HomeMy WebLinkAboutOUTBoard agenda 112818
AGENDA
Orange Unified Transportation Board
November 28, 2018
6:30 p.m.
You can bring your laptops/tablets if you would like to use them.
West Campus Office Building
2nd Floor Conference Room 204
131 West Margaret Lane, Hillsborough
*PLEASE NOTE CHANGE IN LOCATION*
Page Item Title
3
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
5.a.
5.b.
5.c.
6.
Call to Order, Determination of Quorum, and Introductions of New Members
Election of New Chair/Vice-Chair - The annual terms for the current Chair and
Vice Chair are concluding; new appointments are needed.
Approval of Minutes from September 19, 2018 and October 17, 2018
Consideration of Additions to the Agenda
Transit Advisory Services/Orange County Public Transportation (OCPT)
This section of the agenda is addressed jointly by the OUTBoard and supplemental
staff from other County departments (Aging; DSS; Housing, Human Rights and
Community Development; Health; and Child Support Enforcement) to address
transit services.
OCPT Administrative Updates (Theo Letman) – Information to be provided at the
meeting.
OUTBoard/Transit Advisory Services Action: Receive and review information,
provide comments
OCPT/OCCO Update (Allyson Coltrane) - PowerPoint presentation to be presented
at the meeting.
OUTBoard/Transit Advisory Services Action: Receive and review information,
provide comments.
Transit Advisory Services (TAS) Comments/Questions (Theo Letman) - Opportunity
for TAS members to offer transit related comments and ask questions regarding
issues not on the agenda.
OUTBoard/Transit Services Action: P rovide comments and q uestions, receive
feedback.
Regular OUTBoard Agenda (Action Items)
15
27
35
37
49
6.a.
6.b.
7.
7.a.
7.b.
7.c.
8.
Annual Report (2018) and Work Plan (2019) (Abigaile Pittman) - To discuss the
OUTBoard Annual Report 2018 and Work Plan 2019 for the annual Board of County
Commissioners (BOCC) planning retreat in early 2019. The Annual Report informs
the BOCC of the past year’s activities of advisory boards/commissions and assists in
overall County work planning for 2019.
OUTBoard Action: Receive the information and provide any comments or direction
that the Board might have; approve the annual report and work plan; and forward to
the BOCC.
Bicycle Safety Implementation Subcommittee Report (Abigaile Pittman)
OUTBoard Action: Receive the information and provide any comments or direction
that the Board might have.
Staff Updates
MPO/RPO NCDOT Project Updates (Abigaile Pittman)
OUTBoard Orientation Materials (Abigaile Pittman)
Call for High Impact – Low Cost Projects (Abigaile Pittman)
Adjournment – There will be no meeting in December. The next regularly
scheduled meeting date is January 16, 2019.
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
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.
DRAFT MINUTES 1 Orange County OutBoard Meeting 2
September 19, 2018 3
4 5
Members Present: Heidi Perry (Chair) At-Large Representative; Alex Castro (Vice-Chair), Bingham Township 6
Representative; Donna Musson, Eno Township Representative; David Laudicina, Cheeks Township Representative; 7
Jenn Sykes, At-Large; Ed Vaughn, Cedar Grove Township Representative; Brantley Wells, Hillsborough Township 8
Representative; Alyson West, At-Large Representative; Ted Triebel, Little River Township Representative; Art Menius, 9
At-Large Representative; 10
11 Members Absent: Jeff Charles, At-Large Representative; Justin Miller, At- Large Representative; Erle Smith, Chapel Hill 12
Township Representative; Gary Saunders, At-Large Representative 13 14
Staff Present: Abigaile Pittman, Transportation/Land Use Planner; Nishith Trivedi, Transportation Planner; Tina Love; 15
Administrative Assistant III 16 17
Others Present: Linda Griffin, Minutes Preparer 18
19
Agenda Item 1: Call to Order and Determination of Quorum 20
21 Agenda Item 2: Approval of Minutes from August 25, 2018 Meeting 22
Motion by Art Menius to Approve Minutes, seconded by Alex Castro. 23
Vote: Unanimous 24
25
Agenda Item 3: Consideration of Additions to the Agenda 26
There were none. 27
28 Agenda Item 4: Regular OUTBoard Agenda 29
30
4b. Bicycle Safety Implementation Subcommittee Report (Abigaile Pittman) 31
32
Abigaile Pittman presented a summary of recent events including a presentation to the Commissioners on June 5, 33
bicycle safety videos, the campaign logo and slogan, a draft of the bicycle safety web page, the purchase of branded 34
marketing materials, the design of five draft posters, the purchase of fifteen road signs, and the approval of 35
encroachment agreements by NCDOT. Upcoming work includes erecting the road signs, the design and distribution on 36
social media and radio ads. Community events may be deferred until next spring. 37
38
Abigaile Pittman: I think that some of the photos should be changed out for a couple of the posters, or some of the 39
wording revised because the safety message is not coming across well. 40
41
Jenn Sykes: The word ‘Police’ could be photo-shopped onto the car hood or another screen shot of a police car could 42
be used. 43
44
Abigaile Pittman: Consider adding wording to the ‘4 ft.’ poster stating that the law allows crossing the double yellow line 45
when passing bicyclists. 46
47
Abigaile Pittman: Does the Board think the information on the youth poster could be turned into a brochure? 48
49
There was general agreement among Board members, adding that the flip side of a folded brochure could be used for 50
providing rules of the road. 51
52
Abigaile Pittman: There could possibly there could be two different kinds of brochures. 53
54
55
3
4b. Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan Update (Nish Trivedi) OUTBoard Action: To review and 56
comment on the Draft Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan (E-B-M AMP). 57
58
Nish Trivedi: The background of this plan; it was originally adopted in November 2011. A Transportation Study was done 59
in 2017. It looked at existing conditions, environmental, traffic analysis and other issues related to the 2011 E-B-M AMP. 60
He explained the process of updating the plan. The Access Management Plan is the proposed long-range master plan 61
for the possibility of new roads and the connection to existing roads. The main purpose is to maintain the overall safety 62
of the transportation system, minimize congestion and crashes, provide efficient traffic flow and safety; and ensure 63
access to adjacent properties as development occurs over time. The plan is a long-range vision of the area. It is a means 64
of requesting right-of-way dedication during the development review process. Nish explained the history of the planning 65
process and what the plan does and does not do. In 2017 Volkert conducted the transportation study. The original 2011 66
E-B-M AMP included a map of the area and identified key intersections in the area. It included a variety of access 67
management strategies including 2 possible street cross sections. In September 2011 the Planning Board and 68
OUTBoard reviewed it and made its recommendations. There was a public information meeting held in November of that 69
year and the Board of County Commissioners adopted it that same month. In 2017 Volkert worked with Pilot 70
Environmental Inc. in completing the study. They determined the development potential for the area based on 71
environmental and other constraints as well as the traffic impact of that development. 72
73
Alex Castro: The Plan didn’t address multi-model concerns; it is only about roads. And there is nothing about commuter 74
rail, only about roads. 75
76
Nish Trivedi: The Plan addresses multimodal in the recommended NCDOT Standards Street cross-sections which are 77
covered later in the presentation. This study included a big spreadsheet with 30 rows of data that showed what the 78
various development sites might be. Hypothetical example is a 100 acre property was evaluated and it was determined 79
that only 30 acres was actually developable due to environmental issues, market factors and other constraints. 80
Maximizing the 30 acres development would result in a traffic impact; more cars on the road will be generated from that 81
development. The 2017 Transportation Study also considered NCDOT 24 different street cross sections, what State 82
routes should look like. It proposed 3 NCDOT standard street cross-sections for this area. The Study also took into 83
consideration the impact at intersections, what would be needed at those intersections, would turn lanes be needed due 84
to increased traffic. The slides show some of the intersections that would need turn lanes, stops signs, etc. to address 85
the increased traffic for that development. Now we are in the process of updating the original 2011 E-B-M AMP using 86
the 2017 Study. 87
88
David Laudicina: Study for Railroad 89
90
Nish Trivedi: NCDOT is having conversations with the railroads for improvements at railroad crossings. I have been told 91
that the railroad wants to close at-grade crossings. NCDOT is working with them on this issue and we have not heard 92
any specifics. The railroad has plans for this area and has ongoing conversations with NCDOT. I keep hearing different 93
things on their wish list going forward. We conducted a community meeting to let the public know what is going on in this 94
process and get their feedback. The study also included recommendations, and these are all presented to you for your 95
consideration as we draft the E-B-M AMP. We are taking the original 2011 E-B-M AMP, adding the 2017 Transportation 96
Study, with public comments, to create a whole new plan. The 2017 Transportation Study analyzed potential roads and 97
whether those roads were feasible and ensure everyone had access to their property while development occurs, and the 98
circles are for various intersection improvements. The green lines are from the study itself. The purple lines you see are 99
where staff determined additional roads and studies would be needed to address increased traffic brought on by the 100
development. The red circles are the intersections from the Transportation Study. We as staff think that additional 101
intersections will be needed, and more study and possible improvements needed for those intersections. Mebane has 102
also recently adopted a Comprehension Transportation Plan this June 2018. That is shown as the yellow line and yellow 103
circles. The study proposed 3 different cross sections and they include bike and pedestrian accommodations either by 104
paved shoulder and/or sidewalks. 105
106
Heidi: Does this include bike lanes? 107
108
Nish Trivedi: There are wide paved shoulders and/or sidewalks in the street cross sections but no specific bike lane 109
notations because plan does not include road design. Paved shoulders could be used as bike lanes. 110
111
4
Heidi Perry: What was the first right-of-way? 112
113
Nish Trivedi: There are four different street cross sections recommended in the plan, 60, 80, 90, and 100 feet. It 114
included a 60 ft. right-of-way for areas east of Buckhorn Road, 90 ft. right-of-way west of Buckhorn Road, and 80 ft. right-115
of-way for some of the major areas. The study also recommended improvements to various intersections, adding turn 116
lanes for various routes such as US-70, Buckhorn Road, West Ten Road and Ben Wilson Road. As part of community 117
outreach, we sent out letters to property owners in and around the study area. 118
119
Ted Triebel: How many people attended the public information meeting? 120
121
Nish Trivedi: We sent out over 700 notices about the community meeting. The community meeting was held last August 122
28, 2018 at Gravely Hill Middle School. An estimate 100 people attended. 123
124
Heidi Perry: What was the hot topic? 125
126
Nish Trivedi: Most wanted to know what is happening with their neighborhood. Some of them were at the intersection of 127
Green and Turner, some were from Mebane. The meeting had nice positive feedback. People engaging in knowing 128
what’s going on in the area. We created a website to keep the public informed and involved in the process and getting 129
more feedback as this process continues. We handed out a survey at the Community meeting to get feedback about 130
what was presented to them. We did not send these surveys through the mail. We also put this on the website, so 131
people can download from the website and return back to us. We have not gotten any back yet from that source. The 132
next steps – we are currently at the next step phase as we presented this to the Planning Board of the 5th of this month in 133
the same way as presented to you in your attachment to provide your comments. We will come back next month in 134
October for your recommendations to present to the Board of County Commissioners’. A tentative Public Hearing is 135
scheduled to go before the Board of County Commissioners’ in November along with the Planning Board’s and 136
OUTBoard’s recommendations. Depending on what they decide to do, they will act in November or December for their 137
decision. The plan will be implemented through the Unified Development Ordinance which requires development be in 138
compliance with adopted local plans like an Access Management Plan and it is through them we would use this 139
Ordinance to ask people to dedicate the right-of-way in the event these roads are needed. Any Questions? 140
141
Abigaile Pittman: You have a month to review this plan (which is in your packet) and make comments at the next 142
meeting. 143
144
Nish Trivedi: You are welcome to send me any of your comments and I will get the comments together. My contact 145
information is provided. 146
147
Heidi Perry: In the Executive Summary near the end it states Orange County uses Access Management Plans to ensure 148
land use decisions take into consideration their impacts on transportation networks. Nothing is said about bicycle safety. 149
150
Nish Trivedi: Safety is included; we can include text about bicycle safety if you would like. There are also some of the 151
surveys that were completed at the Community Meeting in your packet, with the questions and answers we asked at the 152
Meeting. 153
154
Jenn Sykes: Was Ikea seriously asked about one of those sites? Someone thought Ikea looked at Mebane. 155
156
Nish Trivedi: It was at one time going to Cary and then they pulled out. I have not heard about them coming to Mebane. 157
158
Heidi Perry: Does anyone else have any questions for Nish? 159
160
Nish Trivedi: Just to let you know that from the 2011 E-B-M AMP only one road was built, the service road for Morinaga 161
Candy Factory. Even that road had to go through the NCDOT process. 162
163
Heidi Perry: Where is NCDOT with this Plan? 164
165
Nish Trivedi: They attended the Community Meeting to answer any questions. There is no design or construction of the 166
roads, nor is there any funding for them. No projects or work are specifically identified in the Plan. 167
5
168
Alex Castro: I see 4 crossings of the railroad, I am familiar with one at Mt Willing Rd where a young woman was racing 169
the train and did not make it at that crossing, so my question is, what kind of road modifications will be made if the 170
railroad does not want any more at-grade crossings with increase of traffic flow, is there any thought of reconfiguring 171
those roads so they are no longer at-grade crossings? The crossings are there, they are major roads. 172
173
Nish Trivedi: The Plan does not go into any detail about what specific crossing will be closed. It does not make any 174
recommendations at any railroad crossing. Some intersections with the railroad are identified in the Plan as needing 175
additional study. 176
177
Alex Castro: No at-grade crossing between 85 to 70 and the segment I am looking at on page 66; it just shows the 178
railroad. If they close all those at-grade crossings and you can’t get from 70 down to 85 in this area and if you are 179
coming out of the Economic Development Zone you are not going to get up there. The big rail crossings are Buckhorn 180
Road and Mt Willing Rd. I know this Board with the Planning Department looked at what was going to be done in terms 181
