HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.22.23 OUTBoard Packet ORANGE TRANSPORTATION
COUNTY GOVERNMENT
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES DEPARTMENT
COUNTY
NoKm CALIQLLNA PUBLIC TRANSIT
�rangeCounty
AGENDA
ORANGE UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION BOARD
Monday, May 22, 2023, 5:30 pm
600 NC 86, Hillsborough, NC 27278
OUTBoard meetings are held in person and open to the public. Any member of the general public
who wishes to make public comment should email eange@orangecountync.gov and the
comment will be read to the OUTBoard during the public comment portion of the meeting.
1. Call to Order
2. Consideration of Additions or Changes to Agenda
3. Public Comments
4. Approval of Minutes— February and April 2023
5. Regular OUTBoard Agenda
a. Transit Dashboard
i. Action: Provide comments
b. Orientation Material
i. Action: Provide comments
c. NC 54 West Multimodal Corridor Study
i. Action: Recommend BOCC approve study in Orange County
6. Staff Report/Updates
a. MPO, RPO, and NCDOT Updates
7. Information Items
8. Adjournment -The next meeting -June 2023
It is the policy of Orange County Transportation Services to ensure that no person shall, on the
ground of race, color, sex, age, national origin, or disability, be excluded from participation in, be
denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity
as provided by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987.
600 Hwy 86 N - Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
Phone (919) 245-2008 - Fax (919) 732-2137
orangecountync.gov/transportation
DRAFT
1 MINUTES
2 ORANGE COUNTY OUTBOARD
3 FEBRUARY,2023
4
5 MEMBERS PRESENT: : Michael Hughes, (Chair), At-Large Representative; Randy Marshall (Vice-Chair),
6 Bingham Township Representative; Joshua Mayo, At-Large Representative; Jamie Crandall, Eno
7 Township Representative; Art Menius, Little River Township Representative; Roy Schlonberg, Chapel Hill
8 Township Representative, Amy Cole, At-Large Representative; Hillsborough Township Representative;
9 Patricia Hull, Cedar Grove Township Representative; Tom Gray, Hillsborough Township Representative;
10 Todd Jones, At- Large Representative; Amy Cole, At- Large Representative
11
12 STAFF PRESENT: Nish Trlvedi, Transportation Director; EmmaLea Ange, Administrative Support
13
14 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER
15 The meeting was called to order at 5:00pm
16
17 AGENDA ITEM 2: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
18 No additions to the agenda
19
20 Randy Marshal — How close are we to filling vacant positions on the OUTBoard.
21
22 Nish —we are close and have an applicant and County commissioners should be appointing filling them
23 soon.
24
25 AGENDA ITEM 3: PUBLIC COMMENTS
26 No Public Comments received
27
28 Nish —one public comment received requesting NC 10 be added as a County priority for modernization
29 and multi-mobility, from NC 86 to US 751 near US 70. Need a recommendation from this Board to add it
30 as a County Priority.
31
32 Motion by Randy Marshall, Second Amy Cole, unanimously approved, no descent
33
34 AGENDA ITEM 4: APPROVAL OF MINUTES
35 Approved January minutes with minor changes regarding those who were in attendance,
36 Motion by Randy Marshall and Second by Joshua mayo, approved unanimously, no descent
37
38 AGENDA ITEM 5: 5307 DIRECT RECIPIENT TRANSITION
39
40 Nish presented the 5307 urban grant formula transition from sub-recipient of NCDOT to direct recipient
41 of Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Most of the work had already stared before joining the
42 department. Some documents required correction so new documents have been prepared including
43 Legal Counsel and Authorizing Resolution.
44
45 Motion by Randy Marshall, Second Amy Cole, unanimously approved, no descent
46
1
DRAFT
47 AGENDA ITEM 6: UPDATES
48 DCHC MPO is transitioning Staff Work Group responsibilities to the Counties and both Durham and
49 Orange have agreed to take them on. This will start July 1, 2023. The County is also approving the FY 24
50 Annual Work Program to implement the County Transit Tax and will go through a public process prior to
51 approval in May and June.
52
53 We will continue working on creating a bridge update map and coordinate these bridge improvements
54 with multiple local agencies.
55
56 Nish provided the updates for NCDOT projects.
57
58 AGENDA ITEM 7: ADJOURNMENT
59 OUTBoard meeting was adjourned
2
DRAFT
1 MINUTES
2 ORANGE COUNTY OUTBOARD
3 APRIL,2023
4
5 MEMBERS PRESENT: : Michael Hughes, (Chair), At-Large Representative; Randy Marshall (Vice-Chair),
6 Bingham Township Representative; Joshua Mayo, At-Large Representative; Jamie Crandall, Eno
7 Township Representative; Art Menius, Little River Township Representative; Roy Schlonberg, Chapel Hill
8 Township Representative; Amy Cole, At-Large Representative; Hillsborough Township Representative;
9 Patricia Hull, Cedar Grove Township Representative; Tom Gray, Hillsborough Township Representative;
10 Todd Jones, At- Large Representative; Amy Cole, At- Large Representative
11
12 STAFF PRESENT: Nish Trlvedi, Transportation Director; EmmaLea Ange, Administrative Support
13
14 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER
15 The meeting was called to order at 5:30pm
16
17 AGENDA ITEM 2: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
18 No additions to the agenda
19
20 Nish — Requested adding 3 projects to County Priority list: Orange Grove Road Extension, regional
21 multimodal transportation center in Hillsborough and NC 10 modernization
22
23 AGENDA ITEM 3: PUBLIC COMMENTS
24 No Public Comments received
25
26 AGENDA ITEM 4: APPROVAL OF MINUTES
27 Approved March minutes with minor changes regarding those who were in attendance,
28 Motion by Randy Marshall and Second by Joshua mayo, approved unanimously, no descent
29
30 AGENDA ITEM 5: ORANGE GROVE ROAD EXTENSION, NC 10 MODERNIZATION AND REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION
31 CENTER HILLSBOROUGH
32
33 Nish — provided a brief presentation on the 3 requested projects, explained their background,
34 significance and potential process in their incorporation into future State Transportation Improvement
35 Program (STIP)
36
37 Moved by Randy Marshal, seconded by Amy Cole, approved unanimously.
38
39 AGENDA ITEM 5: IMPLEMENTING COUNTY'S COMPLETE STREET POLICY
40
41 Nish — provided a brief presentation on 3 potential options to implement the County's Complete Street
42 and Vision Zero policy
43
44 OUTBoard recommends pursuing all three avenues: Grants, Transit Tax and CIP
45
46
1
DRAFT
47 AGENDA ITEM 5: ORANGE COUNTY ANNUAL WORK PROGRAM
48
49 Nish — presented the Orange County Annual Work Program and encouraged OUTBoard to participate in
50 the public review process by submitting their comments.
51
52 AGENDA ITEM 5: Us 70 MULTIMODAL CORRIDOR STUDY
53
54 Nish — presented the US 70 study and encouraged OUTBoard to participate in the public process.
55
56 AGENDA ITEM 6: UPDATES
57 Nish provided the updates for NCDOT projects.
58
59 AGENDA ITEM 7:ADJOURNMENT
60 OUTBoard meeting was adjourned
2
� ORANGE COUNTY GOVERNMENTri
ORA E L TRANSPORTATION SERVICES DEPARTMENT ,�
NoRrH CARQLLNA Ora"g;„8�,�,u„5nt
Item 5.a.
Subject: Transit Dashboard
PURPOSE: Provide comments on future Orange County Transportation Services (OCTS)Transit
Dashboard
BACKGROUND: Spring 2023, OCTS contracted with WSP to create a transit tracking dashboard
similar to Wake County Transit Performance Tracker(link).This public resources will be published
through the OCTS main website to provide the general public a constant update on all aspects of
the County's public transit services. It will ensure accountability and transparency of the County's
transit infrastructure, in anticipation of staff taking over all Staff Working Group administration
responsibilities on July 1, 2023. Durham County is anticipated to do the same as part of their
Transit Plan update.
OCTS staff is requesting comments from the Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard)
on the Transit Dashboard (e.g. Transit Tracker).
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact to the County. OCTS is conducting this update
in-house through department resources.
SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT: The following Orange County Social Justice Goals are applicable to this
item:
• GOAL: FOSTER A COMMUNITY CULTURE THAT REJECTS OPPRESSION AND INEQUITY
The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race or color; religious
or philosophical beliefs; sex, gender or sexual orientation; national origin or ethnic background;
age; military service; disability; and familial, residential or economic status.
• GOAL: ENSURE ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY
The creation and preservation of infrastructure, policies, programs and funding necessary for
residents to provide shelter, food, clothing and medical care for themselves and their
dependents.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: The following Orange County Environmental Goal impact is
applicable to this item:
• CLEAN OR AVOIDED TRANSPORTATION
Implement programs that monitor and improve local and regional air quality by: 1) promoting
public transportation options; 2) decreasing dependence on single-occupancy vehicles, and 3)
otherwise minimizing the need for travel.
ACTION:
Provide comments on OCTS public transit tracking dashboard.
600 Hwy 86 N - Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
Phone (919) 245-2008 - Fax(919) 732-2137
orangecountync.gov/transportation
� ORANGE COUNTY GOVERNMENTri
ORA E L TRANSPORTATION SERVICES DEPARTMENT ,�
No rH CARQLLNA Ora"g;„8�,�,u„5nt
Item 5.b.
Subject: OUTBoard Orientation Material
Attachment: 1. Material Packet
2. County Advisory Board Policy
3. Annual Report and Work Plan
PURPOSE: Provide comments on Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard) Orientation
Material.
BACKGROUND: August 2022, County consolidated all transportation related roles and
responsibilities into one department Orange County Transportation Services (OCTS). This
requires the need to update the OUTBoard orientation material. While bulk of it remains the
same, some of it will be improved upon through this consolidation. Highlights of possible changes
include and not limited to:
• Consolidating Material Packet (attachment 1) into a single document with graphics
• Updating the Transportation Advisory Service (TAS) and OUTBoard coordination process
• Publishing new material to the Orange County Transportation Services website (link)
o Including County Advisory Board Policy and Annual Report and Work Plan
(attachment 2 and 3)
OCTS staff is requesting comments on the OUTBoard specific material so staff can update it.
Next Step
The updated orientation materials will be available online, on the OUTBoard section of the
Transportation Services web page (link). Hard copies will be made available upon request.
However, digital pdf located on the website will contain links to additional resources.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: No immediate financial impacts approving the study. Local approval of study
allows County opportunity to pursue state and federal funding for transportation improvements
along the corridor. It also allows County staff to utilize it in development review process for the
dedication of right-of-way for future state funded improvements and the construction of
bike/ped facilities through enforcement of County's Unified Development Ordinance (UDO).
SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT: The following Orange County Social Justice Goals are applicable to this
item:
• GOAL: FOSTER A COMMUNITY CULTURE THAT REJECTS OPPRESSION AND INEQUITY
The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race or color; religious
or philosophical beliefs; sex, gender or sexual orientation; national origin or ethnic background;
age; military service; disability; and familial, residential or economic status.
• GOAL: ENSURE ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY
600 Hwy 86 N - Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
Phone (919) 245-2008 - Fax(919) 732-2137
orangecountync.gov/transportation
The creation and preservation of infrastructure, policies, programs and funding necessary for
residents to provide shelter, food, clothing and medical care for themselves and their
dependents.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: The following Orange County Environmental Goal impact is
applicable to this item:
• CLEAN OR AVOIDED TRANSPORTATION
Implement programs that monitor and improve local and regional air quality by: 1) promoting
public transportation options; 2) decreasing dependence on single-occupancy vehicles, and 3)
otherwise minimizing the need for travel.
ACTION:
Provide comments on OUTBoard Orientation Material (attachment 1 and link).
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ADVISORY BOARD POLICY
SECTION I: SCOPE
A. Purpose
1. To establish a policy and procedures whereby the Orange County Board of
Commissioners will make appointments to public advisory boards, committees,
commissions, and councils (hereinafter"advisory boards").
B. Authority
1. North Carolina General Statute 153A-76 grants boards of county commissioners the
authority to establish advisory boards.
2. The Orange County Board of Commissioners may establish rules and regulations in
reference to managing the interest and business of the County.
3. The Orange County Board of Commissioners has the responsibility to appoint
residents to serve as members of advisory boards established by the
Commissioners.
4. Orange County department directors and staff are responsible for providing support
to the advisory boards.
C. Policy and Periodic Review
1. This Advisory Board Policy establishes some parameters for:
a. Appointments to state-mandated, regional, and/or county-developed
advisory boards.
b. Removals from such advisory boards.
c. Quorum and voting standards.
d. A code of general conduct for advisory board members.
e. Other aspects of advisory board service the Orange County Board of
Commissioners wishes to address.
2. Periodic Review
a. Periodic review of this Advisory Board Policy will be conducted every five (5)
years by the Orange County Board of Commissioners.
b. This Advisory Board Policy may be changed or adjusted as deemed
necessary by the Orange County Board of Commissioners regardless of
whether it is scheduled for a review.
D. Applicability
1. To the extent it does not conflict with the statute or ordinance creating a specific
advisory board, where applicable, this Advisory Board Policy applies to the following
Orange County advisory boards, policies, commissions, and councils:
a. Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee
b. Advisory Board on Aging
c. Affordable Housing Advisory Board
d. Agricultural Preservation Board
e. Animal Services Advisory Board
f. Arts Commission
Adopted 2-21 12;Amended 8-21-12;Amended 11-8-12;Amended 3-3-15
g. Commission for the Environment
h. Economic Development Commission
i. Historic Preservation Commission
J. Human Relations Commission
k. Nursing Home Community Advisory Committee
I. Orange County Parks and Recreation Council
m. Orange County Planning Board
n. Orange Unified Transportation Board
o. Visitor's Bureau
2. Except as otherwise provided herein or through a specific advisory board policy this
Advisory Board Policy shall control the appointment, reporting, operation and other
requirements of the advisory boards listed above except to the extent the same are
controlled by a specific statute or ordinance. In those cases, as noted above, where
a statute or ordinance controls the requirements of the advisory board and the
terms of this Advisory Board Policy conflict with the terms of the statute or
ordinance the statute or ordinance shall prevail.
SECTION II: DUTIES
A. Community Contact
1. Advisory boards, through their membership and subcommittees, shall maintain
contact with stakeholder groups. In this manner, the advisory board is kept
apprised of current information related to matters under the jurisdiction of Orange
County.
B. Primary Responsibilities
1. Individual advisory boards shall maintain awareness of their goals and objectives as
those goals are related to the Orange County Board of Commissioners' adopted
overall goals and objectives for Orange County.
2. All actions or recommendations of the advisory board shall be communicated to the
Orange County Board of Commissioners as provided herein.
SECTION III: MEMBERSHIP
A. Authority
1. North Carolina General Statute 153A-76 grants boards of county commissioners the
authority to establish advisory boards and to appoint members to and remove
members from those advisory boards. In acting on this authority the Orange County
Board of Commissioners hereby establishes certain general conditions to which
applicants and members of advisory boards should conform.
a. All members of standing, statutory boards must meet the qualifications for
the specific statutory requirements for an appointed position.
b. All boards members must be eighteen (18) years of age or older unless
applying for a youth-designated position.
c. All board members shall be residents of Orange County and shall maintain
their domicile in Orange County unless they are under eighteen (18)years of
age and applying for a youth-designated position. The Clerk shall confirm
Adopted 2-21 12;Amended 8-21-12;Amended 11-8-12;Amended 3-3-15
applicants are residents of Orange County and maintain their domicile in
Orange County.
i. Domicile is defined as one's permanent established home as
distinguished from one's temporary although actual place of
residence.
d. All board members shall have good reputations for integrity and an interest
in community service.
e. No nominee to a board shall be currently employed by Orange County
government and serve on a board that directly affects their work.
f. No nominee may currently be a party to or be the actual legal
representative in litigation against Orange County. The Clerk shall confirm
nominees are not involved in such litigation.
g. Each nominee must be prepared and committed to participate in advisory
board work in a manner that enhances relationships between the county
and the community.
h. Advisory board members shall owe no outstanding taxes at the time of
appointment.
i. All board members are representatives of the Orange County Board of
Commissioners and shall conduct themselves, both in their official actions
and personal actions so as to be above reproach in their conduct and shall
not bring disrepute to either the County or the Commissioners.
J. The Orange County Board of Commissioners may waive any of the
conditions within this section, with the exception of statutorily imposed
conditions.
B. Composition
1. The Orange County Board of Commissioners shall appoint all voting and nonvoting
ex officio members to advisory boards. The Orange County Board of Commissioners
shall endeavor to appoint members who represent the ethnic, cultural,
demographic, and geographic diversity of the community.
C. Selection Criteria
1. Appointed members, except for ex officio members, shall be qualified by the Clerk
to the Board of County Commissioners.
2. Members shall be appointed from applicants whose properly filed and submitted
applications were submitted to the Clerk to the Board of Orange County.
D. Appointment
1. All members of advisory boards serve at the pleasure of the Orange County Board of
Commissioners.
2. Appointments to advisory boards will be initiated with a public application process
from individuals, advisory boards, or community and professional organizations.
3. All appointments to advisory boards will be made by the Orange County Board of
Commissioners.
a. The Orange County Board of Commissioners may elect to interview
applicants to certain advisory boards.
b. In the event the Orange County Board of Commissioners conducts such
interviews the advisory board to which the applicant seeks appointment
Adopted 2-21 12;Amended 8-21-12;Amended 11-8-12;Amended 3-3-15
may identify and suggest interview questions to the Orange County Board of
Commissioners.
4. No person appointed to an Orange County advisory board shall serve on that board
for more than two consecutive terms of three years each.
5. The Orange County Board of Commissioners may direct the Clerk to the Board of
County Commissioners to establish an orientation program for certain advisory or
other boards.
6. Extension of a member's term may be approved by the Orange County Board of
Commissioners if it is determined that it is in the best interest of Orange County to
allow an individual to continue to serve.
E. Term
1. Each appointed advisory board member shall hold office until the qualification and
appointment of his or her successor or until one year has elapsed since the
expiration of the term for which the member was appointed, whichever first occurs.
No person shall serve as an appointed member of an advisory board for more than
two consecutive terms of three years.
2. In order to establish staggered terms the original voting members of the advisory
board shall be appointed as follows:
a. One-third for a one year term.
b. One-third for a two year term.
c. One third for a three year term.
d. Thereafter, each newly appointed voting member shall serve for a three
yearterm.
3. Advisory board members whose terms are due to expire may request they be
appointed to a second term or be asked to accept a second term appointment to
the position.
4. Notwithstanding section III(E)(1) above the membership of any advisory board
member whom the Orange County Board of Commissioners decline to appoint to a
second term shall immediately terminate upon the expiration of their term.
5. Advisory board members may not serve concurrently on more than two (2) Orange
County advisory boards. This restriction does not impact an individual's service on
boards and commissions that are not Orange County advisory boards or short term
task forces or work groups.
F. Resignation
1. If a member wishes to resign, the member shall submit the resignation in writing to
the Chair of the advisory board on which the member serves and the Clerk to the
Board of Orange County Commissioners, noting the effective date of the
resignation.
2. The advisory board Chair will forward a copy of the resignation to the Clerk to the
Board of Orange County Commissioners.
