HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 11-14-23; 7-b - US 70 Multimodal Corridor Plan 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 14, 2023
Action Agenda
Item No. 7-b
SUBJECT: US 70 Multimodal Corridor Plan
DEPARTMENT: Orange County Transportation Services (OCTS)
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
1. Draft Existing Conditions Report Darlene Weaver, Transportation
Planning Manager, 919-245-2002
PURPOSE: To receive the draft Existing Conditions Report and provide comments on the US 70
Multimodal Corridor Study.
BACKGROUND: In 2019, Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) approved US 70 as a County
Priority for possible consideration in the State's Strategic Prioritization of Transportation (SPOT)
process. This occurred with the understanding the corridor posed significant safety and mobility
issues for all uses. The Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) in Durham-Chapel Hill-
Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization (DCHC MPO) identified this corridor for potential
multimodal improvements. The CTP in Burlington-Graham Metropolitan Planning Organization
noted US 70 as a corridor needing multimodal improvements. Both CTP were amended in 2022
incorporating the State's new Complete Street Policy.
Following County approval as a priority, Orange County staff started working with Vanessa
Hangen Brustlin (VHB) to analyze the corridor in partnership with local jurisdictions and regional
agencies. DCHC MPO provided the funding while Orange County managed the project. A Core
Technical Team (CTT) was created composed of Hillsborough, Mebane, Orange County, the
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), DCHC MPO and BG MPO staff, with the
State's Integrated Mobility Division (IMD) and Rail Road Division invited as critical stakeholders.
The CTT meets monthly with VHB.
The draft Existing Conditions Report is provided at Attachment 1. This report was used as part of
the first round of public workshops. VHB completed the first round of public workshops last March,
with the second round scheduled for late November and early December. Staff will continue to
encourage input throughout the planning process and present the findings to all boards along the
corridor at the end of the year. OCTS staff will present a summary of the draft Existing Conditions
Report, along with outcomes from the public workshops and next steps, for Board feedback.
All public comments will be included in the appendix, with responses to how they were addressed.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact with receiving this report. The final plan will
determine potential projects and processes necessary to implement the plan.
2
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.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board receive the information and
provide comments on the US 70 Multimodal Corridor Plan.
3
V11b
Table of Contents
1.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................................................................4
1.1.1 Study Purpose............................................................................................................................................................................................4
1.1.2 Study Context............................................................................................................................................................................................. 5
1.2 Transportation Infrastructure.......................................................................................................................................................................... 12
1.2.1 US 70 Roadway Design Elements............................................................................................................................................................. 12
1.2.2 US 70 Intersections.................................................................................................................................................................................. 12
1.2.3 Bridges...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 17
1.2.4 Pedestrian Facilities .................................................................................................................................................................................20
1.2.5 Bicycle Facilities .......................................................................................................................................................................................21
1.2.6 System Connectivity................................................................................................................................................................................. 23
1.2.7 Planned &Committed Improvements.....................................................................................................................................................23
1.2.7.1 STIP Projects......................................................................................................................................................................................... 24
1.3 Corridor Travel Demand Characteristics..........................................................................................................................................................26
1 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
4
V11b
1.3.1 Historic Traffic Volumes (AADTs).............................................................................................................................................................26
1.3.2 Traffic Data...............................................................................................................................................................................................30
1.3.2.1 Traffic Characteristics...........................................................................................................................................................................30
1.3.2.2 Intersection Turning Movement Counts..............................................................................................................................................47
1.3.3 Pedestrian and Bicycle Trips....................................................................................................................................................................48
1.3.4 Transit Service..........................................................................................................................................................................................50
1.4 Traffic Operations and Quality of Service........................................................................................................................................................55
1.4.1 Corridor-Level ..........................................................................................................................................................................................56
1.4.2 Intersections ............................................................................................................................................................................................60
1.5 Safety ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 66
1.6 Environmental Context....................................................................................................................................................................................84
1.6.1 Built Environment....................................................................................................................................................................................85
1.6.2 Land Use...................................................................................................................................................................................................85
1.6.2.1 Natural Environment............................................................................................................................................................................89
1.6.2.2 Water Quality.......................................................................................................................................................................................91
1.6.2.3 Wildlife Resources and Natural Heritage Elements............................................................................................................................. 94
1.7 Relevant Plans..................................................................................................................................................................................................96
1.7.1 Regional/ Long Range Transportation Plans...........................................................................................................................................96
1.7.2 Statewide Transportation Plans...............................................................................................................................................................98
1.7.3 Countywide Transportation Plans............................................................................................................................................................98
1.7.4 Municipal Transportation Plans............................................................................................................................................................. 101
1.7.5 Other Plans, Studies, Policies, and Documents...................................................................................................................................... 110
2 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
5
fr0i -
V11b
1.8 Public Input.................................................................................................................................................................................................... 116
1.8.1 Stakeholder Interviews.......................................................................................................................................................................... 116
1.8.2 Community Workshops ......................................................................................................................................................................... 117
1.8.3 Community Events................................................................................................................................................................................. 117
1.9 Findings............................................................................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
1.10 Appendices..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 117
3 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
6
lib
US 70 Existing Conditions
1.1 Introduction
1.1.1 Study Purpose
The US 70 Corridor Study is an in-depth review of the 18.9-mile stretch of US 70 between NC 119 in Mebane to the
Orange/Durham County line and the 3-mile stretch of US 70 Business from NC 86(Churton Street)to US 70.The existing
two-lane roadway is a regionally significant east-west corridor with daily traffic volumes ranging from less than 4,000
vehicles/day to about 17,000.Traffic congestion along the corridor is concentrated during peak periods at a few locations
with more frequent intersections and/or heavy conflicts/turning movements. The route also acts as relief for I-85 or a
secondary route in the event of an accident. Much of the western portion of the corridor runs adjacent to the North
Carolina Railroad(NCRR)line carrying both passenger and freight rail services.There are numerous stream crossings
along this portion of US 70,most notably over the Eno River where the Mountains-to-Sea Trail(MST)also crosses.Other
parks and open spaces in and around the corridor include the Eno River State Park and Quarry,Historic Occoneechee
Speedway and Natural Area,River Park and Riverwalk Trail,Kings Highway Park,Efland-Cheeks Park and Community
Center, and Lake Michael Park.The roadway also traverses rural,residential,commercial,manufacturing,institutional,
and agricultural land uses,which makes designing a roadway that accommodates the needs of all users an important
challenge.
The City of Mebane,Town of Hillsborough,NCDOT Division 7,Burlington-Graham Metropolitan Planning Organization
(BGMPO)and the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization(DCHC MPO)recognized the need
to evaluate this vital roadway and have come together to fund this study.
The goal of this study is to develop a long-term vision for this corridor,including the US 70 roadway itself and the
surrounding communities and natural areas.This vision is comprehensive,addressing preservation of the area's
4 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
7
lib
character,economic opportunity and vitality,environmental sensitivity, and transportation improvements for all users
(e.g.,drivers,freight,pedestrians,bicyclists).While this vision cannot determine ultimate design details,its analysis and
recommendations will help guide those decisions by documentixk.•.transportation needs,community priorities,and
4,4441,41,4111
environmental constraints.
The project's Study Team represents the broad interests of the corridor,including members from the City of Mebane,
Town of Hillsborough,BGMPO,DCHC MPO,Alamance and Orange Counties,VHB, and Rose&Associates.The Study
Team is reviewing land use and roadway plans,examining economic and land use trends,and considering both short-
term and long-range improvements that will preserve and enhance environmental resources and the economic vitality of
the corridor and the surrounding communities it supports.
an
1.1.2 Study Context
The study corridor spans 18.9 miles of US 70 from NC 119 in Mebane and the Orange/Durham County line and the 3
miles of US 70 Business from NC 86(Churton Street)in Hillsborough to US 70. The current federal function classification
of this stretch of US 70 is Minor Arterial,while the stretch of US 70 Business under study is classified as a Major Collector
/Other Principal Arterial.
Historically,the purpose of this route was to link the municipalities of Durham,Hillsborough,Mebane,and beyond;
however, the completion of I-85 and I-40 diminished the importance of this function.Although the corridor is still an
important commuter route and plays an important role in acting as a secondary route for I-85,a growing share of trips
using this part of US 70 begin or end at homes and businesses along the corridor itself.
Given the length of the corridor and the wide variation in traffic demand,land use,topography,and roadway design
elements,it is helpful to logically divide the corridor into shorter segments,ideally segments that share relevant
characteristics. Figure 1 identifies seven corridor segments,A—F.Segments A through E comprise the US 70 corridor
from west to east,while Segment F includes the entirety of US 70 Business. Segments range from just over three miles
long to just under four miles,averaging about 3.6 miles in length.
5 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
8
fir►Pft
ig
vilb
Figure 1: Project Vicinity and Study Segments
"'vhb
57 j
I
Mebane- I �`Q �—•�� - - - - - - - -. 1
I
jl0l. - �'~ Hillsborough _ ` f
Ir�,
I A
y i
Diri:ham
I 147
1 � 1
1 I _
I `
Maes
Legend Segment A-US 70 from NC i19 to Mace Road
Segment A Segment D ;US 70 Corridor Study Buffer — Railroad Track Segment B-US 70 from Mace Road to Lloyds Dairy Road
Segment B —Segment E III County Boundary Segment C-'US 70 from Lloyds Dairy Road to east of INC 86(Churton Street)
Segment D-US 70 from east of NC 86(Churton Street)to US 70 Business
Segment C Segment F Municipal Boundary
Segment E-US 70 from US 70 Business to the Orange/Durham County Line
Segment F-US 70 Business from NC 86(Churton Street)to US 70
6 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
9
lib
Segment A
This segment through Downtown Mebane passes through the most urban part of the entire corridor,and it includes all
the Alamance County portion of the study area. The Alamance/Orange County line falls within the area of study.Most
of the westernmost 2 miles of the corridor fall within the City of Mebane in Alamance County.
Segment A extends from James Walker Road east to Mace Road.NCRR tracks run along the southern side of US 70 for
most of this segment,within 40-50 feet through the western half. This proximity creates delays and safety concerns when
trains cross intersecting roadways. Right-of-way constraints and conflicts limit options for improving traffic,pedestrian,
and bicycle trips in this vicinity.There are some constraints related to potential historic elements.Beyond the Downtown
area,surrounding land uses consist mainly of highway commercial and light industrial uses in a suburban setting.
The most recent BGMPO Comprehensive Transportation Plan(CTP),adopted on May 24,2022,identifies the western
portion of this segment of US 70 as a Boulevard in need of improvements to accommodate traffic congestion and enhance
mobility as well as addressing a need for modernization.Through Downtown Mebane eastward,US 70 is classified as a
Major Thoroughfare(2-lane). Various plans recommend bicycle and pedestrian improvements along US 70 at key points
throughout Downtown Mebane. There are also long-range proposals for fixed-route bus service.Key roadway attributes
include the following:
Op R
• The prevailing roadway Ycross-section is two lanes with paved 2'-4'shoulders. Just west of Downtown,curb-&-
gutter and sidewalk begin along the north side;eventually,curb-&gutter appears on the south side.On-street
parking is provided along both sides of the street between 3rd and 5th Streets.Curb-&gutter disappear from the
south side and then the north just east of 51h Street,although sidewalk continues along the north side until 9th
Street.There are turn lanes at some intersections.There are no bicycle accommodations.
• Speed limits drop from 55 mph to 45 mph at the western end of this segment,transitioning down to 25 mph
through the Central Business District(CBD),then back up to 45 mph through the eastern half of the segment(see
Figure 2 for statutory speeds throughout the study).
• Estimated 2022 average annual daily traffic volumes(AADTs)range from about 9,000 vpd to a high of
approximately 12,000 vpd through the CBD.
7 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
10
lib
Segment B
Segment B extends through the Buckhorn Road intersection east to Lloyds Dairy Road.Land use along this segment is
mixed suburban-rural,with industrial,institutional,commercial, residential,and even some agricultural uses.The latest
DCHC MPO CTP(amended March 9,2022)identifies this segment of US 70 as a Major Thoroughfare(2-lane),and the
plan recommends improvements with respect to transit service. Key roadway attributes include the following:
• The prevailing roadway cross-section is two lanes with paved 2'-4'shoulders. Some intersections have left-turn
lanes. There are no sidewalks or bicycle facilities.
• The speed limit is 45 mph throughout.
• Estimated 2022 AADTs range from about 5,000 vpd to a high of approximately 7,500 vpd
Segment C
This segment extends eastward from Lloyds Dairy Road through the NC 86/Churton Street intersection.The western end
of the corridor includes an unusual high-speed interchange with the I-85 Connector that does not serve eastbound US 70
traffic and incorporates an unorthodox left-lane exit(westbound) and a mainline yield(eastbound). This design presents
particular challenges to pedestrians and bicyclists. Immediately east of this interchange is a narrow bridge over the Eno
River,followed by a significant hill and curve.Land use along this segment is mixed suburban-rural,with industrial,
institutional,commercial,residential, and even some agricultural uses.
The latest DCHC MPO CTP(amended March 9,2022)identifies this segment of US 70 as a Major Thoroughfare(2-lane)in
need of multimodal improvements,primarily related to bicycle and pedestrian accommodations,as well as transit service,
including a park&ride lot near Revere Road.The I-85/US 70 Connector interchange is cited for conversion to a full
access connection.Key roadway features include the following:
• The prevailing roadway cross-section is two lanes with paved 2'-4'shoulders,with the exception of the I-85
Connector interchange,where the eastbound and westbound lanes separate,and an additional lane is added to
the entry/exit roadways.There are turn lanes at major intersections,but sidewalks and crosswalks(with
pedestrian signals)are only at the Revere Road/Faucette Mill Road intersection.
• West of the Hillsborough Town Limits,the speed limit is 50 mph,except for a short 55 mph segment though the I-
85 Connector interchange.The speed limit is 45 mph within the Hillsborough Town Limits.
• Estimated 2022 AADTs are around 5,000 vpd west of the 1-85 Connector,jumping to nearly 12,000 west of the
Connector and increasing to about 15,000 vpd at NC 86/Churton Street.
8 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
11
lib
Segment D
Segment D extends from just east of the NC 86/Churton Street intersection to the US 70 Business intersection.US 70 in the
vicinity of Orange High School Road is subject to school-related queuing and delays. Intersections at NC 86,St Mary's
Road,and Lawrence Road experience peak-period congestion, and lack adequate pedestrian crossing treatments.There
are significant grades approaching the new bridge across the Eno River,which lacks pedestrian and bicycle
accommodations.Land use along this segment is mixed suburban-rural,with industrial,institutional, commercial,
residential, and recreational uses.
The latest DCHC MPO CTP identifies this segment of US 70 as a Major Thoroughfare(2-lane)in need of multimodal
improvements,primarily related to bicycle and pedestrian accommodations west of Lawrence Road. There are also
recommendations for bus service improvements west of St Mary's Road,including a park&ride lot near Gwen Road.
Key roadway attributes include the following:
• The prevailing roadway cross-section is two lanes with paved 2'-4'shoulders. Some intersections have turn lanes.