of the traffic flow down Buckhorn Road and the railroad and some of the proposals were ludicrous down to tractor trailers 182
being able to manage the roundabouts they were proposing. 183
184
Abigaile Pittman: That was part of Mebane Traffic Separation Study that was done, which studied about 5 existing 185
crossing. The Study recommended closing a couple and 3 were remaining. For Buckhorn they did 3 different options for 186
doing an overpass and the Orange County Planning staff had a preference that varied somewhat – A connection with 187
Frasier Road was favored, but without a round-about on Buckhorn Road just north of the interstate interchange. 188
189
Alex Castro: Some were problematic like the one where that accident occurred. That is very difficult for tractor trailers 190
and are also a problem for low-boy trailers that get hung up because of the crest of the railroad crossing and so, that is 191
why I brought up the question. The railroad is not going away, and you are talking about access management road 192
improvements and they co-inhabit, and you must co-exist with the railroad and how are you dealing where they meet. 193
194
Abigaile Pittman: The railroad also has some plan to alter the curve to make it less sharp because of the future train 195
speed increase. More planning needs to be done at the intersection of Buckhorn Road and the railroad. If you ever 196
want to see the Mebane Traffic Separation Study it is on the City of Mebane Website. The railroad will not have the 197
much higher speeds in Orange County as in other counties. 198
199
5.0 Staff Updates 200 201
5a MPO/RPO and NCDOT (Nish Trivdei) Materials to be provided at Meeting 202
OUTBoard Action: Receive Information. 203
204
Abigaile Pittman passed out project updates for the Burlington-Graham MPO which was not available at the time the 205
agenda packet was distributed. 206
207
Alex Castro: Question, Hwy 54 Corridor. Temporary traffic lights. They have been removed. Do you have any 208
information about what they found out about the lights, the effectiveness, traffic, cross traffic or any other results of the 209
test period? 210
211
Nish Trivedi: I can find out for you. 212
213
Alex Castro: The lights were removed completely. They were active for about 60 days at most. They were installed for 214
longer than that. A lot of people were complaining that it was causing traffic problems. 215
216
Heidi Perry: Was it signalization timing or something else? 217
218
Nish Trivedi: It slowed down traffic. It was supposed to improve the traffic. 219
220
Alex Castro: They put one at Hatch Rd and one at Neville and both roads were one way, the north side of both roads 221
were a dead end at 54, Hatch goes a little further but basically, they were a dead end at 54 and it was to prevent traffic to 222
flow out of Neville up 54 during the rush hour. 223
6
224
Nish Trivedi: I will find out from the consultant and get back to you. 225
226
Heidi Perry: It would be good to know what the people thought who were trying to get out and then the people already on 227
54. You will let us know? 228
229
Alex Castro: One traffic light has been added at Mebane Oaks Rd, that is far out. Play chicken crossing 54. 230
231
Heidi Perry: Report on 54? 232
233
Nish Trivedi: It has been pushed out another month. I will keep you informed. I will be presenting to you for your 234
comments in November. 235
236
Alyson West: When is STIP? 237
238
Nish Trivedi: Should be done in January or February. I think they pushed it out for another month due to the hurricane. 239
240
Alyson West: Are we going to see it again? 241
242
Nish Trivedi: Yes. Right now we are working on Division Points and pursuing local points on projects you recommended 243
get priority. OCPT’s 2 transit vehicles and Old Greensboro road. There is a chance NC 86 going north of Hillsborough to 244
NC 57 widening and intersection improvements getting funded if other division projects don’t. The Old Greensboro Rd. 245
was too high of a cost and will not get funded. 246
247
Alex Castro: They did put in a new Bridge on Old Greensboro Rd. east of the Edwards property, west of Jones Ferry Rd 248
and that permits bicyclists to be on the road at the bridge when someone is coming, just wide enough I would say. It 249
does have a shoulder to it. 250
251
Nish Trivedi: Right now, State projects and Regional projects have been determined. Right now you can go to NCDOT 252
STIP process and see the results, both with a map as well as the spread sheet which shows you the projects across the 253
state that have gotten Statewide and Regional Funding and the draft of the Division. 254
255
Heidi Perry: So, when you said we did not make a recommendation for 54 it didn’t get points but that’s the same 54 you 256
are going to be reporting on in October or November? 257
258
Nish Trivedi: Yes. There are several NC 54 projects in the STIP. There is the Old Fayetteville Rd and 54 intersection 259
improvement, Carrboro doesn’t want that one. 260
261
Alex Castro: The development of the Lloyd Property. 262
263
Nish Trivedi: Another NC-54 project from Orange Grove Road to Old Fayetteville Rd, the Operation Improvement project 264
is already funded, so they are doing that project. The widening of that same portion of NC-54 was not recommended for 265
points so it did not get funded. They are also waiting for the corridor study to be done. It is the 3rd highest scoring 266
Regional Project in Division 7. Just letting you know the results of the Regional Project. If it received local points it would 267
have been done because NCDOT division did put points on it. 268
269
Heidi Perry: Whether we wanted it or not. 270
271
Nish Trivedi: If it was recommended as one of the top 2 Orange County priorities in TARPO and it had gotten the local 272
input points. Division 7 put the points on it because they thought it was a great project and the study was almost 273
complete. The study would have been completed before the draft STIP went out for review. We did not put points on it in 274
either MPO or RPO so it’s not getting done. There is the other NC 54 widening project from Orange Grove Road to NC-275
119 in Alamance County. BGMCO submitted this project to NCDOT. BGMPO, I believe put points on it but nobody else 276
did therefore it did not get funded, that I am aware of. I will show you the results when the draft STIP is released. The 277
only project that has as chance for funding is NC 86 north of Hillsborough from 70 to NC 57, widening and improving the 278
intersection. 279
7
280
Heidi Perry: Widening of lanes? 281
282
Nish Trivedi: Yes. The draft will be out in January or February 283
284
Alex Castro: With these roads flooding and everything NCDOT did have a site, DriveNC.org which indicated what 285
segments of what roads were closed. You could go county by county, so if you were going out you could tell if you 286
needed to find an alternate road because such n such a road was flooded. That looked like it was effective. 287
288
Ted Triebel: The Waze app is a GPS app– road closures and stuff like that. I think the flooding was happening faster 289
than the site could keep up with. In some areas it was still cresting and in other areas it was going down, so you had to 290
know what was happening 291
292 5b. OUTBoard Members whose terms are ending (Abigaile Pittman): 293
Abigaile Pittman: At the end of the month the Board will have six vacancies. Abigaile the terms ending are for Alex 294
Castro, Earl Smith, Ted Triebel, Gary Saunders, Jeff Charles and Justin Miller. A Public Service Announcement (PSA) 295
was sent out several weeks ago, and a second one went out earlier today. I have copies available should Board 296
members want one to pass on potential applicants. A number of applications had been submitted but that more were 297
needed 298
299
Tina Love: I will email the PSA to Board members. 300
301
Certificates of Appreciation to the two Board members present: Alex Castro and Ted Triebel; and the staff and the Board 302
thanked them for their years of service. 303
304
Ted Triebel: I want to thank Heidi Perry for chairing the Board and Alex Castro for his astute comments to the Board. 305
306
Alex Castro: I want to thank Abigaile for coming forward. I am also on the Aging Advisory Board and helping with work to 307
implement the Master Aging Plan. One of the problems we had was that we developed it as dreamers, if you will, and 308
we lacked the practitioners, the people to make it happen. It’s people like Abigaile and Stephanie Trueblood, a planner 309
from Hillsborough that populated the committees and what they do is make it more realistic in terms of what we can 310
aspire to in terms of improvement. I think that is what we do at the OUTBoard meetings; we try to add to the government 311
what we feel all communities would wish to see in terms of what is happening transportation-wise. It is good that we are 312
cross-populating getting people involved. One of the things that I consider as an outstanding accomplishment of the 313
OUTBoard is the bicycle safety effort, and the fact that the High School students were involved in producing the video 314
PSAs. I feel other noteworthy accomplishments were the fencing on the bridge over I-40 on Orange Grove Road; and 315
the Department on Aging’s AARP grant for the purchase of Semme seats. There is a great deal of bureaucracy with 316
NCDOT and the BOCC. It seems that there are many bureaucrat hurdles for such simple things as fencing on a bridge. 317
or signage for bus stops. We’ve got to fight the good fight and it will always be ongoing. 318
319
Heidi Perry: With the end of Alex Castro’s term the Board will need a new Vice-Chair. 320
321
Tina Love: Board Members can continue to attend meetings for up to one year or until someone is appointed to take 322
their place. 323
324
The meeting adjourned. 325
8
DRAFT MINUTES 1 ORANGE COUNTY OUTBOARD 2 OCTOBER 17, 2018 3
REGULAR MEETING 4 5 MEMBERS PRESENT: Heidi Perry (Chair), At-Large Representative; David Laudicina, Cheeks Township 6
Representative; Ed Vaughn, Cedar Grove Township Representative; Brantley Wells, Hillsborough Township 7
Representative; Art Menius, At-Large Representative; Erik Broo, At-Large Representative 8 9 MEMBERS ABSENT: Jenn Sykes, At-Large; Alyson West, At-Large Representative; Donna Musson, Eno Township 10
Representative; 11 12 STAFF PRESENT: Abigaile Pittman, Land Use/Transportation Planner; Nishith Trivedi, Transportation Planner; Tina 13
Love, Administrative Assistant III; 14
15
OTHERS PRESENT: Cy Stober, City of Mebane; Betty Rogers; Brian & Bonnie Myers; Jennifer Terrell; Anthony 16
Corbett; Mai & Huong Hguyen; Octavio Hernandez Lesso; Dana Richardson; Jolanda Williams; Annie Whitted; 17
Kristen Marbais; Richard & Brenda Bright; Robert Jones; Knox Efland 18
19 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND DETERMINATION OF QUORUM 20
There was not a quorum for the meeting 21
22
AGENDA ITEM 2: APPROVAL OF MINUTES 23
There was no quorum for the meeting so the minutes will be added to the November meeting 24
25
AGENDA ITEM 3: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA 26
There were none. 27
28 AGENDA ITEM 4: REGULAR OUTBOARD AGENDA 29 AGENDA ITEM 4A: BICYCLE SAFETY IMPLEMENTATION SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT (ABIGAILE PITTMAN) – 30
Receive information and provide comments 31
32
Abigaile Pittman: There were some revisions on the posters and more needs to be done before they are finalized. 33
34
Heidi Perov: I would like to include how to safely adjust a child’s helmet as a flyer. 35
36
Abigaile Pittman reviewed the posters 37
38
Consensus was all were ok with the exception of poster number 4 about facilitating passing of cars by pulling over. 39
40
Erik Broo: I can try to contribute some photos or get some; I do have a couple of friends that ride with cameras so I 41
can ask them for some shots. 42
43
Abigaile Pittman: The subcommittee will meet next week to try to finalize some of these items. 44
45 AGENDA ITEM 4B: EFLAND-BUCKHORN-MEBANE ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE (NISH TRIVEDI) – 46
Make a recommendation on the Efland-Mebane Access Management Plan 47
48
Nish Trivedi reviewed a PowerPoint presentation on the draft plan. 49 50
Resident: Does this include Highway 70? 51
52
Nish Trivedi: There are no recommendations on Hwy 70; it was not recommended for any right-of-way changes. If 53
the state decides to pursue some of these projects, these are along state roads and NCDOT has their own process 54
to acquire any additional right-of way. 55
9
56
Resident: I live in the Cheeks Crossing community and I noticed the intersections around where I live are congested; 57
I see congestion isn’t mentioned. Were there any studies done at the intersections of South Frazier and Buckhorn 58
Rd, East Washington Street Extension and Buckhorn Road? Those are highly congested areas. We have had 59
several accidents there. It really needs improvements. Also, what are the specific plans in terms of extending of 60
those roads on Buckhorn beginning on Exit 157 off I-85/40 going along Buckhorn Road toward US 70? That’s the 61
community I live in; what were the specific plans; what were the studies and what were the results in those areas? 62
63
Nish Trivedi: We have Cy Stober from Mebane. 64
65
Cy Stober: My name is Cy Stober and I’m the Development Director with the City of Mebane. To answer your 66
questions, in May of this year the NC Railroad conducted a study recommending improvements in the exact area you 67
are talking about for what they call grade separation, a bridge over the railroad tracks. I have sketches there is not a 68
public process; no designs have been done. The project is not funded. It was the only project in this plan that was 69
not funded. There are a number of safety improvements that are being done from Gibson Road in Mebane all the 70
way through town. The Buckhorn Road project is estimated to be around 8.5 million dollars and so it would have to 71
be funded and done by the state. There are 3 sketches in here, Mr. Jones came by the office this morning and got a 72
copy of the plan. We have more copies of the plan and it’s available on our website. I would be happy to talk with 73
you after the meeting and show you some of the safety improvements suggested for that very area. In addition, the 74
City adopted its own transportation plan. The limit of our jurisdiction is Buckhorn Road. Widening of Buckhorn for 75
safety improvements including intersection improvements is identified in this plan as a priority project. The City 76
cannot afford to do that project, it is well beyond our means. We would have to rely on state funding and again this is 77
an unfunded project that we would like to pursue that would be entirely separate process from what Nish is doing 78
here this evening or that Orange County is considering. These are unfunded projects that would have to have a 79
totally separate public participation and design process that would come in the future should the project be funded. 80
81
Resident: So what is long range goal here in terms of the future? 82
83
Cy Stober: We actually had a meeting yesterday about how to acquire state funds to do these two projects. Best 84
case scenario would be that the projects would be nominated for state funding in spring 2019. That will be a one 85
year process of consideration by the state so we won’t even know for over a year. After that point, should they be 86
funded, there would be a design and public participation process that last another year to 2 years and then 87
construction would begin. The first year of construction, the public doesn’t see anything, nothing happens. The 88
fastest track that we could see anything would be 4 years from now roughly. The soonest you would hear something 89
is 18 months from now about whether the state has funded anything and if it is this project, how you can participate to 90
make sure your concerns are heard. We know there are concerns about impacts to the churches on Buckhorn and 91
of the 3 sketches that have been done so far, avoid the churches there. 92