3. The Orange County Board of Commissioners may recognize the individual's service
via a letter or certificate.
4. An announcement of the open seat will be made at the time the resignation
becomes effective.
G. Vacancies
Adopted 2-21 12;Amended 8-21-12;Amended 11-8-12;Amended 3-3-15
1. Upon the expiration of the term of service of members or should a vacancy
otherwise occur, the Orange County Board of Commissioners shall have the
responsibility of selecting and appointing new members to the advisory board.
2. Should any vacancy for which there is a board specific requirement that such
vacancy be filled by a nominee of a municipal corporation or a resident of a specific
Orange County township remain unfilled for six (6) consecutive months the board
specific requirements may be set aside and the Orange County Board of
Commissioners may fill the vacancy with any applicant otherwise qualified to serve.
H. Removal
1. Members of Orange County's advisory boards serve at the pleasure of the Orange
County Board of Commissioners and may be removed for any reason or no reason
with or without cause.
2. Members of Orange County's advisory boards are expected to abide by the highest
ethical and professional standards.
3. In addition to Section III(H)(1) above, the Orange County Board of Commissioners
shall remove any member of an advisory board for neglect of duty, nonparticipation
that becomes problematic to the advisory board's functioning and purpose. Neglect
of duty and nonparticipation are defined as follows:
a. Missing three (3) consecutive meetings; or
b. Missing twenty-five percent (25%) of meetings within any twelve (12)
month period.
c. For this section III(H)(3) to apply, the missed meetings in question must be
unexcused.
4. The advisory board Chair shall notify a member if the member is at risk of being
removed pursuant to section III(H)(3).
5. The advisory board Chair shall notify the Clerk to the Board of Orange County
Commissioners if a member has violated section III(H)(3).
I. Release from Service
1. When it is deemed necessary by the Orange County Board of Commissioners to
release a member from his or her term of appointment on an advisory board, the
affected individual shall be notified by the Clerk to the Board of County
Commissioners by letter and/or electronic mail.
2. When an advisory board has completed its function,the members shall be informed
of the completion of their service and the termination of the advisory board by
letter and/or electronic mail.
SECTION IV. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
A. Members
1. Members shall attend meetings of the advisory board, serve on subcommittees, and
perform other functions as assigned by the advisory board chair with the approval
of the advisory board.
2. If a member is unable to attend a meeting the member shall contact the Chair or
designated staff as much in advance of the scheduled meeting as possible.
Adopted 2-21 12;Amended 8-21-12;Amended 11-8-12;Amended 3-3-15
3. Ex officio members may be appointed by the Orange County Board of
Commissioners for the purpose of meeting subject matter expertise needs. Ex
officio members are nonvoting members of the advisory board.
4. Upon review of the above matters, the Orange County advisory board shall address
recommendations and concerns, if any, to the Orange County Board of
Commissioners in writing.
B. Advisory Board
1. The Orange County Board of Commissioners will consider all advisory board
recommendations and/or concerns.
a. Should any concerns remain unresolved after a response has been received
from the advisory board, the Orange County Board of Commissioners may
request that the matter be referred to the County Manager.
2. To enhance trust between Orange County Government and the community, Orange
County advisory boards shall:
b. Assist the staff of Orange County in achieving a greater understanding of the
nature and causes of community issues, with an emphasis on improving
relations between the department and the residents.
c. Recommend methods to encourage and develop the advisory board's ability
to accomplish their work.
d. Work throughout the community to gain relevant information about
advisory board issues and communicate these to the staff of Orange County
and the Orange County Board of Commissioners.
e. Promote public awareness of contemporary issues Orange County must
address to achieve the Orange County Board of Commissioners' goals and
priorities.
C. Chair,Vice Chair, Secretary
1. Selection
i. Election
1. Chair, Vice Chair and Secretary shall be elected by the advisory
board unless otherwise specified by the Board of Commissioners.
2. Chair, Vice Chair and Secretary shall be elected to one-year terms.
3. Chair, Vice Chair and Secretary shall serve no more than three
consecutive one-year terms.
4. Chair, Vice Chair and Secretary shall assume office on the date of
their election. At the first advisory board meeting upon assuming
office the advisory board Chair or department staff shall present
members with a copy of the advisory board's charge, scope of
authority, membership responsibilities, and code of conduct.
2. Responsibilities
i. The advisory board Chair:
1. Calls all meetings.
2. Serves as the presiding officer and conducts advisory board
meetings.
3. Is the Authorized spokesperson for the advisory board.
4. Assists staff in developing the advisory board meeting agenda.
Adopted 2-21 12;Amended 8-21-12;Amended 11-8-12;Amended 3-3-15
5. Appoints and dissolves subcommittees, and the Chair and members
thereof, of the body in consultation and with approval of the
advisory board.
6. Sets goals for the advisory board in consultation with the Orange
County Board of Commissioners.
7. Carries out advisory board assignments as required by the Orange
County Board of Commissioners.
8. Reviews all advisory board minutes and proposed recommendations
or assigns another member of the advisory board to do so.
9. May excuse members from attending advisory board meetings up
to two (2)times per twelve (12) month period.
ii. The advisory board Vice Chair:
1. Serves as the presiding officer and conducts advisory board
meetings in the absence of the Chair.
2. Has all the responsibilities of the Chair in the Chair's absence.
iii. The advisory board Secretary:
1. Takes (or oversees the taking of) minutes for all advisory board
meetings.
2. Submits minutes to the Chair to be distributed to advisory board
members in advance of meetings.
3. Submits approved advisory board minutes to the Clerk to the
Orange County Board of Commissioners for retention and
distribution to the Orange County Board of Commissioners.
4. Assures that other records of the advisory board are kept as
directed by the Chair or the Orange County Board of
Commissioners.
iv. Removal:
1. The Chair, Vice Chair and/or Secretary may be replaced at any time
by the Orange County Board of Commissioners.
SECTION V. ORGANIZATION
A. Orientation and Training
1. Orange County will make available for advisory board members and department
staff periodic training on state and/or county goals and priorities as well as relevant
statutes and policies, including open meetings, public records, conflicts of interest
and ethics.
2. Each member shall attend an orientation to familiarize the advisory board members
with the operation of County government, applicable department rules, and the
operating procedures of the advisory board.
a. The Chair and Vice Chair, if newly elected, shall attend an additional
orientation to familiarize themselves with the duties and responsibilities of
the Chair and Vice Chair and the guidelines for conducting meetings.
3. Each voting member will be encouraged to complete the orientation within the time
frame established by the policy of the specific advisory board to which they have
been appointed.
Adopted 2-21 12;Amended 8-21-12;Amended 11-8-12;Amended 3-3-15
4. Advisory board members will be issued a manual and should become familiar with
its contents.
B. Operating Expenses
1. Members, when in service on the board, are not employees of Orange County.
2. Members serve in a voluntary capacity and shall receive monetary compensation or
reimbursement only per standard county policy and with Orange County Board of
Commissioners approval.
3. Members shall receive no financial or employee benefits from the County unless
authorized by another section of this policy and specifically approved by the Orange
County Board of Commissioners.
4. The County will provide office supplies and assume responsibility for other
reasonable expenses necessary for the operation of the board.
C. Confidentiality
1. The Chair shall serve as the spokesperson for the advisory board.
2. Except for the Chair, no member of the advisory board shall make any written or
oral statement of any confidential matter to any individual, business, or agency. A
violation of this section will result in that member's immediate removal from the
advisory board.
3. Members of the advisory board may receive information regarding personnel
matters and other information of a sensitive or confidential nature. It shall be the
duty and responsibility of each member to respect and maintain the confidentiality
of client issues presented before the board. Neither the advisory board nor any
individual member shall disseminate confidential information received during
advisory board meetings.
4. Advisory board members may be required to sign confidentiality statements as
necessary and will be removed from the advisory board upon violation of the
confidentiality agreement.
SECTION VI. MEETINGS
A. Regular Meetings
1. All meetings are to be open to the public as required by the applicable North
Carolina General Statutes.
2. Unless otherwise specified, public meetings will follow the standard rules of
procedure defined by the Orange County Board of Commissioners.
3. The advisory board members shall determine the date, time, and place for each
meeting, consistent with the guidelines below.
a. Regular advisory board and subcommittee meetings.
i. The advisory board convenes upon call of the Chair and meets on
schedule as established by the specific advisory board policy.
ii. Subcommittee meeting dates shall be set by the subcommittee
Chairs and shall be scheduled in conjunction with advisory board
meetings.
Adopted 2-21 12;Amended 8-21-12;Amended 11-8-12;Amended 3-3-15
iii. A schedule of all meeting dates, times, and places shall be properly
posted in accord with North Carolina Law and delivered to the Clerk
to the Board.
B. Special Meetings
1. A majority of advisory board members or the Chair may call special meetings at any
time for any specific business. Special meetings shall be convened at a location
selected by the Chair.
2. All called special meetings shall be noticed in accord with North Carolina Law and
delivered to the Clerk to the Board.
C. Emergency Meetings
1. A majority of advisory board members or the Chair may call a meeting in emergency
circumstances by providing telephone notice to media outlets at least one hour
prior to the meeting.
2. An emergency situation includes a disaster that severely impairs the public's health
or safety. In the event telephone services are not working, notice that the meetings
occurred must be given as soon as possible after the meeting in accord with North
Carolina Law and by delivery to the Clerk to the Board.
D. Notice of Meetings Generally
1. Notice of advisory board meetings, including public hearings and appeals if
applicable, and agendas shall be made available to all members and interested
parties, and to any person who requests such notice, at least ten (10) days in
advance of the meeting by e-mail and by posting on the Orange County government
website.
2. All applicable notice requirements established by North Carolina law shall be
followed.
3. Prior to January 5t" of each calendar year the Board shall cause a schedule of its
meetings to be posted in a readily accessible location. Such schedule shall be
delivered to the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for posting to the Orange
County website.
E. Agendas
1. Board members and/or staff members shall submit agenda items to the Chair and
staff for consideration at least fifteen (15) days prior to a scheduled meeting.
2. The agenda must provide a description of each item of business to be transacted or
discussed so that interested members of the public will be capable of understanding
the nature of each agenda item.
3. As a general rule, only those items appearing on the agenda will be discussed or
voted on. However, if an item is raised by a member of the public, the advisory
board may accept public comment and discuss the item so long as no action is taken
until a subsequent meeting.
4. With the Chair's agreement, the designated staff will develop and distribute to each
member an agenda listing the matters to be considered at upcoming advisory board
meetings. Also, so far as practicable, copies of all written reports that are to be
presented to the advisory board for members' review will be included in this
package at least ten (10) days before the meeting.
Adopted 2-21 12;Amended 8-21-12;Amended 11-8-12;Amended 3-3-15
5. All recommendations and reports of the advisory board, approved in the form of
motions, shall be conveyed exclusively to the Orange County Board of
Commissioners for consideration, approval or denial. Outcomes are reported back
to the advisory board.
F. Minutes
1. Minutes shall be taken of all advisory board meetings and submitted to the Clerk to
the Board of Orange County Commissioners for retention and distribution to the
Orange County Board of Commissioners.
SECTION VII. SUBCOMMITTEES
A. Purpose and Formation
1. Subcommittees may be formed by the advisory board to research and make special
recommendations on special issues or areas in order to carry out the duties of the
advisory board.
2. All subcommittees shall be reviewed by the appointing body on an annual basis to
determine continued need and realignment with the priorities of the advisory
board.
3. Approved subcommittees must have documented goals, deliverables, and a
timeline. The subcommittee will cease to meet when these are satisfied.
4. The advisory board Chair may request that the Orange County Board of
Commissioners change the structure and/or operating procedures of the advisory
board if he or she deems it essential for improving the board's productivity and
effectiveness.
5. A subcommittee can be formed with the approval of the advisory board chair and
majority vote of the advisory board.
6. Subcommittees shall operate as directed by the advisory board.
B. Procedure and Membership
1. A member of the subcommittee shall take responsibility for taking minutes of
subcommittee meetings and shall report to the advisory board the subcommittee's
progress toward its stated objectives, including dissenting viewpoints.
2. Subcommittees shall operate by majority vote.
3. Subcommittees may request a technical representative be approved by the County
Manager.
4. Subcommittees shall operate openly as defined by applicable North Carolina State
law and local ordinances and policies.
5. Membership on subcommittees shall be voluntary unless the specific advisory board
policy dictates otherwise.
SECTION Vill. QUORUM AND VOTING
A. Quorum
1. A quorum for a meeting of an advisory board and any subcommittee thereof shall
consist of a majority of the number of appointed members. Vacant positions are
not counted when determining if a quorum is present.
Adopted 2-21 12;Amended 8-21-12;Amended 11-8-12;Amended 3-3-15
2. Members who teleconference into the meeting may not be counted present for
purposes of a quorum.
B. Voting
1. Unless otherwise required by law, all decisions shall be reached by a simple majority
vote.
2. All voting will be conducted in open meetings, except when in closed session where
such closed session is permitted by North Carolina law.
3. No issues can be voted upon unless a quorum is present.
4. Only appointed members can vote at advisory board meetings.
5. Appointed members shall not delegate their vote to another member.
6. The Chair of the advisory board may participate and vote on all issues.
7. Voting by proxy is not authorized and shall not be allowed.
S. Members may not abstain from voting but where a member has a conflict of
interest the member may be excused by majority vote of the advisory board.
9. Members of advisory boards must be physically present to vote.
10. Individuals appointed as ex officio members of the advisory board are not
authorized to vote on any issue before the advisory board.
SECTION IX. ETHICS
A. Conflict of Interest
1. During advisory board meetings, a member shall immediately disclose any potential
conflict of interest and request to be excused from voting when he or she has a
conflict of interest.
2. During appeal proceedings, the applicant has the right to question the interest of
any voting member. The advisory board chair should consult with the County
Attorney or staff attorney on any potential conflict of interest in appeal matters.
3. In determining from existing facts and circumstances whether a conflict of interest
exists the determining party shall consider the facts and circumstances as would an
ordinary and reasonable person exercising prudence, discretion, intelligence, and
due care.
B. Gifts
1. An advisory board member shall not directly or indirectly ask, accept, demand,
exact, solicit, seek, assign, receive, or agree to receive any gift or honorarium for the
advisory board member, or for another person, in return for being influenced in the
discharge of the advisory board member's official responsibilities.
2. This section shall not apply to gifts or awards authorized by Orange County Policies,
Resolutions, or Ordinances.
C. Code of Ethics
1. Advisory board members should act with integrity and with independence from
improper influence as they exercise the functions of their offices. Characteristics
and behaviors that are consistent with this standard are:
a. Adhering firmly to a code of sound values.
b. Behaving consistently and with respect towards everyone with whom they
interact.
Adopted 2-21 12;Amended 8-21-12;Amended 11-8-12;Amended 3-3-15
c. Exhibiting trustworthiness.
d. Living as if they are on duty as appointed officials regardless of where they
are or what they are doing.
e. Using their best independent judgment to pursue the common good as they
see it, presenting their opinions to all in a reasonable, forthright, consistent
manner.
f. Remaining incorruptible, self-governing, and not subject to improper
influence, while at the same time being able to consider the opinions and
ideas of others.
g. Disclosing contacts and information about issues that they receive outside
of public meetings, and refraining from seeking or receiving information
about quasi-judicial matters outside of the quasi-judicial proceedings
themselves.
h. Treating other advisory boards and advisory board members and the public
with respect, and honoring the opinions of others even when they disagree.
i. Being careful not to reach conclusions on issues until all sides have been
heard.
j. Showing respect for their appointed office and not behaving in ways that
reflect badly on the office, the advisory board, Orange County, or the
Orange County Board of Commissioners.
k. Recognizing that they are part of a larger group and acting accordingly.
I. Recognizing that individual board members are not generally allowed to act
on behalf of the board, but may only do so if the board specifically so
authorizes, and that the board must take official action as a body.
m. Being faithful in the performance of the duties of their offices.
n. Acting as especially responsible residents whom others can trust and
respect.
o. Faithfully attending and preparing for meetings.
p. Carefully analyzing all credible information that is properly submitted to
them, and when applicable, being mindful of the need not to engage in
communications outside the meeting in quasi-judicial matters.
q. Being willing to bear their fair share of the board's workload.
r. To the extent appropriate, they should be willing to put the board's
interests ahead of their own and shall avoid the appearance of a conflict of
interest and shall, under no circumstances, use their position on any board
for personal gain or profit.
2. Members of the Planning Board, Board of Adjustment, Economic Development
Commission, and Board of Equalization and Review shall upon initial appointment,
and prior to December 31 annually thereafter, disclose:
a. Any interest he or she or his or her spouse or domestic partner has in real
property situated in whole or in part in Orange County and the general
description of that property.
b. Any legal, equitable, beneficial or contractual interest he or she or his or her
spouse or domestic partner has in any business, firm or corporation, which
is currently doing business with Orange County pursuant to contracts
awarded by Orange County, or which is attempting, or has attempted in the
Adopted 2-21 12;Amended 8-21-12;Amended 11-8-12;Amended 3-3-15
past calendar year, to secure the award of a bid from Orange County or the
approval of any Board or Agency of Orange County.
c. Failure to file a disclosure statement setting out the above required
information shall result in immediate removal of the member from the
applicable board.
SECTION X. COMPENSATION AND TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT
A. Compensation
1. As a general rule advisory board service is voluntary and appointed members shall
receive no form of compensation for their services.
2. However, should the Orange County Board of Commissioners determine, in its sole
discretion, that an advisory board's members should be compensated, such
compensation shall be addressed in that advisory board's specific policy and rules of
procedure as adopted by the Commissioners.
B. Travel Expense Reimbursement
1. The Chair shall, to the extent practicable, schedule all hearings and advisory board
meetings to minimize travel and per diem costs.
2. Payment of expenses to advisory board members shall occur only when travel has
been approved by the County Manager prior to the time the expenses are incurred.
3. Orange County shall reimburse reasonable and necessary travel and incidental
business expenses from pre-approved travel to advisory board members
4. Advisory board members shall be reimbursed in accordance with current local
and/or state rules and regulations. Expense claims shall be submitted as required
pursuant to the Orange County travel policy.
5. Transportation expense claims shall include charges essential for transportation to
and from the meeting place. Reimbursement shall be made only for the local
government's standard mileage allowance. Travel should be via the shortest, most
commonly traveled route.
6. Travel expense does not include hotel/motel expenses.
SECTION XI. LIMITATION OF POWER AND AUTHORITY
A. Nothing contained in this Advisory Board Policy shall be construed to conflict with any North
Carolina law or Orange County ordinance. Should there be an appearance of conflict, the
appropriate North Carolina law or Orange County ordinance shall prevail.
B. The activities of the advisory board shall, at all times, be conducted in accord with applicable
Federal law, North Carolina law, and Orange County ordinances.
C. Advisory Boards and any members thereof shall not (and shall not have the express or
implied authority to):
1. Incur expense or obligate Orange County in any manner.
a. Any expense incurred must have been pre-approved either through the
department director overseeing the advisory board's budget, the Orange
County Board of Commissioners, or the County Manager.
Adopted 2-21 12;Amended 8-21-12;Amended 11-8-12;Amended 3-3-15
b. It is specifically acknowledged that no member of an advisory board has the
authority, express or implied, to, contractually or otherwise, bind Orange
County.