Other than a short sidewalk segment on the north side of US 70 east of NC 86,there are no sidewalks or bicycle
facilities.
• The speed limit is 45 mph west of the Eno River,transitioning to 55 mph just east of the bridge.
• Estimated 2022 AADTs range from about 15,000 vpd west of St Mary's Road to approximately 10,000 vpd east of
Lawrence Road.
Segment E
This segment extends from the US 70 Business intersection east to NC 751,near the Durham County line.Technically,the
portion of US 70 east of the I-85 interchange is designated US 70 Business(US 70 follows I-85 east though Durham).
Segment E is part of the NC Colonial Heritage Byway,as designated in the NC Scenic Byway program.This byway
provides an impressive tour of 18th and 19th-century history in North Carolina.Land use along this segment is mixed
suburban-rural,with industrial,institutional,commercial,residential,and recreational uses.
The latest DCHC MPO CTP identifies this segment of US 70 as a Major Thoroughfare(2-lane)in need of multimodal
improvements west of Pleasant Green Road.The unconventional high-speed design(left-side exits and required U-turns)
of the I-85/US 70 interchange combines its proximity to the Pleasant Green/Mt Herman Church Road intersection to create
congestion and safety problems. This design is especially challenging for bicyclists and pedestrians.While previous plans
9 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
12
lib
have suggested solutions,there are currently no recommended improvements.Key roadway attributes include the
following:
• The prevailing roadway cross-section is two lanes with paved 2'-4'shoulders. Some intersections have turn lanes.
There are no sidewalks or bicycle facilities.
• The speed limit is 55 mph except for a short segment of 45-mph between University Station Road and Mt Herman
Church Road/I-85.
• Estimated 2022 AADTs are over 15,000 vpd west of the I-85 interchange, dropping to 10,000 vpd or less to the
east.
Segment F
Segment F extends from just east of the NC 86/Churton Street intersection to the US 70 Business intersection.Segment F
also comprises part of the NC Colonial Heritage Byway.Land use along this segment is mixed suburban-rural,with light
industrial,institutional, commercial,residential, and recreational uses. There are some constraints related to potential
historic elements.
This facility is functionally classified as Other Principal Arterial west of NC 86,and Major Collector to the east.The latest
DCHC MPO CTP identifies this segment of US 70 Business as a Major Thoroughfare(2-lane)in need of bicycle
improvements west of Lawrence Road,and enhanced bus service west of NC 86.Key roadway attributes include the
following:
• The prevailing roadway cross-section is two lanes with minimal paved shoulders(e.g.less than 2'). Some
intersections have turn lanes.There are limited sidewalks on the south side of US 70 Business,extending east
from NC 86 to the Sportsplex.There are no bicycle facilities.
• The speed limit is 40 mph throughout.
• Estimated 2022 AADTs range from just over 9,000 vpd on the west end,down to over 3,000 vpd on the east end.
10 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
13
lib
Figure 2: Statutory Speed Limit Map
N
I SV Hh i
I
� 5]
I I
l I
` tF
I`
wan — — — — — —�— ��
70
1F9 1 ! db
I r
i
7
i
I ;u.
I 147
I + I
f �
l
I
I II
N i I
I
Legend
US 70 Corridor Study Buffer NCDOT Posted Speed Limit — 25 — 45 — 65
1
County boundary 0 30 — 50 — 70
20 — 40 — 60
11 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
14
lib
1.2 Transportation Infrastructure
1.2.1 US 70 Roadway Design Elements
US 70 is a basic 2-lane highway,most of which has 4'paved shoulders and 120'ROW.Thirteen intersections along this
18.9-mile segment are signalized.Driveways and intersections are frequent,but visibility is often adequate.The terrain is
mildly-to-moderately rolling,with some significant vertical and horizontal curvature,though not excessive for the
primarily 45 mph speed limit.There are no bicycle facilities and limited pedestrian facilities along the corridor.
1.2.2 US 70 Intersections
Within the study area,US 70 and US 70 Business intersect approximately 95 public streets,and numerous private roads
and driveways. 15 intersections are currently signalized (see Figure 3).
k�y�ylyly h�p,
12 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
15
lib
Figure 3: Project Vicinity and Study Intersections
I r &s I
°e Is
s m 57 z.
s i
aB`sree
jt sa
Hillsborough r`m
Mebane, \
Id
� � 1
� 1
Durham
j h Rd
i Dld Hi11sb°r°�9 _
1 � 751
i
I es
0
I y f
0, T 2 Miles
Legend
US 76 Carridor Study Buffer I Municipal Boundary US 70 Key Intersection•for quantitative anatysis
_ County Boundary Railroad Track US 70 Key Intersei-for gaaldabve analysis
u
n
13 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
16
lib
Signalized Intersections
➢ US 70(W.Center Street)at James Walker Road
➢ US 70/NC 119(Center Street)at SR 1962(Third Street) and Washington Street and Norfolk Southern Railway
Crossing 735 469V*
➢ US 70/NC 119(Center Street)at 4th Street and Washington Street and Norfolk Southern Railway Crossing 735
471W*
➢ US 70/NC 119(Center Street)at NC 119 (Fifth Street) and Norfolk Southern Railway Crossing 735 472D*
➢ US 70 at SR 1114(Buckhorn Road)**
➢ US 70 at SR 1004(Efland-Cedar Grove Road)**
➢ US 70(Cornelius Road)at US 70 Business/SR 1328 (Faucette Mill Road-Revere Road)*
➢ US 70 at NC 86/US 70 Business/Churton Street*
➢ US 70 at SR 1588(Orange High School Rd)*
➢ US 70 at SR 1555(Miller Road)
➢ US 70 at SR 1002(St Mary's Road)*
➢ US 70 at SR 1561/1709(Lawrence Road)* q0006� .
➢ US 70 at SR 1567(Pleasant Green Road)and SR 1713(Mount Herman Church Road)*
➢ US 70 Business at NC 86/SR 1879(Elizabeth Brady Road)
➢ US 70 Business/NC 86 at SR 1009(Churton Street)
As part of the traffic analysis,peak-period turning-movement counts were collected at ten of these signalized
intersections,indicated with an asterisk(*).Recent traffic counts determined to still be accurate were also used as part of
the traffic analysis,indicated with two asterisks(**). These intersections were determined to be most critical,and most
likely to undergo significant change.Peak-period turning-movement counts were also collected at these major
unsignalized intersections:
Unsignalized Intersections
➢ US 70/SR 1303(East Washington Street)at SR 1402(Mattress Factory Road)*
➢ US 70 at US 70 Business/SR 1562(Palmers Grove Church Road)**
14 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
17
lib
Several signalized and unsignalized intersections have been upgraded beyond their original cross-sections to reduce crash
potential and/or increase capacity.Such improvements--typically involving additional turn-lanes,acceleration
/deceleration lanes,or channelization--are summarized below: Win.
aha
James Walker Road
➢ Median crossover,no left turn bay
Third Street
➢ Dedicated left turn lanes on US 70 yrs 1111i
Fourth Street tl
➢ Dedicated left turn lanes on US 70 -
Fifth Street
➢ Dedicated left turn lanes on US 70
➢ Dedicated left turn lanes on Fifth Street
➢ Dedicated eastbound right turn lane on Fifth Street
➢ Traffic queuing safety measures
Buckhorn Road
➢ Dedicated southbound left turn lane on US 70 =
Faucette Mill Road I Revere Road Fifth Street at US 70-looking north
➢ Dedicated left turn lanes on US 70
➢ Channelized right turn lanes on Faucette Mill Road/Revere Road
➢ Dedicated westbound left turn lane on Revere Road
NC 861 Churton Street
➢ Dedicated left turn lanes on US 70
➢ Channelized right turn lanes on NC 86/Churton Street
➢ Dedicated left turn lanes on NC 86/Churton Street
15 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
18
lib
Orange High School Road
➢ Dedicated northbound left turn lane on US 70 -
➢ Dedicated northbound right turn lane on US 70AM
'`
Miller Road
➢ Dedicated left turn lanes on US 70 `4;
fCCCCTTTSTi,T
St Mary's Road .�
➢ Dedicated left turn lanes on US 70 ==
➢ Dedicated northbound right turn lanes on US 70
➢ Dedicated left turn lanes on St Mary's Road ' .
Lawrence Road _
➢ Dedicated left turn lanes on US 70
Pleasant Green Road I Mount Herman Church Road
➢ Dedicated left turn lanes on US 70
➢ Dedicated right turn lanes on US 70
➢ Median crossover,no left turn bay NC 86/Churton Street at US 70-looking north
NC 861 Elizabeth Brady Road
➢ Dedicated left turn lanes on NC 86/Elizabeth Brady Road `k,,
Old NC 861 Churton Street
➢ Dedicated right and left turn lanes on US 70 Business
➢ Dedicated eastbound left turn lane on Old NC 86/Churton Street
Monolithic channelization islands are used on several side roads intersecting US 70.These islands help guide vehicles
turning off US 70 into the proper lane, avoiding sideswipe or head-on collisions.This is especially relevant for left-turns,
at skewed intersections, and where large turning radii(used to accommodate higher-speed turns and large vehicles)
create wide intersection throats.The following intersections incorporate this treatment:
➢ US 70(Cornelius Road)at US 70 Business/SR 1328(Faucette Mill Road-Revere Road)
➢ US 70 at NC 86/US 70 Business/Churton Street
.00141,10101*00,
16 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
19
lib
1.2.3 Bridges
US 70 crosses four bridges and three culverts,and US 70 Business crosses one culvert in the study corridor(see Figure 4).
Figure 4: Bridge and Culvert Locations in Corridor
IUS 7o Eastbound. . . i
'+ Eno Riverr
+ j f
XT x
j 70
zIn i
Durham
US
r.
o.
I nRhodes Creek
I ,
(north .south)
�I Ev
.. -
Legend
US 70 Structure Locations _county Boundary M Wate—V Railroad Track
0 BRIDGE
CULVERT MumctpaE Boundary Stream US 70 COMdar Study Buffer
} PIPE
17 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
20
lib
Some of these structures present physical constraints for multimodal improvements to US 70. Any plans to improve or
replace these structures should carefully consider existing and future capacity,connectivity,and safety needs for all
relevant modes,as well as environmental implications.Structurere summarized below in west-to-east order:
p�cccccr•'
US 70 Eastbound Bridge over 1-85 Connector Southbound
Bridge No.670007 carries US 70 over the I-85 Connector.The bridge was constructed in 1953,has a Sufficiency Rating of
61.92,and is Functionally Obsolete and Structurally Deficient,but has no weight restrictions.The substructure is a
reinforced concrete deck on I-beams.The superstructure is approximately 180-feet long and 28-feet wide with a single 14-
foot eastbound travel lane that has 7-foot paved shoulders on either side.
Due to its low guardrails and relatively high traffic speeds(posted 50 mph),this bridge is not suitable for pedestrian or
bicycle use.In addition,the southbound 1-85 Connector passes beneath this bridge at a highly skewed angle as a 2-lane,
one-way road with no shoulders and a posted speed limit of 55 mph.
US 70 over Eno River Bridge—West of Hillsborough
Bridge No.670032 carries US 70 over the Eno River. The bridge was constructed in 1922,has a Sufficiency Rating of
57.87,and is Structurally Deficient,but has no weight restrictions.The substructure is a reinforced concrete deck on
girders.The superstructure is approximately 165 feet long and 26 feet wide with two 10-foot travel lanes and 3-foot paved
shoulders.
Given its narrow width and relatively high traffic volumes and speeds(posted 50 mph),this bridge is not suitable for
pedestrian or bicycle use.In addition,there are no trails or sidewalks to/from the bridge.
US 70 over Eno River Bridge— East of Hillsborough
Bridge No.670046 carries US 70 over the Eno River.The bridge was recently replaced in 2021 and has a Sufficiency Rating
of 99 with no weight restrictions. The superstructure is approximately 265 feet long and 28 feet wide with two 12-foot
travel lanes and 3-foot paved shoulders.
Due to narrow width,low guardrails, and relatively high traffic volumes and speeds(posted 45 mph),this bridge is not
suitable for pedestrian or bicycle use.In addition,there are no trails or sidewalks to/from the bridge,but the MST will
pass beneath the bridge;because of that,improvements to the underpass have been made on both sides of the Eno River.
18 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
21
lib
US 70 at Stony Creek Culvert
Culvert No.670056 carries Stony Creek under US 70 and has a Sufficiency Rating of 87.88 with no weight restrictions.The
structure is a single reinforced concrete arch pipe that is approximately 38 feet by 18 feet,and 63 feet long.
1-85 Bridges over US 70
There are four bridges on I-85 that span US 70 at the interchange just east of Pleasant Green Road.All were constructed in
1958.
➢ Bridge#670103 (NB I-85 over EB US 70)is Functionally Obsolescent,with a Sufficiency Rating of 74.81
➢ Bridge#670106(SB I-85 over EB US 70)is Functionally Obsolescent,with a Sufficiency Rating of 67.00
➢ Bridge#670110(SB I-85 over WB US 70)is Structurally Deficient and Functionally Obsolescent,with a Sufficiency
Rating of 67.00
➢ Bridge#670111 (NB I-85 over WB US 70)is Functionally Obsolescent,with a Sufficiency Rating of 64.07
Clearances beneath these overpasses could constrain improvements to US 70 and should be considered in future bridge
improvement/replacement projects.
US 70 at Rhodes Creek Culvert(north)
Culvert No.670255 carries Rhodes Creek under US 70/US 70 Business and I-85.The culvert has a Sufficiency Rating of
100.00 with no weight restrictions.The structure consists of three reinforced concrete box culverts,each 7 feet by 8 feet,
extending approximately 397 feet at their centerline.
US 70 at Rhodes Creek Culvert (south)
Culvert No. 670254 carries Rhodes Creek under US 70/US 70 Business and I-85.The culvert has a Sufficiency Rating of
85.81 with no weight restrictions. The structure consists of three reinforced concrete box culverts,each 7 feet by 8 feet,
extending approximately 87 feet at their centerline.
US 70 Business at Cates Creek Culvert
Culvert No.670029 carries Cates Creek under US 70 Business.The culvert has a Sufficiency Rating of 66.67,and is
Structurally Deficient with no weight restrictions.There have been recurrent flooding issues, and some mitigation work
has been performed. The structure consists of two reinforced concrete box culverts,each 10 feet by 6 feet,extending
approximately 42 feet at their centerline.
19 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
22
lib
1.2.4 Pedestrian Facilities
Sidewalks are largely absent from both the US 70 and US 70 Business corridors(Figure 5).The exception to this is where
US 70 travels through the City of Mebane,where there is nearly a mile stretch of sidewalk on the north side of the road
between the Mebane Community Park driveway and 9th Street.There are also marked crosswalks,pedestrian signal
heads,and ADA features(curb ramps and tactile warning strips)at the signalized intersections at Third Street and Fourth
Street in Mebane. However,not all of these treatments were constructed in accordance with current best practices. For
example,several curb ramps lead into the center of the intersection rather than aligning with the sidewalk/pedestrian
access route. Some pedestrian improvements are planned.