93
Resident: What about the homes? 94
95
Cy Stober: There is one sketch that avoids all homes and then two others that do not. We need your input to help us 96
decide the best sketch. We don’t have a favorite, Orange County has two sketches that don’t like and the one they 97
do like is the one that does not impact any homes. They sent us a letter to that effect. 98
99
Resident: It still would be an impact, noise, getting out of their homes with a bridge. How close would it be near the 100
homes. There would be some impact. So as a homeowner there I would like to know now what would be the 101
foreseen impacts if I remain there. 102
103
Nish Trivedi: Right now it is not in the plan, if it is funded by the state it is in a ten year window. If within the first five 104
years it is guaranteed to be built. 105
106
Resident: I’m not asking about the process about when it will be built, I am asking about the study. If you did a study 107
and it was a holistic study then you should know the impact it would cause. You have 194 people in the Cheeks 108
Crossing Township that you are going to impact. What were the results in terms of if you did this, what would be the 109
impact on the people who remain living in that community? 110
10
111
Cy Stober: We simply cannot answer that question at this time because a design has not been determined. 112
113
Resident: So you did a transportation study and you don’t know the impact it is going to have on the community in 114
which you are going to put the road through? You did a transportation study, you had transportation engineers you 115
had environmental engineers and there is no results on how that would impact the 194 people that live there. There 116
were no results? 117
118
Nish Trivedi: In the 2017 study, that area was not studied. That is why we are saying additional study is required. 119
120
Resident: So when will it be done? The letter I received said you would connect Industrial to South Frasier, add two 121
lanes on Buckhorn starting from I-85/40 to Highway 70 so that is the Cheeks Crossing Township. That township has 122
194 people so that is not the study? You didn’t do any transportation study in that area? 123
124
Nish Trivedi: Not when the 2017 study was done, when the project is being done by the state the state would do a 125
separate, more detailed, on the ground public involvement study for that road. There is no design for that road at this 126
point. 127
128
Resident: You sent me a letter as a property owner telling me that you are going to impact my road and there still 129
was no study done. 130
131
Nish Trivedi: We’re not having any impact on your road, if you are not developing your property then there is no 132
impact at this stage. If the state doesn’t fund the project there is no impact. 133
134
Resident: Then why did I get a letter? 135
136
Nish Trivedi: To get your input and comments so we can include it in this plan when it is updated. If the state does 137
fund it we would come back to you again for more detailed, direct community meeting for that project - because there 138
is going to be increased traffic along Buckhorn Road, because of the development goal for this area and because if 139
any development does occur it is going to create more traffic. In the event that is not done it will create more safety 140
problems and more issues if not addressed. We feel that area needs to be studied and addressed. It is on the plan 141
as a blue dot indicating additional study needs to be done to address the increase of traffic that is going to be 10-20 142
years down the line for that road. 143
144
Resident: I would like to add there is already increased traffic. 145
146
David Laudicina: You mentioned the cross-section potential for bridges over the railroad, did they take into 147
consideration the fact that they may double that track in the future? 148
149
Cy Stober: That has been discussed with DOT and would be addressed by the design. Independent of all of this, 150
Orange County and Mebane have successfully lobbied DOT to put a traffic light at the intersection of Buckhorn Road 151
and US 70. It will be there by Christmas of this year. It’s been delayed already but we are working hard to get that 152
installed. 153
154
Nish Trivedi: One of the considerations the Planning Director made was to remove a road near the Mattress Factory 155
Road area because of a stream crossing and all the issues involved so we have removed some of that road network 156
to avoid touching the streams and the crossing and provide the same east/west connection. We have added text to 157
include bicycle safety based on the recommendations from the OUTBoard and to include that this network should be 158
for all users whether transit, auto or bike/ped. Another recommendation was how it addresses the Economic 159
Development objectives in the plan and how does it encourage mixed use projects to support walkable communities 160
and how does the plan address public transportation and alternative modes such as carpooling and park/ride 161
facilities. I will include more narrative about the cross section and try to meet these objectives. Now we are seeking 162
OUTBoard comments and recommendations. 163
164
Heidi Perov: You’ve had a lot of public comment, did any of it change any of the plans? 165
11
166
Nish Trivedi: The only real change was the removal of the roads in the Rock Quarry Road area we discussed. 167
168
Heidi Perov: The questionnaire you used was odd because you are working in an area where there isn’t any public 169
transit, bike or pedestrian facilities so it seems like the better way to ask this in the future is would you use transit if it 170
were available; would you ride bikes or walk in your community if there were facilities available; what is the one part 171
of your commute that is the most frustrating. Other comments I have is that I would like to see included in there in 172
the intersection improvements that roundabouts be considered along with turn lanes. I would say if you have a road 173
with sidewalks included in the cross-section that it would be good not to have a speed limit over 45 mph. I would also 174
say when you have a road with 12 foot lanes and 5 foot shoulders; I would consider changing that design to 11 foot 175
lanes and putting in an extra buffer between the lane and the shoulder with the other foot. Also, I didn’t hear anything 176
in the report about air quality. Is there anything that requires an air quality report would be part of that road 177
improvement process? 178
179
Nish Trivedi: No, I don’t think that is part of our UDO for development. 180
181
Heidi Perov: My last comment is that I think as part of this report there should be something that says that new 182
technologies should be taken into account and studied which may offer new ways to address intersection 183
improvements, traffic flow and safety without road widenings. I think there is going to be smart signalizations that are 184
going to improve in 10 years’ time and promoting transit to get people to not be in their cars which would actually 185
improve the roads to the point that we may not have to widen them. So I think new technologies and public transit 186
should be addressed. 187
188 AGENDA ITEM 4C: NC 54 CORRIDOR PLAN PRESENTATION (NISH TRIVEDI) – 189
Provide comments to the BOCC for November 1st meeting 190
191
Nish Trivedi reviewed a presentation on the draft plan. 192
193
Nish Trivedi: Because of the congestion along Hwy 54, people along 54 wanting to get out of their driveway have to 194
wait there for a long time just to get out. There are a couple of subdivisions along that road that people have 195
reported having to wait a very long time to get out on the road. 196
197
Heidi Perov: Where are the high crash points on this road, are there high crash points on this road? 198
199
Nish Trivedi: There have been crash studies done. As you can see on the bottom it shows the number of accidents. 200
201
David Laudicina: There is very high traffic on Mebane Oaks especially on the weekends going to Saxapahaw. 202
203
Nish Trivedi continued presentation 204
205
Heidi Perov: That’s not going to support our planet very well. There’s nothing in this project that support public 206
transit. 207
208
David Laudicina: Was there any talk about having a Bus Rapid Transit with stations along the way. Make them 209
dedicated. 210
211
Nish Trivedi: We can include that in the comments. One thing mentioned as PART to provide service along this 212
corridor all the way to UNC. The total cost of this project if the entire thing was done over the next 20 years or 30 213
years would be 180 million dollars; 80 million in Alamance County and 100 million in Orange County and it does 214
include the shared use path which 20% would be on the County. 215
216
Heidi Perov: They also don’t have the right-of-way. 217
218
Nish Trivedi: And it would require right-of-way acquisition. 219
220
12
Heidi Perov: So it will never happen, I don’t even think you should include it because it is obvious – without the right-221
of-way. 222
223
Erik Broo: If the plan shows the path and it is being shown to the public and the conversation in this room is that it is 224
probably not going to happen, should the public be shown that without the context that we know. 225
226
Nish Trivedi: NCDOT is working on changing their bike/ped policies there is a big effort to change that rule. This is a 227
statewide issue and they’re changing it and it includes updating a complete street policy. There is an effort to push or 228
more bike/ped consideration in highways. Carrboro is very skeptical about the widening; they feel that intersections 229
improvement will address all the issues. There is an understanding that this is a 20-30 year long process because of 230
the phasing. 231
232
Erik Broo: So on the Orange County side most of the parcels of land are rural, and rural buffer. There is only a 233
handful of commercial properties and future land use doesn’t indicate that have changed to commercial. How does it 234
look on the Alamance side? 235
236
Nish Trivedi: Alamance County doesn’t have zoning. 237
238
Erik Broo: So is there an expectation that there be greater development on the Alamance County side than the 239
Orange County side? 240
241
Nish Trivedi: That’s a good question. 242
243
Erik Broo: So even if the public comments include that there isn’t going to see much development on the Orange 244
County side, we’re still going to see potentially a lot of development on the Alamance County side. 245
246
Nish Trivedi: And that development increases traffic. 247
248
Erik Broo: It’s like when Chapel Hill didn’t want Walmart so they just went across the line into Chatham County but 249
Orange County still has to manage all the traffic. 250
251
Nish Trivedi: Transit would help address some of the traffic that is why there needs to be better coordination 252
between PART and Chapel Hill Transit along this corridor. The plan doesn’t address it and that is one of the 253
comments that Carrboro is submitting and we will submit the same. There needs to be better coordination among 254
the transit agencies along this corridor. 255
256
Art Menius: We keep attacking this from the wrong end. Reducing use instead of increasing capacity. 257
258
David Laudicina: My concern is that we’re planning for all this road and more cars and it is going to be done by 2040. 259
Did that plan just come out that we are going to have a worldwide catastrophe with climate change in 2040 if we don’t 260
start doing something. A little thing like Bus Rapid Transit on this road would do something to reduce the usage. 261
262
Art Menius: I agree we don’t need wider roads, we need more transit along those corridors. 263
264
Heidi Perov: Unless the goal of NCDOT is to get more cars on the road, this is not the answer. I totally agree with 265
David, I think that global warming is right here right now whether anyone believes it or not. Pavement is increasing 266
that. I think the intersection improvements should be done but not the widening. Is it because people can’t get 267
where the want to go as fast as they want or is it a safety issue causing more crashes. I would like to see the crash 268
report and if that is the case then we have to improve the intersections where the crashes are occurring but we don’t 269
just pave over the entire western part of that area. I also think that technology is going to be changing a lot of the 270
congestion that we’re seeing with signalization being able to be synched in a way it puts people through in a more 271
efficient and safer way. 272
273
13
Erik Broo: With a lot of the road, if you want to pass someone there are certain sections that the elevation is too 274
great and there is no line of sight. If we are looking to increase driver safety and pedestrian and bicycle safety, are 275
there other ways of going about grading or making line of sight better or creating passing zones. 276
277
Brantley Wells: If you are talking about changing grade you might as well triple those costs. 278
279
Heidi Perov: Well, a passing lane if it is a constant problem in one spot. They have passing lanes all over Alaska 280
and it allows the slow vehicles to continue at their pace and the trucks and motorhome then everyone goes around 281
them. I just think it too much to widen that entire area. 282
283
Art Menius: I agree and would go beyond that to say I oppose the widening. 284
285
Heidi Perov: I would go with you on that and say I oppose the widening the entire length of 54 and would prefer to 286
see the intersection improvements done first based on safety and congestion. Identifying areas where passing is 287
especially problematic with possible location of passing lanes. Do we want more cars on 54 and remember that cars 288
coming into Carrboro are going to be quickly brought down to 2 lanes and it is going to cause a problem. 289
290
David Laudicina: They are also going to UNC to work, that’s the problem. People can’t afford to live here so they 291
have to live outside and drive in every day to go to work. 292
293
Heidi Perov: So if they have to have that commute why don’t they have a bus so they can actually ride or listen to 294
music on their way to work. 295
296
Art Menius: The reality is this massive exchange of traffic in and out of Orange County, the breakdown of white 297
collar- blue collar - managerial is almost identical with people leaving and people coming in. 298
299
Heidi Perov: You can also say that part of the reason for this because we are concerned about how it affects air 300
quality and the climate. 301 302 AGENDA ITEM 5: INFORMATION ITEMS 303
AGENDA ITEM 5A: IDENTIFICATION OF SMALL, RURAL, AND/OR MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS (ABIGAILE 304 PITTMAN) – Receive information and provide input to staff 305 306
Abigaile Pittman presented information on small transportation projects. 307
308
Abigaile Pittman: We are asking the OUTBoard to assist staff to develop a potential project list so when we get 309
requests we have this list that we can use. We want to have an ongoing process so we have greater input when 310
these funds become available. Typically we have a very short window of opportunity. 311
312
Consensus was to have bi-annual meetings with occasional reminders on the OUTBoard Agenda to email any 313
projects to staff who will keep a running list of projects. 314 315 AGENDA ITEM 6: STAFF UPDATES 316 AGENDA ITEM 6A: MPO/RPO AND NCDOT UPDATES (NISH TRIVEDI) – Receive information 317
318
Nish Trivedi reviewed the projects 319
320
*The next OUTBoard meeting is postponed one week to accommodate the member schedules for the 321 Thanksgiving Holiday and will take place Wednesday, November 28, 2018*. *There will be no OUTBoard 322 meeting in December* 323 324 AGENDA ITEM : ADJOURNMENT 325
OUTBoard meeting was adjourned 326
____________________________________
Heidi Perry, Chair
14
ORANGE COUNTY
ORANGE UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION BOARD
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 28, 2018
Action Agenda
Item No. 6.a.