2. Identify or release any draft document that has not been approved for release by
the Orange County Board of Commissioners or County Manager.
3. Take positions, in their capacity as an advisory board member, on any political issue
or support or oppose any candidate for public office.
4. Independently investigate resident complaints against Orange County, any
department or any employee of a department.
5. Conduct any activity that might constitute or be construed as an official
governmental review of departmental or employee actions.
6. Conduct any activity that might constitute or be construed as establishment of
Orange County or departmental policy.
7. Violate the confidentiality of any information related to matters involving pending
or forthcoming civil or criminal litigation.
8. Engage in any act to impose or attempt to impose discipline on any advisory board
member, department, or employee.
9. Interfere, attempt to interfere or involve themselves in any way in staff personnel
matters regardless of the nature of the matter.
Adopted 2-21 12;Amended 8-21-12;Amended 11-8-12;Amended 3-3-15
Amended October 18, 2022
Orange Unified Transportation (OUT) BOARD POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
SECTION I: SCOPE
A. Purpose
1. To establish a policy and procedures whereby the Orange County Board
of Commissioners will establish the specific policies and procedures
governing the Orange Unified Transportation (OUT) Board.
2. The Orange County Board of Commissioners may appoint an advisory
board whose duty is to serve in an advisory capacity in regards to
planning and programming transportation infrastructure improvements
and other County transportation planning initiatives, as determined by
the Board of Commissioners.
B. Authority
1. North Carolina General Statute 153A-76 grants boards of county
commissioners the authority to establish advisory boards.
2. The Orange County Advisory Board Policy serves as the underlying
policy document to which the OUT Board, in addition to this policy and
procedure document, is subject. The Orange County Advisory Board
Policy is attached hereto as "Exhibit A".
3. In the event that there is a conflict between the Orange County Advisory
Board Policy and this Policies and Procedures document this Policies
and Procedures document shall control.
C. Charge
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. Upon request, OUT Board may advise other boards regarding
transportation.
SECTION II: GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
A. Goals
The Transportation Element of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan includes the
County's goals for transportation planning and provides guidance for the OUT
Board, Planning Board, Board of County Commissioners, and staff.
B. Objectives
The OUT Board shall:
1. Identify and provide prioritization recommendations on the County's
roadway, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian needs.
2. Assist in development and review of updates to the Transportation
Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
Amended October 18, 2022
3. Provide recommendations to the Board regarding Federal and State
legislation affecting transportation in Orange County.
4. Provide recommendations on innovative techniques and methods to
improve the efficiency and capacity of existing and future transportation
systems.
5. Carry out special projects as assigned by the Board of Commissioners.
6. Serve as an advisory body to the Administrative Staff of the Orange
Public Transit (OPT) System. The roles of assistance may include but
are not limited to being:
a. A forum to discuss relevant issues related to public transportation;
b. An advocate in promoting new or expanded transit services;
c. Sounding board on program operations, goal setting and
monitoring;
d. As a guardian of passenger rights for the general public and special
targeted populations; and
e. When directed by the BOCC, recommends NCDOT grants,
contracts, and studies that affect the current or future service levels
of public transportation in Orange County.
SECTION III: MEMBERSHIP
A. Authority
1. North Carolina General Statute 153A-76 grants boards of county
commissioners the authority to establish advisory boards and to appoint
members to and remove members from those advisory boards. In acting
on this authority the Orange County Board of Commissioners hereby
establishes certain general conditions to which applicants and members
of advisory boards should conform.
B. Composition
1. The OUT Board is composed of seven (7) voting members.
2. Members shall represent demographic, geographic, cultural and
professional characteristics, as follows:
a. Seven (7) members, one from each township:
b. Seven (7) alternates or non-voting members,
SECTION IV.MEETINGS
A. Staffing
1. Orange County staff may serve a support function to the OUT Board
upon the approval of the Orange County Manager.
B. Agendas
1. Items for agendas shall be approved by the OUT Board Chair and
Orange County staff.
Amended October 18, 2022
C. Date, Time, and Location of Regular Meetings
1. 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 Monday of the month.
The start time and location of the meeting shall be included on the
agenda and shall typically be at the Orange County Transportation
Services Administration Building, 600 NC 86, 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.
SECTION V. ORIENTATION
A. Attendance
1. Each member shall attend an orientation presented by the Orange
County Transportation Services Department to familiarize the advisory
board members with the operation of County government,
2. Each voting member will be encouraged to complete the orientation
within six weeks of his or her appointment.
SECTION VI.BY-LAWS
A. By-Laws
1. Any Bylaws adopted by the OUT Board are void and no further bylaws
shall be adopted. Procedure shall be governed solely by this policy
document and the General Advisory Board Policy Document.
2. Should the OUT Board determine modifications to policies and
procedures are necessary, the OUT Board may petition the Board of
County Commissioners for such modifications.
NAME OF BOARD/COMMISSION Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard)
Report Period January 2022-December 2022
ORANGE COUNTY ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
ANNUAL REPORT/ WORK PLAN FOR THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
The Board of Commissioners appreciates the dedication of all the volunteers on their
boards and commissions and welcomes input from various advisory boards and
commissions throughout the year. 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.
Board/Commission Name:
• Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard)
Person to address the BOCC and contact information:
• Michael Hughes, Chair, mmh mmhpe.com
Primary County Staff Contact:
• Primary administrative and professional support for OUTBoard
o Nishith Trivedi, Transportation Director
• Additional professional support for OUTBoard
o Bernard Clark, Transportation Administrator
o EmmaLea Ange, Office Assistant
• Burlington-Graham Metropolitan Planning Organization (BG MPO), Durham-
Chapel Hill-Carrboro (DCHC) MPO and Triangle Rea Rural Planning Organization
(TARPO)
o Nishith Trivedi, Transportation Director
• Transit Division
o Jamael Wiley, Transit Operations Manager
How many times per month does this board/commission meet, including any
special meetings and sub-committee meetings?
• Once per month — third Monday — or as needed to address items that require action
consistent with its Charge and Duties as specified in the OUTBoard Rules and
Procedures. The Board met ten times in 2022.
Brief Statement of Board/Commission's Assigned Charge and Responsibilities.
The OUTBoard is charged with advising the BOCC on the planning and programming of
transportation infrastructure improvements and other County transportation planning
initiatives, as directed by the Board. Upon request, OUT Board may advise other boards
regarding transportation.
What are your Board/Commission's most important accomplishments?
In 2022, the OUTBoard has:
1. Recommended Orange County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) approve
the County's Vision Zero and Complete Street Policy.
2. Provided comments on list of local and regional transportation Plan, programs and
projects including DCHC MPO 2050 MTP, BG MPO Safety Plan, ADA Paratransit
Plan, OCTS Agency Safety Plan, Title VI Plan, Orange County Transit Plan
3. Provided comments on and recommended Board of County Commissioners approve
Orange County Transit Plan Update
TAS accomplished the following:
1. OCPT Quarterly Operational Statistics, including ridership data.
2. 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.
3. Transit Scheduling and Planning Software upgrades and procurements.
4. Orange County commuter options.
5. Mobility on Demand service pilot program, through collaboration with Transloc/
Ford and NC State University Research grant.
6. Awarded the 5339 bus and bus facilities grant to purchase up to 3 electric buses
and will be replacing up to 10 of its older buses with new clean diesel buses
through funding from NCDOT.
List of Specific Tasks, Events, or Functions Performed or Sponsored Annually.
1. Continue improving coordination, collaboration and comprehensive transportation
planning with local, regional, state and federal agencies.
2. Continue improving upon countywide multimodal safety assessment and determine
unique ways Orange County can help meet MPO safety performance measures and
targets.
3. Continue pursuing all funding sources for County transportation priorities and track
status of project implementation.
4. Continue monitoring locally and regionally adopted plans for updates and
amendments like Orange County plans, Comprehensive Transportation Plan,
Metropolitan Transportation Plan and others.
5. NCDOT's bi-annual STIP
a. 1st year, recommend to BOCC Orange County's transportation priorities for
MPO/RPO SPOT consideration.
b. 2nd year, provide comments on the draft STIP
6. Regularly review NCDOT implemented projects and MPO/RPO activities.
7. Bi-annually review Small Projects Program for non-STIP funding.
8. Quarterly discuss any OCPT and TAS activities.
9. BOCC initiatives as assigned.
10.OUTBoard membership, offices and other items assigned by the BOCC.
Describe this board/commission's activities/accomplishments in carrying out
BOCC goal(s)/priorities, if applicable.
• Priority 6: Develop plan and tools to improve how County and citizens communicate
with each other; foster two-way exchange.
o Regularly update Transportation Planning and OUTBoard website
o Publish online all public meeting notices issued by local, regional and state
agencies related to transportation plan and projects in the County
• Priority 20: Support transit, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities and other alternatives to
the single passenger automobile.
o Ensure transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities are addressed in each
transportation plan, project, and program.
o Quarterly discuss County transit activities with OCPT and TAS.
o Participate in addressing bicycle and pedestrian safety along Orange Grove
Road and other corridors.
o Actively participate in states SPOT/STIP process as well as MPO/RPO
activities ensuring multimodal issues are addressed.
Describe the collaboration relationship(s) this particular board has with other
advisory boards and commissions?
OUTBoard meets monthly Orange County Transportation Services, including other
County Department staff (Aging, DSS, Housing, Human Rights and Community
Development, Health, and Child Support Enforcement) to address transportation.
Identify any activities this board/commission expects to carry out in 2023 as they
relate to established BOCC goals and priorities. If applicable, is there a fiscal
impact (i.e., funding, staff time, and other resources) associated with these
proposed activities (please list).
Following tasks are part of OUTBoard's current work plan.
1. Participate in aspects of the US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study — Data collection,
analysis, and recommendations for potential multi-modal (bike, pedestrian, transit,
freight, rail, highway) projects. This includes public outreach, OUTBoard review, and
recommendations to the BOCC for its action.
2. Implement Orange County Complete Street and Vision Zero Policy.
3. Update Orange County Short Range Transit Plan and identify long term goals,
objectives and project for Orange County.
4. Conduct Orange County Transportation Master Plan.
5. Participate in State Prioritization of Transportation (SPOT) 7 process.
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. Monitor connectivity and infrastructural changes with the local jurisdictions,
surrounding counties, regional agencies, and along utility easements in order to
create a more comprehensive multimodal transportation system.
2. Work with NCDOT to promote funding of multimodal projects in rural areas to a
greater degree.
3. Promote alternative transportation modes during peak hours via public-private
partnerships through County TDM Program.
4. Continue work with NCDOT in completing pedestrian counts as a function of the
Municipal Schools Transportation Assistance (MSTA) study conducted at Grady
Brown Elementary School and Cedar Ridge High School and share findings from the
final report.
5. Improve transportation planning process by encouraging local schools and other
public agencies to be more involved through public engagement.
6. Pursue alternative means of addressing local match and local administration
requirements for non-highway projects when plausible options exist for rural, low-
density areas of the County; at the same time, encourage municipal partners to
pursue similar options in urbanized, higher-density municipal areas.
Orange County Transportation Planning Jurisdictions
i
Caswell ! Person
— --------------------- i
-------------------- ----------------------------------------------
I I
I I
I
49 157 j
I
I
I I
I I
I I
I
86 57 I
I I
I
I I
t� I
I I
I I
} I
? j
1
I
e acne 70
Hillsb rough
{ 70A
I I
I 70 I
t j urham
Alamance
s
I I
86
I I
I I
I I
j
I � I
I
I 15
501
n Carrboro. Chapel Hill
f! i
I j
501
CBurlington Graham MPO — County Boundary N 1 in=smiles
- Durham Chapel Hill City Limits 0 ,
Carrboro MPO 4
ME=Miles
C Trian le Area RPO Orange County Planning and Inspections Department
9 GIs Map Prepared by Brian Carson.3/3/2016
Transportation Acronyms — Frequently Used
AADT Average Annual Daily Traffic
AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
ADT� Average Daily Traffic
AFV Alternative Fuel Vehicle
AVO T Average Vehicle Occupancy
AVR Average Vehicle Ridership
AWDT Average Weekday Daily Traffic
B/C Ratio Benefit-Cost Ratio
BG MPO Burlington/Graham Metropolitan Planning Organization
BOT Board of Transportation (NCDOT)
C/B Analysis Cost-Benefit Analysis
CAMPO Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization
CATS Capital Area Transit System
CHT Chapel Hill Transit
CIP Capital Improvement Program low
CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality
CMS Congestion Management System
CO Carbon Monoxide
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
CTIP Community Transportation Improvement Plan
CTN Chatham Transit Network
CTP Community Transportation Program
CTSP Community Transportation Service Plan
DAQ Division of Air Quality
DCHC MPO Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization
DMV Division of Motor Vehicles
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
GIS Geographic Information System
HOV High Occupancy Vehicle
HSIP Highway Safety Improvement Plan
HTF Highway Trust Fund
LOS Level of Service
MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization
MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area
MTC Major Transportation Corridor
NCBOT North Carolina Board of Transportation
NCDOT North Carolina Department of Transportation
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
OC Orange County
OCPT Orange County Public Transportation
OUTBoard Orange Unified Transportation Board
PUD Planned Unit Development
ROW Right of Way
RPO Rural Planning Organization
SIP State Implementation Plan
SOV Single Occupant Vehicle
SPOT Strategic Planning Office of Transportation (NCDOT)
STIP Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
STP Surface Transportation Program
STP-DA Surface Transportation Program Direct Attributable Funds
TAC Transportation Advisory Committee (local elected officials)
TARPO Triangle Area Rural Planning Organization _
TAZ Traffic Analysis Zone
TCC Technical Coordinating Committee
TCM Transportation Control Measure
TDM Transportation Demand Management and Travel Demand Management
TIA Traffic Impact Analysis (also referred to as TIS-Traffic Impact Study)
TIP Transportation Improvement Program
TJCOG Triangle J Council of Governments _
TMA Transportation Management Area
TND Traditional Neighborhood Design
TOD Transit Oriented Development
TPB Transportation Planning Branch (NCDOT)
TRM Triangle Regional Model
TSB Orange County Transportation Services Board
V/C Ratio Volume to Capacity
VHT Vehicle Hours of Travel
VMS Variable Message Sign
VMT Vehicle Miles of Travel
VOC Volatile Organic Compound
VPD Vehicles Per Day
VPH Vehicles Per Hour
Introduction to the Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard)
On May 17, 2005, the Orange County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC)
established a County transportation advisory board, at that time called the Orange
County Unified Transportation Advisory Board (OCUTAB). OCUTAB, under continuing
direction of the BOCC, was to advise the BOCC and provide information and comments
on major transportation issues; and provide recommendations regarding the overall
planning and programming of transportation improvements in the County. The advisory
board was directed to:
• Identify and pr ioritize the County's roadway and t ransit needs along with
associated costs and specific sources of funding;
• Assist in development and review of the transportation component of the
Comprehensive Plan;
• Provide recommendations to the Board regarding Federal and State legislation
affecting transportation in Orange County; and E xplore and make
recommendations on innovative techniques and methods to improve the
efficiency and capacity of existing and future transportation systems.
On August 22, 2006, the advisory board was renamed to the Orange Unified
Transportation Board (OUTBoard).
Board membership is comprised of fourteen (14) voting members representing
demographic, geographic, cultural and professional characteristics:
• Seven (7) members, one from each township (Cedar Grove, Little River, Cheeks,
Hillsborough, Eno, Bingham and Chapel Hill)
• Seven (7) members with expertise or specific interests in as many of the
following areas as possible:
o Bicycle transportation
o Pedestrian access and safety
o Public Transit
o Environmental Issues
o Economic Development
o Planning
o Public Health
From time to time the OUTBoard may be directed to provide input on regulations or
other matters on w hich another County board has statutory and/or local ordinance
advisory duties. I n these instances, the OUTBoard serves in an advisory capacity to
that board. Other County Boards and Commissions that deal with transportation issues
includes:
• Orange County Planning Board
• The Economic Development Commission
• The Commission for the Environment
• The Aging Department
The advisory board is administered by the Planning Department with primary staff
support provided by transportation staff with assistance from Orange County Public
Transportation (OCPT) for issues pertaining to OCPT service.
Transportation Advisory Services (TAS) Role
Legal Requirement for Recipients of Federal Section 5311 Funds
Orange County is a sub-recipient of the State of North Carolina to receive federal
Section 5311 funds for OCPT services provided within the County's non-
urbanized areas. To continue receiving Section 5311 funding in support of
OCPT services, the County is required to have a Transportation Advisory Board
(TAB) approved by the BOCC. A TAB is a locally formed advisory group that is
made up of representatives from the County's public human service agencies,
transportation providers, public and business sectors, government affiliates, and
transit users, as well as representatives from elderly, minority, and limited
English proficiency populations, etc.
For reference, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Public
Transportation Division (PTD) FY18 Community Transportation Program
Application Package is appended to this attachment. This package includes the
Section 5311-Non-urbanized Area Formula Program TAB requirements.
History
The County's transportation services/OCPT advisory function has been in
existence since 1992 when it was operating under the name of the
Transportation Services Board (TSB). In June, 2010 OCPT and the BOCC
approved the administration of the TSB to be moved from the Aging Department
to the Planning Department, and the function was incorporated into the Orange
Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard). County staff members from
departments that represent populations that NCDOT requires to be represented
were included in the staff component of the transportation services/OCPT
advisory function of the OUTBoard.
More Recent Transportation Services Advisory Function
As part of the 2012 Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan (OCBRIP)
development and implementation, there were many outreach meetings and
interdepartmental meetings, supplemented by OUTBoard meetings, which were
used to meet the requirements of the NCDOT. However, there was a need for
ongoing interaction with human service agencies regarding the provision of
public transit and opportunities to access public services.
Current Transportation Advisory Services Advisory Function
In order to more fully meet requirements for Section 5311 funding, Planning and
OCPT staff , the TAB function in Orange County was established as the Transit
Advisory Services (TAS) group, to function in conjunction with the County's
existing OUTBoard. The transportation services/OPT advisory function are
expanded by adding transit topics to OUTBoard agendas on a quarterly basis,
formally including OCPT staff on the agenda for the community transportation
system to maintain ongoing communications as one means of seeking public
involvement, and ongoing administrative oversight. The TAS jointly discusses
unmet needs in the OCPT service area, service design and scheduling, billing
rates and fares, and to resolve complaints. Meetings are to be held quarterly at a
minimum. The TAS group consists of staff from other County Departments (DSS,
Aging, Housing, Human Rights & Community Development, Child Support
Enforcement, and the Library).
OUTBoard's Role in Transportation Planning Processes and Requirements
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 inTIP 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 Air 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 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 the NCDOT quarterly luncheon
topics of discussion.
8. Submits comments and questions for discussion with OCPT staff during
Transit/OPT Advisory Services Group meetings.
9. Reviews and discusses current Board vacancies.
10.Other items as assigned by the BOCC.
Activities the OUTBoard expects to carry out in 2019 as they relate to
established BOCC goals and priorities.
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 Transit Advisory Services/OCPT meetings to discuss 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. Continue to jointly address transit topics relating to Orange County Public Transit
(OPCT), with supplemental staff from other County departments (Aging; DSS;
Housing, Human Rights and Community Development; Health; and Child
Support Enforcement), including new bus routes proposed to be initiated in 2017
(BOCC Goal 3, Priority 20). Related staff time is a part of staff's current work
plan.
