,500,000 TARPO 2 $ 35,000,000 $ 6,000,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 42,500,000 4- foot paved shoulders. SR 1004/1357 (Efland -Cedar Grove Road) from SR 1332 3 Highway Division (Highland Farm Rd) to NC 86 - Modernization', including $ 17,500,000 TARPO 3 $ 15,000,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 500,000 $ 17,500,000 turn lanes where appropriate, and addition of 4 -foot paved shoulders. NC 54 from SR 1006 (Orange Grove Rd) to SR A Highway Regional 1937/1107 (Old Fayetteville Rd) - Widen to a four -lane $ 83,000,000 Carryover N/A $ 55,500,000 $ 24,500,000 $ 3,000,000 $ 83,000,000 boulevard. NC 54 from NC 119 to Orange Grove Rd - Widen 8 Highway Regional roadway from two -lane undivided to four -lane divided $ 107,600,000 BGMPO N/A $ 79,000,000 $ 25,500,000 $ 3,100,000 $ 107,600,000 roadway. N/A - Not Applicable, as not on the County's list of priority projects. If left unranked by Orange County, no TARPO local input points will be assigned to these NC -54 projects Cost determined by NCDOT Feasibility Studies Unit using their Cost Estimation Tool. 1- Modernization projects typically include: • Improving roadway geometry for motorist (recovery area) and bicyclists (additional room on paved shoulder) safety. • Bringing groadway up to current standards by increasing lane and pavement width without adding additional lanes. • Adding turn lanes at multiple intersections along section of roadway. Attac'hmerlt 1 Orange County SPOT 5.0 TARPO Scored Projects Caswell Co. I I I Pers n o. 1 I I 49 � i 157 i 86 I � , i i 57 i i86 I i I Mebarl ik I _ �? illsb rough I i 70A � I Alamance Co. 70 i Durham Co. 4 751 I 86 i , ; i Durham t Lable Name I B l 1 Orange Public Transit, Purchase two lighttransitvehicles. SR 1005 (Old Greensboro Rd) from SR 1942 (Jones Ferry 54 I A 2 Rd) to NC 87 in Alamance County, Modernize' and add 4 r\ foot paved shoulders. SR 1004/1357 (Efland ?Cedar Grove Road) from SR 1332 C (Highland Farm Rd) to NC 86, Modernization', including 1 3 turn lanes where appropriate, and addition of 4foot 2 paved shoulders. NC 54 from SR 1006 (Orange Grove Rd) to SR 1937/1107 A (Old Fayetteville Rd), Widen to a four lane boulevard. _ — NC 54 from NC 119 to Orange Grove Rd, Widen roadway B from two lane undivided to four ?lane divided roadway. County Priorities TARPO Boundary hatham Co. MPO /RPO DCHC MPO Boundary s N f'�-�g \5 tin = Smiles Ir i I 0 1 TAR PO B -G MPO Boundary L' Miles Municipal Boundaries P Orange County Planning and Inspections Nishith Trivedi (04/19/2018) Attachment 2 SPOT P5.0 Transportation Project Prioritization Process (STIP 2020 — 2029) — TARPO Inkfal Projed Ust 100% Data Driven 70% Data Driven, 15% MPO /RPO Input, 15% Division Input —MiRF:Adiii/july 2018 Old Greensboro Road Modernize _ and add 4' Paved Shoulders 0 Updated By: Nishith Trivedi, Orange County Transportation Planner Wslon N s 50% Data Driven, 25% MP0 /RP0 Input, 25% Division Input ♦ Old Greensboro Road Modernize and add 4' Paved Shoulders 1 22.36150 (Division) -' / — — — — — — — — — — — — — Efland -Cedar Grove Road / Efland -Cedar Grove Road I Modernization, includingturn lanes Modernization, including turn lanes W where appropriate and add 4' paved i where appropriate and add 4' paved shoulders: t shoulders: 14.63 150 (Division) Deviated Fixed Route Orange Public Transit - Purchase two light transit -0-3 vehicles. Carryover projects from previous SPOT processes NC -54 from SR 1006 (Orange Grove Road) NC -54 Orange Grove Road to 1 w to SR 1937/1107 (Old Fayetteville Rd) - Old Fayetteville widen to 4 1 widen to 4 lane boulevard lane boulevard 1 / 46.80170 (Region) Submitted by BG MPO, not an Orange County Priority ♦ — — — — — — — — — — — — Project, awaiting NC -54 West Corridor Study / — — — — — — — — — — — — NC- 54fvom NC -119 to SR 1006 ! NC -54 from NC -119 to SR tik; (Orange Grove Road) widen to 4 1006 (Orange Grove Road) lane boulevard widen to 4 lane boulevard 38.35170 (Region) 1 -- — — — — — — — — — — — I +F Orange Grove Road Paved Shoulder Not Carried Forward (:i)" Not Carried Forward Dairyland Road Paved Shoulders Orange Grove Road /Dodsons ♦rt Not Carried Forward Crossroads Paved Shoulders — — — — — — — — — — — — — I Purchase two light transit vehicles. 