SUBJECT: OUTBoard Annual Report 2018 and Work Plan 2019
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Annual Report and Work Plan
2. BOCC Goals and Objectives
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Abigaile Pittman, Transportation/Land
Use Planner, 919-245-2567
PURPOSE: To discuss the OUTBoard Annual Report 2018 and Work Plan 2019 for the annual
Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) planning retreat in early 2019. The Annual Report
informs the BOCC of the past year’s activities of advisory boards/commissions and assists in
overall County work planning for 2019.
BACKGROUND: As part of its annual planning retreat, the Board of County Commissioners
(BOCC) welcomes input from various advisory boards and commissions, including the
OUTBoard. The Planning Staff completes the Annual Report 2018, and consults with the
OUTBoard on the development of the Work Plan for 2019.
The Annual Report 2018 and Draft Work Plan 2019 is provided as Attachment 1 for the staff and
the OUTBoard to complete and return to the Clerk’s office by December 14. The Annual Report
will inform the BOCC of the past yearly activities of the OUTBoard. The Work Plan will provide a
plan for future activities of the OUTBoard. These activities should be consistent with the adopted
goals and objectives of the Board of County Commissioners (Attachment 2).
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no immediate financial impact associated with this item.
RECOMMENDATION(S): Staff recommends that the OUT Board:
1. Receive information;
2. Provide any comments or direction that the Board might have;
3. Approve the OUTBoard Annual Report 2018 and Work Plan 2019; and
4. Forward to the Clerk’s Office.
15
ORANGE COUNTY ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS INPUT
FOR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS’ ANNUAL PLANNING RETREAT
The Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) welcomes input from various
advisory boards and commissions in preparation for its annual planning retreat.
Please complete the following information, limited to the front and back of this
form. Other background materials may be provided as a supplement to, but not
as a substitute for, this form.
NAME OF BOARD/COMMISSION: Orange Unified Transportation Board
(OUTBoard)
Report Period: 2018
Person to address the BOCC at Retreat (if requested by BOCC) and contact
information:
Heidi Perry, Chair. Telephone 919-618-8199; E-mail: heidiperov@gmail.com
Primary County Staff Contacts:
Primary Administrative and Professional Support for General Agenda Topics –
Abigaile Pittman, Transportation/Land Use Planner
Burlington-Graham Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) – Abigaile Pittman,
Transportation/Land Use Planner
Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro MPO and Triangle Area Rural Planning
Organization (RPO) – Nish Trivedi, Transportation Planner
Secondary Administrative – Tina Love, Administrative Assistant III (provided for
distribution/website posting of agenda packets, quorum polling, room set-up,
recording of meetings, note taking and pr eparation of detailed minutes, and
coordination with the Clerk’s office regarding Member appointments and
attendance records.)
Transit Advisory Services – Theo Letman, Director, Orange County Public
Transportation Department, OCPT; Teleishia Holloway, Transportation
Administrator, OCPT; and Allyson Coltrane, Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) Coordinator, OCPT.
Planning Department Management – Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Tom
Altieri, Comprehensive Planning Supervisor
How many times per month does this board/commission meet, including
any special meetings and sub-committee meetings?
The OUTBoard meets as needed per its BOCC adopted Rules of Procedure
(amended 09/06/2016), generally 7 to 8 times per year. When held, meetings
take place on the third Wednesday of the month. The Board met 8 times in 2018,
as needed to address Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) priorities. At 4
these meetings the Transit Advisory Services/OCPT Group, including
supplemental staff from other County departments (Aging; DSS; Housing,
Attachment 1 16
Human Rights and C ommunity Development; Health; and Child Support
Enforcement) jointly addressed transit services agenda items with the
OUTBoard.
Following completion of the Bicycle Safety Task Force (BSTF) in 2017, an
implementation sub-committee of the OUTBoard was formed that includes four
members of the OUTBoard. This subcommittee has been meeting as needed,
with staff support, throughout 2018.
Brief Statement of Board/Commission’s Assigned Charge and
Responsibilities:
1. The OUTBoard is charged with advising with 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 OUTBoard may be di rected to provide input on
regulations on which the Planning Board has primary statutory and l ocal
ordinance advisory duties. In such instances, the OUTBoard shall serve in an
advisory capacity to the Planning Board.
What are your Board/Commission’s most important accomplishments?
In 2018, the OUTBoard has:
1. Received and reviewed information regarding Orange County’s SPOT 5.0
project lists and scores submitted by the DCHC MPO, the BG MPO, and
the TARPO and NCDOT for ultimate consideration of inclusion in the
2020-2028 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).
2. Received and r eviewed regular updates regarding NCDOT Division 7
projects located in the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning
Organization (DCHC MPO), (Burlington-Graham Metropolitan Planning
Organization) BG MPO, and (Triangle Area Rural Planning Organization)
TARPO.
3. Initiated a quarterly effort to assist Planning staff with the identification of
small transportation projects, to be submitted to NCDOT when there are
opportunities to submit requests to fund Orange County projects. Potential
funding sources for these projects include the High Impact – Low Cost
Project Program, the Resurfacing Program, and the Spot Safety Program.
4. Received updates and commented on the NC 54 Corridor Study.
5. Received updates and commented on t he revised Efland-Buckhorn-
Mebane Access Management Plan.
6. Reviewed and commented on updated OUTBoard orientation materials.
7. Received reports from the Bicycle Safety Implementation Subcommittee,
and participated in review and comments at OUTBoard meetings.
17
In 2018 the Transit Advisory Services (TAS) effort led by Orange County Public
Transportation (OCPT) Department, has addressed transit topics at OUTBoard
meetings relating to public transit:
a. OCPT rebranding and marketing efforts in early 2018.
b. OCPT Quarterly Operational Statistics, including Orange County
ridership data.
c. OCPT expansion services, including the recent purchase of three new
28-foot Light Transit Vehicles (LTV’s) to expand service delivery and
replace older vehicles which has long reached their useful life.
d. Implementation of a new route, the Orange Alamance connector, that
provides midday service from northern Hillsborough out to Cone Health
facility in Mebane, then back to southern Hillsborough, and through the
heart of the historic downtown area.
h. NCDOT compliance and safety audit results for OCPT, Department of
Aging contractor audits, and Department of Social Services audits as a
Medicaid contractor, required for certification as a Medicaid provider.
i. Transit Scheduling and Planning Software upgrades and
procurements.
j. Orange County commuter options.
List of Specific Tasks, Events, or Functions Performed or Sponsored
Annually.
1. The Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is typically a recurring
two-year process:
First year: Develops priority list of projects to request in
TIP for BOCC approval.
Second year: Recommends comments regarding draft TIP
for BOCC approval to submit to NCDOT during
the public comment period.
The OUTBoard assists with the identification and prioritization of NCDOT
projects for rural (TARPO) and metropolitan (DCHC MPO and BG MPO)
planning areas.
2. Reviews active NCDOT projects in the County, including various paving,
construction and Congestion Mitigation and A ir Quality (CMAQ) Grant
projects.
3. Receives updates and reviews the progress of NCDOT transportation
projects within rural Orange County.
4. Receives updates and reviews the progress of Orange County
transportation planning efforts.
5. Receives updates and reviews OCPT Operational Statistics for federal
and state program transportation grants including the North Carolina
18
Department of Transportation Rural Operating Assistance Program
(ROAP) Grant, NC Community Transportation Program (CTP) Grant, and
the CMAQ Grant.
6. Receives updates on TARPO, BG MPO and DCHC MPO transportation
planning activities.
7. Receives updates from the Planning staff on t he NCDOT quarterly
luncheon topics of discussion.
8. Submits comments and questions for discussion with OCPT staff during
TAS Group meetings.
9. Reviews and discusses current Board vacancies.
10. Other items as assigned by the BOCC.
Describe this board/commission’s activities/accomplishments in carrying
out BOCC goal(s)/priorities, if applicable.
The OUTBoard is involved in the ongoing implementation of the 2030
Comprehensive Plan and related BOCC adopted goals/priorities. Annual work
related to these efforts includes addressing the Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP); the review of active NCDOT projects; the review of county
transportation planning efforts, including the activities of TARPO, BCHC MPO
and B-G MPO and local plans; and participating in the review of transit
operational statistics for federal state and program transportation grants.
If your board/commission played the role of an Element Lead Advisory
Board involved in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan preparation process,
please indicate your board’s activities/accomplishments as they may relate
to the Comprehensive Plan’s goals or objectives.
(The Element Lead Advisory Boards include: Planning Board, EDC, OUTBoard,
Commission for the Environment, Historic Preservation Commission, Agriculture
Preservation Board, Affordable Housing Board, Recreation and Parks Advisory
Council)
Following are specific Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives that have been
part of the OUTBoard’s work in 2018:
Transportation Overarching Goal: An efficient and balanced transportation
system that uses multiple motorized and non-motorized modes of transportation
and for which the planning, design, and implementation will be guided by the
following overarching qualities:
A. Protects air quality, water quality and quantity, soil quality, and biological
resources
B. Promotes public health and safety
C. Encourages sustainable economic development
D. Provides equal access to all users
E. Is highly modally and inter-modally integrated and connected
19
F. Fosters sustainable and efficient use of resources, including financial and
natural resources
G. Protects the County’s natural and cultural heritage
H. Uses creative and well-designed infrastructure
I. Is attractive, user-friendly, and eas y to understand because of factors
such as signage, brochures, and web pages
J. Respects privacy and citizen rights.
Transportation Goal 1: An efficient and integrated multi-modal transportation
system that protects the natural environment and community character.
Objective T-1.1: Increase the occupancy of automobiles through
ridesharing and other means; and expand the use of public transit
(including bus and rail), walking, and biking as primary modes of travel.
Objective T-1.2: Facilitate the overall development and use of a
transportation system that is more energy-efficient, reduces carbon
emissions, and reduces the use of fossil fuels while promoting the use of
local renewable and sustainable fuels.
Objective T-1.3: Develop new transportation facilities in a manner that
has a pos itive impact or avoids negative impacts on t he natural
environment, including air quality, water resources, biological resources,
and wildlife habitat.
Objective T-1.4: Develop new transportation facilities in a manner that
has a positive impact or avoids negative impacts on the community,
including historical or cultural assets, existing neighborhoods, schools and
recreational facilities, and the overall rural character in Orange County.
Objective T-1.6: Expand the availability and use of public transportation
(including bus and rail) throughout the County to provide better
connections between employment centers, shopping and service
locations, and other key points of interest in both urban and rural areas,
particularly for the County's senior and disabled populations and others
without access to automobiles.
Transportation Goal 2: A multi-modal transportation system that is affordable,
available, and accessible to all users and that promotes public health and safety.
Objective T-2.1: Increase the provision of bikeways and walkways, and
also increase supportive facilities such as bicycle parking zones.
Objective T-2.2: Evaluate and serve special transportation needs of the
senior population, youth, the economically disadvantaged and the
disabled, including both everyday needs and disaster transit provision.
Objective T-2.4: Improve the provision of public transit facilities and
services, and also increase supportive facilities for transit, such as park
and ride lots.
20
Objective T-2.5: Improve public education and advertising of existing
transit services.
Objective T-2.6: Increase safety awareness between car drivers and
bicycle riders, and increase safety for pedestrians.
Objective T-2.7: Construct bicycle facilities in Orange County that will
make cycling safer, more convenient, and more efficient.
Transportation Goal 3: Integrated land use planning and transportation
planning that serves existing development, supports future development, and is
consistent with the County’s land use plans which include provisions for
preserving the natural environment and community character.
Objective T-3.1: Improve the County’s transportation system by first
enhancing existing facilities as opposed to developing new facilities.
Objective T-3.2: Create and implement an Orange County
Comprehensive Transportation Plan that provides the framework for a
comprehensive and connected transportation system supporting a mix of
all transportation modes, including sidewalks and bicycle facilities, bus
and rail transit facilities, and highways. The plan should be coordinated
with the goals and objectives of this Comprehensive Plan and seek to
maintain and enhance community character and the natural environment.
Objective T-3.3: Determine the policies to guide connectivity within and
between residential developments based on their impact on neighborhood
character.
Objective T-3.4: Direct development to higher density mixed-use districts
along transit corridors and make necessary multi-modal transportation
improvements to service lands that are slated for future intense
development, such as Economic Development Districts
Objective T-3.5: Use innovative techniques to increase mobility and
reduce rush hour congestion.
Transportation Goal 4: A countywide and regionally-integrated, multi-modal
transportation planning process that is comprehensive, creative and effective.
Objective T-4.1: Work with nearby jurisdictions to integrate the County's
transportation plans with those of other transportation planning agencies
and service providers in Orange County and the Triangle region. T he
resulting intermodal transportation system should reflect regional goals
and objectives to meet projected travel demand and to reduce congestion
and reliance on single occupancy vehicles.
Objective T-4.2: Plan and integrate the County's multi-modal
transportation routes and services with regional transportation agencies
21
and transit service providers, agencies and transit providers in neighboring
counties, the North Carolina Department of Transportation, Amtrak, and
the North Carolina Railroad.