9. 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.
ORANGE TRANSPORTATION
COUNTY GOVERNMENT
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES DEPARTMENT
COUNTY
NoKm CALIQLLNA PUBLIC TRANSIT
OrangeCounty
Item 5.c.
Subject: NC 54 West Multimodal Corridor Study
Attachment: 1. Phase 2 Report
PURPOSE: Approve the NC 54 West Multimodal Corridor Study in Orange County.
BACKGROUND: In fall of 2018, VHB concluded the NC 54 West Multimodal Corridor Study
presenting a thorough existing conditions, environmental and economic analysis of the corridor,
two rounds of public engaging workshops in each of the local jurisdictions and presented the full
report (link). They also followed up on it with a Phase 2 (attached) report addressing all the
important issues raised throughout the planning process.
City of Graham approved the study prior to Phase 2 report while Burlington-Graham
Metropolitan Planning Organization in collaboration with Alamance County approved the study
in its entirety, with phase 2. They submitted the western portion of the corridor for the States
Strategic Prioritization of Transportation (SPOT) 6.0 and will do so again for 7.0. Orange County
received the report as did Triangle Area Rural Planning Organization (TARPO)and Durham-Chapel
Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization (DCHC MPO). Both regional agencies defer to
the County respectively. Fall 2019, Carrboro unanimously approved a resolution unconditionally
opposing the study.
While Orange County continues coordinating and collaborating with all its local and regional
partners along the corridor since the study's completion, traffic on NC 54 has returned to pre-
covid levels, serious injuries and fatalities continue at increasing rate, and development pressure
increase in southern Orange County. Orange County continues to collaborate with North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) who updated their Complete Street Policy and
Implementation Guide in 2019, revamping state highway projects for a more comprehensive
benefit for all users. The state also grants local government the ability to adopt transportations
plans and implement them through Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Ordinances
State New Process—Complete Streets (link)
Over the past three years, NCDOT has significant progress is advancing the policy and improving
its implementation through their Project Delivery Network (PDN). All highway projects now go
through a comprehensive "complete" use assessment. The Comprehensive Transportation Plan
(CTP) is the governing document for the state's new Complete Street Policy and its
implementation. Per the new policy, "during the Comprehensive Transportation Planning
process, bicycle, pedestrian, transit, and other multimodal usage shall be presumed to exist along
and across certain corridors." NCDOT recognizes that an individual user is a pedestrian, bicyclist,
transit rider, EV/gas vehicle driver, etc., and often times in the same day. Therefore, the policy
dictates "Consideration of multimodal elements will begin at the inception of the transportation
planning process and the decisions made will be documented."
600 Hwy 86 N - Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
Phone (919) 245-2008 - Fax(919) 732-2137
orangecountync.gov/transportation
Local Authorization — UDO and Collector Street Plans
The Orange County Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) section 2.5.3.(v) and reiterated in
section 6.10.A.1.(b), includes the requirements for reserving and dedicating right of way or
requiring road construction listed in locally adopted Collector Street Plans or on the CTP. Specific
mention is also made to the dedication of right of way based on the concepts shown on the CTP
and locally adopted transportation plans, in accordance with N.C.G.S. § 136 66.2 and § 136 66.10.
Orange County currently has three locally adopted transportation plans:
• Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan
• Orange Grove Road Access Management Plan
• Eno River Economic Development Access Management Plan
Approval of NC 54 West Multimodal Corridor Study will demonstrate County's commitment to
multi-mobility, transit access, and safety of the transportation as an important local priority,
followed by the US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study which is anticipated to be completed fall 2023.
It will also demonstrate to local, regional and state partners that the County, like NCDOT's
Complete Streets, the County sees the road network as equitable for all travelers, not favoring
one over the other, and acknowledges that a traveler throughout the course of their day will walk
one place, ride another, drive to and from a third, and bike yet another.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: No immediate financial impacts approving the study. Local approval of study
allows County opportunity to pursue state and federal funding for transportation improvements
along the corridor. It also allows County staff to utilize it in development review process for the
dedication of right-of-way for future state funded improvements and the construction of
bike/ped facilities through enforcement of County's Unified Development Ordinance (UDO).
SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT: The following Orange County Social Justice Goals are applicable to this
item:
• GOAL: FOSTER A COMMUNITY CULTURE THAT REJECTS OPPRESSION AND INEQUITY
The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race or color; religious
or philosophical beliefs; sex, gender or sexual orientation; national origin or ethnic background;
age; military service; disability; and familial, residential or economic status.
• GOAL: ENSURE ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY
The creation and preservation of infrastructure, policies, programs and funding necessary for
residents to provide shelter, food, clothing and medical care for themselves and their
dependents.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: The following Orange County Environmental Goal impact is
applicable to this item:
• CLEAN OR AVOIDED TRANSPORTATION
Implement programs that monitor and improve local and regional air quality by: 1) promoting
public transportation options; 2) decreasing dependence on single-occupancy vehicles, and 3)
otherwise minimizing the need for travel.
ACTION:
Recommend Board of County Commissioners approve the NC 54 West Multimodal Corridor
Study.
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
00
■��
00
Vhb.
To: DCHC MPO Date: October 1, 2019 Memorandum
Project#: 38587.01
From: Don Bryson Re: NC 54 Supplement
INTRODUCTION
In response to the findings of the NC 54 West Corridor Study,the analyses summarized in this memorandum were
requested to better understand and explain traffic patterns associated with the portion of NC 54 between 1-40 in
Graham and Old Fayetteville Road in Carrboro.Although the focus of the additional analyses is the eastern (Orange
County) end of the corridor,the study area was expanded to provide more regional context, and to more directly
address West Main Street and the NC 54 Bypass to the east.
The analyses in this memorandum address specific questions, supplementing the NC 54 Corridor Study. The NC54
Corridor Study provides more detailed documentation of underlying assumptions,traffic data, analytical
methodology, and findings related to existing conditions, demand forecasts, and evaluation of alternatives.
Some of the major issues addressed in this memorandum include:
• Origins and destinations of traffic using this portion of NC 54
• Traffic forecasts
• Traffic impacts of the proposed widening on other roads
• Transit options, including:
o Park-and-ride lots
o Potential options for UNC-CH and hospital employees
CORRIDOR TRIP ORIGINS AND DESTINATIONS
According to the latest data (2017) available from the NCDOT traffic count program, average annual daily traffic
(AADT) on NC 54 ranged from a high of 23,000 veh/day at the western end of the study area (just east of 1-40 in
Graham)to a low of 6,400 veh/day near the county line (just west of Mebane Oaks Road/Saxapahaw Road). From
that point eastward AADTs increase to a high of 15,000 just west of Old Fayetteville Road,the eastern end of the
study. This pattern indicates that only a portion of the NC 54 traffic at Old Fayetteville Road consists of"through"
trips (defined as vehicles travelling the entire length of the corridor from 1-40 to Old Fayetteville Road). Even if all
6,400 veh/day at the county line were through trips, only 43%of the traffic approaching Old Fayetteville Road could
be defined as trips traveling the entire length of the corridor.Analysis of travel patterns suggests a much lower
percentage; many of these 6,400 trips having origins or destinations along the corridor or intersecting roadways
such as NC 119, Mebane Oaks Road, Orange Grove Road, and Bethel Hickory Grove Church Road. NC 54 collects and
connects traffic between these dispersed trips ends.
The following sections summarize analyses performed to help identify sources of traffic on this portion of NC 54.
Venture 1
940 Main Campus Drive, Suite 500
Raleigh, NC 27606-5217
P 919.829.0328
Page 1 of 12
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
Ref: 38587.01
October 1, 2019
Page 2
NC 54 Travelsheds
Figure 1 represents the approximate extent of the "travelshed"for trips to/from the center of Chapel Hill via the NC
54 West corridor. Trips beginning/ending within the shaded area are more likely to use NC 54 than alternate routes
(especially 1-40)for trips to/from downtown Chapel Hill, based on historically-determined relative travel times for
routes provided by Google Maps. For example, a traveler starting near the northern edge of the shaded area could
drive to downtown Chapel Hill via NC 54 or 1-40 in about the same time. Figure 2 demonstrates the impact of shifting
the destination slightly south,to Southern Village. The added time required to drive all the way through Chapel Hill
results in NC 54 being a shorter route for trips from the northwest (Burlington/Graham). There is a dividing line for
somewhere around the NC 54 Bypass. Figure 3 is a comparable representation for trips to Burlington/Graham.
Note that the relative volume of trips in each of these cases varies, and will change over time.
The key to defining these travelsheds is the difference in relative travel times among alternative routes. Increasing
congestion along 1-40 or NC 86 would be expected to shift this boundary northward and eastward, while more
congestion along NC 54 would constrict the shaded area. Conversely, improvements that reduce relative travel
times would expand a road's travelshed.
Observations
Comparing the travelsheds for the two major locations considered reveals several interesting observations:
• For central Chapel Hill trips,while the travelshed spreads farther north and east, it does not extend beyond
the ends of the corridor.
• A minor shift south to Southern Village yields a travelshed that extends west and north of the Graham end
of the corridor. This helps demonstrate the complex combination of origins and destinations served by the
NC 54 west corridor. Although Chapel Hill is a major destination for trips using the NC 54 Study Area
Corridor, there are dozens of significant trip-end pairs using portions of the corridor, and the relative
volumes of these trips can shift over time in response to local and regional growth and development,
congestion, and roadway improvements.
• For the centralized Burlington/Graham location,while the travelshed is narrower on the northern side, it
extends well beyond the eastern end of the corridor, widening greatly to the south to include portions of
northern Chatham County. This travelshed also applies to destinations north and west of the indicated
location. Growth outside the corridor is a more significant factor in traffic increases in this travel market
than for the downtown Chapel Hill travel market.
• Trips between western Orange County and points east of Chapel Hill (such as Durham and RTP) use this
portion of NC 54 and the Bypass; however, 1-40 is a more attractive option for trips originating farther west,
or even a slight distance north of NC 54 through the study area.
Although this analysis does provide some insights about who is using this portion of NC 54, it has limitations. It does
not reflect route selections of actual travelers, only the estimated minimum travel-time routes based on historical
averages.These travel times are derived from samplings of signals from location-based services,which are subject to
Page 2 of 12
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
Ref: 38587.01
October 1, 2019
Page 3
variation. Furthermore, travelers do not always base their route choices on minimum travel times, even if they have
accurate real-time information and reliable short-range predictions (which is not typically the case). Some drivers
prefer to avoid freeways; others are less comfortable on rural two-lane roads that may require passing. If travel-
time reliability is critical, routes with longer(but more consistent and predictable)travel times may be preferred to
the risk of a long delay. Also,this analysis considers only three very specific—though important—locations. There
are countless other potential locations that would generate different travelsheds.
StreetLight Data
To better understand the origin/destination patterns of traffic on NC 54 west of Carrboro, an analysis was
performed using a StreetLight dataset provided by DCHC.This dataset is comprised of anonymized location
information obtained from personal electronic devices during weekdays (Monday through Thursday) in April, May,
September, and October of 2016-18.The results summarized here are based on a sample of approximately 8,000
devices, representing about 29,000 individual trips.The StreetLight Index sample represents about 23%of the
averaged 2016-2018 AADT on NC 54, based on Index-to-AADT ratios.
The available StreetLight dataset did not include the entire NC 54 West study area (see Figure 4); only the portion of
the corridor east of Orange Grove Road could be analyzed. Figure 5 depicts the associated portion of the corridor in
more detail.
The goal of this analysis was to determine the major origins and destinations of traffic using this segment of NC 54.
In particular, what portion of traffic is passing through the corridor, which intersecting roads contribute the most
traffic, and what traffic is using the NC 54 Bypass versus West Main Street?This analysis can help quantify and
evaluate potential markets for alternative travel options, as well as validating forecast assumptions and confirming
the Triangle Regional Model's accuracy in representing traffic patterns.
It must be emphasized that in the following analyses, percentage drops in traffic refer only to the distribution of
trips passing the defined reference point (indicated by the "100%" label).This does not indicate a reduction in total
traffic (AADT) on NC 54. The exercise traces the destinations of vehicles captured at the reference point as we move
east or west along the corridor away from the reference point. It indicates where these vehicles leave NC 54 and
what portion remain on NC 54 at the end of the analyzed segment.This is not an analysis of traffic passing through
the entire length of the corridor, nor of AADTs.
Eastward Trip Distribution
Figure 6 depicts the eastward distribution of daily vehicle-trips on NC 54 to/from a point just east of Orange Grove
Road. Note that the"100%" label in the figure represents only traffic passing that point on NC 54, in both
directions. This analysis traces the destinations of these trips along the corridor. For simplicity and clarity, we will
discuss eastbound trips; westbound trips are the mirror image of these. The diagram indicates that 83%of these
trips are still on NC 54 just west of Old Fayetteville Road. This 17% drop in volume works out to nearly 2,000
veh/day out of the original 2017 AADT of 11,000 veh/day east of Orange Grove Road. Most of the trips that have
Page 3 of 12
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
Ref: 38587.01
October 1, 2019
Page 4
left the corridor by this point used White Cross Road (7%) and Bethel-Hickory Grove Church Road (4%). The
remaining 6% departed via Dodsons Crossroads, Butler Road, Neville Road, Hatch Road, and various smaller roads
and driveways. (Due to rounding, percentages may not add up precisely.)
Ten percent of traffic drops off at Old Fayetteville Road (8% northbound and 2%southbound), leaving 73%of the
original traffic on NC 54. Another 7%of trips are destined for development in the immediate vicinity of Carrboro
Plaza. The remaining 66% divides between West Main Street(12%) and NC 54 Bypass (54%).This represents an
82%/18% (or 4.5 to 1) split of this traffic between NC 54 Bypass and West Main Street.
For comparison, the analysis was repeated for only the period between 6:00 and 10:00 AM, which includes the
critical AM peak. These results are summarized in Figure 7. The most significant differences are that a higher
proportion of traffic is still on NC 54 just west of Old Fayetteville Road (91%versus 83%), and that most of this
increase continues onto NC 54 Bypass (63%of origin traffic, as opposed to 54%on a daily basis). This results in an
increased share relative to West Main Street (85%/15%, or 5.7 to 1). These differences are consistent with a higher
proportion of commuter traffic to UNC in the morning peak.
Westward Trip Distribution
Similar analyses were performed to estimate the westward distribution of NC 54 traffic to/from West Main Street,
and to/from NC 54 Bypass. Note that the"100%" label in these figures represents only traffic passing those points
(on West Main Street or NC 54 Bypass), in both directions. For simplicity and clarity,we will discuss westbound
trips; eastbound trips are the mirror image of these. Figure 8 depicts the findings of this analysis for traffic on West
Main Street immediately east of NC 54, where the 2017 AADT is 6,400 veh/day. About 44%of this traffic is
associated with destinations in the immediate vicinity of Carrboro Plaza. Another 26% heads east on NC 54 Bypass.
Old Fayetteville Road attracts 6%to the north, and 2%to the south, leaving 22%of the original traffic on NC 54
immediately west of Old Fayetteville Road. Another 9%disperses before Dodsons Crossroads, mainly via Neville
Road (2%) and Bethel-Hickory Grove Church Road (2%).Another 2%each turn off on Dodsons' Crossroads and White
Cross Road, with 10%of the traffic from West Main Street remaining on NC 54 just east of Orange Grove Road. This
translates to a drop of nearly 800 vehicles between Old Fayetteville and Orange Grove Roads.
Figure 9 summarizes the results of a similar analysis for NC 54 Bypass south of West Main Street,where the 2017
AADT is 25,000 veh/day. Ten percent of this traffic diverts east onto West Main Street, and another 30% heads for
destinations in the vicinity of Carrboro Plaza. A substantial 21% heads north via Old Fayetteville Road, with 1%going
south, leaving 38%of the original traffic on NC 54 to the west. Intervening roads and driveways attract another 7%
between Old Fayetteville Road and Dodsons Crossroads. White Cross Road (2.5%) and Dodsons Crossroads (1.5%)
account for most of the remaining reduction, leaving 27%of the original NC 54 Bypass traffic on NC 54 just east of
Orange Grove Road. This represents a decrease of nearly 2,800 vehicles between Old Fayetteville and Orange Grove
Roads.
Page 4 of 12
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
Ref: 38587.01
October 1, 2019
Page 5
Observations
• About 17% of daily traffic on NC 54 just east of Orange Grove Road enters/exits NC 54 between this location
and just west of Old Fayetteville Road.
• During the AM peak, only 9%of traffic on NC 54 just east of Orange Grove Road enters/exits NC 54 between
this location and just west of Old Fayetteville Road.This is consistent with a higher proportion of longer
commuter trips.
• For West Main Street daily traffic, about 12%of traffic enters/exits NC 54 between this just west of Old
Fayetteville Road and just east of Orange Grove Road. For NC 54 Bypass traffic,this figure is about 11%.
• Trips using West Main Street tend to be more local that trips using NC 54 Bypass.
TRAVEL DEMAND MODELS
The NC 54 West corridor study area spans two regional travel demand models. The portion west of the Alamance
County line is represented in the Piedmont Triad Regional Model (PTRM), while the Orange County portion to the
east is part of the Triangle Regional model (TRM v6).
Growth Forecasts
Traffic growth in both models is derived from forecasts of population and employment growth and characteristics,
geographically distributed by traffic analysis zone. Figures 10a-10c and 11a-11c depict TRM and PTRM assumptions
about the distribution and growth of population and employment relative to the NC 54 West study area and the
three travelsheds presented previously.
Because population and employment data available for the two models have different base and design years,values
were extrapolated to obtain consistent values for 2017 and 2045. Also, dot-density plots were used to more
effectively represent the density, magnitude, and distribution of population and employment among traffic analysis
zones (TAZs). Note that each dot represents a number of data points (100 persons; 50 jobs). Dots are randomly
located within each TAZ, and do not represent specific locations.
The socio-economic forecasts in both models were approved and adopted by relevant MPOs and RPOs for use in
transportation planning. Consultation with Alamance and Orange County planning staff did not identify any
problems with the growth assumed in either the TRM and PTRM.
Observations
• Development remains sparse along the middle segment of the corridor, due in large part to environmental
constraints.
• Relative growth is greatest in the western portion of the corridor, both in Alamance County and Mebane,
especially along and west of NC 119. Development includes residential, industrial, and commercial, as well
as newly-approved high school at the corner of NC 54 and NC 119.
Page 5 of 12
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
Ref: 38587.01
October 1, 2019
Page 6
• Growth in the east is concentrated in Chapel Hill, primarily in nodes along NC 86 and US 15/501. Particularly
relevant to this study is the Lloyd Farm development in the northeast quadrant of the NC 54/Old Fayetteville
Road intersection.
TRM Comparison to StreetLight InSight Analysis
A select-link analysis was performed using the Triangle Regional model (TRM v6)to provide a comparison against
the StreetLight analysis described previously for the eastward distribution of trips to/from a point on NC 54 just east
of Orange Grove Road. Because of minor anomalies in the Base Year network loading at the western end of the
corridor, some manual adjustments were necessary, and comparative runs for 2045 Build and No-Build scenarios
were also conducted. The results are summarized in Figure 12. The major differences between the TRM the
StreetLight trip distributions occur at the eastern end of the corridor.Just east of Old Fayetteville Road, both
analyses estimate between 82%and 83%of eastbound trips from just east of Orange Grove Road are still on NC 54.