There are two short stretches of sidewalk where US 70 travels through the Town of Hillsborough.One stretch of sidewalk
(approximately 350')is in front of the Walgreens near the intersection with US 70 Business(Churton Street),though the
sidewalk does not front the road and therefore does not connect to the bus stop.There is also a small segment of sidewalk
on the north side of US 70 and marked crosswalks,pedestrian signal heads,and ADA features at Faucette Mill Road.The
crosswalks at this intersection mainly serve pedestrians traveling north-south on Faucette Mill Road/Revere Road.Worn
paths along the shoulder of US 70 were also observed in Hillsborough,suggesting that pedestrians are walking along the
roadside,particularly between US 70 Business(Churton Street) and Faucette Mill Road.
Sidewalks are absent near Efland Cheeks Elementary School Road(4401 Fuller Rd,Efland);however,no children have
been observed walking along US 70.
There are also several short stretches of sidewalk present on the US 70 Business corridor.There is sidewalk present on the
south side of US 70 Business directly in front of Sport Endeavors.There are also segments of unconnected sidewalk on
either side of US 70 Business near the Poplar Ridge neighborhood and marked crosswalks at the intersection of Quincy
Cottage Road and a midblock crosswalk in front of the Orange County Sportsplex.
20 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
23
lib
1 1'
Ai I III
- 4 r
11� — Ir.
Marked crosswalk and pedestrian signal heads Worn path observed west of US 70 Business Pedestrian facilities at Fourth Street in
at Faucette Mill Road (Churton Street) Mebane
1.2.5 Bicycle Facilities
There are no dedicated bicycle facilities on either the US 70 or US 70 Business corridor(Figure 5).There are narrow paved
shoulders,generally three or less feet wide,along the two-lane section of roadway,which represents the largest portion of
the corridor.These shoulders are not wide enough for cyclists to ride completely out of the travel lane.Neither Share the
Road signs nor shared lane markings were found along the corridor to indicate the presence of bicyclists.
�1
10"
21 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
24
lib
Figure 5: Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations
I _
86
—ii
i^ s7 1
I,
i
_ I
i
USI Y �
u z-� 'Hillshorouglr,��., �v 1
1
I'
70 -.—Durham
_I' 147
� 1 �
I
1
0 0.6 1,2 Miles i 751
Legend
_ US 70 Corridor Study Buffer Railroad Track Existing Bike Lane Urban
Municipal boundary -- Existing Shared Use Path NC Bike Route System
County
County Boundary Existing Sidewalk
mm
22 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
25
lib
1.2.6 System Connectivity
I-85 supplants much of US 70's role in connecting the Mebane/Burlington area with Hillsborough and Durham.While the
proportion of traffic traveling the entire length of the corridor has declined since the completion of 1-85,new development
along the corridor and along roads accessed via US 70 has generated additional trips that use parts of the corridor in
travelling to jobs,residences,schools,stores,and other services or activities.Although traffic growth for the study
corridor overall averaged about 2.3%annually between 2011 and 2019,rates varied considerable year-to-year and by
location.
aB����888889°'
The lack of north-south connectivity along the corridor results in vehicles using portions of US 70 to complete north-south
trips.This adds traffic and turning movement conflicts that increase delay,especially at key intersections.Vehicles using
NC 86 and NC 57 north of US 70 is an example of this issue. Congestion through downtown Hillsborough discourages
automobile trips,and truck traffic is(mostly) routed around downtown.Completion of the new NC 119 connection
helped address a similar situation in Mebane.Traffic also uses US 70 to access one of the limited number of north-south
routes across or to/from I-85,such as Lawrence Road.
The lack of western access at the I-85 Connector also represents a lack of connectivity,forcing traffic to use indirect routes
on minor roads with at-grade rail crossings through Efland,or to continue eastward on US 70 through Hillsborough. This
is a particularly noticeable problem for truck traffic.
The proximity of the rail line to US 70 along the western portion of the corridor limits connectivity to the south,while
trains at at-grade rail crossings introduce temporary restrictions to connectivity.
For pedestrian and bicycle travel,the lack of facilities and continuity in the study corridor is a major obstacle,not only for
trips along US 70,but for trips across it. This deficiency also reduces the attractiveness and effectiveness of transit service
in the corridor.
1.2.7 Planned & Committed Improvements
The following sections describe planned or committed projects that directly or indirectly affect—or are affected by—travel
in the US 70 corridor.
23 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
26
lib
................................................................................................. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.2.7.1 STIP Projects
The current NCDOT 2020-2029 State Transportation Improvement Program(STIP)includes nine projects located within
the project study area(see Figure 6).The nature,purpose,and schedule of each project is summarized below.
Figure 6: Current 2020-2029 NCDOT STIP Projects in Corridortttt Sao
, = �+ vhb.
57
Green
Level -
��-
Haw 4 ••
River 70 _ __4 ice'
ayMebane
1 - ,
Graham
J
Durham
ire p5gri vi I I e ! , ��
i � l
int
Legend
US 70 Corridor Study Buffer Municipal Boundary * STTP Points within Project Area STIP Lines within Project Area
___ County Boundary Railroad Track Other STIP Projects ®Other STIP Projects
24 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
27
lib
STIP# U-3109A- NC 119
U-3109A proposes to relocate NC 119 from I-40/I-85 to north of SR 1921 (Mebane Rogers Road).The project is currently
under construction. likw''
STIP# RX-2007B- Norfolk Southern Railroad
RX-2007B proposes to install active warning devices at Norfolk Southern Railroad crossing 735145T near Efland.
Construction is scheduled for Fiscal Year(FY)2023.
STIP#C-5184-Riverwalk Trail
C-5184 proposes to construct a paved, off-road trail along the Eno River and construct a sidewalk to provide bicycle and
pedestrian connectivity to the greenway as part of the Riverwalk Trail.
STIP#P-5701A1B-Norfolk Southern Railroad
P-5701A proposes to construct a passenger rail station building,site access,utilities,and parking, and P-5701B proposes to
construct a station platform and realign the curve for the Norfolk Southern Railroad H-Line at milepost 41.7 in
Hillsborough. Construction for P-5701A is scheduled to begin in FY 2022,and P-5701B is scheduled to begin in FY 2023.
STIP# U-5845-SR 1009 (South Churton Street)
U-5845 proposes to widen SR 1009 (South Churton Street)to multilanes from 1-40 to the Eno River in Hillsborough.Right
of way acquisition is scheduled to begin in FY 2029,and construction is currently unfunded.
STIP#TD-5295-GoTriangle
TD-5295 proposes to construct a GoTriangle park-and-ride lot in the Town of Hillsborough.Construction is scheduled for
FY 2023.
25 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
28
lib
STIP# 1-5984- 1-85
I-5984 proposes to upgrade the I-85/NC 86 interchange in Hillsbfough.Right of way is scheduled for FY 2024,and
construction is scheduled for FY 2026. 3
STIP# 1-5959-1-85
I-5959 proposes pavement rehabilitation on I-85 from west of SR 10 a nge Grove Road)to the Durham County Line.
Construction is scheduled for FY 2028.
STIP#1-0305-1.85
I-0305 proposes to add lanes to I-85 from west of SR 1006(Orange Grove Road)in Orange County to west of SR 1400
(Sparger Road)in Durham County.
1.3 Corridor Travel Demand Characteristics
This section summarizes characteristics of travel in the study corridor,including historic and current AADTs and
associated trends;truck/heavy vehicle volumes;traffic speeds;time-of-day characteristics;peak-period turning
movements at signalized intersections;and relevant attributes of pedestrian,bicycle,transit,and rail modes.
1.3.1 Historic Traffic Volumes (AADTs)
NCDOT's count program provides a consistent source of data for assessing traffic volume trends over time.There are
multiple count stations on US 70 within the study limits.This study uses data from NCDOT's Traffic Count Database
System for the years 2011-2022,as summarized in Table 1 and Figure 6. AADT estimates derived from StreetLight Insight
and VHB's 2022 traffic counts were also considered.
26 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
29
lib
AADTs on US 70 are highest on the eastern portion of corridor in Hillsborough(14,400 vpd)and by the I-85 interchange
near Durham(17,000 vpd).Volumes are steady through Mebane,then decrease towards the middle of the study corridor,
reaching a low of 3,800 vpd in Efland,before increasing through Hillsborough.
..............
Due to the effects of COVID-19,however,traffic volumes dropped substantially in 2020,before beginning to recover in
2021,and continuing through 2022(although complete NCDOT data for 2022 AADTs are not yet available). Overall,
available 2022 traffic levels appear similar to those in 2019.However:
• Trucks make up a larger share of traffic now than in 2019. This is due in part to increased online shopping and
home delivery,and in part because truck traffic was less impacted by COVID than travel by personal automobile.
• Traffic volumes recovered somewhat faster in the western portion of the corridor than the eastern. This may be
due to the more industrial/commercial nature of employment in the west,resulting in more work-from-home
opportunities(thus less trau to the east.
o��
Although traffic growth for the study corridor overall averaged about 2.3%annually between 2011 and 2019,rates varied
considerable year-to-year and by location(typically between 2%and 3%annually).
Further analysis of NCDOT count data reveals no substantial, sustained traffic growth trends for US 70 immediately
beyond the study limits;in fact, some minor decreases were observed.Traffic volumes for significant roads intersecting
US 70 within the study corridor were also assessed.NCDOT AADT records were reviewed, along with other counts and
StreetLight estimates, and in general,traffic trends at these locations are consistent with US 70 observations.Figure 6
shows the average historic NCDOT AADT for each segment in the study area from 2011-2022.
27 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
30
VIIb
Table 1: US 70 Historic NCDOT AADTs and Estimates (by location)
Route Location 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
US 70 West of Moore Road 6,500 - 6,700 - 6,600 - 7,200 - 7,800 - 6,800 -
US 70 East of Woodlawn Road 7,900 - 8,400 - 8,100 - 8,600 9,500 7,500 8,600
US 70 East of 2nd St 11,000 - 10,000 - 10,000 - 11,000 - 12,000 - 10,500
US 70 West of 4th St 8,600 - 8,400 - 8,500 - 9,500 9,800 - 9,000
US 70 West of 7th St 7,800 - 7,800 - 7,300 - 8,400 - 8,800 - 8,600
US 70 East of 9th Street 7,300 - 7,600 - - - 8,600 9,100 - 8,900
US 70 East of Supper Club Rd 7,400 - 7,700 - - 9,000 9,500 9,600 8,300 9,300
US 70 West of Railroad Crossover - - - - - 7,600 9,500 - - -
US 70 West of Mace Road 6,200 - 6,700 - 5,300 - 7,700 8,100 8,700 7,200 8,700
US 70 West of Frazier Rd 5,800 6,500 5,900 - 5,300 - 6,700 7,000 7,400 6,300 6,500 7,200
US 70 West of Efland Cedar Grove Rd - - - - - - - - - - 5,700
US 70 East of Efland Cedar Grove Rd 4,400 4,800 4,100 - 4,200 5,000 4,400 4,800 4,600 3,900 4,400 5,400
US 70 West of Forrest Ave 3,900 4,200 3,700 3,800 3,600 4,500 4,600 4,500 4,800 4,100 3,800 5,000
US 70 West of West Hill Ave N 8,800 9,600 7,700 - 9,200 11,000 8,500 9,300 10,800 9,000 9,900 11,800
US 70 West of Holiday Park Rd 7,100 7,800 6,900 6,900 7,400 8,200 7,800 9,200 9,700 8,100 8,000 9,600
US 70 West of Hill St - - - - - - - 12,300 8,800 - - 11,200
US 70 West of NC 86 9,800 11,000 9,200 - 9,700 12,000 10,100 11,100 10,500 8,700 9,000 11,800
US 70 East Of US 70 Bus N Church St 12,000 13,000 11,000 11,000 11,000 14,000 11,000 14,000 14,800 12,300 12,200 14,400
US 70 West of Lawrence Rd 11,000 12,000 11,000 - 11,000 13,000 11,600 13,100 13,900 11,600 10,200 12,500
US 70 East of Lawrence Rd 9,400 10,000 9,300 9,200 9,300 11,000 10,500 11,400 12,100 10,000 9,500 10,700
US 70 East Of US 70 BUS 12,000 12,000 11,000 - 9,400 14,000 12,800 14,700 15,500 12,900 11,700 13,800
US 70 East of Riverside Dr - - - - - - 12,500 11,600 - - 12,500
US 70 East of Linden Rd - - - 15,000 13,600 - - 14,400
US 70 East of University Station Rd - - 13,500 13,500 15,400 12,800 14,100 -
US 70 North Of 1-85 - - - - - - - 17,000
US 70 West of Old NC 10 6,800 - 6,300 - 6,600 - 7,000 7,000 7,400 6,400 6,400
US 70 East of NC 751 8,500 - 8,100 - 8,300 - 8,700 8,700 9,500 7,900 8,200
US 70 Bus East of S Churton St 9,200 8,700 7,900 8,800 6,700 9,000 9,200 8,600 9,100 7,600 7,300 8,100
US 70 Bus East of NC 86 6,700 6,200 5,500 - 6,000 - 7,000 6,800 7,200 6,000 5,600 6,600
US 70 Bus East of Lawrence Rd 2,500 2,400 2,400 2,600 2,500 2,900 3,200 3,200 3,400 2,700 2,600 3,100
28 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
31
vilb
Figure 6: Historic Traffic Volume Trends by Study Segment
15,000 -
14,000 -
E
13,000 - -
D
12,000
11,000 _...... .. - C
A
10,000 - - - - - --:.
,000 -
- - -
..............
. ....... .. .
Q 8,005 � .... -- -
v .................. ..
r 7,000
w
6,oaa
.......... _................................................... ........... _.._... - F
5,000 ..,.......................... ....................... - ........ . ,......,....
4,000
3,000
2,000 - -
1,000
0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
A 7,800 7,900 7,900 7,800 7,600 8,200 8,800 8,900 9,400 7,700 8,800 10,500
-B 4,700 5,200 4,600 4,500 4,400 5,200 5,200 5,400 51600 4,800 4,900 5,800
--C 8,600 9,500 7,900 6,900 8,800 10,400 8,800 10,500 10,000 8,600 9,200 11,100
D 10,800 11,700 10,400 10,400 10,400 12,700 11,000 12,800 13,600 11,300 10,600 12,500
-1 9,100 9,000 8,500 8,300 8,100 9,800 10,500 11,900 12,200 10,000 11,900 13,600
-f 6,100 5,800 5,300 5,700 5,100 6,100 6,500 6,200 6,600 5,400 5,200 .5,900
29 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
32
e�0 V11b
1.3.2 Traffic Data
VHB collected relevant traffic data at locations along the corridor in September of 2022,primarily at major intersections,
both signalized and unsignalized.Data obtained and analyzed included turning movement volumes by time-of-day for
all vehicles and for trucks and busses,and bicycles,as well as pedestrian crossing volumes.To capture representative
peak conditions,counts were obtained for typical Tuesdays,Wednesdays,and Thursdays when schools were in session.