Identify any activities this board/commission expects to carry out in 2019
as they relate to established BOCC goals and priorities. If applicable, is
there a fiscal impact (i.e., funding, staff time, other resources) associated
with these proposed activities (please list).
1. Assist with the identification of potential NCDOT small transportation
projects that may fit well within the context of the 2018-2019 High Impact –
Low Cost Project Program, the Resurfacing Program, and the Spot Safety
Program. Related staff time is a part of staff’s current work plan.
2. Continue to review and make recommended implementation efforts for the
Bicycle Safety Task Force Report to the BOCC (BOCC Goal 3, Priority
20). Implementation efforts will utilize previously budgeted funds, and are
a part of staff’s current work plan.
3. Review and comment on amendments to the UDO and revised Efland-
Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan (BOCC Goal 3). Related
staff time is a part of staff’s current work plan.
4. Continue to work with staff and the BOCC to recommend and monitor
Orange County Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) projects,
including recommending new projects in 2018 (BOCC Goal 3, Priority 20).
Related staff time is a part of staff’s current work plan.
5. Continue quarterly meetings with OCPT regarding Transit Advisory
Services (TAS) to discuss new bus routes, unmet needs in the service
area, service design and scheduling, marketing, billing rates and fares,
resolve complaints; and to monitor compliance with federal regulations
and the status of any deficiencies noted in any official federal, state or
local review or report (BOCC Goal 3, Priority 20). Related staff time is a
part of staff’s current work plan.
6. Review, comment and make recommendations on the B-G MPO CTP/
MTP (BOCC Goal 3, Priority 20). Related staff time is a part of staff’s
current work plan.
7. Participate in the development of transportation projects as part of the
TARPO, DCHC MPO and B-G MPO STI local input processes for SPOT
6.0. (BOCC Goal 3, Priority 20). Related staff time is a part of staff’s
current work plan.
8. If referred by the BOCC:
a. Implementation efforts related to the Safe Routes to School (SRTS)
Action Plan (BOCC Goal 3, Priority 20). Related staff time would
be a part of staff’s current work plan.
22
What are the concerns or emerging issues your board has identified for the
upcoming year that it plans to address, or wishes to bring to the
Commissioners’ attention?
1. Continue to explore implementation opportunities for Safe Routes to
School (SRTS) projects, including prioritizing the county and the Town of
Hillsborough working out an agreement for sidewalk construction and
maintenance to facilitate sidewalks to the schools that are outside the
Town limits;
2. Pursuit of funding sources for prioritized transportation projects and track
status of project implementation;
3. Coordinate connectivity and infrastructural changes with the towns in
order to create better conditions for bicycling and other alternate forms of
non-motorized transportation;
4. Work with NCDOT to promote funding of pedestrian and bicycle projects
in rural areas to a greater degree.
5. Promote alternative transportation modes during peak hours via public-
private partnerships through collaboration with the Orange County
Transportation Demand Manager (TDM) Coordinator.
23
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
GOALS AND PRIORITIES
Goal One: Ensure a community network of basic human services and
infrastructure that maintains, protects and promotes the well
being of all County residents.
Priority 4: Review services to identify and protect ‘safety net’ programs
and services.
Priority 5: Encourage for profit investments in affordable housing and
review available tools.
Goal Two: Promote an interactive and transparent system of governance
that reflects community values.
Priority 6: Develop plan and tools to improve how County and citizens
communicate with each other; foster twoway exchange.
Priority 7: Improve intra and intergovernmental coordination, cooperation
and collaboration. (a) Work with Town of Hillsborough on:
Joint land use planning approaches, policies/ordinances, and annexation,
and Economic Development Districts. (b) Work with City of Durham on:
Economic Development Districts
Priority 8: Examine advisory boards and commissions to: (a) Ensure they
are meeting their missions; (b) Determine how boards relate to each other
and how their work can best be integrated with the BOCC; (c) Ensure
sustainability goals; (d) Ensure fit with overall County vision; and (e)
Recognize (and be sensitive to) consistencies represented by boards,
commissions when framing this review
Priority 26: Clarify and communicate to public how and why County
funding is allocated the way it is
Goal Three: Implement planning and economic development policies
which create a balanced, dynamic local economy, and which
promote diversity, sustainable growth and enhanced revenue
while embracing community values.
Priority 2: Implement Comprehensive Plan (a) Rewrite zoning and
subdivision regulations (Unified Development Ordinance).
Priority 3: Develop economic plans for three (3) districts.
Attachment 2 24
2
Priority 9: Update economic development plan for County: (a) Clarify
economic development plan for each district; (b) Identify spectrum of tools;
(c) Identify other stakeholders; and (d) Identify what the County wants to
see happen.
Priority 10: Develop an energy plan that includes economic development
strategies to attract, retain, and grown ‘green’ business
Priority 19: Be actively involved and informed about UNCCH decisions
and intentions
Priority 20: Support transit, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities and other
alternatives to the single passenger automobile.
Priority 21: Amend County zoning to address and modernize airport and
related issues.
Goal Four: Invest in quality County facilities, a diverse work force, and
technology to achieve a high performing County government.
Priority 11: Invest in technology to increase work efficiencies; e.g. web
streaming, paperless agendas, integrated tracking systems between field
and office.
Priority 22: Review and update County personnel and operational
policies and procedures.
Priority 23: Design and fund space for County Attorney Offices. Manager
and BOCC to discuss concept and staffing
Goal Five: Create, preserve, and protect a natural environment that
includes clean water, clean air, wildlife, important natural
lands and sustainable energy for present and future
generations.
Priority 1: Conserve high priority natural areas, wildlife habitat, and prime
forests.
Priority 12: Implement County’s Environmental Responsibility goals
Priority 15: Complete stewardship and management plans for Lands
Legacy.
Priority 16: Develop an accounting and assessment system of water and
air pollution: (a) In conjunction with ICLEI; Set emissions reduction target
25
3
for 2030; Conduct public education campaign; and Link public with
opportunities to improve energy efficiency and use sustainable energy
sources; (b) Begin multiyear implementation of Observable Well Network
Priority 24: Plan to acquire/land bank for future park development.
Priority 25: Develop a policy/update current plan about how parks will be
developed, appropriate ratio of parks to population, length of time to
develop, and incorporation of such into the Capital Investment Plan (CIP).
Goal Six: Ensure a high quality of life and lifelong learning that
champions diversity, education at all levels, libraries, parks,
recreation, and animal welfare.
Priority 13: Plan to provide ‘equitable’ library services for Orange County
residents.
Priority 14: Fulfill remainder of bond issuance approved by voters in
2001 for soccer and Twin Creeks
Priority 17: Review the Schools and Adequate Public Facilities
Ordinance: (a) Is it doing what it was originally intended to do? (b) Does it
have application for Durham and Mebane?
Priority 18: Address inequities between old and new schools. Older
schools are in need of capital improvements. Building new schools has
been the funding priority.
26
ORANGE COUNTY
ORANGE UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION BOARD
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date:November 28, 2018
Action Agenda
Item No.6.b.
SUBJECT:Bicycle Safety Implementation Subcommittee (BSIS) Report
DEPARTMENT:Planning and Inspections
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Final Posters
2. Draft Rules of the Road Brochure
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Abigaile Pittman, Transportation/Land
Use Planner, 919-245-2567
PURPOSE:Receive a report on the recent activities of the BSIS.
BACKGROUND:Since the October 17 OUTBoard meeting, four posters have been approved
by the BSIS (Attachment 1) and printing ordered by staff. A draft brochure focused on ‘Rules of
the Road’ has been prepared for OUTBoard review and comment (Attachment 2). Additionally,
the bicycle safety website has been completed and is now
live: https://orangecountyncbicyclesafety.com/. The video PSAs are included on the website
and the poster still shots from the videos are being circulated through information monitors at
locations throughout Orange County.
Next Steps
x Staff and the BSIS will continue to work on:
x Social media ads and posts, and radio ads will be underway late fall of this year.
Budgeted funds will be utilized for social media ads on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter,
print and/or radio ads (WCHL Radio, News of Orange, etc.). Audio PSAs will be
produced by WCOM Radio next spring.
x The installation of fifteen bicycle safety road signs at entry points to the county and along
frequently used bicycle routes late this year.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:There is no i mmediate financial impact associated with this item.
Budgeted funds from are being utilized.
RECOMMENDATION(S):Staff recommends that the OUTBoard:
1. Receive information; and
2. Provide any comments or direction that the Board might have.
27
When passing a bicyclist in a no passing zone, the operator of the passing vehicle must allow four feet of space or change lanes.4 FeetGeneral Statute 20-150(e)For more information, call 919-245-2567www.orangecountyncbicyclesafety.com"UUBDINFOU28
Riding 2 abreast is allowed in North Carolina. It makes cyclists more visible and shortens the passing distance needed.General Statute 20-150(e)For more information, call 919-245-2567www.orangecountyncbicyclesafety.com29
Both motorists and bicyclists must pull over and stop for sirens and lights!General Statute 20-157(a)For more information, call 919-245-2567www.orangecountyncbicyclesafety.com30
• DRESS BRIGHT FOR SAFETY: Makeyourself visible by wearing bright orreflective clothing when you ride.• WATCH FOR AND AVOID ROADHAZARDS: Look for hazards that maycause you to crash, such as potholes,broken glass, gravel, puddles, leaves, and dogs.• USE BIKE LANES OR BIKE PATHS, IFAVAILABLE: While bikes are allowed on roads, riders may feel safer being separated from traffic. A lane or path is a safer chose than riding on a sidewalk. Sidewalk riding puts you at risk for crashes at driveways and intersections.• CONTROL YOUR BIKE: Ride with twohands on the handlebars unlesssignaling a turn. Place books and other items in a bike carrier or backpack. • USE VERBAL AND NON-VERBALCOMMUNICATION:This includes eyecontact with drivers,bells, turn signals,pointing to road hazards forbicyclists behind you, andstating “passing on your left,” or “on your left.” Protect your brain, save your lifeFitting Your Bike Helmet•EYES: Helmet should sit one or twofinger widths above your eyebrow.• EARS: The straps should meetright under your ear lobes toform a “Y.”• MOUTH: The strap should be looseenough so you can breathe andinsert a finger between the buckleand your skin, but tight enoughthat if you drop your jaw you canfeel the helmet pull down on thetop of your head.For more information: www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/8019_fitting-a-helmet.pdfAIR. Be sure tires are properly inflated and spin the wheels to make sure the tires are not worn out and the wheels don’t wobble.BRAKES. Check to be sure coaster brakes will stop the bike when you pedal backward. To check hand brakes, squeeze them back and make sure they don’t hit the handlebars. Brake pads should still have ¼ “ of pad on them and should not be rubbing against the wheel rim. Test the brakes to be sure they can stop the bike before you ride.CRANKS, CHAINS, COGS. The crank arms are what the pedals attach to. Pull your cranks away from the bike – if they are loose, tighten the bolt. Check your that your chain is free of rust and gunk. If you bike has gears, check to be sure the chain can go from one gear (cog) to another.• WATCH FOR PARKED CARS: Ride far enough from aparked car to avoid being hit by a car door openingor a car pulling out.• WATCH FOR CARS COMING FROM DRIVEWAYSAND SIDE STREETS: Be prepared to stop if you see acar entering the road in front of you.•YIELD TO TRAFFIC and PEOPLEWALKING: Slow down and look.• ENTERING THE ROAD: Look left,right, then left again before enteringthe road.• USE LIGHTS: White lights onthe front of the bike and a red reflector and red light on the back are required at night.• RIDE ON THE RIGHT: Ride withthe flow of traffic, not against it.• FOLLOW ALL TRAFFIC LAWS:Obey traffic signs, signals andlane markings.• BE PREDICTABLE: Ride in astraight line, don’t weave, useturn signals.• SIGNAL BEFORE TURNING: Look behind, thensignal, watch for traffic.BE PREPARED • BE PREDICTABLE • BE VISIBLEQUICK RELEASE. Some bikes have quick releases on the wheels or the seat post. Check to be sure the quick releases are tight and closed properly. CHECK THE BIKE. Check the seat and the handlebars to be sure they are tight and at the proper height. Get on the bike and check to make sure everything works before riding.Passing on your left!For more information, call 919-245-2567www.orangecountyncbicyclesafety.com31
ROLL
with
RESPECT
A Guide
for
People who Drive
and
People who Ride
What to put on back panel?
"UUBDINFOU
32
Orange County Cares about the safety of all of its road users.
Please follow these rules and best practices to keep everyone safe on our roads.