But the TRM distributes 5%fewer trips north on Old Fayetteville Road, and loses none at Carrboro Plaza.This leaves
77%of the original trips, as opposed to 66%according to StreetLight. More importantly,TRM assigns a far higher
proportion of these trips to West Main Street. TRM has 25%of the initial traffic turning on West Main Street (versus
12%according to StreetLight), and 52%continuing down NC 54 Bypass (versus 54%). This works out to a 68%/32%
(or 2.1 to 1) split between n NC 54 Bypass and West Main Street. The Streetlight analysis yielded a split of 82%/18%
(or 4.5 to 1).
This difference is probably attributable to the fact that regional travel demand models like TRM tend to under-
estimate intersection delay as congestion increases, especially through denser downtown areas. It also appears that
trips to Carrboro Plaza and up Old Fayetteville Road (including McDougal Middle School) are either under-
represented or inaccurately routed.
TRM Comparison of Build (Widen NC 54) and No-Build Scenarios
To estimate the traffic impacts of the proposed widening of NC 54 on traffic patterns,two 2045 TRM networks were
compared. Both have identical socio-economic data and include all transportation improvement projects assumed
in the latest DCHC Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP).The only difference is that the Widen NC 54 (Build)
Scenario, a 45-mph 4-lane divided cross-section is assumed for NC 54 between 1-40 in Graham and Old Fayetteville
Road in Carrboro. The No-Build Scenario assumes the existing cross-section is maintained.
After trips were distributed and assigned to the two networks, daily volumes in the No-Build network were
subtracted from the corresponding link volumes in the Build (widen NC 54) network. Results are summarized in
Figure 13. Where traffic volumes are higher in the Build scenario (due to diversion from other routes), links are
shaded red and given bandwidths corresponding to the magnitude of the increase. Where traffic volumes are lower
in the Build scenario, links are shaded blue and assigned bandwidths corresponding to the magnitude of the
decrease. Changes in daily traffic volumes are indicated on representative links. Changes of less than 100
vehicles/day are not represented.Volumes for West Main Street and NC 54 Bypass were adjusted to compensate for
Page 6 of 12
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
Ref: 38587.01
October 1, 2019
Page 7
the model's over-assignment of traffic to West Main Street (discussed above). An 80%/20% (4:1) split between NC
54 Bypass and West Main Street was assumed.
A comparison of the daily volumes from the 2045 Build and No-Build scenarios west of Old Fayetteville Road is
shown in Figure 14 to illustrate the shifts in network traffic assignments associated with the widening, according to
the TRM. Historical volumes and 1%and 1.5%annual volume growth rates are displayed, and the typical capacities
of a 2-lane roadway and a 4-lane divided roadway are indicated to provide context for the road's current and
anticipated performance.
Observations
Volume Increases
• As traffic volumes increase on NC 54, longer segments exceed capacity for longer time periods.Travel times
increase, while also becoming less reliable due to crashes, weather events, and other incidents. In response,
some traffic shifts to alternate routes. When NC 54 is widened, congestion and resulting delays and
variations are reduced, and these trips return to NC 54, which should also reduce crashes.
• The most significant volume shifts are on NC 54. The 2,000 veh/day added between Dodson's Crossroads
and Old Fayetteville Road represent about a 10% increase over the No-Build scenario. The resulting volume
is well within the capacity of the proposed 4-lane divided cross section. Assuming 10%of traffic occurs in the
peak hour, with a 60/40 directional split, this translates into about 200 additional vehicles in the peak hour,
with 120 vehicles (two/minute) added in the peak direction.
• Traffic shifts back onto NC 54 decrease to the west, both on an absolute and a percentage basis.To the east,
about 200 vehicles/day are added to West Main Street, and 1000 to the NC 54 Bypass. About one-third of
these are added to South Columbia Street traffic, half continue on the Bypass, and the remainder are
oriented southward.
• Orange Grove Road and Mebane Oaks Road experience smaller increases from traffic that would have
headed north to 1-40 or used rural roads (such as Arthur-Minnis and Bradshaw Quarry)for east-west trips.
Some of these trips appear to be shifted from Old NC 86/Hillsborough Road, Union Grove Church Road, and
even M.L.K.Jr Boulevard. Minor traffic increases occur on segments of Eubanks, Bethel-Hickory Grove
Church, Butler, and White Cross Roads.
• Both the Build and No-Build scenarios exceed the capacity of the 2-lane existing roadway across a range of
growth rate estimates.
Volume Reductions
• Overall,traffic reductions resulting from the proposed NC 54 widening are more dispersed than the traffic
increases.There is a noticeable reduction in east-west traffic along Arthur-Minnis, Bradshaw Quarry, and
New Hope Church Roads. North-south traffic on Old NC 86/Hillsborough Road and Old Fayetteville Road also
decreases.The most significant decrease is 800 vehicles/day along the segment of Old NC 86 between
Dairyland/Homestead Roads and Old Fayetteville Road. Minor reductions occur on portions of Old
Page 7 of 12
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
Ref: 38587.01
October 1, 2019
Page 8
Greensboro, Dairyland,Albert, and Union Grove Church Roads, as well as M.L.K.Jr Boulevard. Reductions
to 1-40 traffic, although larger in absolute terms, represent less than 1%of average daily traffic.
Other
• Some feedback questioned whether volumes on rural roads such as Arthur-Minnis and Bradshaw Quarry
would actually increase in response to increased congestion on NC 54, given the nature of these roads.
While there is no way to be absolutely certain,these are the findings based on the Triangle Regional Model,
developed and approved by NCDOT and local agencies for use in transportation planning.These findings
appear reasonable in light of relative travel times and distances. However, if future traffic does not divert to
these roads, most of it would remain on NC 54,with a portion shifting to 1-40. In that case,traffic volumes
on NC 54 would be even higher in the No-Build scenario than in our analysis,while volumes in the Build
scenario would be the same. The end result would be a smaller difference in volumes between the Build
and No-Build scenarios.
HISTORICAL TRENDS
Historical trend analysis is not especially useful in forecasting traffic volumes along this segment of NC 54. Attempts
were made to correlate changes in annual average daily traffic (AADT) along the Orange County portion of NC 54 to
population changes in the vicinity of the corridor.The only consistent population estimates available are for
counties, municipalities, and townships from 2009 through 2017.
Figure 15 shows the jurisdictions used for population estimates.These areas are generally too large for the purposes
of this type of analysis, and neither the estimates nor the AADTs appear to be precise enough. Lagged correlations
did not perform significantly better. In aggregate, however, populations and AADTs were generally consistent, with
population growing by 16%and AADTs by 15% between 2009 and 2017 (see Figure 16). Based on TRM and PTRM
forecasts (and consistent with NC OSBM forecasts), populations in these jurisdictions are estimated to increase by
42% between 2017 and 2045.This study forecasts a corresponding 40% increase in traffic on the Orange County
portion of the NC 54 West study corridor(see Figure 17).
Observations
• Although population and traffic volume trends could not be strongly correlated on an annual or time-series
basis, overall growth rate trends are reasonably consistent.
TRANSIT
There is currently no fixed-route transit service along NC 54 west of Old Fayetteville Road.To gain a better
understanding of historical transit service,future transit plans, and anticipated effects of emerging transportation
technologies, interviews were conducted with four transit agencies in the region,with emphasis on fixed-route
service,versus paratransit:
Page 8 of 12
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
Ref: 38587.01
October 1, 2019
Page 9
• Piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation (PART)
• Link Transit (Burlington/Alamance County)
• Chapel Hill Transit (CHT)
• GoTriangle
Because of the significant role UNC-CH and UNC Hospitals play in local and regional transit (as well as traffic and
parking), representatives from these institutions were also consulted. Figure 18 depicts transit routes by agency in
the region, as well as locations of relevant existing and proposed park-and-ride lots.
PART
The Piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation (PART), offers service on the Alamance Burlington Express
(Route 4) between Alamance County and UNC Hospitals. Route 4 is one of PART's most popular routes due in part to
UNC GoPass holders commuting to campus.This route used to run along NC 54 until late 2013, but the routing
switched to 1-40 due to congestion along NC 54 impacting travel-time reliability and the addition of the Mebane Park
& Ride Lot. One of the determinants PART uses in its route selection is congestion along the proposed corridor.
Congestion along a route can affect travel time reliability and schedule adherence. This is especially critical when
connecting to other transit routes; Route 4 provides a transfer to GoTriangle's ODX route. Another reason for PART's
decision to use 1-40 is to serve Alamance Community College and Mebane Cone Health.
Route 4 continues to grow in ridership, with standing room only during some peak periods runs. Every two years,
PART undertakes a system wide analysis and examines its routes and potential adjustments.According to the FY
2020-2029 STIP, PART will be receiving funds to increase Route 4 frequency.
LINK
While Link Transit does not provide transit service to UNC, it does operate fixed-route service in the northern
portion of the study area.The Orange Route services Graham and crosses the north-western portion of the corridor
on 1-40. The two stops in the corridor's vicinity are a park-and-ride lot (located at Hwy 87 and Crescent Square Drive)
and Alamance Community College.The Orange Route has been one of Link Transit's most productive routes with the
top five stops for the system occurring in Graham. Link Transit would like to expand service further into Graham and
Mebane, but needs additional funding or partnerships to implement expanded service.The northern portion of the
NC 54 corridor has potential to support fixed-route transit with continued increases in residential density and
employment centers, like the Honda Manufacturing plant.
Chapel Hill Transit and UNC
The NC 54 West corridor serves east-west travel to and from UNC Chapel Hill and UNC Hospitals. Figures 19 and 20
show residence locations for UNC-CH and UNC Hospital employees, based on the UNC-CH Development Plan, 2017
TIA Update. (Locations are not precise, but representational.) Figure 21 (also from the UNC-CH Development Plan,
2017 TIA Update) indicates that just under 2,000 employees (or 12.4%of total employment) are in the sector
assigned to the NC 54 West corridor.This number is a rough estimate, however. The travelshed analysis described
Page 9 of 12
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
Ref: 38587.01
October 1, 2019
Page 10
above suggest that many of these employees actually use 1-40, and that some use NC 87. Between 750 and 1450
employee residences are estimated to fall within the travelshed depicted in Figure 1, with most the uncertainty
concentrated in the easternmost end of the travelshed. The potential market for a UNC-oriented transit service
along the NC 54 west corridor falls somewhere in this range.
Park-and-ride lots serving UNC Chapel Hill have long helped reduce demand for on-campus parking, as well as
providing an alternative to reduce personal vehicle use.To help support their fare-free transit system, Chapel Hill
Transit began charging for the use of their park-and-ride lots in 2013. Chapel Hill Transit Park-and-Ride Permits are
available at a daily rate of$2, a monthly rate of$21, or an annual rate of$250. Chapel Hill Transit operates four
park-and-ride locations serving commuters coming from the western portion of the region to campus.Table 1
(below) details the Chapel Hill Transit Park-and-Ride lots, which are also depicted in Figure 18.
While parking demand has fallen for the westernmost park-and-ride lots (Jones Ferry and Carrboro Plaza), demand
has risen for the northern park-and-ride along NC 86 (Eubanks Road) and the southern park-and-ride lot along US
15-501 (Southern Village). While the percent of commuters within each respective corridor is similar, utilization is
not. One key reason appears to be the enhanced service level provided by the NS route compared to those routes
serving the Jones Ferry and Carrboro Plaza.The NS Route operates all day with headways as little as ten minutes
during the peak.This level of service frees commuters from having to plan their journey around a bus schedule.
Commuters have the flexibility to arrive at a park-and-ride at a time of their choosing, knowing the next bus will be
coming shortly.This pattern suggests commuters coming from the west pass by the Carrboro Plaza and Jones Ferry
Park-and-Ride lots in favor of the Southern Village Park-and-Ride (and to a lesser extent,the Eubanks Park-and-Ride)
to take advantage of enhanced transit service.
Table 1: Chapel Hill Transit Park and Ride(data from UNC Chapel Hill Development Plan—TIA Update)
Park-and-Ride Routes Number of Fall 2013 Fall 2015 Fall 2017 %of Total
Lot Served Spaces Utilization Utilization Utilization Commuters
in Corridor
Eubanks Road NS, CRX 400 185 188 216 12.1%
(GoTriangle)
Jones Ferry CM, CW and JFX 443 132 102 86
11.4%
Carrboro Plaza CPX and CW 145 52 30 24
Southern Village NS and V 400 272 260 325 11.7%
Page 10 of 12
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
Ref: 38587.01
October 1, 2019
Page 11
The Town of Chapel Hill is in the process of designing the North-South Bus Rapid Transit.This system will run
between the Eubanks Road Park-and-Ride and the Southern Village Park-and-Ride, providing frequent all-day service
to downtown Chapel Hill and UNC Hospitals. Bus rapid transit(BRT) elements such as dedicated lanes,traffic signal
priority, and high capacity transit vehicles,will further increase level of service and convenience for those choosing
to park-and-ride from Southern Village or Eubanks to ride the North-South BRT. These enhancements will increase
the appeal for those previously using Carrboro Park-and-Ride or the Jones Ferry Park-and-Ride to reroute their trip
to one of the BRT stations for the premium transit service provided by BRT.
The Draft Chapel Hill Transit:Short Range Transit Plan provides short-term recommendations to improve bus
routing and frequency on key routes, while remaining cost neutral.The Plan also lays out a set of unfunded
improvements. Several desirable service upgrades were identified that could not be achieved within the existing
budget. One such improvement was the West NC 54 Route, which would provide new weekday peak-only service
from White Cross along the NC 54 corridor to UNC Chapel Hill. This route adds approximately ten route-miles per
trip, and is proposed to run at 70-minute headways during peak periods only, Monday through Friday, at an
additional annual operating cost of$154,000.
One alternative suggested for a park-and-ride at White Cross could be the Henry Anderson III Community Park in
Carrboro. However, a park-and-ride lot does not appear to be compatible with park operations, given current
parking demands.
Emerging Technologies
Emerging technologies continue to redefine transit and the micro-mobility industry while providing alternatives to
traditional fixed route transit service.Transit companies in the region continue to explore the possibilities of on-
demand service and its potential to best meet the agencies goals at a reduced cost compared to fixed route service.
Beginning in August, GoTriangle is partnering with Uber and Lyft to subsidize Ride Sharing trips up to ten dollars if it
connects with one of the GoTriangle bus routes within the Research Triangle Park. GoDurham's long term transit
vision also includes "on-demand zones" where GoDurham will subsidize ride sharing trips connecting to their transit
service.The on-demand type trips are viewed as being most effective where traditional fixed route service may not
be efficient as well as when the on-demand trip connects with high frequency transit. PART has also tested on-
demand shuttles around Piedmont Triad International Airport but reverted to fixed route shuttles when on-demand
ridership did not meet expectations. On-demand style shuttles are best used when looking to replace a costly, low-
ridership, inefficient route to soften the financial burden while still providing service coverage to an area.
Transit agencies continue to face a constrained funding environment and must make tough decisions on trade-offs.
Extending transit service along NC 54 would provide additional coverage to an area previously unserved and thus
would create the possibility for new trips. However, given limited resources, extending service further west from
Carrboro limits other opportunities, such as providing more frequent service on core routes with higher ridership.
Page 11 of 12
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
Ref: 38587.01
October 1, 2019
Page 12
Observations
• As indicated in Table 1,the current supply of park-and-ride spaces serving traffic from the west (including
the NC 54 West corridor) is underutilized.
• Convenience and frequency of service seem to be significant factors in attracting park-and-ride patrons,
favoring park-and-ride lots along the planned BRT route. This limits traffic reduction benefits along NC 54
west.
• UNC and Chapel Hill Transit support park-and-ride and other transit options in the NC 54 west corridor.
However, low ridership potential and long routes limit the cost-effectiveness of this service relative to other
transit investments.
• Focusing on improvements to higher-demand transit corridors—including BRT—could be a more productive
and cost-effective overall strategy than shifting limited resources to the NC 54 West corridor,given its lower
densities, smaller market, and longer route lengths.
• UNC-CH and UNC Hospital are not planning substantial increases in parking capacity. Travel demand
management (TDM) policies are being implemented to encourage and support a mode shift away from
single-occupant vehicles and towards to transit, biking, walking, and ridesharing. These efforts will be most
productive—and cost-effective—in denser corridors with efficient transit service and/or shorter trip
distances. Limited impacts can be expected in the NC 54 west corridor, given the relatively lower
concentration of trip ends and longer travel distances. Ridesharing and park-and-ride appear to be the most
promising options in this corridor.
• As an important public institution serving the State of North Carolina (and beyond), UNC Hospital must be
accessible to a broad range of patients, visitors, and others.A balance of convenient access by both transit
and automobile must be maintained.
• Although UNC-CH and UNC Hospital are significant contributors to traffic using the NC 54 West corridor,
these trips are only part of the volumes on NC 54. As the region grows,these trips will represent a shrinking
share of NC 54 West traffic. The biggest sources of new traffic on NC 54 West appear to be growth in
Alamance and Chatham Counties, along with overall growth in Orange County.
Page 12 of 12
S -1 11 PO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8 5.
Lebanon Rd L c
R r �
70 f l f
70 r
S Mom" INas[-Tan lam' 4
62
Paw,0
3 Ilse,
54
87
a
._ '� o-f °,[ /� •r iSJ, � �Zt lSlnsrR� r
�-
16
�` ti/ i4 $ J• � i+ { 4 ��j � ![huh Mlnnls
b P TIy`L ~I 1 [did WFinlfalC Rd
49
+ dfRd sti4
OIL
a
lY r tp�+ E c J F ,P
eraensy y `slFIYI'Rd' "", f s� � �,
pJtl Gm9nebcrv.T3d k R
NJ J;W
L4„ dC1, m ?Sh'Rd s �a perry ri `
} r
� fk, — ° �� prep 3 �c s r ids !° L�-
�� �• � �a
Derived from relative historical travel times for 8 AM weekday,per Google Maps
�<< Page 1 of 25
"WbFigure 1: Estimated NC 54 Travelshed for Trips to Chapel Hill �
0 1 2 4 Milft
PO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
+ ,4 '
70 r
q � 'i:5 4 y •^T
62
A M p
I87 � + � n
~�8prleRdL l
l y V G r f f i S1 } ' i 1 SlnBCR� r
dry �J Y
16
49
A I
_4 ` �— n r
}
� gam
Fe
C ,
Y / f r 1 F •P
raensy y `s l FIYI'Rd'• •' @W t"
4� add bqq!. d.
�.C}wrch-R3� Sj i1 L
c<7 h6 a }}
tihU1 Rd
Rd
Old Oill1
Derived from relative historical travel times for 8 AM weekday,per Google Mapsisl, CO
�<< Page 2 of 25
"WbFigure 2: Estimated NC 54 Travelshed for Trips to Southern Village �
0 1 2 4 Milft
S %;a -1 11 PO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8 5.
Lebanon Rd L c r
Ur
WsFsant_St S y fG
70 r
S Mom" West-Ten S13 4
62
119
CV
y q, iff
S f Q aio
87
Not86
p ? 1 TL?L 1 �'spd WFn1f01C Rd
�c1� ,11=r Y , r psalms
r
f 93
SSr r-
U� �s � r. �.Y.ftd •..y — � l.to,;;esr4°
x�{
A - � r t_ •�
e�raensy�y� `s� � �-� �lFIYI'R8' �' � "''7 I sY � 'yprim'-F��,�•�'•�t:��:. µ'r, .