24.81150 (Division) ♦ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I ♦ — — — — — — — — — — — — — NC -54 Orange Grove Road to Old Fayetteville widen to 4 lane boulevard 1 36.58150 (Division) ♦ — — — — — — — — — — — — ! —/ NC -54 from NC -119 to SR 1006 (Orange Grove Road) widen to 4 lane boulevard 31.42 150 (Division) I -- — — — — — — — — — —I SPOT P5.0 Transportation Project Prioritization Process (STIP 2020 — 2029) — B -G MPO Initial Proled fist Stotewidw Regional laps r 100% Data Driven 70% Data Driven, 15% MPO /RPO Input, 15% Division Input —fil _C ?" -C �drlr X1:'1 X1111 l._ � 7, Mattress Factory Road Interchange �ft Not Carried Forward Mattress Factory Road � Not Carried Forward Extension to U.S. 70 Buckhorn Road SR 1114 Widening vv Not Carried Forward Not carried forward due to BG MPO project ranking and selection process which only submitted projects with highest pre - preliminary scores. 7 Updated By: Nishith Trivedi, Orange County Transportation Planner Diirlsion Nwawds 50% Data Driven, 25% MPO /RPO Input, 25% Division Input C�CC I iii �i j k_tl_ai r -fit; %ti�l_1 SPOT P5.0 Transportation Project Prioritization Process (STIP 2020 — 2029) — DCHC MPO Initial Proled Ust - 100% Data Driven 70% Data Driven, 15% MPO /RPO Input, 15% Division Input 1 T 1 1 -85 /NC 86 Interchange improvements f l ! INC 86 Improvements North of Hillsborough Eno Mountain Rd /Mayo Street at Orange Grove Rd 4 U.S. 70 East /I- 85/I -40 Connector Orange Grove Road Widening with Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Calvander Roundabout Q -- * South Churton Street (bill NC 86 rom I -40 to Eno River Improvements I-40 Widening from 1- 40/1 -85 interchange to NC 86 1 -40 Widening from NC -86 to U.S. 15 -501 Orange County Public Transportation Circulator II Vehicles Dimmocks Mill Rail Trestle Improvements Q, Exchange Park Lane Rail Trestle Improvements 1 Old INC 86 Bike Lanes - Homestead to Farmhouse 04 Homestead Road Bike Lanes and Sidewalks 12 Eubanks Road Bike Lanes 'PFt_Ca�meiC u'h rc�i�adBike /Pedestrian I 13 Improvements l .14 Orange High School oa aro Latta Road Si ewa Improvements Orange Grove Road /1 -40 Pedestrian Bridge 1 -85 Pedestrian Bridge Dairyland Road Paved Shoulders 1 g Trail Connection from English Hill Lane to Buttonwood Drive Trai Connection rom Patriots Pointe to Tim ers 1'9 Drive ' �/i li i`Jlil "]1,1,, )'k t FUNDED! I -85 /NC 86 Interchange Improvements #6 Not Carried Forward wo Not Carried Forward FUNDED] South Churton Street (Old NC 86) from I -40 to Eno.River Improvements FUNDED! I -40 Widening from I -85 to 15/501 `y Not Carried Forward V Not Carried Forward Updated By: Nishith Trivedi, Orange County Transportation Planner DMsion Nis 50% Data Driven, 25% MPO /RPO Input, 25% Division Input �#. I (I�_1!f =1 /�'_� ?'i:(sJii�1�1 -Vi' I�� -�� _ �• �j�- �(= J_I.1L?l� �;�)'.[�_!�IrJ f:��7i �.) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 7 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1 NC 86 Improvements North of Hillsborough Q NC 86 Improvements North of Hillsborough !��^, 27.42 1 50 (Division) ! _36.02170 (Region _ _ _ _ � _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ — Eno Mountain Rd /Mayo Street at Orange Grove Rd ! _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ � _ _ _ _ _ 14.36150 (DivisioJ_ Q' U.S. 70 East /1- 85/1 -40 Connector U.S. 70 East /I- 85/I -40 Connector _18.43 1 70 (Region _ _ _ _ •�� _ _ _ _ 13.03150 (Division) V„ Not Carried Forward _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Old NC 86 Bike Lanes- Homestead to Farmhouse ! 19.20150 (Division) _ _ _ _ _ ! Not Carried Forward Not Carried Forward Mt. Carmel Church Road Bike /Ped Improvements ! 23.01150(Division)_ _ _ _ _ ! Not Carried Forward Not Carried Forward Not Carried Forward Not Carried Forward Not Carried Forward A Not Carried Forward * Carryover projects from SPOT 4.0