CYCLISTS
Ride Predictably
• Bicycles are vehicles in NC and shouldoperate as vehicles
• )ollow ALL traϫc laws
• Always ride in the same direction as traϫc
• Ride as far to the right as is practicable (oftendebris or broken pavement, preparing to changelanes, or the need for more conspicuity, mayrequire you to ride in the center of the lane,which is allowed)
• Scan behind you before changing lanes
• Signal when turning
• Do not swerve between parked cars
• Do not ϧlter up beside stopped cars atintersections
• Make eye contact with motorists, especiallyat intersections & driveways
• Give an audible warning to pedestrianswhen approaching from behind
• Pull over for emergency vehicles with sirens and
lights on
Be Safe, Be Visible
• Don’t wear headphones while riding
• Wear a properly ϧtting helmet (NC law requiresthose under 16 to wear a helmet)
• When riding at night, NC law requires cycliststo have a white front headlight, a rear reϩector,AND a red rear light or reϩective clothing
MOTORISTS
Watch for Bicycles
In NC, bicyclists have the same rights & duties as a motorist & are subMect to traϫc vehicle laws Some laws for motorists changed in 16 )or more info visit https wwwncdotgovdivisions bikepedPagesbikepedlawsasp[
• Always Drive Cautiously
• Scan for cyclists in traϫc & at intersections
• Look for cyclists before opening your car door
• Do not te[t while driving or drive distracted
• Cyclists are vehicles & should be givenappropriate right of way
• Cyclists may use the entire traϫc lane, andare not required to ride single ϧle
Pass with Care
• Reduce speed when encountering cyclists
• Give cyclists e[tra trailing & passing roomin potentially dangerous situations
• Drivers may legally cross a double yellow lineto pass a cyclist provided they have clear sightdistance and it is safe to do so
• Motorists passing bikes must provide at least4 feet between their vehicle & the bicyclist, orthey must completely change lanes to pass
• Do not blast your horn at or near cyclists
• Drivers causing cyclists to leave their travel lane& causing a crash or inMury can be ϧned up to
4 feet
or
change
lanes
33
34
ORANGE COUNTY
ORANGE UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION BOARD
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 28, 2018
Action Agenda
Item No. 7
SUBJECT: Staff Updates
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. MPO/RPO NCDOT Project Updates
2. Criteria for High Impact – Low Cost
Projects
3. High Impact – Low Cost Funding
Report
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Abigaile Pittman, Transportation/Land
Use Planner, 919-245-2567
Nish Trivedi, Transportation Planner
919-245-2582
PURPOSE: Receive staff updates and provide any comments that the Board might have.
Item 7.a – MPO/RPO NCDOT Project Updates - NCDOT regularly releases lists of
transportation projects underway in the DCHC MPO and BG MPO. See Attachment 1.
Item 7.b. – OUTBoard Orientation Materials – At several meetings earlier this year, staff
reviewed and revised OUTBoard Orientation materials with the Board. The proposal was to
bring all information up to date, to add new topics that have arisen over the past several
years, and t o provide materials that would be most helpful to Board members. The
orientation materials are now available online through the Boards and Committees section of
the Planning Department’s web page: http://www.orangecountync.gov/2005/OUTBoard-
Orientation-Materials . Links are also provided within the orientation sections to information
that is already provided elsewhere and/or regularly updated by other agencies, such as
NCDOT and the MPOs/RPO. In this way, information is uniformly and accurately updated by
the responsible agency.
Staff will schedule an orientation session with new OUTBoard members in December, and
any other members that wish to attend.
Item 7.c. – Call for High Impact – Low Cost Projects – At its October 17 meeting, staff
requested OUTBoard members assist them in developing potential project lists by making
note of needed small transportation improvements as they travel county roads. Throughout
each fiscal year opportunities arise for Orange County to submit requests to fund small
transportation projects to the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT).
Potential funding sources for these projects include the 2018-2019 High Impact – Low Cost
Project Program. Last week staff received a notice from NCDOT that they are requesting
project submittals under the High Impact – Low Cost Project Program. NCDOT expects the
program will be funded at $1.78M/year for each of the 14 NCDOT Divisions.
35
NCDOT uses a quantitative, evidence-based formula when selecting Highway projects to
receive funding for 2019 candidate projects (Attachment 2). The criteria address:
• Current volume/AADT
• Accident rate (Combined Safety
Score)
• Existing lane width
• Existing shoulder width
• Pavement condition score
• Non-Highway modal components
included in project
• Other Funding Availability
• County Tier Designation
NCDOT Division 7’s 2018 list of funded projects is also provided for reference (Attachment 3). If
estimated candidate project costs exceed $250,000, a Resolution of Support from the Board of
County Commissioners (BOCC) is required.
The turn-around time between NCDOT notification of requested projects, and the deadline for
submission is typically very short and rarely allows sufficient time for full OUTBoard review and
discussion. The deadline to submit projects for funding under the High Impact – Low Cost
Project Program is Monday, December 3, 2018. Staff will bring a list of proposed project
submissions to the November 28 meeting. OUTBoard is invited to submit suggestions for
candidate projects to staff by Wednesday, November 28, 2018 (at the OUTBoard meeting).
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no i mmediate financial impact associated with this item.
Budgeted funds from are being utilized.
RECOMMENDATION(S): Staff recommends that the OUTBoard:
1. Receive information; and
2. Provide any comments that the Board might have.
36
TIP/WBS # Description Let/Start
Date
Completion
Date Cost Status Project Lead
SS-4907BS
44894.2.1
44894.3.1
Installation of traffic signal at the intersection of US70 and
SR 1114 (Buckhorn Road) East of Mebane.
5/31/2017 Dec. 2018 $40,500 R/W
$43,200 CON
Utility relocations complete, Right of
entry complete, R/W acquisition
pending
Dawn McPherson
U-5846
50236.1.1
50236.2.1
50236.3.1
Construct a roundabout at SR 1772 (Greensboro Street) and
SR 1780 (Estes Drive) in Carrboro.
9/6/2018 FY2021 $775,000 1st bid opening received no bids,
Re-let 9/6/18 bids exceeded
engineers estimate, project cost
evalution being performed
Chad Reimakoski
W-5707C
44853.1.3
44853.3.3
47490
Revise pavement markings and overhead lane use signs for
removal of inside lane drop configuration on I-40 Westbound
in vicinity of US 15-501 interchange. Resurfacing I-40 WB
by use of contingency funds
11/1/2018 Aug. 2019 $395,000 Planning and design activities
underway, re-let due to bids
exceeded engineers estimate, new
let date 11/1/18
Chad Reimakoski
47798 Increase length of existing turn lane / slip ramp and improve
existing radius in the SE quadrant of US 70 Business/ NC 86
at US 70 Bypass in Hillsborough
1/17/2019 Jun. 2019 $189,000 Planning and design activities
complete, R/W certified 9/18/18
Chad Reimakoski
U-5847
50238.1.1
50238.2.1
50238.3.1
Intersection improvements at SR 1010 (West Franklin St.)
and SR 1771 (Merritt Mill Rd)/SR1927 (Brewer Lane) in
Chapel Hill / Carrboro.
1/17/2019 FY 2020 $775,000 Planning and design activities
underway, bike/ped improvements
to be completed under project 48283
Chris Smitherman
48283 Remove and replace existing curb & gutter and sidewalk,
add pedestrian signals, concrete island, and signal
modifications on SR 1010 (E. Main St / W. Franklin St) from
Brewer Ln to Graham St. in Chapel Hill and Carrboro
5/31/2019 Sept. 2019 $250,000 Funds approved 9/6/18,
Construction May 2019
Chris Smitherman
B-4962
40174.1.1
40174.2.1
40174.3.1
Replace Bridge #46 over Eno river on US 70 Bypass 4/16/2019 FY 2021 $5,826,000 Planning and Design activities
underway, ROW acquisition - 15%
complete
Kevin Fischer
NCDOT DIV 7 PROJECTS LOCATED IN DCHCMPO - UNDER DEVELOPMENT
Attachment 1 37
TIP/WBS # Description Let/Start
Date
Completion
Date Cost Status Project Lead
NCDOT DIV 7 PROJECTS LOCATED IN DCHCMPO - UNDER DEVELOPMENT
SS-4907CD
47936.1.1
47936.2.1
47936.3.1
Horizontal curve improvements on SR 1710 (Old NC 10)
west of SR 1561/SR 1709 (Lawrence Road) east of
Hillsborough. Improvements consist of wedging pavement
and grading shoulders.
12/5/2019 Spring 2020 $261,000 Planning and design activities
underway
Chad Reimakoski
I-3306A
34178.1.3
34718.2.2
34178.3.3
Wideing I-40 from I-85 in Orange Co. to Durham Co. line (US
15/501 Interchange)
TBD TBD $98,800,000 Planning and design activities
underway, No schedule at this time
other than CE doucment scheduled
for 12/28/2018
Laura Sutton
P-5701
46395.1.1
46395.3.1
Construct Platform, Passenger Rail Station Building at
Milepost 41.7 Norfolk Southern H-line in Hillsborough
6/30/2021 FY2022 $7,200,000 PE funding scheduled 7/1/2020,
Coordinate with U-5848
Matthew Simmons
R-5821A
47093.1.2
47093.2.2
47093.3.2
Construct operational improvements including
Bicycle/Pedestrian accommodations on NC 54 from SR 1006
(Orange Grove Road) to SR 1107 /SR 1937 (Old Fayetteville
Road).
6/21/2022 FY2024 $3,924,000 Planning and design activities
underway, coordinating with NC54
West Corridor Study
Jennifer Evans
U-5848
50237.1.1
50237.2.1
50237.3.1
Extend SR 1006 (Orange Grove Road) on new location with
Sidewalks and bike lanes from existing SR 1006 (Orange
Grove Road) to US 70 Business in Hillsborough.
3/21/2023 FY 2025 $5,326,000 Planning and Design activities
underway, Coordinate with P-5701
and U-5845
Laura Sutton
I-3306AC
34178.1.6
34178.2.5
434178.3.9
Interchange improvements at I-40 and NC86 in Chapel Hill 3/21/2023 FY 2025 $16,500,000 Planning and Design activities
underway
Laura Sutton
I-5959
45911.1.1
45911.3.1
Pavement Rehabilitation on I-85 from West of SR 1006
(Orange Grove Road) to Durham County line
11/21/2023 FY 2025 $11,155,000 Funding approved 10/10/17 Chris Smitherman
I-5967
45917.1.1
45917.2.1
45917.3.1
Interchange improvements at I-85 and SR 1009 (South
Churton Street) in Hillsborough
1/16/2024 FY 2027 $20,700,000 Planning and Design activities
underway
Laura Sutton
38
TIP/WBS # Description Let/Start
Date
Completion
Date Cost Status Project Lead
NCDOT DIV 7 PROJECTS LOCATED IN DCHCMPO - UNDER DEVELOPMENT
U-5845
50235.1.1
50235.2.1
50235.3.1
Widen SR 1009 (South Churton Street) to multi-lanes from I-
40 to Eno River in Hillsborough
1/16/2024 FY 2027 $49,751,000 Planning and Design activities
underway, Coordinate with U-5848
and I-5984
Laura Sutton
I-5984
47530.1.1
47530.2.1
47530.3.1
Interchange improvements at I-85 and NC 86 in
Hillsborough
11/18/2025 FY 2027 $16,488,000 Funding approved 10/10/17,
Coordinate with U-5845 and I-5959
Laura Sutton
U-6071
47496.1.1
47496.2.1
47496.3.1
Intersection improvements at NC 54 and SR 1007 (Old
Fayetteville Rd) in Carrboro
1/15/2026 FY 2027 $1,216,000 Planning and design activities
underway
Jennifer Evans
39