StreetLight Insight probe data were used to supplement turning movement volumes at additional intersections,and to
estimate changes in traffic characteristics observed during the pandemic. StreetLight analysis provided information on
changes in daily traffic,time-of-day distributions,truck percentages, travel speeds, trip lengths, and trip origin-
destination patterns.
1.3.2.1 Traffic Characteristics
2022 Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT)Volumes
StreetLight was used to estimate AADTs and other traffic data, such as peaking characteristics and vehicle classifications, for Monday-Thursdays
in 2019 and 2021.Available data for 2022 was also collected; however,these AADTs are an approximation using data from September 2021
through April 2022 to obtain an adequate sample size.Truck AADTs (AADTTs), including medium and heavy trucks, were only available for 2019
and 2021.The locations and respective AADTs are listed in
30 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
33
lib
Table 2.
�n.
31 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
34
e�0 -
VIIb
Table 2: StreetLight AADTs
Route Segment Location 2019 2021 2022
E of Woodlawn 8,900 8,300 8,500
A W of Supper Club 8,300 7,500 7,800
W of Buckhorn 7,100 6,700 7,200
E of Frazier 3,800 3,800 4,000
B W of Richmond 3,500 3,200 3,400
W of Efland-Cedar Grove 3,900 3,700 4,000
W of Connector 4,100 4,000 4,400
C W of Eno R West 10,000 9,200 9,700
US 70 W of Lakeshore 8,900 8,900 9,500
W of Constitution 9,400 9,700 10,500
W of Orange High School 12,600 12,000 12,900
W of Miller 12,500 11,600 12,000
D W of Eno R East 11,200 9,900 10,200
W of Lawrence 11,000 9,700 10,000
W of US 70 Bus East 10,100 8,800 9,000
W of University 12,700 10,800 10,700
E W of Pleasant Green 14,000 11,700 11,800
W of NC 751 7,500 7,000 6,600
US 70 Bus F E of Churton 7,600 6,900 6,900
E of Quincy Cottage 4,800 4,700 4,900
Overall,volumes at these locations remained slightly lower in 2021 than in 2019,as people continued working from home
through the pandemic. The estimated AADT for each segment is shown in Table 3.The eastern segments of US 70
experienced a larger drop in volumes (-10%)than the western segments(-5%)and Segment F on US 70 Business near
Downtown Hillsborough(6%). This difference may be attributable to socio-economic and employment type differences.
Higher-income white-collar work proved more amenable to working from home than did lower-paying industrial,
32 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
35
lib
agricultural,and service work.Such variations map onto the corridor consistent with the observed changes in traffic
volumes.
During 2022,traffic nearly returned to pre-pandemic levels in Segment A and increased compared to pre-pandemic
volumes in Segments B and C,between Efland and NC 86 in Hillsborough.Traffic volumes in Segment D,from NC 86 in
Hillsborough to Palmers Grove Church Road,increased again in 2022 but remained about 6%lower than pre-pandemic
volumes.Traffic volumes in Segment E continued to decrease with a 2%drop in volume from 2021 that amounted to a
15%drop in volume since 2019.
Table 3: StreetLight Estimated AADTs
Segment 2019 2021 2022
A 8,100 7,500 7,800
B 3,700 3,600 3,800
C 8,100 7,900 8,500
D 11,500 10,400 10,800
E 11,400 9,900 9,700
F 6,200 5,800 5,900
Time-of Day Traffic Characteristics (Peaking)
StreetLight data analysis also yielded valuable information about the hourly distribution of traffic(peaking
characteristics). Figure 7 and Figure 8 depict the variations in total(two-way)traffic volumes throughout the day along
each segment of the corridor, and Figures 9-14 depict the variations for each segment.
The study area generally has higher volumes during the PM peak than the AM peak.US 70 exhibits a sharp drop in traffic
after the AM peak with a slight midday increase attributable to lunch trips while increasing until the PM peak.The
section between Woodlawn Road and Mebane has an unusual peak at 3:00 pm followed by a sharp drop at 4:00 pm before
returning peak conditions at 5:00 pm(the"M" shape between 3:00 and 6:00 pm),which is attributable to the nearby
elementary school.Segment A,located between Woodlawn Road and Buckhorn Road,has a steeper increase approaching
the PM peak than the other segments due to the unusual traffic pattern east of Woodlawn Road.
33 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
36
lib
Peaking characteristics for the remainder of Segment A--as well as Segments B,C,and E--are line with expectations for a
minor arterial like US 70.
Segment D experiences an earlier peak than the other segments,which is attributable to school pick-up at the nearby
Orange Middle and High Schools along Orange High School Road.
Segment F on US 70 Business shows sustained volumes after the AM peak including elevated midday volumes which as
attributable to people entering Downtown Hillsborough in morning and for lunch.The PM peak is lower and flatter than
the other segments and is attributable to most people commuting on US 70 after work.The higher AM and PM peaks
exhibited in the middle location are typical of lower-volume rural roads with higher proportions of commute trips.
No extremes or significant imbalan� in the directional distribution of traffic were observed.
Time-of-day traffic distributions were affected by the safer-at-home directives associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.
Morning peaks were drastically reduced due to school closures and people working from home. Midday traffic increased
as a share of daily travel as people scheduled discretionary trips during off-peak hours.However,time-of day travel
appears to have returned to pre-pandemic patterns.
StreetLight data were also used to compare weekend travel patterns to typical weekdays. As expected,weekend traffic
volumes were lower, with fewer morning trips and less peaking. However,traffic on Pleasant Green Road was
surprisingly high on weekend mornings, a characteristic attributed to recreational trips to Eno River State Park and its
trail heads and river access.
34 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
37
fir►a+0
vilb
Figure 7: Percent of Daily traffic by Time-of-Day, US 70 & US 70 Bus (by Study Segments)
12%
10%
A
8%
H
6%
A
4
4%
2%
0%
vo 101 � r0, t,;.o 6pry 1�O 6�O fO)p�0�, VIO go %RO SRO �QO t"?o �qo c jo 1�0 ae �-qo��90 ti�e0
—A —8 —C D —E —F
35 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
38
e�0 -
vilb
Figure 8: Traffic Volumes by Time-of-Day, US 70 & US 70 Bus (by Study Segments)
1200
1000
800
U
_
M
600
2.1
400
200
a
tivo " V � 3�O Ivo �vo �0 �O SPO wo wo wo go ""go `�$o OQO Zo "� � gp qO� 10
—A —8 —C —.D —E —F
36 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
39
e�0 -
VIIb
Figure 9: Traffic Peaking Characteristics, US 70 (Segment A)
i
x
r
ss„
r
� t r
w J
F
a
0
4%
2%
0%
— —E of Wood lawn _W of SupperClub —W of Buckhorn — —Average
37 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
40
�►Po
Vo
ilb
Figure 10: Traffic Peaking Characteristics, US 70 (Segment B)
12%
105/0
8%
7+
6%
0
IR
4%
2%
0%
E of Frazier W of Richmond W of Efiand Cedar Grove W of Connector _ —Average
38 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
41
�►Po
Vo
ilb
Figure 11: Traffic Peaking Characteristics, US 70 (Segment C)
12%
10%
8%
L,7
1
L7F_]f
,•"0
4-
0
a
X %
2%
[1%
W of Eno R West W of Lakeshore W of Constitution — —Average
39 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
42
�►Po
Vo
IIb
�y(�/
Figure 12: Traffic Peaking Characteristics, US 70 (Segment D)
12%
10%
� w yy
1
f
8%
- 4
H
6% j k
O � �
8
4%
\
2%
0%
,apo ,�p.10 llv'o 3 p0 po Po �'o J pts $p �. p �pZ � tiQ� ,CQ\`S'` -gqo 00 '�'qo "Qo ,J Qo 'gty '901.113goISN
go
1N of Orange HS W of Miller W of Eno R East W of Lawrence W of US 70 Bus East — —Average
40 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
43
�►Po
Vo
IIb
Figure 13: Traffic Peaking Characteristics: US 70 (Segment E)
12%
105/0
r �
r �
8%
U
60.-
4—
L
? 6•^o
0
O
4%
2%
0%
W of University W of Pleasant Green W of NC 751 -- —Average
41 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
44
fir►:+0' -
Vilb
qq Figure 14: Traffic Peaking Characteristics: US 70 Bus (Segment F)
10%
9%
y
8% ►
! 1
U 6% !
M
H
5%
M
O
Q
e 4% f
3% �
r
z%
f
0%
E of Churton E of Quincy Cottage — —Average
42 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
45
�►Po
vo
ilb
Vehicle Speeds
Vehicle speeds were gathered from StreetLight at locations distributed throughout the corridor.The 2019 average and 850,
percentile speeds (mph) are shown alongside the speed limit in Table 4 and
Figure 15.Locations where the 85th percentile vehicle speed is five mph or higher than the speed limit are shown in bold.
The locations with vehicle speeds higher than the speed limit are situated in the less urban areas between Mebane and
Hillsborough, and Hillsborough and Durham.
Table 4: 2019 Speed Data and Limits
Average 85th Percentile Speed
Route Location Speed Speed Limit
US 70 E of Woodlawn 35 46 45
US 70 W of Supper Club 34 44 45
US 70 W of Buckhorn 39 49 45
US 70 E of Frazier 37 49 45
US 70 W of Richmond 41 51 45
US 70 W of Efland-Cedar Grove 36 47 45
US 70 W of Connector 43 53 55
US 70 W of Eno R West 49 59 50
US 70 W of Lakeshore 45 54 50
US 70 W of Constitution 36 46 45
US 70 W of Orange High School 34 46 45
US 70 W of Miller 34 47 45
US 70 W of Eno R East 36 48 45
US 70 W of Lawrence 39 50 45
US 70 W of US 70 Bus East 41 52 55
US 70 W of University 46 57 55
US 70 W of Pleasant Green 41 52 45
US 70 W of NC 751 43 54 45
US 70 Bus E of Churton 29 42 40
US 70 Bus E of Quincy Cottage 30 44 40
43 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
46
fir►:+0 VIIb
Figure 15: 2019 Speed Data and Statutory Limits
Legendliills6unmgl� — — —
Observed 2019 Daily Spaed Limit -
2019 Speeds Volume = — -
- 6.000 i 55 mph �\
• s 50 mph
4000 45 mph
'70+ 40 mph
60-70 0 -JS mph
M 50-60 -25 mph7a,;
40-50 Speed Limit
i30.40
M 20.30 Average Speed tt
r0.2fl
85t'Percentile Speed
44 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
47
fir►e�+�
Vhb
Truck Volumes 1 Freight Movement
Data is divided into medium trucks,which have two or more axles but no towed trailer, and heavy trucks,which are
trucks towing separate trailer units.2019 average daily traffic data for Monday-Thursday was analyzed using
StreetLight data,which were validated against available counts. Truck percentages at multiple locations throughout the
corridor are summarized in Table 5.
Table 5: 2019 Truck Percentages
Route Location Heavy Medium All Trucks
US 70 E of Woodlawn 0.6% 2.3% 2.9%
US 70 W of Supper Club 0.8% 2.4% 3.2%
US 70 W of Buckhorn 1.2% 3.2% 4.4%
US 70 E of Frazier 1.7% 5.6% 7.4%
US 70 W of Richmond 1.8% 5.0% 6.8%
US 70 W of Efland-Cedar Grove 1.5% 3.9% 5.4%
US 70 W of Connector 1.1% 3.3% 4.4%
US 70 W of Eno R West 3.1% 2.9% 6.0%
US 70 W of Lakeshore 3.3% 3.2% 6.5%
US 70 W of Constitution 2.9% 2.9% 5.8%
US 70 W of Orange High School 2.2% 2.7% 4.9%
US 70 W of Miller 2.3% 2.7% 5.1%
US 70 W of Eno R East 2.4% 3.3% 5.7%
US 70 W of Lawrence 2.5% 3.4% 5.9%
US 70 W of US 70 Bus East 2.7% 3.6% 6.3%
US 70 W of University 2.2% 4.0% 6.3%
US 70 W of Pleasant Green 2.1% 3.9% 6.0%
US 70 W of NC 751 0.7% 3.4% 4.1%
US 70 Bus E of Churton 0.3% 1.5% 1.7%
US 70 Bus E of Quincy Cottage 0.5% 2.9% 3.4%
These truck percentages are in the expected range for a Minor Arterial like US 70,given surrounding land uses and
connections.The higher share of truck traffic(especially heavy trucks)in Segment C can be explained by the fact that US
45 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
48
lib
70 is the only viable route for trucks using NC 86 and NC 57 to serve Danville,Yanceyville,Rougemont,Roxboro,and
other areas to the north of Hillsborough.The lower truck percentages on US 70 Business are also what would be expected
entering Downtown Hillsborough.Truck data from traffic count*,,,Wld StreetLight were used to calculate intersection
.
levels-of-service during peak periods,when trucks typically o se a smaller share of total traffic.
Ga�
a�
ttccrtr' a°aG
aG
aG
aG
aG
a�
aG
aG
aG
aG
aG
'•' aG
46 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
49
lib
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
1.3.2.2 Intersection Turning Movement Counts
Traffic counts were collected at 11 intersections on Tuesday,September 20th,2022,with schools in session.Sixteen-hour
traffic counts were collected at the following nine intersections along US 70:
➢ NC 751
➢ Pleasant Green Road(SR 1567)/Mt.Hermon Church Road(SR 1713)
➢ Lawrence Road(SR 1561/SR 1709)
➢ St.Mary's Road(SR 1002)
➢ NC 86/US 70 Bus/Churton St
➢ US 70 Bus Revere Road Faucette Mill SR 1328
➢ Mattress Factory Road(SR 1402)
➢ NC 119 Fifth Street
➢ Third Street(SR 1962)
24-hour traffic counts were collected at the following two intersections along US 70:
➢ Orange High School Road (SR 1588)
➢ Buckhorn Road(SR 1114)
The peak hour volumes from the traffic counts are shown in Section 1.4-Traffic Operations and Quality of Service as part
of the volumes used in the Synchro analysis (Figure 20)
47 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
50
lib
1.3.3 Pedestrian and Bicycle Trips
Pedestrian counts were collected for this study at the intersections listed above. These counts revealed a total of 192
pedestrians crossing the corridor during the count periods.A total of 131 pedestrians were observed in Mebane at Third
Street(100)and Fifth Street(31).In the Hillsborough segment of the corridor,49 pedestrians were observed at Faucette
Mill Road(30),NC 86(11),St.Mary's Road(7),and Orange High School Road(1).
Bicycle counts collected for this study revealed a total of 99 cyclists at nine intersections.Of these,75 traveled on roads
and 24 used sidewalks.Over 40%of the cyclists (46)were observed on the eastern portion of the corridor near Pleasant
Green Road(22)and NC 751 (24).All 22 cyclists at the Pleasant Green Road intersection were using the road,and half(11)
were traveling on US 70 through the intersection.Two cyclists were turning onto or off US 70,and nine were traveling
across US 70 between Pleasant Green Road and Mt.Hermon Church Road.