Old G-r0i'm bcr°Rd
Q, 311�
L 1 " Derr!
did ClhfA � C° j 'i. � � � � '�„ ` Cr�fH `"r� S�`- •';7 �
Derived from relative historical travel times for 5 PM weekday,per Google Maps
Page 3 of 25
Figure 3: Estimated NC 54 Travelshed for Trips to Burlington M
"'Vhb0 1 2 4 Miles
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
j I Roxboro Henderson
Oxford
►� I
a�
L/
Hittrel!
IGt Stem 15
Ossipee ,r, I
Green I Creedmoor u
Burner
Level ►J
Elon \� ;wll Frankllnton Louisburg
Haw River
Burlington Melia{
r!}y Hillsborough
Graham
►i
Alamance Swepsonviller
+� �`• I Yovngsville
f •
Durham
Wake Forest
#� ■�..Carm Chapel HIII Rolesville
t K3
Ell
Morrisville.
I ,
►5i � 2ebulon
I Raleigh Knightdale
Cary Wendell
�4�73
1
® AID
Streetlight Data Cowfage Area Plttsbom
Project SYudyArea ��� Garner a a {c
\/ Miles
Page 4 of 25
Vhb
Figure 4: StreetLight Insight Dataset Coverage
MPO Board 9/2019 Item 8
! F1
Tear-
DafrylAnd-Rd p
Mac-+ — om �e Rd
U
to
m
a /
� 1 54
L
� r
—Old Greens Fed•
, Page 5 of 25
�� Figure 5: NC 54 Corridor Segment for Streetlight Origin-Destination Analysis
0 0.3 0.6 12 Miks
1 MPO Board 9/2019 Item 8
qk
Dail Vehicle-Trip Distribution StreetLi ht InSi ht Data '" f
Y p � g g )
Teer•�� -
Dairyland-Rd �
<1 �ti 4%
0
54 <1%' j
° °<11%
7i
. 7 , 12% sr
� 1 54
f
• Average Mon-Thu for Apr,May,Sep,&Oct,2016-18
--Old Greepsboro-Rd f
Totals may not add up precisely due to rounding
Blue%s represent trips to/from intersecting roads
r Red%s represent trips to/from minor roads and —
7Q 80
f i driveways along a segment of NC 54
Page 6 of 25
hb Figure 6: Origin-Destination Analysis — NC 54 East of Orange Grove Road
0 0.3 0.6 12 Miles
1 MPO Board 9/2019 Item 8
AM Peak Vehicle-Trip Distribution (StreetLi ht InSi ht Data) F1 '" I
Teer•�� -
Dairyland-Rd �
4% .
$ f o
10 <1% 2/ <1/o a
o <1°
�64 <1%
<1% <1%' �� f
_ °
3%
2% 600
• Average Mon-Thu for Apr,May,Sep,&Oct,2016-18
--.Old Greepsboro-Rd f
Totals may not add up precisely due to rounding
• Blue%s represent trips to/from intersecting roads
• Red%s represent trips to/from minor roads and —
7Q ° >r driveways along a segment of NC 54
Page 7 of 25
hb Figure 7: Origin-Destination Analysis — NC 54 East of Orange Grove Road
0 0.3 0.6 12 Miles
1 MPO Board 9/2019 Item 8
Dail Vehicle-Trip Distribution StreetLi ht InSi ht Data '" f
Y p � g g )
Teer•�� -
Dairyland-Rd �
J luau-%
CIS
1% Fa
a
6%
2% J.
¢o "' __ 2Yo 400 Sf
54
Rp.f 2 YO
• Average Mon-Thu for Apr,May,Sep,&Oct,2016-18
--Old Greepsboro-Rd f
Totals may not add up precisely due to rounding
• Blue%s represent trips to/from intersecting roads
r • Red%s represent trips to/from minor roads and —
7a oaf i driveways along a segment of NC 54
Page 8 of 25
hb Figure 8: Origin-Destination Analysis — West Main St East of NC 54 Bypass
0 0.3 0.6 12 Miles
1 MPO Board 9/2019 Item 8
Dail Vehicle-Trip Distribution StreetLi ht InSi ht Data '" f
Y p � g g )
Dairyiand-Rd �
J
luau-%
Rd U
° <1% 1st% ` T �a
° <1°
64 <1/01% ° <1% is
web'
eb 1/0 000 10%. 'sr
f
100
• Average Mon-Thu for Apr,May,Sep,&Oct,2016-18
--.Old Greepsboro-Rd f
Totals may not add up precisely due to rounding
• Blue%s represent trips to/from intersecting roads
r • Red%s represent trips to/from minor roads and —
7a oaf driveways along a segment of NC 54
77
Page 9 of 25
hb Figure 9: Origin-Destination Analysis —NC 54 Bypass South of West Main St
0 0.3 0.6 12 Miles
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
Figure 10a: TRM & PTRM Population Growth (2013 — 2045)
57
• _ •,! _�Q - ' , � • �.�ti . { �• `•n '� w� a tea,• • 1,`/ _ _.� �'a r•r •a•,. ._+
�i�'�:�s - - .� - �;• •��• - �- - fit. �F � : � • �•w....
.. .�... /4s1
` S 71) �, _ •�, j ,•a
.• - �q�"�;•. . •� � �11.+ it • � ,+f'
54,
IF:71
147
• 4j -
�.• : .
49
• l-',: �} �It • • • � . • � ` ••�f '.± .,. •_f �1 } i { •' ''�.
• Y• �111� /ik
11 � � . �' rr � • - i• '
a 1 z 4MiII NC 54 West Corridor Study j Alamance and Orange Counties
5 Mile Nopd Buffer
!((((EPmject Corridor
Population 2011 v 2045 TRM&PTRAA Socio-Econortlic Data(2013-2045)
1❑ot=1°o Source Info:MCDC1T,VHB,MCOneMap,
• Population 2017 to 2045 A amance County,Orange County
Population 2017 Page 10 of 25
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
Figure 10b: TRM & PTRM Population Growth (2013 — 2045)
57
/ash 'is• .. ''`- - - -�a. •F ,��'� '
71)
' Y �,L ..-� .__.._r--..—... •• "�1_• . .S•• ' - � F- � '•[ 1. •�
f • � 1 �i1 •Y .l r.�
- _ - _ r •I , �•fir•. - • • �I•Y• �� � �•�
Ie5 ,s
61, 1. • •L:
\� I 147 •.
67 I f• i
.a _ r��/ .• � • • • i � �/� .I I� j,1_ Sir..J i.�••�
f .ti ---- �rJ• n— • n i
a 1 z 4Miila� NC 54 West Corridor Study Alamance and Orange Counties
5 Mile Nopd Buffer
�Pmj.c Corridor
Population 2011 v 2045 TRM&PTRAA Socio-Ecortortlic Data(2013-2045)
1❑ot=10o Source Info:MCDC1T,VH6,MCOneMap,
• Population 2017 to 2045 A amance County,Orange County
Population 2017 Page 11 of 25
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
Figure 10c: TRM & PTRM Population Growth (2013 — 2045)
57
• - •,! _�, a , � • �.�ti . { �' `•n '� w� a �a,• f 1,`/ - _.� r-'a r•r •a•.. .-+
�i�'�:�s - -'� - ;:• .��• - �- - fit. �F : � • �•w....
.. .�... /4s1
71)
71)
• ! ••;• �..�, - - • r-• .S • • a . • ' �y +- ��' '- � - •., 1.
54
is
� 4 .+ .• • Vet; ' 'Y
' r its'•' • �:
147
70
54
• "\ 7 to -
- r••} Alt •.�_ _ � .; •�f •�+i• a •�����ti ;��' i .,�,
11 � _ '� • . ,.'' �r� • i•
a 1 z 4Miila� NC 54 West Corridor Study Alamance and Orange Counties
5 Mile Nopd Buffer
�Pmject Corridor
Population 2011 v 2045 TRM&PTRAA Socio-Economic Data(2013-2045)
1 Dot=1100 Source Info:NCDC1T,VHB,NCOneMap,
• Population 2017 to 2045 A amance County,Orange County
Popu]ation 2017 Page 12 of 25
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
Figure 11a: TRM & PTRM Employment Growth (2013 — 2045)
x"
_ Y r
.t
••a .¢+r. e.!3; •'j:• -� To •i-•' ,�� •� ..* '� 1�; ••Imo, -•
__ _ "' s- ',. *ram f` �-:.,. - • �d• �• t .
h �••s •� •S ,ice ' •� •'_• - � � � ,
•' " 4' - 3.
61
R• • \ I r1 • . � f •�, • �.
62
j.
• r I � • - ' yam• —+�^� ^ .• '•1•• . _ •
• \ :N
1 2 4MR. INC 54 West Corridor Study Alamance and orange Counties
5 Mile PrbpdL buffer
�Pmjeet Corridor
Employment 2017 v 2M TRM&PTRM Sotio-Eeortomic Data(2013-2045)
• 1 Dot=50 Source Info:NCf7OT,VHB,MCOneMap,
• Employment2017w2045 Alamance County.Orange County
Empl%--t2017 Page 13 of 25
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
Figure 11b: TRM & PTRM Employment Growth (2013 — 2045)
.r
r: 570'
pop
, I
•.
51
■ tit 4 -�`\% �� :� 1462
•`+ ' �+..•
C.. 1' I • 51Ail
.E
;� Y • 4i
J.
54
. � ,
it / r ,�-1 - • •pry •' �'• �Y��yyd YYi H
---. :i
S r C
I '. �" ' �= :' � lam^� � -• ':,. . _ ,. '�,
+•�•
2 4MR. INC 54 West Corridor Study Alamance and orange Counties
s Mi 1e P-j—L 9.fser
�Pmject Corridor
Employment 2017 v 2W TRM&PTRM Socio-Economic Data(2013-2045)
• 1 Dot=50 Source Info:NCDOT,VHB,NCaneMap.
• E.ployrn-t20!7 m 204° Alamance County,Orange County
Ern loym ent 20!7 Page 14 of 25
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
Figure 11c: TRM & PTRM Employment Growth (2013 — 2045)
x"
_ Y r
10
t
�`` TO
Ir
54 op
61
- �, •�• c • ':�r.,�, ��-,. + ,�� ��19 � .• i,M� r Il,..��� I� '`= _ rS.Lillr V
f A, • T I ' • • , • , ,
147
,.
] 62
k.
Of
.•
J.
3.
54
1 2 4MR. NC 54 West Corridor Study Alamance and orange Counties
5 Mile PrbpdL buffer
�Pmjeet Corridor
Employment 2017 v 2M TRM&PTRM Socio-Eeor►omic Data(2013-2045)
• 1 Dot=50 Source Info:NCf7OT,VHB,MCOneMap,
• Employment2017W2045 Alamance County.Orange County
Empl%--t2017 Page 15 of 25
MPO Board 9/2019 Item 8
Dail Vehicle-Trip Distribution TRM
� Y p � )
Teer•� -
Niryiand-Rd �
5/ 2% � �a
° 2% o
54 <1% <1%' J � f
<1%
7%
2 gip/ 25%, sr
f r •f 5 a
• Totals may not add up precisely due to rounding
—Old Greepsboro-Rd- ! • Blue%s represent trips to/from intersecting roads
• Red%s represent trips to/from minor roads and
ti Bo driveways along a segment of NC 54
C2�
a.
Page 16 of 25
�� Figure 12: TRM Select Link Analysis — NC 54 East of Orange Grove Road
0 0.3 0.6 112 Miles
HIsO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
c + Bland Rd
i Ln
+
c - -400
R,,cks Rd p ,
U1
+150 00
-1 J
-250 'd
w
v+
-54 +2000 o p 1
-XXX Vehicle/day reduction due to NC 54
E rJ
widening 0 O +
+XXX Vehicle/day increase due to NC 54
widening
XXX* Manually adjusted to compensate for +10po*�J
TRM over-assignment to West Main St -150
NOTE: Only differences>100 veh/day are showni}
Yellow indicates roads in TRM network with Q'
<100 veh/day change between Build&No Build l-r'
Page'17 of 25
' �� Figure 13: TRM — Daily Traffic Differences between 2045 NC 54 Widened and No-Build Scenarios
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
35,000 4-Lane Divided Capacity*
Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) West of Old Fayetteville
30,000
25,000 _
aue to
,ncrease
20,000 _---
15,000
2-Lane Capacity*
10,000
5,000
■Historical 1.5%Growth 51.0%Growth
6
2003 2008 2013 2018 2023 2023 2033 2038 2043
Page 18 of 25
Figure 14: Relative Impacts of Traffic Shifts due to NC 54 Widening
f\APO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
Haw River
Township
57
Burlington Cheeks Hillsborough
Townshi 70 Township Township Eno Township
Melville 70
Township
62
Graham
Township
54
Coble 87 86
Township
491 Thompson
Towns h i p
Albright
Township
Bingham Chapel Hill
Township Township
54
Patterson
Township Newlin
Township
15
Page 19 of 25
,q;gV1_I_ Figure 15: Areas Included in Population-AADT Correlation Analysis
1.16 MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
1.14
+sp.
•
•
1.12 40
•
•
Ow
1.10 •
do
4
3 or
o of
1.08
Op
I
1.06 �qO
do do 09 Ow
1
I
1.04
1
I
l
I
1.02
I
1.00
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
-Roads Sum - Combined Population
Page 20 of 25
Figure 16: Comparison of Historical Population and AADT Aggregations
1.70 MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
1.60 ♦ ♦ ♦•
1.50
1.40
Qj 1.30
1.20
1.10
1.00
2009 2014 2019 2024 2029 2034 2039 2044
Roads Sum —Combined Population
Page 21 of 25
Figure 17: Comparison of Aggregated Population and AADT Forecasts
MPO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
6 I�1
\I
Green Level
�60
Elora Burlington Haw River 70
Gibsonville Mebane
Graham Hillsborough
O
Aiamance Swepsonville
O CCarrboro Chapel Hill
i
Park and Ride Lots
_ EKrsting y
I,W} PropOSEd J
Transit Route
LINK
PART
Chapel Hill Tra nm
�GaTyanple
Ore nge Co Vu hlic Tra nsit 9 2 3
Miles
Page 22 of 25
Figure 18: Transit Routes and Park-&-Ride Lots Vhb
• r ' 158 / Item 8
15
Or
t 'a 70IN
de
• •� Y .1 - t +• i - ti• y
40
.74
49
r 1 ,•`' -
• ••. :..•. •.L!•• F r • +' ••a.'1��(; •'"�■' V�'L��.'A: ■t - ■•'� '�fti i ` •;.r •+ r
64
421
40
do
• UNC-CH Employees 5dh ~, ,401
• Hospital Employees ,� • f• t .
Source:UNC-CHDevelopmenpgffb7V?bfl�61pdate
hb Figure 19: Regional Distribution of UNC-CH and Hospital Employee Residences (2017)
57PO Board 10/9/2019 Item 8
119
87 `4 86
49
- . .. � 5� � � ••psi i,;r�� •.ia�l.;• �,
' s` +fix'. �• ��•'yl�+' �•�•''�`"�q' �- .�
15
• UNC-CH Employees
• Hospital Employees
{r Source:UNC-CH Developmenpiggr6 M bfl��pdate
�� Figure 20: Study Area Distribution of UNC-CH and Hospital Employee Residences (2017)
MPO Board 9/2019 Item 8;f
Approach Corridors
i Study Area
Bell Tower
Highway
Employees in Approach
01,993
24.8 939
3 2,331
0 3,906
1,949
2,058 0 2,058
07,713
1 71
a
12.7% 9.J9
1,993 }}
Figure 21: Proportion of UNC-CH and Hospital
Employees by Commute Corridor (2017
Page 25 925
�••■ , �.,\ ___ __- Source:UNC-CH Development Plan,2017TIA Update
MPO Board 5/10/2023 Item 15
NCDOT DIV 7 PROJECTS LOCATED IN DCHCMPO - UNDER DEVELOPMENT
TIP/WBS# Description LET/Start Draft STIP Completion Cost Status Project Lead
Date Let Date Date
U-47261K Construct sidewalk/MUP on Homestead Road from Seawell 4/7/2023 N/A FY2025 $1,300,000 Construction funding authorized-Letting Town of Chapel
School Road to Weaver Dairy Road in Chapel Hill activates pending Hill/Stephen Robinson
EB-5721 Upgrade existing off-road path and construct new section of 4/20/2023 FY2022 FY2025 $2,400,000 Construction funding authorization Town of Chapel
path of Bicycle Route#1 from Cleland Drive to Willow Drive pending Hill/Stephen Robinson
in Chapel Hill
BL-0044 NC 54 from Westbrook Drive in Carrboro to west of US TBD FY2023 2/28/2024 $1,311,000 Planning and design activities underway Chad Reimakoski
49998.1.1 15/501/NC 86(South Columbia Street)interchange in
Chapel Hill. Construct sidewalk and install pedestrian
signals,crosswalks,and refuge islands at selected locations.
U-4726DF Bicycle detection at signalized intersections in Carrboro 4/30/2023 N/A FY2025 $36,000 Plans at 90%completion Town of
Carrboro/Stephen
Robinson
P-5701 Construct Platform, Passenger Rail Station Building at 6/30/2023 N/A FY2025 $7,200,000 PE funding scheduled 7/1/2020 Matthew Simmons
46395.1.1 Milepost 41.7 Norfolk Southern H-line in Hillsborough
46395.3.1
SS-6207A NC 54 Pedestrian improvements between SR 1902 6/30/2023 N/A 12/31/2023 $171,000 Planning and design activities underway Dawn McPherson
50337 (Manning Drive)and SR 1937(Old Fayetteville Road)in
Chapel Hill and Carrboro. Improvements will include refuge
islands,crosswalks and pedestrian signals. Improvements
to be completed by state forces.