ContractNumberTIPNumberLocation DescriptionContractor NameResidentEngineerContract BidAmountAvailabilityDateCompletionDateWork StartDateEstimatedCompletionDateProgressSchedulePercentCompletionPercentNorth Carolina Department of TransportationActive Projects Under Construction - Orange Co.C203640REPLACEMENT OF 4 BRIDGES INGUILFORD COUNTY AND 3 BRIDGESIN ORANGE COUNTY.HAYMES BROTHERS,INC.Lorenz, PE, Kris $3,124,500.00 06/01/2015 11/01/2017 09/02/2015 12/01/2018 100.00 87.93C203946 B-5348DANE CONSTRUCTIONINCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$984,596.98 02/01/2018 12/27/2018 02/01/2018 01/30/2019 99.00 92.33C204025 I-5954PAVEMENT REHABI-40/I-85 FROM EAST OF NC-54 IN GRAHAM IN ALAMANCE CO. TO WEST OF SR-1114 (BUCKHORN RD) IN ORANGE CO.APAC - ATLANTIC INCTHOMPSON ARTHURDIVISIONKirkman, PE,Christopher D$9,699,053.68DG00302 P-4405K EXTEND BRYDSVILLE ROAD TO NC86 AND REMOVE RAIL CROSSINGTRIANGLE GRADING &PAVING INCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,683,900.00 07/01/2016 12/30/2017 09/29/2016 10/31/2018 100.00 89.87DG00321IMPROVEMENTS ONSR 1004 (EFLAND-CEDAR GROVE RD) CAROLINA SUNROCK,LLCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,711,133.05 04/02/2018 04/02/2019 04/02/2018 04/02/2019 85.20 69.86DG00332W-5601 IF I-85 GUARDRAIL END TERMINALUPGRADESNICKELSTONINDUSTRIES INCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$494,243.00 12/05/2016 09/05/2017 05/01/2017 08/22/2018 100.00 100.00DG00371RESURFACE 9 SECONDARY ROADSCAROLINA SUNROCKLLCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,688,750.33 07/05/2017 11/01/2018 08/30/2017 11/01/2018 62.00 96.08DG00372R-5787B ADA CURB RAMPS IN BURLINGTON,GIBSONVILLE, GRAHAM, MEBANE IN ALAMANCE CO., CARRBORO & CHAPEL HILL IN ORANGE COUNTYATLANTICCONTRACTINGCOMPANY, INC.Kirkman, PE,Christopher D$128,910.00 07/24/2017 03/28/2019 02/26/2018 08/31/2018 89.81 98.29DG00391REPLACE BRIDGE # 104 OVER STONEY CREEK ON SR 1712 (UNIVERSITY STATION RD)R.E. BURNS & SONSCO., INC.Kirkman, PE,Christopher D$561,562.02 01/30/2018 10/26/2018 03/01/2018 05/02/2019 99.00 63.09DG00393RESURFACE SR 1101, SR 1118, SR 1119, SR 1124, SR 1125, SR 1127,SR 1128 SR 1130, SR 1134, SR 1135, SR 1137, SR 1141, SR 1143, ETC.RILEY PAVING INC Kirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,084,520.40 04/02/2018 10/12/2018 06/18/2018 10/12/2018 60.00 63.83DG00395REPLACE BRIDGE #189 ON SR 1114 (BUCKHORN ROAD) OVER CANE CREEKS T WOOTENCORPORATIONKirkman, PE,Christopher D$723,924.13 04/01/2018 01/01/2019 05/07/2018 02/07/2019 97.00 99.75DG00413RESURFACE US 70 BUS, SR 1009, SR 1102 , SR 1129, SR 1239, SR 1352, SR 1716 AND SR 1841CAROLINA SUNROCKLLCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$3,562,232.66 05/28/2018 11/01/2019 05/29/2018 11/01/2019 32.00 38.14DG00419RESURFACE NC 86 AND 17 SECONDARY ROADSCAROLINA SUNROCKLLCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$3,764,001.64 05/14/2018 11/01/2019 05/14/2018 11/01/2019 40.00 23.23DG00427REPLACE BRIDGE #51 ON SR 1534 (MCKEE ROAD) OVER BUFFALO CRKNATIONAL BRIDGEBUILDERS LLCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$521,443.82 05/07/2018 03/04/2019 07/30/2018 04/29/2019 23.00 24.84DG00435RESURFACE 22 SECONDARY ROADSWHITEHURST PAVINGCO INCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$846,340.66 04/01/2019 10/11/2019DG00444 R-5821B INTERSECTION IMPORVEMENTS ATTHE INTERSECTION OF NC 54 ANDSR 1006 (ORANGE GROVE ROAD)FSC II LLC DBA FREDSMITH COMPANYKirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,039,900.00 07/16/2018 05/16/2019 08/13/2018 05/16/2019 14.21 4.85DG00445 R-5787BB INSTALLATION OF ADA COMPLIANTCURB RAMPS AT VARIOUSINTERSECTIONSLITTLE MOUNTAINBUILDERS OFCATAWBA COUNTYINCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$319,319.80 06/25/2018 02/15/2020 08/06/2018 02/15/2020 10.00 22.75REPLACE BRIDGE #85 OVER PHILS CRK ON SR-1005(OLD G'BORO RD)W-514340
ContractNumberTIPNumberLocation DescriptionContractor NameResidentEngineerContract BidAmountAvailabilityDateCompletionDateWork StartDateEstimatedCompletionDateProgressSchedulePercentCompletionPercentNorth Carolina Department of TransportationActive Projects Under Construction - Orange Co.DG00445 W-5707A INSTALLATION OF ADA COMPLIANTCURB RAMPS AT VARIOUSINTERSECTIONSLITTLE MOUNTAINBUILDERS OFCATAWBA COUNTYINCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$319,319.80 06/25/2018 02/15/2020 08/06/2018 02/15/2020 10.00 22.75DG00451 U-5854 SR 1008 (MT. CARMEL CHURCHROAD) AND SR 1913 (BENNETTROAD) ROUNDABOUT AND RELATEDSAFETY IMPROVEMENTSCAROLINA SUNROCKLLCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,833,468.84 08/15/2018 04/30/202041
ContractNumberTIPNumberLocation DescriptionContractor NameResidentEngineerContract BidAmountAvailabilityDateCompletionDateWork StartDateEstimatedCompletionDateProgressSchedulePercentCompletionPercentNorth Carolina Department of TransportationActive Projects Under Construction - Orange Co.C203640REPLACEMENT OF 4 BRIDGES INGUILFORD COUNTY AND 3 BRIDGESIN ORANGE COUNTY.HAYMES BROTHERS,INC.Lorenz, PE, Kris $3,124,500.00 06/01/2015 11/01/2017 09/02/2015 11/01/2017 93.20 86.93C203641REPLACEMENT OF 5 BRIDGES INGUILFORD COUNTY AND 5 BRIDGESIN ORANGE COUNTY.R.E. BURNS & SONSCO., INC.Kirkman, PE,Christopher D$5,940,323.00 06/01/2015 11/01/2018 06/01/2015 08/31/2018 100.00 99.40C203946 B-5348DANE CONSTRUCTIONINCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$984,596.98 02/01/2018 12/27/2018 02/01/2018 01/30/2019 99.00 85.05C204025 I-5954PAVEMENT REHAB ON I-40/I-85 FROM EAST OF NC-54 IN GRAHAM TO WEST OF SR-1114 (BUCKHORN RD) IN ORANGE COUNTY.APAC - ATLANTIC INCTHOMPSON ARTHURDIVISIONKirkman, PE,Christopher D$9,699,053.68DG00302 P-4405K EXTEND BRYDSVILLE ROAD TO NC86 AND REMOVE RAIL CROSSINGTRIANGLE GRADING &PAVING INCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,683,900.00 07/01/2016 12/30/2017 09/29/2016 10/31/2018 100.00 89.87DG00321SR 1004 (EFLAND-CEDAR GROVE RD) CAROLINA SUNROCKLLCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,711,133.05 04/02/2018 04/02/2019 04/02/2018 04/02/2019 25.00 49.86DG00332W-5601 IF I-85 GUARDRAIL END TERMINALUPGRADESNICKELSTONINDUSTRIES INCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$494,243.00 12/05/2016 09/05/2017 05/01/2017 09/05/2018 100.00 100.00DG00371RESURFACE 9 SECONDARY ROADSCAROLINA SUNROCKLLCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,688,750.33 07/05/2017 11/01/2018 08/30/2017 11/01/2018 42.40 92.43DG00372R-5787B ADA CURB RAMPS IN BURLINGTON,GIBSONVILLE, GRAHAM, MEBANE IN ALAMANCE CO., CARRBORO & CHAPEL HILL IN ORANGE COUNTYATLANTICCONTRACTINGCOMPANY, INC.Kirkman, PE,Christopher D$128,910.00 07/24/2017 03/28/2019 02/26/2018 03/28/2019 40.95 54.52DG00391REPLACE BRIDGE # 104 OVER STONEY CREEK ON SR 1712 (UNIVERSITY STATION RD)R.E. BURNS & SONSCO., INC.Kirkman, PE,Christopher D$561,562.02 01/30/2018 10/26/2018 03/01/2018 05/02/2019 60.07 72.05DG00393RESURFACE SR 1101, SR 1118, SR 1119, SR 1124, SR 1125, SR 1127,SR 1128 SR 1130, SR 1134, SR 1135, SR 1137, SR 1141, SR 1143, ETC.RILEY PAVING INC Kirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,084,520.40 04/02/2018 10/12/2018 06/18/2018 10/12/2018 24.00 25.98DG00395REPLACE BRIDGE #189 ON SR 1114 (BUCKHORN ROAD) OVER CANE CREEKS T WOOTENCORPORATIONKirkman, PE,Christopher D$723,924.13 04/01/2018 01/01/2019 05/07/2018 02/07/2019 95.25 69.47DG00413RESURFACE US 70 BUS, SR 1009, SR 1102 , SR 1129, SR 1239, SR 1352, SR 1716 AND SR 1841CAROLINA SUNROCKLLCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$3,562,232.66 05/28/2018 11/01/2019 05/29/2018 11/01/2019 23.00 24.53DG00419RESURFACE NC 86 AND 17 SECONDARY ROADSCAROLINA SUNROCKLLCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$3,764,001.64 05/14/2018 11/01/2019 05/14/2018 11/01/2019 26.00 7.32DG00427REPLACE BRIDGE #51 ON SR 1534 (MCKEE ROAD) OVER BUFFALO CRKNATIONAL BRIDGEBUILDERS LLCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$521,443.82 05/07/2018 03/04/2019 07/30/2018DG00435AST RETREATMENT ON 22 SECONDARY ROADSWHITEHURST PAVINGCO INCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$846,340.66 04/01/2019 10/11/2019DG00444 R-5821B INTERSECTION IMPORVEMENTS ATTHE INTERSECTION OF NC 54 ANDSR 1006 (ORANGE GROVE ROAD)FSC II LLC DBA FREDSMITH COMPANYKirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,039,900.00 07/16/2018 05/16/2019REPLACE BRIDGE #85 OVER PHILS CRK ON SR-1005(OLD G'BORO RD)W-514342
ContractNumberTIPNumberLocation DescriptionContractor NameResidentEngineerContract BidAmountAvailabilityDateCompletionDateWork StartDateEstimatedCompletionDateProgressSchedulePercentCompletionPercentNorth Carolina Department of TransportationActive Projects Under Construction - Orange Co.DG00445 R-5787BB INSTALLATION OF ADA COMPLIANTCURB RAMPS AT VARIOUSINTERSECTIONSLITTLE MOUNTAINBUILDERS OFCATAWBA COUNTYINCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$319,319.80 06/25/2018 02/15/2020W-5707A INSTALLATION OF ADA COMPLIANTCURB RAMPS AT VARIOUSINTERSECTIONSLITTLE MOUNTAINBUILDERS OFCATAWBA COUNTYINCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$319,319.80 06/25/2018 02/15/2020DG00451 U-5854 SR 1008 (MT. CARMEL CHURCHROAD) AND SR 1913 (BENNETTROAD) ROUNDABOUT AND RELATEDSAFETY IMPROVEMENTSCAROLINA SUNROCKLLCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,833,468.84 08/15/2018 04/30/202043
TIP/WBS # Description Let/Start
Date
Completion
Date Cost Status Project Lead
ER-2971
3607.3.08
Install widening, curb and gutter, and construct sidewalk on
NC 49 (Main St.) between the east side of the Haw River
Bridge and Stone St. in Haw River
1/27/16 Oct. 2018 $275,000 LAP- Under construction - 100%
complete, final inspection pending
Donnie Huffines
SS-4907BS
44894.1.1
44894.2.1
44894.3.1
Installation of traffic signal at the intersection of US70 and SR
1114 (Buckhorn Road) East of Mebane.
5/31/17 Dec. 2018 $40,500 R/W
$43,200 CON
Utility relocations complete, Right of
entry complete, R/W acquisition
pending
Dawn McPherson
SS-4907BQ
44757.1.1
44757.2.1
44757.3.1
Intersection improvements (All Way Stop) at SR 1005
(Greensboro-Chapel Hill Road) at SR 2369 (Sylvan
School Road) and SR 2371 (Pleasant Hill Road) in Snow
Camp.
8/15/17 Fall 2018 $22,500 R/W
$153,000 CON
4-way stop installation and flasher
completed 4/17/18, R/W certified
9/25/18, utility relocations underway,
widening Fall 2018
Chris Smitherman
Dawn McPherson
SS-4907CB
47675.1.1
47675.2.1
47675.3.1
47721
Installation of traffic signal at the intersection of SR 1530
(Burch Bridge Road) at SR 1515 (Flora Avenue) north of
Burlington.
7/2/2018 Dec. 2018 $107,500 Traffic signal activated, Project
completed pending final RTE
inspection
Dawn McPherson
U-6015
47160.1.1
47160.2.1
47160.3.1
Burlington-Graham Signal System upgrade 9/18/18 FY2020 $11,851,000 R/W Certified 7/18/2018, Let and
awarded contract to ALS of North
Carolina
Sherry Yow
U-5843
50233.2.1
50233.3.1
Intersection improvements at US 70 (South Church Street)
and SR 1817 (Graham-Hopedale Road) in Burlington
11/15/18 FY2020 $2,300,000 R/W Certified, Utility relocations
pending, Project let and received no
bids, Re-let 11/15/18
Chad Reimakoski
ER-2971
3607.1.16
3607.3.16
Construct sidewalk on the east side of SR1716 (N. Graham
Hopedale Rd) between Wilkins St. and North Ashland Drive
in Burlington
Nov. 2018 Apr. 2019 $70,000 LAP, Let schedule pending Donnie Huffines
NCDOT PROJECTS LOCATED IN BGMPO - UNDER DEVELOPMENT 44
TIP/WBS # Description Let/Start
Date
Completion
Date Cost Status Project Lead
NCDOT PROJECTS LOCATED IN BGMPO - UNDER DEVELOPMENT
47771 Widen and improve right turn taper, radius and signal
upgrade at the intersection of NC 54 and SR 1945
(Riverbend Rd.) in Graham.
Nov. 2018 Mar. 2019 $250,000 Planning and design activities
underway, scope reduction in
progress
Chad Reimakoski
48712 Planning and design of SR 1446 (Rockwood Ave.) from
existing end of maintenance to NC87 in Glen Raven.
Develop roadway, hydraulic and ROW plans
N/A N/A $500,000 Funding approved Sept. 2018 Chris Smitherman
47786
SM-5707B
47903.2.1
Intersection improvements on SR 1007 (Mebane Oaks Rd) at
SR 2126/2128 (Old Hillsborough Rd) south of Mebane.
Improvements include addition of left and right turn lanes,
radii widening, signal installation, resurfacing, and pavement
markings.
Jan. 2019 May. 2019 $898,500 Planning and design activities
underway, ROW acquisition
pending, CFI schedule pending
Chad Reimakoski
AV-5737
46331.1.1
46331.2.1
Burlington-Alamance Regional Airport, Obtain navigation
easements and clear obstructions in runway 24 approach
Jan. 2019 FY2019 $1,200,000 Funding approved Feb. 2018, R/W
acquisition scheduled 10/27/18
Rachel Bingham
W-5707D
44853.1.4
44853.2.4
44853.3.4
Safety improvements for curve on NC 49 located between
Buckingham Mountain Road (non-system) and SR 2363
(Beale Road) in Snow Camp.