At NC 751,88%(21)of cyclists were using the road.Eight cyclists were traveling on US 70 through the intersection,and
six were turning onto or off US 70.The seven remaining cyclists on the road were observed along the old road alignment
between NC 751 and Old NC 10.Five used this pavement section to turn right on NC 751,and the remaining two crossed
NC 751 to continue eastbound on US 70 towards Durham.Although the pavement section ends without connecting to
Old NC 10,a well-traversed path or maintained strip of grass can be seen,suggesting cyclists may be using this old
alignment to avoid the section of US 70 between NC 751 and Old NC 10.
Due to large traffic volumes,high travel speeds, and limited accommodations,most cyclists who utilize this corridor are
likely experienced and more comfortable operating alongside vehicular traffic.For example,cycling clubs and groups
organizing rides throughout the week in the corridor's vicinity are generally experienced and used to the conditions.
Most cyclists are generally less experienced, and therefore,choose to avoid riding along this corridor(see Figure 16).
48 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
51
lib
Figure 16: Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations
- - r
57 -
Mebane
�o
-F
r I `Hillsborough
\ l
ne
7jlyAueharn
1 I
0 0.6 1.2 Mlles I ]51
Legend
_ US 70 Corridor Study Buffer Railroad Track Existing Bike Lane Urban
Municipal Boundary Existing Shared Use Path NC Bike Route System
County
County Boundary Existing Sidewalk
49 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
52
lib
1.3.4 Transit Service
The US 70 study area is served by several public transportation providers and regional transportation authorities that
accommodate regional and local transit trips through Alamance County,Orange County,Durham County and within
municipalities.Local and regional transportation systems operate a variety of services including demand response
services,local fixed route bus and express bus routes.Figure 17 shows the study area's existing local fixed bus routes,
express bus routes,and park-and-ride lots.
Figure 17: Transit Routes in Corridor
t���illao
57 i
JiI a1
i
1,1 is
alb -
119 1,6
r-. I
�• '—Plucham
r
y
i 1�1
0 0.6 12 Mlles I X51
1
Legend
US 70 Corridor Study Buffer • Go Triangle Transit Stops • PART Transit Stops —Go Durham Transit Routes
—_J County Boundary -•••- Go Triangle Transit Routes —PART Transit Routes
Municipal Boundary Hillsbarough Circulator • Co Durham Transit Stops
50 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
53
lib
Piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation (PART)
The Piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation(PART)provides regional planning and coordination services for
the Piedmont Triad and operates the Piedmont Triad regional public transportation system that overlaps with US 70
corridor study.PART's regional programs include the following transit services:
➢ Regional transit system(PART Express)
➢ Regional ridesharing and vanpool program
The PART Express system provides a regional bus service connecting across Alamance County and Orange County and
connecting to other local and regional transit providers.The PART Express Route 4("Alamance Burlington Express")is a
peak-only service that operates every 20-40 minutes between Greensboro and Chapel Hill,with stops along I-40 in
Burlington,Graham and Mebane.PART Express Route 4 does not operate during the evening or on weekends.A one-
way fare on PART Express is currently listed at$2.50(*$1.25 for a discounted fare),with UMO smartcard and mobile app
electronic fare payment options available.
PART Routes
GTA Routes
Greensboro
Depot
PT1ArF �- Mebane Cone a`
2 as �� Sti< r °(?
�� Lc1 J Ttansferto e Health rt
ie Link Routes I Park&Ride
.PART—tes& Q C7a -
Airwrt shuttle
a r
Cotyle Greensboro 10,® W �
m .Airpel[❑r
Transportation Alamance Graham Alamance transfer cn ;
GoTNen e96%
Center Regional Park$t Ride Community � u«,sleaa D.
Park 8t Ride College
7 Franklin St
LEGEND
t� BUS STOP A4 ern ethy Hali
SEE SCHEDULE Chape a
– Phis bore Or
BUSSTOP Hill .'
8 Q UNC
PARK&RIDE LOT Hospitals
HOSPITAL/MED CENTER M'. rr41t C�Tryseand
CHTZ.. - 9
Ambulatory Care Center
51 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
54
lib
GoTriangle
GoTriangle provides regional transit
services between Wake,Durham,
Orange,and Alamance Counties.In
addition to regional bus operations, Co-® !Va a
GoTriangle provides other commuter nHYKn vugh
resources for the Raleigh-Durham- prj w+.."
Chapel Hill area,including paratransit1�
services,ridem �,.�.Hatching and vanpools, » N13 ar:
R 0-n.'[w��4nW
and an emergency ride home program.
The following two GoTriangle routes
overlap with US 70 study area:
uo---, ,----,
Route 420-Provides weekday peak r ,�
k
, D pwrraana
period express service hourly between
Hillsborough and Chapel Hill.The
GoTriangle Short Range Transit Plan r-m-c—"o-
(SRTP)(2018)proposed moving the
route to 1-40 between Chapel Hill and
Hillsborough(instead of NC-86)and to
use Churton Street instead of NC 86 a"`
ChapN NJ71 TnMit "6SPRACS 8
and US 70 in Hillsborough to improve „®
on time performance and provide more
direct service.
Orange-Durham Express(ODX) -Provides weekday rush hour express service hourly between Efland,Mebane,
Hillsborough,DukeNA Hospitals, and downtown Durham.The GoTriangle SRTP(2018)proposed increasing the
frequency of the route to every 30 minutes and streamlining the service between Mebane Cone Park&Ride,the Durham
Tech Orange County Campus, and Durham.ODX route does not operates during the evening or on weekends.
The GoTriangle transit fare is typically$2.25 for regional routes and$3.00 per one way trip on Express routes(with
discount fares also available);the agency is temporarily operating a fare-free format until June 2023.
52 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
55
lib
Orange County Public Transportation (OPT)
Orange County Public Transportation(OPT)is Orange County's transportation agency responsible for providing
transportation services to residents of Orange County,the Town of Hillsborough,Efland and a part of the City of Mebane.
OPT provides community transportation including demand response and circulator bus service,with the following
circulators in service:
➢ Hillsborough Circulator:A fare-free route connecting major destinations throughout Hillsborough.The
Connector provides hourly service Monday-Friday between 8 PM and 5 PM. The Hillsborough Circulator is a
fare-free service.
➢ Orange-Alamance Connector:Connects major destinations in Hillsborough,Efland, and Mebane.The route
operates hourly Monday-Friday between 10 AM and 3 PM.
➢ Orange-Chapel Hill Midday Connector(OCH):Connects major destinations in Hillsborough,Chapel Hill,and
Cedar Grove.The OCH runs hourly Monday-Friday between 9:45 AM. and 3:50 PM.
The fare to ride the Orange-Alamance Connector and the Orange-Chapel Hill Connector is$2(one way)for the general
public,$1 for children 6-12,and free to seniors 60+,children under the age of 6,and persons with disabilities.Orange
County Transportation has recently shifted to cashless fare collection and accepts UMO smartcard and mobile app for
fare payments.
GoDurham
GoDurham is the Durham County public transportation agency. GoDurham operates a variety of fixed bus routes that are
generally outside of the US 70 corridor study area;these routes interconnect with other transit providers in the region
including PART,Orange County Transportation, and GoTriangle.
As part of public transportation services available in Durham County,Durham County ACCESS provides transportation
to Durham County residents who meet certain criteria(including Durham County residents who are disabled,seniors
60+,transportation disadvantaged,or live in rural areas of Durham County).Applications are required to ride Durham
County ACCESS.Durham County ACCESS also provides trips for activities and destinations related to:
• Work and Work-Related Training
• Nutritional and Medical Appointments
• Shopping and Personal Needs Regardless of Age(based on factors including distance from the GoDurham fixed-
route bus service)
53 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
56
lib
Alamance County Transportation Authority(ACTA)
The Alamance County Transportation Authority(ACTA)provides transportation for the elderly, disabled,and general
public in Alamance County.ACTA uses ADA-accessible vans and buses to assist individuals with special needs.All
transportation services are available Monday-Friday from 5:00 AM-5:30 PM and must be scheduled by 11 AM on the
previous working day.ACTA provides transportation for general purpose trips,medical trips,and almost any non-
emergency trip destination.In addition,special programs and pricing are available to qualified riders based on eligibility
requirements.
ACTA fares are$5.00 for a one-way trip/or$10 for a round trip. Starting on March 24,2020 and through the end of
January 2022,ACTA has been waiving the fare collection.
Planned Transit Improvements Based on Prior Plans
The Orange County Transit Plan(2017)was developed by representatives from
Orange County,the Towns of Hillsborough,Chapel Hill,and Carrboro,the done
University of North Carolina(UNC), and GoTriangle to improve transit options
throughout Orange County and strengthen regional transit connections.The plan
examines ways to improve the transit network through enhanced bus service and
facilities.The Orange County Transit Plan has several goals,including improving
overall mobility and transportation options while providing geographic equity
and positive impacts on air quality.
Relevant recommendations include:
➢ New Hillsborough Train Station for intercity(Amtrak)service =_
➢ New commuter express service between Mebane,Hillsborough,and ?\rte
Durham(implemented) -- - —
➢ Improvements to Hillsborough bus stops
➢ Additional deviated fixed-route transit service
➢ Hillsborough transfer center to connect Orange Public Transportation and GoTriangle
54 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
57
lib
1.4 Traffic Operations and Quality of Service
There are a variety of ways to measure the performance of a transportation facility.Transportation professionals typically
rely on guidance from the Highway Capacity Manual,which describes performance from the traveler point of view that is
designed to be useful to roadway operators,decisions makers, and member of the community.Individuals may travel
along US 70 via personal vehicle,walking,bicycling,or via transit,each of which can be quantitatively measured using
standard criteria such as delay, average speed,percent time spent following,or other measures.The dominant form of
transportation currently along US 70 is by automobile.As a result,this section covers traffic operations along the corridor
on a corridor basis(i.e.distinguishable segments with common roadway characteristics),as well as by individual
intersections.Given the low volume of pedestrian and bicycle trips,and the lack of dedicated facilities,providing a
meaningful assessment of bicycle level-of-service is difficult;however, deficiencies and opportunities can be identified.
The conventional concept of traffic,level-of-service(LOS) can be summarized—at least qualitatively—in Figure 18.More
detailed, qualitative tables are presented in subsequent sections.Generally,LOS D is acceptable in most rural and
suburban situations.In some highly urbanized settings,or where there are unacceptable environmental/community
impacts,excessive costs, or other policy or planning objectives,LOS E can be appropriate.
Figure 18: Level of Service Illustration
QUALITY OF TRAFFIC FLOW DECREASES
Considered an acceptable LOS
LOS A LOS •S C LOS ! LOSE LOS
• Light traffic Slightly . Approaching • Speeds • Congestion . Road at
increased moderate reduced! capacity
• Free flow irregular
speeds traffic levels congestion . Lane traffic flow . Gridlock
• Still free flow levels changes with
speeds . Speeds near restricted frequent
free flow due to traffic stops
55 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
58
lib
1.4.1 Corridor-Level
For corridor-level capacity analysis using Highway Capacity Software Plus(HCS7),sections in four of the segments were
assessed for LOS in the AM and PM peak hours.These four sections were treated as two-lane highways which matches
most of the corridor.This classification applies to intercity routes connecting major traffic generators and serving
commuters who expect to travel at relatively high speeds,with few or no traffic signals.For these segments,directional
analysis was required to capture the effects of opposing traffic and passing restrictions.
Segmental corridor analyses were conducted using the Highway Capacity Software Plus(HCS7)software package.
Segmental corridor LOS results reflect daily operations;however,peak-hour parameters are considered.To analyze
segments,various parameters are accounted for,including daily volume,lane width, shoulder width,peak hour
directional split,terrain type,and truck percentages.Free flow speed for each of the sections was collected from
StreetLight.The LOS analysis integrated data from the traffic counts collected in Fall 2022.Figure 19 graphically
represents the worst case(AM or PM peak)directional LOS for the corridor.
Figure 19: Corridor Level of Service Summary for US 70
Qb 4b
4b
m b
a a¢ o�
�' Lr Us 70 BUS
Signalized Inteesection
cr �
LOS•■A-C ■D ■E-F r c*
'Worst case from ANE and PM p-,aks
56 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
59
lib
Table 6 describes LOS criteria relating to average travel speed(ATS) and percent time-spent following(PTSF)for Class I
facilities.PTSF can have a significant impact on LOS when there are few opportunities to pass slower-moving vehicles,
typically because of sight-distance limitations.
Table 6: Level of Service Description for Two-Lane Highways
Level of Class I Highways
Service ATS (mph) PTSF(%)
A >55 <=35%
B >50-55 35%-50%
C >45-50 50%-65%
D >40-45 65%-80%
E <=40 >80%
F Flow rate exceeds Flow rate exceeds
segment capacity segment capacity
Table 7 summarizes the results of HCS capacity analysis by segment and direction for the AM and PM peak periods.In
general,LOS is slightly lower in the AM peak due to a combination of higher volumes and more pronounced
directionality.
The sections in Segments A,B,C, and D operate at an acceptable LOS in both directions during both peak hours.The
section from US 70 Business to Pleasant Green Road in Segment E operates at an acceptable LOS in both directions during
the PM peak hour and in the eastbound direction during the AM peak hour.This section operates at LOS E in the
westbound direction dulrylrryling4 cptchCpe AM peak hour.
¢�I4RI4RI4��R�414�144144k4�a�..
57 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
60
fir►Po
vo
ilb
Table 7: Corridor Level of Service Summary for US 70 Using Two-Lane Highways Analysis
Segment AM Peak PM Peak
Segment Segment Location Length
p
Segment ATS(mph) PTSF Segment ATS(mph) PTSF
(miLOS N LOS N
A Supper Club Rd to Mace Rd(EB/WB) 1.7 C/B 43.6/44.4 62.4/48.7 B/C 44.6/43.4 46.6/64.1
B Buckhorn Rd to Efland-Cedar Grove Rd(EB/WB) 3.9 B/A 49.3/50.4 47.9/31.8 AIB 50.2/49.5 34.7/46.0
C East of US 70 Connector to Hillsborough Border(EB/WB) 1.4 DIB 45.6/48.4 67.7/44.6 C/D 47.4/46.2 56.1 /65.1
E US 70 Bus to Pleasant Green Rd(EB/WB) 2.2 B/E 50.5/47.4 46.3/72.4 DIB 47.6/50.4 69.7/46.2
Suburban/urban roadways with more frequent traffic signals require arterial analysis to account for intersection-related
delays. An arterial LOS analysis in Synchro using HCM 2000 methodology was completed for sections in Mebane and
Hillsborough due to the number and spacing of signalized intersections through both municipalities and their transition
areas.2019 Free Flow Speeds from StreetLight were utilized, and Table 8 shows the LOS criteria based on travel speeds.
The average speed and corresponding LOS for both sections are shown in Table 9.