EL-4828A Construct Morgan Creek Greenway Phase 1 in Carrboro 7/31/2023 N/A FY2026 $372,000 Planning and design activities underway Town of
Carrboro/Stephen
Robinson
HL-0045 Repair Bridge#241 on Exchange Park Lane over Eno River 9/28/2023 FY2023 FY2026 $153,800 Planning and design activities underway Town of
from South Churton Street to Faribult Lane in Hillsborough Hillsborough/Stephen
Robinson
C-5181 Jones Creek Greenway Project-Fill Gap between the 9/28/2023 FY2023 FY2025 $654,000 Planning and design activities underway Town of
Carrboro Upper Bolin Trail and Twin Creeks Greenway and 6/30/2023 Carrboro/Stephen
also implement program to support on-vehicle trips to Morris Robinson
Grove Elementary School
DCHCMPO Apr.2023
Page 1
MPO Board 5/10/2023 Item 15
NCDOT DIV 7 PROJECTS LOCATED IN DCHCMPO - UNDER DEVELOPMENT
TIP/WBS# Description LET/Start Draft STIP Completion Cost Status Project Lead
Date Let Date Date
C-5650 Construct sidewalk on one side of SR 1919(Smith Level 3/29/2024 FY2024 FY2026 $1,718,000 Planning and design activities underway Town of
Road/S.Greensboro St.)from Public Works Drive to the Carrboro/Stephen
northern end of Old Pittsboro Road in Carrboro Robinson
BR-0091 Replace Bridge#32 on US 70 over the Eno River 11/19/2024 N/A FY2028 $4,000,000 Planning and design activities underway Bryan Key
B-6037 Replace Bridge#49 over Norfolk Southern Railway on NC 1/21/2025 FY2025 FY2028 $2,500,000 Planning and design activities underway Brian Ketner
86
BR-0092 Replace Bridge#37 on NC 86 over New Hope Creek 8/19/2025 N/A FY2028 $4,100,000 Planning and design activities underway Alexander Foster
EB-5886B Construct sidewalk/MUP/bike lanes on Estes Drive from 9/18/2025 FY2025 FY2027 $3,104,000 Planning and design activities pending Town of Chapel
south of Norfolk Southern Railroad to NC 86(MLK Jr.Blvd.) Hill/Stephen Robinson
in Chapel Hill
EB-5880 Construct sidewalk on the north side of SR 1005(Jones 9/30/2025 FY2025 FY2027 $441,000 Planning and design activities underway Town of
Ferry Road)from Davie Road to SR 1010(West Main St.)in Carrboro/Stephen
Carrboro Robinson
EB-5890 Construct sidewalk on Barnes Street from King Street to SR 9/30/2025 FY2025 FY2027 $230,000 Planning and design activities pending Town of
1005(Jones Ferry Road)in Carrboro Carrboro/Stephen
Robinson
1-3306AC 1-40 at NC 86-Upgrade to superstreet from Northwood Drive 10/21/2025 FY2026 FY2028 $4,350,000 Planning and design activities underway Radha Attaluri
to Ramp C/D at 1-40 interchange
BP7-R009 Replace Bridge#11 on SR 1336(Halls Mill Road) 11/6/2025 N/A FY2028 $1,100,000 Planning and design activities underway Tim Powers
BP7-R013 Replace Bridge#90 on SR 1940(Damascus Church Road) 9/3/2026 N/A FY2029 $800,000 Planning and design activities underway Tim Powers
EB-5998 Construct MUP on US 15/501 from Willow Drive to SR 9/30/2026 FY2026 FY2028 $2,044,000 Planning and design activities pending Town of Chapel
1741/SR 1838(Old Durham Chapel Hill Road)in Chapel Hill Hill/Stephen Robinson
EB-5886A Construct sidewalk/MUP/bike lanes on Estes Drive from SR 9/17/2026 FY2026 FY2029 $848,000 Planning and design activities pending Town of
1772(North Greensboro Street)to south of Norfolk Southern Carrboro/Stephen
Railroad Tracks in the Town of Carrboro Robinson
DCHCMPO Apr.2023
Page 2
MPO Board 5/10/2023 Item 15
NCDOT DIV 7 PROJECTS LOCATED IN DCHCMPO - UNDER DEVELOPMENT
TIP/WBS# Description LET/Start Draft STIP Completion Cost Status Project Lead
Date Let Date Date
1-5958 Pavement Rehabilitation on 1-40/1-85 from West of SR 1114 11/17/2026 FY2027 FY2028 $8,690,000 Planning and design activities pending Chad Reimakoski
45910.1.1 (Buckhorn Road)to West of SR 1006(Orange Grove Road)
45910.3.1
1-5967 Interchange improvements at 1-85 and SR 1009(South 10/19/2027 FY2031 FY2030 $16,900,000 PE funding approved 9/8/17, Planning and Bryan Key
1-5959 Pavement Rehabilitation on 1-85 from West of SR 1006 11/16/2027 N/A FY2029 $11,156,000 Planning and design activities pending Chad Reimakoski
45911.1.1 (Orange Grove Road)to Durham County line
45911.3.1
BR-0247 Replace Bridge#29 on US 70 Business/NC 86 over Cates 11/16/2027 N/A FY2029 Pending Preliminary activities pending Kevin Fischer
Creek
R-5821A Construct operational improvements including 6/20/2028 Funded for FY2031 $7,000,000 PE funding approved 10/10/17,design Rob Weisz
47093.1.2 Bicycle/Pedestrian accommodations on NC 54 from SR Preliminary activities currently suspended,
47093.2.2 1006(Orange Grove Road)to SR 1107/SR 1937(Old Engineering Coordinating with NC54 West Corridor
47093.3.2 Fayetteville Road). Only Study
U-5845 Widen SR 1009(South Churton Street)to multi-lanes from 1- 7/18/2028 FY2031 FY2031 $49,238,000 PE funding approved 5/14/15, Planning Radha Attaluri
50235.1.1 40 to Eno River in Hillsborough and Design activities underway,
50235.2.1 Coordinate with 1-5967
50235.3.1
BP7-R007 Replace Bridge#63 on Pleasant Green Road 8/2/2028 N/A FY2031 $2,500,000 Planning and design activities underway Tim Powers
BP7-R015 Replace Bridge#86 on SR 1942(Jones Ferry Road) 8/18/2028 N/A FY2030 $1,700,000 Planning and design activities underway Tim Powers
8/19/2027 FY2029
I-5984 Interchange improvements at I-85 and NC 86 in 11/21/2028 Funded for FY2031 $20,900,000 PE funding approved 10/10/17, Planning Bryan Key
47530.1.1 Hillsborough Preliminary and Design activities underway,
47530.2.1 Engineering Coordinate with I-0305 and I-5959
47530.3.1 Only
B-5733 Replace Bridge#39 over Booker Creek in Chapel Hill on SR 1/16/2029 N/A FY2031 $5,100,000 Planning and design activities pending Kevin Fischer
1010(E. Franklin St.) 1/19/2027 FY2029
DCHCMPO Apr.2023
Page 3
MPO Board 5/10/2023 Item 15
NCDOT DIV 7 PROJECTS LOCATED IN DCHCMPO - UNDER DEVELOPMENT
TIP/WBS# Description LET/Start Draft STIP Completion Cost Status Project Lead
Date Let Date Date
BR-0195 Replace Bridge#31 on SR 1010(Franklin Street)over Bolin 2/15/2029 N/A FY2031 Pending Planning and design activities underway Kevin Fischer
Creek in Chapel Hill 2/16/2027 FY2029
1-0305 Widening of 1-85 from west of SR1006(Orange Grove Road) 1/1/2040 Funded for FY2044 $132,000,000 PE funding approved 6/5/18, Planning and Bryan Key
34142.1.2 in Orange Co.to west of SR 1400(Sparger Road)in Orange Preliminary design activities underway, Project
34142.2.2 Co. Engineering reinstated per 2020-2029 STIP(funded
34142.3.2 Only project)and delete project 1-5983
DCHCMPO Apr.2023
Page 4
MPO Board 5/10/2023 Item 15
North Carolina Department of Transportation 4/6/2023
Active Projects Under Construction -Orange Co.
Contract TIP Location Description Contractor Name Resident Contract Bid Availability Completion Work Start Estimated Progress Completion
Number Number Engineer Amount Date Date Date Completion Schedule Percent
Date Percent
C204632 1-3306A WIDENING 1-40 FROM 1-85 IN ORANGE COUNTY TO THE DURHAM THE LANE Cvijetic,PE, $236,457,869.00 9/27/2021 9/1/2025 10/28/2021 9/1/2025 21.83 21.83
COUNTY LINE AND 1-40 WESTBOUND IN DURHAM COUNTY NEAR US- CONSTRUCTION Bojan
15/501. CORPORATION
DG00520 R-5787F INSTALLATION OF ADA COMPLIANT CURB RAMPS AT VARIOUS DOT CONSTRUCTION Howell,Bobby J $1,271,240.40 5/10/2021 4/14/2023 1/25/2022 4/14/2023 76.59 45.94
ROUTES INC
D000534 REPLACE BRIDGE#99 OVER NEW HOPE CREEK ON SR 1723(NEW CONTI ENTERPRISES, Howell,Bobby J $1,108,442.00 1/3/2022 11/3/2022 5/9/2022 3/31/2023 100 95.57
HOPE CHURCH ROAD) INC
DG00547 RESURFACE A SECTION OF NC 49&6 SECONDARY ROADS IN FSC II LLC DBA FRED Howell,Bobby J $4,299,745.38 4/1/2022 10/31/2022 4/1/2022 3/31/2023 100 97.69
ORANGE COUNTY SMITH COMPANY
DG00568 RESURFACING OF SR 1001(WALNUT GROVE CHURCH RD.)AND SR CAROLINA SUNROCK Howell,Bobby J $2,144,122.70 5/2/2022 6/30/2023 10/31/2022 6/30/2023 3 23.44
1568(PLEASANT GREEN RD.) LLC
DG00589 HS-2007C INSTALLATION OF THERMOPLASTIC MARKING LINES ON VARIOUS TRIP CONSTRUCTION Cvijetic,PE, $1,494,249.58 3/15/2023 11/7/2023
SECONDARY ROUTES WITHIN DIVISION 7 GROUP LLC Bojan
DG00596 R-57871 INSTALLATION OF ADA COMPLIANT CURB RAMPS AT VARIOUS CAROLINA GROUP Howell,Bobby J $312,070.00 10/12/2022 2/28/2024 11/9/2022
ROUTES PROPERTIES LLC DBA
CAROLINA GROUP
CONTRACT.
Page 1 of 1
MPO Board 5/10/2023 Item 15
Chatham County- DCHC MPO - Upcoming Projects - Planning & Design, R/W, or not started - Division 8--May 2023 Upcoming STIP in RED
Contract#or Route Description Let Date Completion Contractor Project Admin. Funds Needed Notes
WBS#or TIP# Date
U-6192 US 15-501 Convert to reduced conflict intersections After 2031 TBD TBD Greg Davis $117,700,000 Right of Way FY 2026 FY 2028
from US 64 to SR 1919 (Smith Level Rd) FY 2031 (910) 773-8022
NCDOT PROJECTS LOCATED IN BGUMPO - UNDER DEVELOPMENT
Let/Start Draft STIP Completion
TIP/WBS # Description Date Let Date Date Cost Status Project Lead
W-5807B Installation of ADA curb ramps and pedestrian accessible Oct. 2021 N/A FY2022 $75,000 Final inspection completed 1/18/23 Dawn McPherson
48952.1 .3 signals on SR 1301 (Boone Station Drive) at SR 1301 (St. Chad Reimakoski
48952.2.3 Marks Church Road) and Boone Station Drive (non-system)
48952.3.3 at Glidewell Road/Tiki Lane (non-system) in Burlington
47786 Intersection improvements on SR 1007 (Mebane Oaks Rd) at 6/22/2022 N/A Feb. 2023 $898,500 Construction completed. Chad Reimakoski
SM-5707B SR 2126/2128 (Old Hillsborough Rd) south of Mebane. Derek Dixon
47903.2.1 Improvements include addition of left and right turn lanes,
radii widening, signal installation, resurfacing, and pavement
markings.
SS-6207J Installation of all way stop (AWS) and overhead flasher at the Oct. 2022 N/A 11/9/22 $23,000 Construction completed - Dawn McPherson
50667 intersection of NC 49 at SR 1130 (Friendship Patterson Mill inspection pending
Road) south of Burlington.
SM-6107B SR 1167 (Longpine Road) at SR 1146 (Kirkpatrick Road). 6/2/23 N/A 10/31/23 $185,000 Materials ordered, installation Dawn McPherson
50522 Installation of a modular mini-roundabout. expected in Summer 2023 Derek Dixon
W-5707D Safety Improvements including signage and pavement 6/15/23 N/A Nov. 2023 $450,000 Planning and design activities Dawn McPherson
44853.1 .4 markings to curve on NC 49 located between Buckingham underway; ROW acquisition
44853.2.4 Mountain Road and SR 2363 (Beale Road) in Snow Camp complete
44853.3.4
17BP.7.C.18 Replace pipe on Swep-Sax Road/Darrell Newton Road 6/20/23 N/A FY2024 $500,000 Bids under review Tim Powers
SS-6207G NC 87 (East Webb Avenue) at Flanner Street, Pedestrian 6/30/23 N/A 7/1/23 $60,000 Planning and design activities Dawn McPherson
50502 signal installation and crosswalk pavement markings. underway.
HS-2007F NC 87 at 1-40 installation of pedestrian improvements 9/23/23 N/A Late 2023 $86,500 Planning and design activities Dawn McPherson
underway
EB-5885 Construct sidewalk on US 70 (N. Church St.) from Beaumont 9/29/23 FY2023 FY 2025 $120,000 Municipal Agreement required to City of
Avenue to SR 1716 (Graham Hopedale Road) begin work Burlington/Stephen
Robinson
U-6017 Intersection improvements at NC 54 (East Harden St.) and 10/19/23 FY2023 FY2025 $2,100,000 Planning and design activities Chris Smitherman
47162.1 .1 NC 49 (East Elm St.) in Graham 6/15/23 underway - ROW acquisitions
47162.2.1 complete - Utility relocations
47162.3.1 underway - schedule change
pending
BGUMPO May 2023
Page 1
NCDOT PROJECTS LOCATED IN BGUMPO - UNDER DEVELOPMENT
Let/Start Draft STIP Completion
TIP/WBS # Description Date Let Date Date Cost Status Project Lead
U-6013 Widen NC 119 to multi-lanes from SR 1981 (Trollingwood- 12/19/23 FY2024 FY2026 $6,200,000 Planning and design activities Chris Smitherman
47158.1 .4 Hawfields Rd)/ SR 2126 (Old Hillsborough Rd) to Lowes Blvd underway, ROW underway
47158.2.4 (non-system) in Mebane.
47158.3.4
48916 Shift NC 61 and NC 100 intersection in Gibsonville to 1/12/24 N/A FY2026 $650,000 Planning and design activities Chad Reimakoski
improve turning radii for trucks underway - ROW underway
BR-0060 Replace Bridge #14 on NC 87 over Cane Creek 7/16/24 N/A FY2025 $5,900,000 Planning and design activities David Stutts
underway
EB-5879 Construct sidewalk on US 70 (N. Church St.) from SR 1716 9/30/24 FY2023 FY2026 $200,000 Municipal Agreement required to City of
(Graham Hopedale Road) to SR 1719 (Sellars Mill Road) begin work Burlington/Stephen
Robinson
50547 NC 49 at Green Level Church Road/James Boswell Road - 11/7/24 N/A Spring 2025 $650,000 Planning and design activities Chad Reimakoski
Realign Intersection underway
AV-5851 Construct 100' paved overrun and make safety 1/22/24 FY2024 FY26 $2,080,000 Planning and design activities Caleb Whitby
enhancements at the Burl ington-Alamance Regional Airport underway
U-6011 Intersection improvements at US 70 (South Church Street) 8/20/24 FY2025 FY2026 $2,400,000 Planning and design activities Brian Ketner
47146.1 .1 and SR 1158 (Huffman Mill Rd) in Burlington underway - ROW acquisition
47146.2.1 underway
47146.3.1
15BPR.54 Rehab on Structure #197 in Guilford County on SR 1117 (S. 1/21/25 N/A =Y2028 $5,000,000 Planning and design activities Kristy Alford
Holden Street) over 1-85 Business and on Structure #148 on 112/19/23 FY2026 underway
40 over Haw River in Alamance County
U-5844 Construct multi-lanes on NC62 from SR 1430 (Ramada 3/18/25 FY2025 FY2028 $10,000,000 Planning and design activities Chris Smitherman
50234.1 .1 Road) to US 70 (South Church Street) in Burlington underway
50234.2.1
50234.3.1
U-6014 Widen SR 1716 (Graham-Hopedale Rd) to multi-lanes with 3/18/25 FY2025 FY2027 $13,200,000 Planning and design activities Chris Smitherman
47159.1 .1 Bicycle/Pedestrian accommodations from SR 1720 (West underway, Includes EB-5882
47159.2.1 Hanover Rd) to Morningside Drive in Burlington
47159.3.1
U-6131 Install dual left turn lanes in westbound direction at NC 54 1/15/26 FY2026 FY2028 $3,500,000 Planning and design activities Brian Ketner
(W. Harden Street) at NC 49 (Maple Ave.) in Burlington pending
BGUMPO May 2023
Page 2
NCDOT PROJECTS LOCATED IN BGUMPO - UNDER DEVELOPMENT
Let/Start Draft STIP Completion
TIP/WBS # Description Date Let Date Date Cost Status Project Lead
EB-5988 Construct sidewalk on Lee Ave./W. Lebanon Ave. to SR 1454 8/25/2026 FY2026 FY2028 $272,000 Municipal Agreement required to Town of
(W. Haggard Ave.) in Elon begin work Elon/Stephen
Robinson
U-6114 Install traffic signal and add turn lanes at NC 62 (Alamance 10/20/2026 Funded for FY2028 $900,000 Planning and design activities Chris Smitherman
Road) at SR 1155 (Hatchery Road)/Bonnie Lane intersection Preliminary pending
in Burlington Engineering
only
BP7-R016 Replace Bridge #113 on SR 1003 (Lindley Mill Road) 11/5/2026 N/A FY2028 $1 ,200,000 Planning and design activities Tim Powers
underway - Plans at 25%
B-6052 Replace bridge 68 over NCRR / Norfolk Southern Railroad 1/18/28 FY2026 =Y2029 $2,500,000 PE funding approved 5/6/19 David Stutts
48709.1 .1 on SR 1928 (Trollingwood Road) in Haw River 1/20/26 FY2027
48709.2.1
48709.3.1
BP7-R018 Replace Bridge #254 on SR 2104 (Mandale Road) 8/30/30 N/A FY2032 $700,000 Planning and design activities Tim Powers
8/31/29 FY2031 pending
BP7-R019 Replace Bridge #103 on SR 2182 (Perry Road) 10/7/2030 N/A FY2032 $700,000 Planning and design activities Tim Powers
pending
BP7-R023 Replace Bridge #238 on SR 2128 (Old Hillsborough Road) 8/2/2029 N/A FY2031 $700,000 Planning and design activities Tim Powers
underway
1-6009 Interchange improvements at 1-40/1-85 and SR 1158 6/7/29 Funded for FY2031 $936,000 Planning and design activities Brian Ketner
47962.1 .1 (Huffman Mill Road). Construct additional right turn lane on I- Preliminary pending
47962.2.1 40 WB Ramp and improve operations at SR 1308 (Garden Engineering
47962.3.1 Road) intersection in Burlington only
U-6009 Widen and construct center turn lane on US70 (West Church 1/1/40 Funded for FY2040 $6,337,000 Planning and design activities Chris Smitherman
47144.1 .1 St) from Tarleton Ave. to Fifth Street in Burlington Preliminary pending
47144.2.1 Engineering
47144.3.1 only
1-6059 Interchange improvements at 1-40/1-85 and SR 1981 1/1/40 Funded for FY2040 $12,400,000 Planning and design activities Bryan Key
48689.1 .1 (Trollingwood-Hawfields Road) in Mebane Preliminary pending
48689.2.1 Engineering
48689.3.1 only
BGUMPO May 2023
Page 3
5/5/2023
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Active Projects Under Construction - Alamance Co.
Contract TIP Location Description Contractor Name Resident Contract Bid Availability Completion Work Start Estimated Progress Completion
Number Number Engineer Amount Date Date Date Completion Schedule Percent
Date Percent
C203844 U-3109A NC-119 RELOCATION FROM 1-40/85 TO SR-1921 THALLE CONSTRUCTION Howell, Bobby J $45,389,069.36 6/26/2017 1/28/2021 8/3/2017 2/28/2023 100.00 99.31
(MEBANE ROGERS RD/ STAGE COACH RD). CO., INC.