5/16/19 FY2020 $200,000 R/W
$450,000 CON
Planning and design activities
underway
Chad Reimakoski
I-5711
50401.2.1
50401.3.1
Interchange improvements at I-40/I-85 and SR 1007
(Mebane Oaks Rd) in Mebane
9/17/19 FY2022 $17,446,000 Planning and design activities
underway
Laura Sutton
U-6010
47145.1.1
47145.2.1
47145.3.1
Intersection improvements at US 70 (South Church Street)
and SR 1226/SR 1311 (University Drive) in Burlington
10/20/20 FY2021 $1,300,000 Planning and design activities
underway
Brian Ketner
U-6011
47146.1.1
47146.2.1
47146.3.1
Intersection improvements at US 70 (South Church Street)
and SR 1158 (Huffman Mill Rd) in Burlington
11/17/20 FY2021 $1,300,000 Planning and design activities
underway
Brian Ketner
U-5844
50234.1.1
50234.2.1
50234.3.1
Construct multi-lanes on NC62 from SR 1430 (Ramada
Road) to US 70 (South Church Street) in Burlington
11/17/20 FY2021 $10,900,000 Planning and design activities
underway, R/W acquisition
tentatively scheduled for 8/30/19
Chris Smitherman
45
TIP/WBS # Description Let/Start
Date
Completion
Date Cost Status Project Lead
NCDOT PROJECTS LOCATED IN BGMPO - UNDER DEVELOPMENT
U-6017
47162.1.1
47162.2.1
47162.3.1
Intersection improvements at NC 54 (East Harden St.) and
NC 49 (East Elm St.) in Graham
1/19/21 FY 2022 $1,216,000 Planning and design activities
underway
Chad Reimakoski
U-6009
47144.1.1
47144.2.1
47144.3.1
Widen and construct center turn lane on US70 (West Church
St) from Tarleton Ave. to Fifth Street in Burlington
6/15/21 FY2023 $11,319,000 Planning and design activities
underway
Chad Reimakoski
U-6013
47158.1.4
47158.2.4
47158.3.4
Widen NC 119 to multi-lanes from SR 1981 (Trollingwood-
Hawfields Rd)/ SR 2126 (Old Hillsborough Rd) to Lowes Blvd
(non-system) in Mebane.
7/19/22 FY 2024 $8,700,000 Planning and design activities
underway
Jennifer Evans
U-6014
47159.1.1
47159.2.1
47159.3.1
Widen SR 1716 (Graham-Hopedale Rd) to multi-lanes with
Bicycle/Pedestrian accommodations from SR 1720 (West
Hanover Rd) to Morningside Drive in Burlington
7/19/22 FY 2024 $15,200,000 Planning and design activities
underway
Chad Reimakoski
I-6009
47962.1.1
47962.2.1
47962.3.1
Interchange improvements at I-40/I-85 and SR 1158
(Huffman Mill Road). Construct additional right turn lane on I-
40 WB Ramp and improve operations at SR 1308 (Garden
Road) intersection in Burlington
6/18/26 FY2027 $1,936,000 PE funding approved 6/5/18 Chris Smitherman
46
ContractNumberTIPNumberLocation DescriptionContractor NameResidentEngineerContract BidAmountAvailabilityDateCompletionDateWork StartDateEstimatedCompletionDateProgressSchedulePercentCompletionPercentNorth Carolina Department of TransportationActive Projects Under Construction - Alamance Co.C203676 B-5239REPLACE BRIDGE #126 OVER MILL RACE AND BRIDGE #119 OVER HAW RIVER ON NC-87.DANE CONSTRUCTIONINCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$4,786,122.27 03/15/2018 03/29/2020 03/15/2018 03/29/2020 27.00 25.98C203782 I-5309PAVEMENT REHAB ON I-40/I-85 FROM EAST OF THE GUIL. CO LINE TO 0.2 MILES EAST OF NC-54 IN GRAHAM.APAC - ATLANTIC INCTHOMPSON ARTHURDIVISIONKirkman, PE,Christopher D$11,966,430.84 04/25/2016 11/30/2017 07/05/2016 11/15/2018 100.00 100.00I-5836PAVEMENT REHAB ON I-40/I-85 FROM EAST OF THE GUIL. CO LINE TO 0.2 MILES EAST OF NC-54 IN GRAHAM..APAC - ATLANTIC INCTHOMPSON ARTHURDIVISIONKirkman, PE,Christopher D$11,966,430.84 04/25/2016 11/30/2017 07/05/2016 11/15/2018 100.00 100.00C203844 U-3109A NC-119 RELOCATION FROM I-40/85TO SR-1921 (MEBANE ROGERS RD/STAGE COACH RD).THALLECONSTRUCTION CO.,INC.Kirkman, PE,Christopher D$45,389,069.36 06/26/2017 01/28/2021 08/03/2017 02/01/2021 38.10 31.47C203984 B-5347REPLACE BRIDGE #170 OVER A PRONG OF BIG ALAMANCE CREEK ON SR-1145 (POND RD).MOUNTAIN CREEKCONTRACTORS INCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,182,371.52 03/15/2018 03/09/2019 04/16/2018 04/25/2019 68.00 67.44C204025 I-5954PAVEMENT REHAB ON I-40/I-85 FROM EAST OF NC-54 IN GRAHAM IN ALA. COUNTY TO WEST OF SR-1114 (BUCKHORN RD) IN ORANGE CO.APAC - ATLANTIC INCTHOMPSON ARTHURDIVISIONKirkman, PE,Christopher D$9,699,053.68C204026 I-5956PAVEMENT REHAB ON I-40/I-85 FROM EAST OF SR-3056 (ROCK CRK DAIRY RD) TO WEST OF SR-1226 (UNIV. DR).APAC - ATLANTIC INCTHOMPSON ARTHURDIVISIONIngram, PE, J.Paul$4,067,357.08 08/28/2017 07/01/2018 04/30/2018 11/16/2018 95.00 90.48C204106 U-3109B NC-119 RELOCATION NORTH OFSR-1921 (MEBANE ROGERS RD) TOSOUTH OF SR-1918 (MRS WHITE RD).THALLECONSTRUCTION CO.,INC.Kirkman, PE,Christopher D$8,151,660.80 08/27/2018 11/28/2020 10/04/2018 11/28/2020 6.70 2.52DG00372R-5787B ADA CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS ATINTERSECTIONS IN BURLINGTON GIBSONVILLE, GRAHAM, MEBANE,CARRBORO & CHAPEL HILLATLANTICCONTRACTINGCOMPANY, INC.Kirkman, PE,Christopher D$128,910.00 07/24/2017 03/28/2019 02/26/2018 08/31/2018 89.81 98.29DG00379RESURFACE NC 119 FROM +/- 100' W. OF FOUST RD TO US 70, SR 1972 FROM SR 1963 TO E.O.M., SR 1973 FROM SR 1972 TO E.O.M & SR 1975CAROLINA SUNROCKLLCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$757,199.74 07/05/2017 11/01/2018 08/30/2017 11/01/2018 96.50 35.11DG00382RESURFACE SR 1928, SR 1940, SR 2113, SR 2123, SR 2132, SR 2156 SR 2312, SR 2317, SR 2451APAC - ATLANTIC INCHOMPSON ARTHURDIVISIONKirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,455,626.94 07/05/2017 11/01/2018 09/13/2017 11/01/2018 94.00 99.93DG00392RESURFACE 26 SEC. ROADS IN ALAMANCE CO. AND 1 SEC. ROAD IN GUILFORD COUNTY (SR 3349)RILEY PAVING INC Kirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,059,904.41 04/02/2018 10/12/2018 08/02/2018 10/12/2018 57.00 60.81DG00393RESURFACE SR 1101, SR 1118, SR 1119, SR 1124, SR 1125, SR 1127,SR 1128 SR 1130, SR 1134, SR 1135, SR 1137, SR 1141, SR 1143, ETC.RILEY PAVING INC Kirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,084,520.40 04/02/2018 10/12/2018 06/18/2018 10/12/2018 83.37 78.37DG00424REPLACE BRIDGE # 307 ON SR 1936 (STONE ST. EXT) OVER UNNAMED TRIBUTARY OF BACK CREEKNATIONAL BRIDGEBUILDERS LLCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,204,877.32 06/04/2018 05/02/2019 08/02/2018 05/02/2019 43.50 36.96DG00426RESURFACE A PORTION OF NC 87 AND PORTIONS OF 3 SEC. ROADSRILEY PAVING INC Kirkman, PE,Christopher D$3,463,032.95 07/09/2018 11/01/2019B-573547
ContractNumberTIPNumberLocation DescriptionContractor NameResidentEngineerContract BidAmountAvailabilityDateCompletionDateWork StartDateEstimatedCompletionDateProgressSchedulePercentCompletionPercentNorth Carolina Department of TransportationActive Projects Under Construction - Alamance Co.DG00431AST RETREAMENT ON 29 SECONDARY ROADS IN ALAM. CO.WHITEHURST PAVINGCO INCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$868,412.06 04/01/2019 10/12/2019DG00432RESURFACE A PORTION OF US 70AND 6 SECONDARY ROADS INALAMANCE COUNTY AND A PORTIONOF 1 SR IN GUILFORD CO.RILEY PAVING INC Kirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,878,598.12 07/09/2018 11/01/2019DG00441DECK OVERLAYS W/LATEXMODIFIED CONCRETE - VERY EARLYSTR BRDG JNT REPL ON BRIDGE#71-ALA, 90,195,261 - GUILFORDEXTREME CONCRETECUTTING OF GAFFNEYLLCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,248,556.25 06/04/2018 09/24/2018 08/08/2018 11/22/2018 100.00 86.56DG00445 R-5787BB INSTALLATION OF ADA COMPLIANTCURB RAMPS AT VARIOUSINTERSECTIONSLITTLE MOUNTAINBUILDERS OFCATAWBA COUNTYINCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$319,319.80 06/25/2018 02/15/2020 08/06/2018 02/15/2020 10.00 22.75W-5707A INSTALLATION OF ADA COMPLIANTCURB RAMPS AT VARIOUSINTERSECTIONSLITTLE MOUNTAINBUILDERS OFCATAWBA COUNTYINCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$319,319.80 06/25/2018 02/15/2020 08/06/2018 02/15/2020 10.00 22.75DG00457INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT US 70 (CHURCH STREET) AND SR 1301 (ST. MARKS CHURCH ROAD)SHARPE BROTHERS ADIVISION OF VECELLIO& GROGAN INCKirkman, PE,Christopher D$1,790,372.74 09/04/2018 03/31/2020 10/23/2018 03/31/2020 4.00 3.8548
Attachment 2 49
WBS COUNTY DESCRIPTION
YEAR ONE
ALLOCATION TOTAL COST
$1,714,285.71
47725 Guilford
SR 1850 Sandy Ridge Road & Johnson St Inters. - Realign intersection
of Johnson Street (SR 1818) at Sandy Ridge Road (SR 1850) and install
traffic signal.
$400,000 $500,000
47771 Alamance
NC 54 @ Riverbend Road - Widen and improve right turn taper, radius
and signal upgrade at the intersection of NC 54 and SR 1945 (
Riverbend Road)
$250,000 $250,000
47758 Guilford
SR 3056 (Rock Creek Road) Two foot widening on each side of road,
increase length of existing turn lanes, add signal, signal upgrade,
resurface, guardrail and pavement markings on SR 3056 (Rock Creek
Dairy Road ) from SR 3058 (Judge Adams Road) / SR 3000 (McConnell
Road) to US 70 .
$410,000 $820,000
47724 Caswell NC 62,US 158 & NC 86 - Install Traffic Signal $110,000 $110,000
47752 Alamance
SR 2158 (Swepsonville - Saxapahaw Road)-Two foot widening on each
side of road, resurface and pavement markings on SR 2158
(Swepsonville - Saxapahaw Road) from SR 2171 (Church Rd) / SR 2146
(Saxapahaw - Bethlehem Church Rd) to SR 2116 (Boywood Road) To
provide additional pavement width..
$240,000 $2,200,000
TOTAL SPENDING YEAR ONE $1,410,000
FUNDS REMAINING $304,286
WBS COUNTY DESCRIPTION YEAR TWO
ALLOCATION STATUS
47753 Caswell &
Rockingham
NC 150 - Two foot widening on each side of road, resurface and
pavement markings on NC 150 from NC 87 in Rockingham county to
US 158 in Caswell County.
$1,345,011 $3,539,502
47799 Guilford
Pleasant Garden Road & Neelley Road - Install left turn lane on SR
3505 (Pleasant Garden Road) south bound onto SR 3418 (Neelley
Road).
$300,000 $300,000
47798 Orange
US 70 Bypass and NC 86 - Increase the length of the existing turn lane
/ slip ramp and improve the existing radius in the southeast quadrant
of US 70 Business / NC 86 at US 70 Bypass.
$189,000 $225,000
47786 Alamance
Mebane Oaks Road & Old Hillsborough Road- Intersection
improvement on SR 1007 (Mebane Oaks Road) and SR 2126 / SR 2128
(Old Hillsborough Road). Add left & right turn lanes, widen radii,
traffic signal, pavement markings and resurface.
$300,000 $600,000
TOTAL FUNDED $2,134,011
Year two Allocation $1,714,285.71
Remaining funds from year 1 - $304,286 $304,286
Total Remaining High Impact Funding $2,018,571
Overspent -$115,439
DIVISION 7 YEAR ONE HIGH IMPACT / LOW COST
HIGH IMPACT / LOW COST PROJECTS
DIVISION 7 YEAR TWO HIGH IMPACT / LOW COST
Attachment 3 50