Table 8: Level of Service Description for Urban Streets (HCM2000)
Urban Free-Flow Travel Speed Threshold lower limit by Level of Service, mi/h
Street Class Speed, mi/h A B C D E
55 >42 >34 >27 >21 >16
1 50 42 34 27 21 16
45 42 34 27 21 16
45 35 28 22 17 13
11 40 35 28 22 17 13
35 35 28 22 17 13
111 35 30 24 18 14 10
30 30 24 18 14 10
35 25 19 13 9 7
IV 30 25 19 13 9 7
25 25 19 13 9 7
58 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
61
fir►a+0 -
V11b
Table 9: Corridor Level of Service Summary for US 70 in Segment A(Mebane) and Segments C-D (Hillsborough)
AM Peak PM Peak
Segment Town Segment Location Arterial
g g Class Segment
nt ATS(mph) Segment LOS ATS(mph)
A Mebane 3rd St to 5th St(EB 1 WB) IV I III DID 12.1 116.4 D 1 D 12.0115.7
C-D Hillsborough Faucette Hill Rd to Palmers Grove Rd(EB 1 WB) 11 11 BIB 31.7136.3 B 1 C 34.1 133.3
The HCS methodology for estimating LOS for travel by bicycle(BLOS)is an empirically derived procedure that assesses a
facility's suitability for bicycle travel using a specified set of roadway characteristics,including traffic volume and speed;
heavy vehicle percentage;pavement condition;access points on right side;presence of bicycle lane;and bicycle lane,
shoulder,and outside travel lane widths.Table 10 summarizes the BLOS for each segment by direction and peak period.
Note that BLOS for individual intersections has not been calculated.
In its current state, this corridor is generally not well-suited for bicycle travel. Every section analyzed operates at LOS E or
LOS F in both directions during both peak hours The most important contributing factors appear to be traffic volumes
and speeds;lack of bicycle lanes;limited width of shoulders and outside travel lanes;limited sight distance, and density
of access points.
Table 10: Corridor Segment Bicycle LOS Summary for US 70
Segment AM Peak PM Peak
Segment Segment Location Length
(miles) Segment BLOS Segment BLOS
BLOS Score BLOS Score
A Supper Club Rd to Mace Rd(EB I WB) 1.7 F/F 5.61 /5.59 E/E 5.29/5.41
B Buckhorn Rd to Efland-Cedar Grove Rd(EB I WB) 3.9 F I E 5.58/4.56 E 1 E 5.29/5.30
C East of US 70 Connector to Hillsborough Border(EB/WB) 1.4 F I F 6.03/6.15 F 1 F 5.54/5.71
E US 70 Bus to Pleasant Green Rd(EB/WB) 2.2 F 1 F 5.85/6.07 F 1 F 6.30/5.56
59 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
62
lib
1.4.2 Intersections
Peak hour LOS measures the adequacy of the intersection geometrics and traffic controls of a particular intersection or
approach for the given turning volumes.LOS ranges from A through F,based on the average control delay experienced
by vehicles traveling through the intersection during the peak hour. Control delay represents the portion of total delay
attributed to traffic control devices(e.g.,signals or stop signs).The engineering profession generally accepts LOS D as an
acceptable operating condition for signalized intersections in urban areas and LOS C for rural areas.
At unsignalized intersections,LOS E is generally considered acceptable only if the side street encounters delay.
Nevertheless,side streets sometimes function at LOS F during peak traffic periods;however,the traffic volumes often do
not warrant a traffic signal to assist side street traffic. Table 11 provides a general description of various LOS categories
and delay ranges.
Table 11: Level of Service Description for Intersections
Level of Service Description Signalized Unsignalized
A Little or no delay <= 10 sec. <= 10 sec.
B Short traffic delay 10-20 sec. 10-15 sec.
C Average traffic delay 20-35 sec. 15-25 sec.
D Long traffic delay 35-55 sec. 25-35 sec.
E Very long traffic delay 55-80 sec. 35-50 sec.
F Unacceptable delay >80 sec. > 50 sec.
Level of Service Analysis
Intersection LOS analyses were performed for the typical weekday AM and PM peak hours using Synchro/SimTraffic
Professional Version 11. The Existing(2022)scenario analysis utilized the existing signal plans from the NCDOT.The
intersection cycle lengths were set per the minimum cycle lengths in the NCDOT Capacity Analysis Guidelines.Peak
hour volumes used in the analysis are from the traffic counts as well as StreetLight,the 5f Street Improvement Project,
and 2019 turning movement counts.The volumes and source for each intersection are shown in Figure 20.A summary of
the findings for the Existing(2022)scenario level of service analysis can be found in Table 9,and the full Synchro/HCS
60 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
63
lib
output can be found in Appendix II.Figure 21 graphically depicts the worst case(AM or PM peak)LOS for signalized
intersections and unsignalized approaches, as well as identifying locations with potential for queuing problems.
5b.
Figure 20: Peak Hour Turning Movements at Priority Intersections
Third Street Fourth Street Fifth Street
(12) (51) (21) '` B (7) 2 (18) (15) (199) (27) 38 (98)
11 47 18 238 (368) -^ 232 (419) 16 246 40 159 (249) 217 (267)
(` Y 12 (31) Y 8 (12) ') I � 105 (113) Y 249 (146) U570 LEGEND
(9) 8 J '} f r (10) 5 J , (14) 12 J , (' (' — Existing Roadway
(254) 333 , 109 33 41 (373) 374 — 21 9 12 (146) 204 — 89 156 67 (167) 212 T 712 156 -- Future Roadway
(87) 94 -y (69) (36) (24) (19) 9 (27) (20) (21) (112) 162 (110)(308)(123) (134) 348 (331) (154) Existing Stop Controlled Approach
Existing Signalized Intersection
Third Street Fourth Street Fifth Street SR 1914 Turning Movement
{aurkhorn Road) XX AM Peak Hour Turning Movement
1 2 3 4 (XX) PM Peak Hour Turning Movement
SR 1004 Faucette Mill SR 15
8b
ffland-Cedar Grove Road Road NC fld {orange HiSchool Rd)
ro
(3) 038J (40) 37 (75) (26) (24) (27) L 14 (24) (206)(234)(155) L 258 (300) {224} (156) 1L(534)
2022 TMC
15 328 133 — 100 (191) 30 57 30 — 438 (531) 222 457 213 — 274 (374) 224 197 —3
It 71 (57) ) I L ItY 110 (76) J ` U5 7C 2019 TMC
(18) 9 1 ') t (23} 1 5
J f /' (1 B5) 283 J '� / (88) 204 1
(114) 206 — 42 89 6 (366) 539 — 61 17 64 (273) 328 — 47 283 90 (425) 454 —
(51) 113 (110)(284) (11) {159) 100 1 (116) (35) (68) (48) 45 (80) (366)(102} Streetlight 2019 TMC
SR iQQ4 U5 7Q Bus NC 86
(IdWrd-Cedar Grove Road) (Revere Road) N.Churton Street
S 6 7 8 5th St Improvement Project 2022 TMC
SR 117112 SR 1561 SR 1552 SR 1567
St.Ma s R (Lawrence Rd) Palmers Grove Rd Pleasant Green Rd
(3) (21) (11J
(133) (81) (25) 12 (21) (21) (93) (25) 16 (58) 9 1fl 19 L 8 (3) (51) (19) (66) 54 (110)
135 73 32 413 (689) 19 193 115 — 317 (640) J ) �- t 800 (290) 48 59 131 — 445 (853) —257 (586)
us7D
.7 j �.. Y 57 (46) J L Y 3 (7) ® r 0 (4) (. Y 76 (77) 164 (122) U57o
(106) 98 '� f j (10) 6 1 '} 1 >r (I go) 98 J (62) 30 '� 1 f 1 11 gns
(345) 649 9 71 75 (357) 527 -- 76 49 0 (715) 273 '� r (526) 809— 18 14 71 (316) 388 84 72
(7) 2 (15) (66) (51) (151) 178 'v (156)(155) (7) (31) 5 12 25 5 (18) 51 (31) (50) (53) (104) 265 Z (262) (167)
(29) (27) (3)
SR 1002 —-SR 1561 - SR 1713
St.Ma s Rd Lawrence Rd US 70 Bus (Mt.Herman Church Rd) INC 7S1
9 10 11 12 13
61 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
64
lib
All twelve signalized intersections analyzed operate acceptable overall LOS during peak hours,and conditions are
generally similar overall between both peak hours.US 70 generally experiences a better LOS than the cross streets at each
intersection.Most side streets operate at an acceptable LOS during both peak hours except for a few intersections between
Durham and Hillsborough.Mt.Herman Church Road and Pleasant Green Road operate at LOS F during both peak hours.
At Lawrence Road,the northbound approach operates at LOS E during the AM peak,and the southbound approach
operates at LOSE E during the PM peak hour. AW
Between the Mt.Herman Church Road/Pleasant Green Road and Lawrence Road intersections is the unsignalized US 70
Bus/Palmers Grove Road intersection.The NB US 70 Bus approach operates at LOS F during both peak hours(with worse
delay in the PM), and the SB Palmers Grove Road approach operates at the LOS D during the AM peak hour and LOS E
during the PM peak hour.These LOS deficiencies are due mainly to vehicles waiting to turn onto US 70,although
crossing and right-turning vehicles contribute. Combined with heavy peak-hour traffic,high speeds and some visibility
constraints create long delays as drivers wait for adequate gaps in traffic.
Due to their proximity to at-grade rail crossings,several signals in Mebane(Moore Street,3rd Street,4th Street,and 5th
Street)require interconnection with the rail crossing signals and crossing gates to preempt normal traffic signal operation
in the presence of a train.This preemption prevents conflicting signal combinations between the relevant traffic control
devices. LOS is not calculated for preemptive operation,but such conditions obviously add delay and can create long
vehicle queues.
�h
4nhnhnhnhns
`•h+h+'
t,
t u'
u
t, u �
AH i
� f
ut "
{5
Ji i
8
62 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
65
lib
Figure 21: 2022 Intersection LOS
4b
ea b
t
41
AM `¢C 4b ek3S
G� �C
411
a4r -70e
74 T
I f
QSignalized Intersection Stop-eantroliedApproach b 4_11 Ay
A-C D E-F Patentsa l Queueing Problems
'Worst case from AM and PM peaks1
From Lawrence Road Development TIA
From NC 86+Connector Study(2019)
Queuing Analysis
ux.
LOS is not the only metric of intersection performance. The length of vehicle queues waiting to enter the intersection—
while related to delay—is not explicitly considered in calculating LOS. A separate inspection of observed/estimated
queue length is required.Long vehicle queues have the potential to create problems typically by:
➢ Exceeding available storage
➢ Preventing turning vehicles from accessing turn lanes due while stuck in a through lane queue
➢ Increasing rear-end crashes due to unexpected queues especially around curves
➢ Increasing potential for blocked intersections(gridlock),driveways,crosswalks,and railroad tracks
Several signalized intersections have potential long queueing issues:
➢ Buckhorn Road NB lane(Both peak hours)-only about 150' (-6 vehicles)from at-grade railroad crossing in PM.
63 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
66
lib
➢ Efland-Cedar Grove Road SB lane(AM peak only)
➢ NC 86(N.Churton Street)SB through/right-turn lane(AM peak hour)-may block turn lane access.
➢ NC 86(N.Churton Street)SB left-turn lane(AM peak only)—may exceed available storage.
➢ NC 86(N.Churton Street)NB through lanes(Both peak hours)
➢ US 70 WB through lane at NC 86(Both peak hours)—Significant queueing observed back to Orange High School
Road which is more severe than reflected in Synchro analysis.Through lane queueing may block access to turn
lanes that is compounding problems at the Orange High School Road intersection.
➢ US 70 WB through lane at Orange High School Road(Both peak hours)—Significant queueing also observed
during both peak hours.Right-turning vehicles may be stuck queueing in through lane impacting drop-off/pick-
up at the middle school and high school.School-bound vehicles were also observed cutting through a church
parking lot.
➢ US 70 WB through lane at St. Mary's Road(PM peak only)-may block turn lane access and increase potential for
rear-end crashes around curve.
➢ US 70 EB through/right-turn lane at St.Mary's Road(AM peak only)—may block turn lane access and increase
potential for rear-end crashes around curve.
➢ Lawrence Road NB and SB lanes (Both peak hours)
➢ US 70 WB through/right-turn lane at Lawrence Road(PM peak only)-may block turn lane access.
➢ US 70 EB through/right-turn lane at Lawrence Road(AM peak only)-may block turn lane access.
➢ US 70 WB through turn lane at Lawrence Road(PM peak only)—may block turn lane access.
➢ Mt. Hermon Church Road/Pleasant Green Road NB and SB approaches(Both peak hours)
➢ US 70 EB through lane at Mt.Hermon Church Road/Pleasant Green Road(AM peak only)—may block turn lane
access and increase potential for rear-end crashes around curve.
➢ NC 751 NB left-turn lane(PM peak only) may exceed available storage.
64 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
67
lib
Table 12: Intersection LOS and Dela
Traffir Existingi2U2gl Trak E)dstingQOZ2)
ID Intersection and Approach Control AM PM ID Intersection and ApproachTraffic
AM PM
3°a St&US 70(Center St) 5-15.6 B-13.8 Ctrange High School Rd&U S 70 8-16A C-20.6
Eastbound 8-17.1 &11.4 Eastbrnuui A-9.8 A$.8
8 ...- --- - ---- -- St ed
1 Westbotutd Signalised 8-11.9 8-17.5 Westbound --C-21.3 -C-217.0
Northbound 8-11.7 8-15.7 Smithbound C-20.9 C-26.1.
5outhbotutd 0-22.5 C-267 SLAUrys Rd&US 70 C-21.7 C-25.8
4'h St&US 70(Center St) A-6.1 A-8.2 Eastbound 8-19.7 B-10.0
? Eastbound Signalized A-5.7 A3.7 9 Westbound Signah-d 8-15? C-28.0
Westbotuid A-5.5 A-9.4 Northbound C-283 C•282
Northbound 1314,4 8-14.9 Sottbbotutd D,36.9 D-4.7-7
5"St&US 70(Center St) B-13.9 8-15.5 Lawrence Rd&US 70 D-38.0 D-37A
Eastbound - - A4.1 A-8.0 Ea_stbottnd D36.3 C--1 .4
3 Westbound - - Signalized 8-16.3 8-16.2 10 Westbonui Signalized B-16.0 D-36.0
Nortltbnund AA-8 B-115 Northbound - E-69.4 D-52.7
Southbound C-28.1 C-27.6 Sm2hbaa nd D-52.5 &61-,
Buckhom Rd&US 70 r1-36.9 626.7 US 7013uslfthneas Grove Ch Rd&U5 70 - -
4 Eastbound 5ignahzed D-39.4 D-35.4 11 Northbound Unsignalized F-83.4 F-225.8
Westbound C-23.2 8-14.9 I Southbound D-31.8 E- TS
Northbound E-55.5 C-31.3 Mt Herntan Ch Rdl1'leasant Gr Rd&U5 70 0-48.5 D-41.3
Etland-CedarGrove Rd&t US 70 C-20.5 8-15.0 Eastbuand D-44 a C-262
Eastbound C-24.0 _ &14.5 12 Westb_cnmd Sigrolized C?S.5 D-34.7
a' Westbound Signalized 8.1&0 8.16.8 Northbotutd F-1022 F-7i?