C204438 B-5728 REPLACE BRIDGE #112 OVER REEDY FORK CREEK SMITH-ROWE, LLC Howell, Bobby J $6,733,158.50 5/31/2022 12/12/2024 7/25/2022 12/26/2024 48.00 21 .57
ON NC 87 IN OSSIPEE
C204572 U-6010 INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS ON US 70 (SOUTH APAC ATLANTIC INC. Howell, Bobby J $13,975,135.25 7/6/2022 1/13/2025 9/29/2022 1/13/2025 37.50 8.36
CHURCH STREET) AT SR 1226/SR 1311 THOMPSON ARTHUR
(UNIVERSITY DRIVE) IN BURLINGTON DIVISION
C204603 1-5711 1-40/1-85 AND SR 1007 (MEBANE OAKS ROAD) IN ZACHRY Howell, Bobby J $12,865,732.71 4/26/2021 1/11/2024 4/26/2021 2/8/2024 75.00 67.43
MEBANE INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTION
CORPORATION
C204626 RESURFACE 1 SECTION OF NC 87, 1 SECTION OF FSC II LLC DBA FRED Lorenz, PE, Kris $4,639,570.37 6/3/2021 11/1/2022 6/28/2021 3/31/2023 100.00 91 .68
NC 49 AND 21 SECTIONS OF SECONDARY ROADS SMITH COMPANY
C204788 RESURFACING OF SIX SECONDARY ROADS VECELLIO & GROGAN Howell, Bobby J $4,366,972.22 3/15/2023 9/15/2024 3/6/2023 9/15/2024 6.50 58.38
INC DBA SHARPE
BROTHERS
D000559 RESURFACE A SECTION OF NC 100, NC 49, US 70 & BOGGS CONTRACTING, Howell, Bobby J $2,740,478.60 5/1/2022 6/30/2022 5/20/2022 6/30/2023 64.79 49.23
3 SECONDARY ROADS IN ALAMANCE COUNTY INC
DG00574 RESURFACING OF ONE PRIMARY & SIX APAC ATLANTIC INC. Howell, Bobby J $1 ,588,752.25 6/1/2022 6/30/2023 7/18/2022 6/30/2023 42.00 91 .09
SECONDARY ROADS IN ALAMANCE COUNTY THOMPSON ARTHUR
DIVISION
DG00589 HS-2007C INSTALLATION THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT TRP CONSTRUCTION Cvijetic, PE, $1 ,494,249.58 3/15/2023 11/7/2023
MARKINGS ON VARIOUS SECONDARY ROUTES IN GROUP LLC Bojan
DIVISION 7
D000596 R-57871 INSTALLATION OF ADA COMPLIANT CURB RAMPS CAROLINA GROUP Howell, Bobby J $312,070.00 10/12/2022 2/28/2024 11/9/2022
AT VARIOUS ROUTES PROPERTIES LLC DBA
CAROLINA GROUP
CONTRACTING
Page 1 of 1
NORTH Cq O
9
y
% Y
NCDOT TPD NEWS
O Z
q O
is
99T�FNlOF TRAN'90
NCDOT • Newsletter May 2023
Traffic Forecasts (TF)
"Connecting people, products
A Project Level Traffic Forecasting is an essential part of the and places safely and efficiently
planning process. The traffic forecast informs the design of with customer focus, accounta-
STIP projects. There are currently no traffic forecasts in pro- bility and environmental sensi-
gress in the WSUAMPO area.
tivity to enhance the economy
BGMPO Comprehensive Transportation Plan and vitality of North Carolina...."
(CTP) - NCDOT Mission Statement
The BGMPO CTP final adoption was June 8, 2022. NCDOT
TPD is working on the more-detailed documentation of each FHWA New.q
highway recommendation. Final maps and a list of recommen-
dations can be found at https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/ FHWA has released the Promoting Resili-
planninq/Pages/CTP-Details.aspx?study id=Burlington-Graham. ent Operations for Transformative, Effi-
cient, and Cost-Saving Transportation
National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) (PROTECT) Discretionary Grant Program
Notice of Funding Opportunity
Program (NOFO). Applications are due via
The N.C. NEVI Program will initiate a procurement process in grants.gov by August 18, 2023.
fall 2023 to install Direct Current Fast Charging (DCFC) EV The NOFO can be found on grants.gov at:
stations along the State's Alternative Fuel Corridors. NCDOT https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/view-
anticipates entities that are interested in deploying EV Supply opportunity.html?oppld=347585. More
Equipment (EVSE) under the NEVI program will form teams information on this NOFO and the PRO-
potentially consisting of: TECT Program can be found at: https://
• Site Developers www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/protect/
• EVSE Providers discretionary. Applicant questions should
• Site Hosts be directed to:
To help these entities prepare to respond to the procurement PROTECTdiscretionary(a-)_dot.gov.
process, NCDOT is facilitating an online database in addition
to the May 9 virtual meeting that was held. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law estab-
lished the PROTECT Discretionary Grant
NC NEVI Networking Database: Ongoing until June 30, Program to help make surface transporta-
2023: .https://Publicinput.com/nevi-networking tion more resilient to natural hazards, in-
The database and event are intended solely for those in- cluding climate change, sea level rise,
terested in being part of EV charging station deployment flooding, extreme weather events, and
teams in response to the NCDOT's upcoming procurement other natural disasters through support of
process. Responses to the database questionnaire will be planning activities, resilience improve-
available to all respondents via a publicly available data- ments, community resilience and evacua-
base posted to the NCDOT NEVI website: NCDOT: National tion routes, and at-risk costal infrastruc-
Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Program ture. (FHWA News continued on last
page.)
US 70 Corridor Public Study
The Durham Chapel Hill Carrboro MPO is conducting a study of US 70 West, from NC 119 in
Mebane to US 751 in Orange County. The Corridor Study will provide recommendations for future
development of the transportation corridor. Visit the project website for more information. US 70
Multimodal Corridor Study (us70westxom). Public comments are being received through an interac-
tive map on the website through May 19.
NCDOT Participating in FHWA's State Transportation Innovation Councils
NCDOT is participating in FHWA's STIC (State Transportation Innovation Councils) program which
allows each state transportation community to evaluate and deploy innovations that best fit their
program needs and put the innovations into practice quickly.
This program will assist in the research and deployment of low cost, temporary bicycle and pedes-
trian countermeasures related to FHWA's Safe Transportation for Every Pedestrian (STEP) pro-
gram. The project will identify the necessary process steps for launching such a program with local
stakeholders (including schedule, cost, logistics) to support the success of future programs, or the
possibility of dedicated funding to establish a countermeasure program in coordination with Divi-
sion resurfacing schedules. This project will form the foundation for future deployment work with
regard to bicycle and pedestrian countermeasures.
The lead for this project is Edward Johnson at IMD. You can reach out to him for more information
at erjohnson2@ncdot.gov. Project Tables - Tool for Safety Countermeasures (ncdot.gov)
Updated Seasonal Grouping and Factors
The Traffic Survey Group is providing an updated Seasonal Grouping and Factors table for your
use and reference when factoring from Daily Volume to AADT by Day of Week by Month. This
seasonal factor table can be found on our Traffic Survey website: https://connect.ncdot.gov/
resources/State-Mapping/Pages/Traffic-Monitoring-Reports-Statistics.asp x. Once on this page
click on the Resource Tab to find the NCDOT Traffic Volume Seasonal Factors 2021 excel
spreadsheet.
Traffic Monitoring Reports,Statistics& Resources
conned NGDOT r Resources >Mapping Resources,T.IU Moniloring Reports.5tatisties&Resources
Remember: Factors should be
Traffic Volume Interstate&Freeway Volume
applied to short-term counts
Federal Highway Administration&N-C-Classification Scheme C.'3 based on the day of week and
Freguendy Asked Questions a month the count was collect-
AASHT.0 Rounding Rates ...... ....0 ed. All raw counts should be
Secondary Roads Database
....... converted to volumes prior to
Highway Performance Monitoring System
Highway Performance Mcnitonng System Field Manual applying the seasonal factor.
Ol of Highway Policy Information
Traffic Monitoring Guide
NCDOT Traffic Volume Seasonal Factors 2021 el
Integrated Mobility Division (IMD) Quarterly Update
NCDOT's Integrated Mobility Division (IMD) is holding its next quarterly Multimodal Updates Webinar on Thurs-
day, May 25th at 10am. These meetings are designed to inform some of our partners on planning, policy and
programming initiatives that our Division is currently leading.
The agenda for this webinar had not been finalized at the time of this newsletter submittal; however, below are
examples of some items that may be discussed:
• Clean Transportation Plan — Heather Hildebrandt, Statewide Initiatives Group Supervisor, Transportation
Planning Division
• IMD's new Program and Project Management Branch
• Discretionary grants
• Feasibility studies grant program — status of projects
• Multimodal planning grant program — funding approval at June BOT
• Microtransit Feasibility Studies
• Transit Planning activities - regional transit plans, Locally Coordinated Plan, transit facility needs survey
• Motorists and Bicyclists: Best Practices for Road Safety report
• Transportation demand management (TDM) grant program — awards
• Safe Routes to School non-infrastructure grant— awards
• Bicycle Helmet Initiative— awards
• Complete streets updates
• STIC countermeasure project— installation sites
• Micromobility strategic plan
• Innovation initiatives— CASSI, etc.
• North Carolina Non-Motorized Volume Data Program (NC NMVDP)
Meeting information is below.
Multimodal Updates Meeting
Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone.
https://meet.goto.com/797607149
You can also dial in using your phone.
United States: +1 (872) 240-3311
Access Code: 797-607-149
Join from a video-conferencing room or system.
Dial in or type: 67.217.95.2 or inroomlink.goto.com
Meeting ID: 797 607 149
Or dial directly: 797607149(@67.217.95.2 or 67.217.95.2##797607149
Get the app now and be ready when your first meeting starts: https://meet.goto.com/install
Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) Schedule Changes
Beginning Monday, May 1, all customer services statewide will be provided on a walk-in basis after noon.
Appointments will only be available in the mornings through the 11 a.m. hour and can be booked at
skiptheline.ncdot.gov.
Even with this change, walk-in customers may still have the opportunity for morning-hour service if there
is time between scheduled appointments or if a customer does not appear for a scheduled appointment.
Estimated Office Wait Time to be Available Online Soon
As appointment scheduling shifts toward more walk-ins, a new feature will soon be available on the
NCDMV office locations webpage to show the public the current estimated wait time at driver license offic-
es. This will allow customers to see the current estimated wait time at different locations so they can make
the best decision on which office to go to, or whether they want to try again another day.
Saturday Hours Begin June 3
As in years past, NCDMV is preparing to offer Saturday hours at 16 locations this summer during its peak
season. These offices will open from 8 a.m. to noon on Saturdays from June 3 to Aug. 26: Asheville,
Charlotte-University City, Charlotte South, Fayetteville West, Greensboro East, Greensboro West, Green-
ville, Hudson, Huntersville, Jacksonville, Monroe, Morganton, Raleigh North, Raleigh West, Wilmington
South, and Winston-Salem South.
DMV is exploring the potential for adding more Saturday locations as staffing levels permit.
Tips to Improve Your DMV Experience
DMV offers the following tips for an improved customer experience:
• Renew early— Don't wait until the last minute to renew your driver license. DMV sends a reminder
card to the address on file six months before the expiration date. Customers can renew at any time during
this six-month window.
• Renew online — In most cases, unless they renewed online last time, customers can renew their cre-
dential online.
• Be prepared — Check the DMV website to make sure you bring the required documentation for your
desired service. One frequently forgotten item is a printed document proving liability insurance.
• REAL ID — Customers have more time to get their REAL ID as the federal implementation date requir-
ing a REAL ID to fly commercially or to visit federal, military and nuclear facilities has been moved back
two years to May 7, 2025.
Wildlife Crossings Contact Us
The NCDOT and NC Wildlife Resources Commission have partnered Pam R. Cook, PE
to expand wildlife crossings around the state to combat the nearly BGMPO Coordinator
21,000 wildlife-related crashes in NC a year. The partnership aims to
develop effective and efficient passages for various species of wildlife NCDOTTPD
Wilmington
to reduce highway hazards for motorists and wildlife, while minimizing Raleigh,
habitat fragmentation. 707-0975
State agencies team up to reduce roadkill, animal crashes in NC (msn.com) prcook@ncdot.gov
-. www.ncdot.gov
FH\A/A NPWS (contini 1Pd)
U.S. DOT Releases Safe Streets for All Grant Program FY23 Notice of Funding Opportunity
The U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) opened the second round of the Safe Streets for All
(SS4A) Discretionary Grant Program and released the FY23 Notice of Funding Opportunity. The SS4A
Grant Program, established by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, funds regional, local, and Tribal initia-
tives through grants to prevent roadway deaths and serious injuries. The program supports the National
Roadway Safety Strategy and the U.S. DOT goal of zero deaths and serious injuries on our nation's
roadways. A webinar series is available for more information. Applications are due by 5:00 PM ET on
July 10, 2023.
Upcoming Date
TPD approves FY 24 UPWPs and Indirect Cost Allocation Plan June 29, 2023
State FY 23 begins July 1, 2023
NCDOT Statewide Plans:
To learn more, click on the following links or go to ncdot.gov and search using names in blue unless oth-
erwise noted:
NC Moves 2050 Plan
• NCDOT Strategic Transportation Corridors (or go to ncdot.gov and search: Strategic Transportation Corri-
dors)
• NCDOT Comprehensive State Rail Plan (25-Year Vision)
• NC Statewide Multimodal Freight Plan (2023)
• Great Trails State Plan
• Connecting North Carolinians to Opportunities (Public Transportation Strategic Plan-2018)
• NCDOT Resilience Strategy Report (2021)
• Statewide Pedestrian & Bicycle Plan (2013)
Other Plans:
• N.C. Climate Risk Assessment and Resilience Plan by Department of Environmental Quality for Google
search: 2020-Climate-Risk-Assessment-and-Resilience-Plan.pdf)
• NC FIRST Commission
Helpful Links:
To learn more, click on the following links or go to ncdot.gov and search using names in blue unless
otherwise noted:
• NCDOT home page—ncdot.gov
• Real-Time Traffic—drivenc.gov I North Carolina Traffic & Travel Information
• Report a pothole—NCDOT Contact Us Form (ncdot.gov & search "Report a pothole")
• NCDOT: State Transportation Improvement Program - ncdot.gov/sti
• Interactive Bicycle Routes Map—https://www.ncdot.gov/bikeped/ncbikeways/default.aspx—
Links to all traffic count data information - Traffic Survey Group (connect.ncdot.gov & then search)
• NCDOT Interactive Traffic Volume Map—Traffic Volume Maps (ncdot.gov)
• Traffic Safety Data & Engineering—NCDOT: Traffic Safety Data & Engineering
• Federal Functional Classification Map—NCDOT Functional Class Map (ncdot.maps.arcg is.com)
PARTiculars
Piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation
Ambitious And Inclusive Plans
The Piedmont Triad region includes 12 counties -
Alamance, Caswell, Davidson, Davie, Forsyth, Guilford,
Montgomery, Randolph, Rockingham, Stokes, Surry, and Aftv
Yadkin. Serving the region's Economic Development
District, designated by the U.S. Economic Development
Administration, the Piedmont Triad Regional Council
(PTRC) is responsible for developing and maintaining a
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy(CEDS) to PIEDMONT TRuD
stimulate economic growth, diversity, and sustainability.
The PTRC created an ambitious and inclusive plan to REGIONAL
O � T 1 i
serve as the foundation for economic development for I L
our 12-county region.The plan is a cooperative between
local leaders, organizations, and stakeholders to increase
economic capacity and achieve regional goals for collective prosperity.The strategy to advance projects that meet
the identified regional interests and support change has been chosen to encompass the Council's goals.
Accomplishing the CEDS vision and goals requires regional partners and stakeholders across both public and
private sectors. Included in this team are representatives from Public Transportation Authorities, Piedmont
Authority for Regional Transportation (PART),Winston-Salem Transit Authority, Greensboro Transit Authority,
High Point Transit Access, City of Burlington Link, Davidson County Transportation, Regional Coordinated Area
Transportation, and Yadkin Valley Economic Development District Incorporated Transportation Services.These
transportation professionals collaborate to offer mobility options that serve citizens' needs.This is achieved by
developing local and regional mobility options that focus on improving access to public transportation while
protecting our natural, economic, and human resources.To learn more go to PTRC.digitalceds.com.
System Wide Ride Free 5.26.2023
As PART's Route 10 Randolph County Express service expansion approaches one year in August of this year, we
will celebrate with a System Wide Ride Free All Day event on May 26th.
This route expansion included service into the North Carolina Zoo at the North American entrance.As the warmer
weather ramps up Zoo attendance we are offering this additional incentive to peak community interest in riding
PART. While industry-wide ridership in public transportation continues to struggle to gain 'before COVID numbers',
PART is providing valuable and creative ways to engage with our community.
Z- �
!1 k
= = TO CELEBRATE OUR
COUNrv,
a wrim
INTO THE
North
NA FTr.GAI9 � Carolina
Planners Plan ... that's what they do!
As part of the ongoing regional Transportation Demand Management(TDM) planning efforts, PART is
participating in monthly meetings with a group of Piedmont Triad University and College TDM professionals.
The group is focusing on policies institutions of higher education use to ensure students and employees have
transportation options to access classes,jobs, and other resources.
This planning group comes together with a collective understanding that some people who want to attend
classes or work at their institutions need transportation options.They are also aware that their communities want
environmentally friendly options.This team has also voiced a common interest that more parking lots and parking
decks will not solve their ongoing transportation needs—for economic and environmental reasons.
The goal is, that this collaboration will encourage dialogue that creates change in the way institutions of higher
learning approach transportation demands.Through sharing what has worked and what has not, these TDM
professionals will build on each other's strengths with a goal to effect change beyond individual campuses and
into the greater Piedmont Triad Region. PART continues to work diligently to reach our objective of improving
transportation through regional cooperation.
WI'A
O�I < atn � x•�l < �
t
t
Hosting A Full House
PART hosted the Transportation Planning Capacity Building Scenario Planning Peer Exchange workshop May 3rd.
and 4th.Attendance was excellent as the concept of Scenario Planning was introduced to build awareness and
encourage information-sharing among PART, its MPOs, and two peer agencies.The event provided an excellent
opportunity to share information on the Piedmont Triad's s current scenario planning efforts. Peer experts Dale
Stith, Principal Transportation
Planner from the Hampton Roads
Transportation Planning Organization,
and Martin Rivarola,Assistant FHW\
Director of Transportation and Land f
Use at the Mid-America Regional !�
Council, gave presentations on their C_e1JPN0 P�aNN�N�
agencies' scenario planning activities
and perspectives on using scenario
planning in the transportation planning
process.The peer exchange featured
an additional virtual live presentation
from Todd Litman, Founder and
Executive Director of the Victoria _.---
Transport Policy Institute.
The meeting was a success and the
group looks forward to implementing
our ideas collaboratively.THANK YOU
to all in attendance!
PARTmorg
❑ . C u { n 0
13