Northbuand 131 RD 8.16-4 I Sotttltbotutd F-1,9.1,
Southbound C-2.1.5 A-9,5 NC 751&US 70 B-13.0 8-19,7
Revere RdlFaucette Mill Rd&US 70 A-7.7 A-10.0 Eastbound B-15.7" --C.-2v k
Sigivdized
Eastbottnd - - A-6A A-7.1 13 Westbound - A=7.1 B-13.8
6 Westbound Signalized A-6.0 A44 Northbcnutd 8-17.8 I C-25.5
Northbound 8-11.5 &16.9
Southbound 5-147 8-15.0
NC 86 tS Churton SO&US 70 C-30.6 C-30.0
Eastbouul C-29,6 C-28.4
7 Westbotntd Signalized C-26.9 C-28.6
Northbound D-35.6 D-36.9
Smttlnbouui C-31.7 C-26.7
65 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
68
lib
1.5 Safety
Corridor Overview
The Study Team analyzed reported crashes between August 2017 through July 2022 along US 70 from SR 1965(Moore
Street)in Alamance County to 25'north of US 70 Business/SR 1562(Palmers Grove Church Road)in Orange County to
provide an overview of how the corridor is performing and identify potential crash patterns or hotspots.The total crash
rate was higher on US 70 than the corresponding critical crash rate determined by comparing the corridor with similar
facilities in North Carolina(Table 13A-Left). Crash rates along US 70 also exceeded the respective critical rates for non-
fatal injury,night(dark),and run-off road crashes.The crash rates for fatal crashes and crashes occurring under wet
conditions did not exceed their respective critical crash rates. Crashes reported during the same period along US 70
Business from SR 1009(S Churton Street) to NC 751 were analyzed as well.Similarly,the total,non-fatal injury,night
(dark), and run-off road crashes exceeded their respective critical rates,and the fatal and wet crash rates did not(Table
13B-Right).
Table IRA: US 70 Corridor Crash Rates Table 13B: US 70 BusinessCrash Rates
US 70 Crashes Per Statewide Critical Seg.A Crashes Per 'Statewide Critical
Rate Crashes 100 MVM Rate' Rate 2 Rale gashes 100 MVM Rate' Rate 2
Total 828 330.18 263.25 280.30 Total 165 34011 263.25 302.60
Fatal 4 1.60 1.32 2.71 Fatal 0 0.00 1.32 5.06
Nan-Fatal 239 9531 73.07 82.15 Non-Fatal 42 86.57 73.07 0420
Night 210 83 74 57.83 65.93 Night 42 86.57 57.83 7682
wet 115 45.86 43.32 50.36 Wet 22 45.35 43.32 59.90
Run-Off Road 2.10 9571 45.46 52 66 Run-Off Road 25 51.53 45.46 62.11
12017-2021 statewide crash rate for 2-lane undivided urban US Routes
2Based on the statewide crash rate (95%level of confidence)
There were 828 recorded crashes in the study corridor during the analysis period.Rear-end collisions accounted for 366
crashes(44%of total crashes).These crashes occurred frequently throughout multiple sections of the study area especially
near isolated intersections and areas with transitions between rural and urban conditions.The frequency of rear-end
crashes could be attributable to multiple interrelated causes including sections with curves,numerous driveways and
66 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
69
lib
intersections including unexpected or isolated traffic signals,high travel speeds,limited turn lanes,rolling terrain,and
transitions between rural and urban conditions.
qa
The second most common crash type was frontal impact crashes,which includes angle,left-turn,and right-turn crashes
and accounted for 189 of the total crashes(23%).Of these, angle crashes were the most prominent with 83 crashes(10%of
total crashes).Left-turn and right-turn crashes accounted for about 12%and 1%of the total crashes,respectively.These
crashes are concentrated in the urban portions of the corridor,north of Hillsborough and in Mebane,and at isolated
intersections such as in Efland.
Lane departure crashes accounted for 175 of the total crashes(21%).Of these,fixed object crashes were the most
prominent with 86 crashes(10%of total crashes).Run-off road,sideswipe(opposite direction),and head-on crashes
accounted for 4%,2%,and 1%of crashes,respectively.Run-off-road crash locations and severities as well as the passing
zones are shown in Figure 22.An explanation of crash severity can be found in Table 14.
Table 14: Crash Severity Description
Severity Description
K One or more people are killed at the scene or die within 30 days of the crash due to injuries received from
the crash.
A One or more people receive incapacitating injuries that prevent the individuals from performing their normal
activities for 24 hours or longer.
B One or more people receive non-incapacitating injuries that are apparent at the scene and will not prevent
the individual from performing their normal activities for more than 24 hours.
C One or more people complain of pain or momentary unconsciousness; however, the injuries are not visible
or obvious at the scene of the crash.
0 No one is injured, and only property is damaged.
67 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
70
lib
Figure 22: Run-Off Road Crash Severities & Passing Zones
i he.
a4
I
i
Mebane - Q ° �• w G„M``O 4 q•.•o o� o
1 --� liillsburongh
19
0
'I °o 0 00° • °°� �.a
Legend
a+! i
Passing Direction Severity Railroad Track 8g
_ AI uurhan,
No Passing o p C=1 County Boundary
—Passing in One Direction • B/C _ Municipal Boundary \\
—Passing in Both Directions • A
1
• F
There were also 67 animal crashes(8%of total crashes).Segment B and Segment C had the most animal crashes with 26
and 25,respectively, and most of these were concentrated north of Hillsborough. As detailed in the 2019 report,A
Landscape Plan for Wildlife Habitat Connectivity in the Eno River and New Hope Creek Watersheds,these crashes represent not
only a danger to drivers and passengers.The crashes,along with the barrier created by the roadway itself,are a
substantial threat to critical ecosystems and the wildlife they support.The Eno River and New Hope Creek-Jordan Lake
watersheds are home to ecologically important habitats supporting a rich diversity of plant and animal species.
Development and climate change cause habitat fragmentation and loss.To survive,animal species must be able to move
within and between remaining high-priority wildlife habitats.Functional ecosystems require a connected network of
habitats and corridors for movement.In addition to sustaining diverse wildlife populations,such connections can benefit
water quality,native plants,working farms and forests,and public health and safety.
68 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
71
lib
Figure 23 indicates critical wildlife crossing locations in Segments C,D,and E of the US 70 Corridor. The Landscape Plan
identifies criteria for barrier roads and potential crossing locations,along with potential actions to preserve and enhance
connectivity within and between wildlife habitats.This information will help guide design recommendations for US 70
that will benefit both traffic safety and the environment.
Rear end and frontal impact crashes are the most common crash types.Rear end collisions make up almost half of the
crashes along the corridor which suggests drivers may not be anticipating the transitions occurring between more rural
and more urban conditions.The high proportion of rear end crashes and frontal impact crashes at isolated intersections
along the corridor point to unexpected stops in traffic as a contributing factor possibly due to increased turning volumes
and at isolated signalized intersections due to queues at red lights. Other potential contributing factors include curving
approaches,limited turn lanes,and intersection skew.,
69 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
72
fir►e�0
VIIb
Figure 23: Major Wildlife Corridors &Critical US 70 Crossing Areas
TWALS
�,- Protected areas(NCNHP 20191b)overlaid on habitat corridors
(Showing critical crossing areas along US 70 Study Corridor)
4 lose
"�I #
IL
IN-
44,
4 �
Protected Areas -
~+ •,''' PJB'
Habitat-Corridor Network
Highest Connectivity value
Higher Connechwty Value Ar
High Connectivity Value , •
Local or alternative network
4 i IFUnranked �� ry 4 ,.,w,z � f} t •
Not connected
Project Area •r .� �f
County
River
Lake
Major Road
Adapted from A Landscape Plan for Wildlife Habitat Connectivity,2619
70 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
73
lib
The corridor was further analyzed by segment with more attention paid to prominent crash locations and other areas of
concern.The following is a summary of observations and potential considerations by segment alongside figures
displaying prominent crash locations(defined as locations with$*-or or more crashes).
.MHHHHHGe.
0 oHHHHHHHHHHI"
Segment AAl
Ho F
Segment A exceeds the respective statewide average fob es except fatal crashes.This segment exceeds the
aaa Ho
critical rates for total and night crashes(Table 15).
Table 15: Segment A Crash Rates
Rate Seg.A Crashes Statewide Critical
Crashes 100 MVM Rate Rate z
Total 165 340.11 263.25 302.60
Fatal 0 0.00 1.32 5.06
Non-Fatal 42 86.57 73.07 94.29
Night 42 86.57 57.83 76.82
Wet 22 45.35 43.32 59.90
Run-Off Road 25 51.53 45.46 62.41
In Mebane,the Fifth Street intersection experienced a high percentage of rear end crashes.This is the first signalized
intersection entering Mebane from the east,and it is the first traffic signal since the isolated signal at Buckhorn Road.This
traffic signal and associated stops may surprise drivers leading to rear end and turning crashes. Figure 24 shows
prominent crash locations in and near Mebane.Also shown in Figure 24 are the at-grade railroad crossings through
Mebane.As volumes increase in this area,further protections for vehicles and pedestrians at the railroad crossings should
be considered.
71 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
74
.0Vhb
Figure 24: Prominent Crash Locations near Mebane, NC (Segment A)
+ �era w,ora sr I V�7b.
c n `� � = e BIo1Vl1 sl I o
Fourth St I g<o
NQ`119(Fifth St} Lake Dr
w uo„ 6
Woodlawn Rd 11 �`'�'Sr r:Grea'a, sr o<�i
MP 0.33 to MP 0.38 Wilha Rd 5 I
MP 038 to PM 0.44 26 e I '
uv
ai
Third St
I
McLane Athletic
. --�W-MEHin eY-_S.i� Complex arr g� I
/ I 8
I u, MP 1.75 to MP 1.80
Ashbury Blvd
r
Legend Railroad Crossover h2
Segment Crash Type Total Crashes % a E w.Ob St�� I
A � 49 / +
B 21 ? I
N �
C Angle 5 I
�D Leh-Turn
o
E Right-Turn '� c®darLn -
F Lane Departure -a— Rallroad Track I 1
� I
Animal 0 RallruadCrO551ng5 EMCPhe—clit-
Other
9N ,I I I I
72 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
75
lib
Segment B
Segment B exceeds the respective statewide crash rate for every category and the critical rate for all categories except fatal
crashes(Table 16).The total and non-fatal injury crash rates are both double the respective critical rates, and the night and
run-off road crash rates are close to doubling the respective critical rates.It has the highest crash rate of the segments for
total,wet,and run-off road crashes.
bbbbbbbbbbb4+ .aaaaaaado
Table 16: Segment B Crash Rates
Crashes Statewide Critical
Rate Crashes Per
100 MVM RateRate z
Total 171 640.92 263.25 316.80
Fatal 1 3.75 1.32 6.85
Non-Fatal 55 206.15 73.07 102.17
Night 44 164.92 57.83 83.92
Wet 23 86.21 43.32 66.16
Run-Off Road 35 131.18 45.46 68.81
12017-2021 statewide crash rate for 2-lane undivided urban US Routes
2Based on the statewide crash rate(95%level of confidence)
There are clusters of rear-end and frontal impact crashes as well as a cluster of run-off road crashes in the section with
Mace Road(SR 1384),Buckhorn Road(SR 1114),Shambley Road(SR 1309),and Frazier Rd(SR 1310).Buckhorn Road is
the only signalized intersection between Fifth Street in Mebane and Efland-Cedar Grove Road in Efland.This isolated
traffic signal could be unexpected for drivers, contributing to the frequency of rear end and frontal impact crashes.This
may also contribute to the run-off road crashes in the section if drivers are swerving to avoid rear end collisions.
Buckhorn Road may also have higher turning volumes than expected due to the access it provides to I-85 at a nearby
interchange.This group of intersections in general is surrounded by driveways which may cause the increasing turning
volumes to surprise drivers coming around the curves along both sides of the section,especially with the isolated traffic
signal at Buckhorn Road.
Multiple A-and B-injury frontal impact crashes occurred in this section.A-level injury frontal impact crashes included a
left-turn(same roadway) crash at Shambley Road and an angle crash at Frazier Road.The construction of turn lanes at
Mace Road,Shambley Road,and Frazier Road as well as the restriping of the median to a two-way left-turn lane could
73 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
76
lib
reduce the potential for crashes along this section of US 70.Improvements to signage and striping in this section to try to
increase awareness of the side streets could be considered.However,proximity of the unsignalized Mace Road and
Shambley Road intersections to the signalized Buckhorn Road intersection may limit the options for signing
improvements.The installation of flashing Signal Ahead signs in place of the existing warning signs could also be
considered to decrease the potential for rear end and frontal impact crashes at the Buckhorn Road intersection.The
replacement of the existing traffic signal with a roundabout could also be considered to help reduce vehicle speeds and
lower the potential for turning crashes.Figure 25 shows the prominent crash locations near Buckhorn Road and in Efland.
There are also at-grade railroad crossings shown in Figure 25 at the Railroad Crossover and across Buckhorn Road,south
of US 70.As this area continues to grow,further protections for vehicles and pedestrians at the railroad crossings should
be considered.Various improvements have been discussed as part of other planning efforts.
There is also a spike in rear end crashes in Efland at Efland-Cedar Grove Road(SR 1004/SR 1372)and Brookhollow Road
(SR 1324).Brookhollow Road was identified as a potentially hazardous(PH)location in 2022 by the Highway Safety
Improvement Program(HSIP)—PH#67100186.The frequency of crashes may indicate that drivers are not adjusting to
increased traffic conflicts by reducing speeds as they enter Efland.Drivers may not be expecting increased turning
volumes,as reflected in the number of frontal impact collisions at Efland-Cedar Grove Road.The next closest signalized
intersection to Efland-Cedar Grove Road along US 70 from the east is at Revere Road which is about 3.5 miles away and
from the west is at Buckhorn Road which is about 3 miles away.Drivers may not expect this isolated traffic signal,
contributing to crashes.Traffic calming measures entering Efland including restriping or installing pavement markings to
alert drivers to slow down could be considered.To decrease the potential for crashes at Efland-Cedar Grove Road
intersection,the installation of dual-indicated Signal Ahead signs including a flashing LED as well as Signal Ahead
pavement markings could be considered.The replacement of the existing traffic signal with a roundabout could also be
considered to help reduce vehicle speeds entering Efland and lower the potential for turning crashes.
Brookhollow Road is located on the downside of a vertical curve from the east which may contribute to rear end crashes
due to poor sight distance for westbound drivers.The vertical curves entering Efland as well as vehicle speeds may also
be contributing factors to the crashes in Efland.Checking the sight distance near Brookhollow Rd to see if improvements
to the existed alignment and grade could be considered.Improvements to the existing Intersection Ahead sign,such as
the addition of a Hill Blocks View sign and Supplementary Speed Limit Plaque if appropriate and permissible,could be
considered. Checking all signs to ensure appropriate retro-reflectivity and replacing worn signs as well as the installing
retro-reflective signpost panels could also be considered.
74 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
77
lib
The interchange for the I-85 Connector east of Efland may influence drivers to associate the area with conditions like an
interstate as opposed to a road entering a town.The centerline striping and allowance of passing on US 70 entering Efland
may also encourage drivers to maintain high speeds like those on a rural road with lower volumes and may not prepare
drivers to expect turning vehicles in Efland.Prohibiting passing by restriping with double yellow centerlines could be
considered.
The speed limit entering Efland transitions from 55 mph to 50 mph to 45 mph.The decreasing speed limit appears to be
the main warning to drivers of a transition to the more urban conditions in Efland,as there is not a drastic change in the
character of the surrounding area.This may not provide enough advanced notice to drivers of the upcoming conditions in
Efland.Lowering the speed limit if permissible and calling attention to the decreased speed limit with larger warning and
speed limit signs could be considered.
The School Bus Stop Ahead warning sign along westbound US 70 east of the curve entering Efland shows signs of wear
and a potential loss of retro-reflectivity.Other than this warning sign,there is no further signage delineating the bus stop
after the curve.There are no shelters,sidewalks,or crosswalks available for the students using the bus stop.The addition
of pedestrian facilities such as paths,crosswalks, and bus shelters along US 70 in Efland is recommendation if feasible.
There is also an at-grade railroad crossing across Mt.Willing Road south of US 70 shown below,which could cause
unexpected vehicle queues.
75 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
78
.OVh b
Figure 25: Crashes near Buckhorn Road and Efland-Cedar Grove Road (Segments A-C)
co Dnrtari
n
MP 2.89 to MP 2.94
r T
MP 3,49 to MP 3.54 s fe..Rn
Mace Rd
Frazier Rd
a
B
5 17 6 16 - i Eilaod Elland-Cedar Grove Rd
I-85 G3�nnector
2
..- ftRilfponU
r
o erookhollow Rd
18 EFland-Citeek=
Park 3 % —
Miles y
Buckhorn Rd
22 1Q
- �I�CryneRo—.
I
n
Legend
Segment Crash Type Tota[Crashes --_-- --
A44 o
B f i-�—�-21 _—w,_Te° aohnsf,I.n RC-:.
i CI\\I`\ll�fl-N\lam/I-
-D A"le W Ten Rtl
E
Left-Turn a
p t9u-
F _ RighS-Turn — Railroad Track
Lane Departure 0 RailroadCro mg, _
Rear End
Animal
other
Segment C
Segment C exceeds the respective statewide crash rate for every category and the critical rate for all categories except fatal
crashes (Table 17).The total crash rate is over 1.8x higher than the critical rate,and the non-fatal,night,and run-off road
crash rates are over 1.6x their respective critical rates.It has the second highest crash rate of the individual segments for
total,fatal,and run-off road crashes.
76 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
79
lib
Table 17: Segment C Crash Rates
Crashes Statewide Critical
Rate Crashes Per Rate' z
100 MVM Rate
Total 271 555.39 263.25 302.48
Fatal 2 4.10 1.32 5.05
Non-Fatal 77 157.81 73.07 94.23
Night 61 125.01 57.83 76.76
Wet 39 79.93 43.32 59.84
Run-Off Road 49 100.42 45.46 62.36
12017-2021 statewide crash rate for 2-lane undivided urban US Routes
2Based on the statewide crash rate(95%level of confidence)
The high number of rear end crashes at the West Hill Avenue intersection could be due its location after curves in both
directions.It also lacks turn lanes and is the first intersection from the west in urban conditions with increased turning
volumes relative to other nearby roads and driveways. Similarly, the relatively high number of rear end crashes at
Lakeshore Drive and Holiday Park Road(SR 1390) could be due to their location in a curve near edge of Hillsborough
with the potential for unexpected turning volumes along Lakeshore Drive due to vehicles heading into Hillsborough.
There was an A-injury crash and two B-injury crashes involving turning vehicles at Holiday Park Road and Lakeshore
Drive.
Lakeshore Drive does not have turn lanes and is in a curve the near transition from rural to conditions as vehicles enter
and exit Hillsborough which could contribute to rear end crashes.The intersection is located between two lakes with a
culvert crossing the roadway along the eastbound approach and is located at the bottom of a vertical curve.Ensuring
appropriate signage is installed to delineate the culvert crossing and checking to ensure there is not ponding or flooding
during large storms could be considered.Due to the intersection's location,the construction of turn lanes may not be
feasible;however,they could be considered if the intersection continues to see issues with rear end crashes.
There are also a few clusters of lane departure crashes in this section of the study area including a fatal crash.Multiple
factors could contribute to the lane departure crashes in this area,including roadway curvature,high travel speeds,
changing conditions,and limited shoulders.The limited shoulder and proximity of trees to the roadway in certain
segments could also decrease the potential for drivers to recover after departing the roadway.The speed limits between
77 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
80
lib
Efland and Hillsborough are 50-55 mph,which may not appropriately prepare drivers to enter an urban area.The high
speeds could contribute to the number and severity of crashes in this area.A transition in speed limit down to 35 mph
before and throughout Hillsborough could give drivers more ti to adjust to urban conditions and reduce the potential
Aram,
for crashes near the limits of Hillsborough and throughout the o Figure 26 shows the prominent crash locations in
Hillsborough.
Segment D
Segment D exceeds the critical rates for night and run-off road crashes(Table 18).There are clusters of run-off road
crashes near Market House Way/Glen Road and St.Mary's Road,possibl� . We to the location in a curve.There is also a
�G
cluster of run-road crashes near NC 86 as well as one near Lawrence Road.''
Table 18: Segment D Crash Rates
Crashes Statewide Critical
Rate Crashes Per Rate2
100 MVM Rate
Total 221 290.17 263.25 294.49
Fatal 1 1.31 1.32 4.14
Non-Fatal 65 85.34 73.07 89.84
Night 63 82.72 57.83 72.82
Wet 31 40.70 43.32 56.38
Run-Off Road 54 70.90 45.46 58.83
12017-2021 statewide crash rate for 2-lane undivided urban US Routes
zBased on the statewide crash rate (95%level of confidence)
Gwen Road(SR 1628)/Market House Way is near a transition from rural to urban conditions as vehicles enter and exit
Hillsborough.The striping along the westbound approach does not transition from a two-way left-turn lane to a left-turn
lane unlike the striping along the intersection's eastbound approach and the preceding intersection's westbound
approach.This may not provide westbound drivers with enough notice of the upcoming intersection.Restriping with left-
turn lane is recommended for consideration.In Google Street View for July 2022,there is damage to the guardrail on
along eastbound US 70 just after the intersection.This could have potentially occurred for multiple reasons including an
eastbound vehicle attempting to avoid a turning vehicle which failed to yield right of way or a vehicle losing control
78 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
81
lib
while turning left onto US 70 from Gwen Road.Continued monitoring for turning and lane departure crashes at
intersection is recommended.
North Scottswood Boulevard(SR 2300)was identified as a potentially hazardous(PH)location in 2022 by the Highway
Safety Improvement Program(HSIP)—PH#67I00177.Per the US 70 crash analysis,this intersection experienced 3 frontal
impact crashes(2 southbound left-turns and 1 eastbound left-turn)and 1 rear-end crash involving a westbound vehicle
attempting a U-turn.Slightly south of the intersection,there was one more crash that involved a westbound vehicle
attempting an improper U-turn from the right-turn lane over the median and colliding with another westbound vehicle.
Based on the US 70 crash data,this intersection would not meet the 2022 HSIP Intersection Warrants.
Figure E: Prominent Crash Locations in Hillsborough_ (Segments C-D and F)
N n Terrell Rd+raucene -- b
y
Mill Rd/Revere Rd MP 10.33 to�MP 10.39 MP 10.54 to MP 10.59 _ V
Holiday Park Rd+ Lawndale Ave MP 10.70 to MP 10,76 aJE"
Lake Share Dr -
9
MP 10,82 to MP 10.88 - oo B'Vtl
MP 687 to MP 8.92 15 10 Orange High School Rd
\
West Hill Ave 22 air R 11 5 1O Gwen Rd/Market.22 HoseP11.28 Way
sc
5 B MP 11to M5�
MP B-67 to MP 8.72 St Marys Rd
ConStltntlon �f
Way/Rainey Ave 117 16
z
= 29 ivy Dr
— ? Miller Rd
C.-ford Rd
NC 86(Churton St) 7 E, 4—,Slat".
arF
_ Mountain- iew
w�'"'"s` Hillshorough -
w arnnsr Ml
West
Hillsborough Churton St(SR 3009) -
Lawrence Rd
Legend 32 MP 2.081 to MP 2.13
Segment Crash Type Total Crashes 24
NC 86(Churton)/Elizabeth Brady Rd
A
' 21 i l
�C g
D Angle �_', 15 Meadowland Dr
Left-Tum
, Lawrence Rd
Lne
r an.Turn Railroad Track occoneechee z 10 (SR 1709) _
Lan.Departure 4 RailroadCr Ings mounta n state - = '
—Rear End Natural Ars.
Animal
;rn- "ops a1
Omer uarr 1 B.— 1 ve
79 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
82
lib
Segment E
Segment E exceeds the statewide and critical rates for total and run-off road crashes(Table 19).Most of the run-off road
crash locations are spread between Palmers Grove Road and Pleasant Green Road with clusters near Palmers Grove Road
and University Station Boulevard.The cluster near Palmers Grove include an A-injury crash.The cluster near University
Station Boulevards includes a fatal,A-injury,and multiple B&C injury crashes.
Table 19: Segment E Crash Rates
Crashes Statewide Critical
Rate Crashes Per
100 MVM RateRate 2
Total 249 320.43 263.25 294.17
Fatal 1 1.29 1.32 4.11
Non-Fatal 32 41.18 73.07 89.67
Night 42 54.05 57.83 72.66
Wet 28 36.03 43.32 56.25
Run-Off Road 48 61.77 45.46 58.69
There are a high number of run-off road crashes near Palmers Grove Road that could be related to intersection skew and
high travel speeds.The high number of rear end crashes between Linden Road and the I-85 interchange could also be due
to high vehicle speeds as well as unexpected queueing and congestion at the Pleasant Green Road intersection.The traffic
signal at Pleasant Green Road is the first signal since Lawrence Road in over three miles from the west and since NC 751
over 1.5 miles away from the east. The nearby I-85 interchange may lead to drivers exiting I-85 to maintain interstate
speeds and influence drivers passing through the interchange to associate the area with interstate conditions.This could
partially explain the severity of the run-off road crashes near University Station Boulevard.The transition from urban
conditions in Hillsborough to rural and back to urban near Durham as well as the I-85 interchange may lead to confusing
or conflicting conditions for driving traversing the area.Prominent crash locations in Segment E from Palmers Grove
Road to Durham County are shown in Figure 27.
80 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
83
lib
Figure 27: Prominent Crash Locations in near Pleasant Green Road (Segment E)
U5 70/Palmers Grove Church Rd(SR 1562) �Vhb.
A19 SMP 5.011 to MP 5.06
7 . c Green95e�ar"
6"gxdp0.n Dr �A Ccfr _
E eYl°
Reelfew�I
Linden Rd ISR 1566)o'` Eno River SlaleParr
r � G
.-r MP 6.151 to MP 6.23
W i I Ye I;Rd'=-
6.271to MP 6.33MP 5791 to MP 5.875 University Station Rd(SR 1712)M VMP
MP 6.451 t°MP 6,54 �a
o�
6.561 to MP 6.61 Gfe
8 d I
7 a Pleasant Green Rd(SR 1567) I
�fOti?.
59 MMP 7.011 to P 7.07
'111
5�
.1411 6.63 to MP 6.72 5
I
MP 6.661 to MP 6.41 I'
Legend � G MP 7.071 to MP 7.12 I
Segment Crash Type Total Crashes _ a
A '19
_C 51 `� Old Autumnwood(SR 1797) A�
�w�6 S"Angle
E LeR-Tum o E�/ NC 751
F . Rlght-Tum + Railroad Track m` Old NC 10(SR 1F15) f W
Lane Departure 0 RailroadCrvssings
Rear End I g
Animal —
Other Aonne,O
'as Rn Hillstroro�'3n Rd
Segment F
Segment F exceeds the respective statewide crash rates for every category and the critical rates for all categories except
fatal crashes (Table 20).Segment F has the highest fatal,non-fatal injury,and night crash rates of the segments.There are
clusters of run-off road crashes in the curve between the Tuscarora Drive segments(Figure 26).The high rates in this
section may be partially attributable to drivers maintaining high speeds as conditions changes closer to downtown
Hillsborough.
`')383839p�1���3938383L`
81 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
84
lib
Table 20: Segment F Crash Rates
Crashes Statewide Critical
Rate Crashes Per
100 MVM RateRate z
Total 146 413.47 263.25 309.58
Fatal 2 5.66 1.32 5.92
Non-Fatal 81 229.39 73.07 98.15
Night 59 167.09 57.83 80.30
Wet 29 82.13 43.32 62.96
Run-Off Road 29 82.13 45.46 65.54
Pedestrian and Bicycle Crashes
Four pedestrian crashes and zero bicycle crashes were reported along the corridor between August 2017 and July 2022, as
summarized in Table 21.Many bicycle or pedestrian"near-misses" are not reported and are,therefore,unsubstantiated.
Both travelling along US 70 and crossing US 70 are potentially hazardous,given the lack of appropriate accommodations
for pedestrians and bicyclists. Traffic speeds,rolling terrain, driver expectations,and access locations all contribute to
crash potential,and suggest that pedestrian and bicycle travel in this corridor is suppressed due to discomfort and risk.
Vehicle safety is typically measured in terms of crash history;given that many bicycle and pedestrian trips are trips are
foregone due to the above reasons, crash history is not a reliable indicator of conditions related to bicycle and pedestrian
safety. Given the potential amount of latent demand and the scarcity of crash data,bicycle and pedestrian safety are
generally assessed differently from vehicular crashes, relying more on physical conditions.A similar approach is applied
to railroad safety as well, due to the infrequent—but typically severe--nature of such rail crashes.
Table 21: Bicycle and Pedestrian Crashes (August 2017 -July 2022)
Day of Nearest Severity Road Surface Ambient Light
Date Week Time Location Intersection Condition
Jul 2021 Thursday 10:03 PM Orange County Buckhorn Rd Possible Injury(C) Dry Dark-Not Lighted
Jul 2021 Sunday 2:44 PM Hillsborough,Orange County Faucette Mill Rd Evident Injury(B) Dry Daylight
Feb 2020 Tuesday 7:36 PM Hillsborough,Orange County Faucette Will Rd FEvident Injury(B) Dry Dark-Lighted
Jan 2020 Friday 9:38 PM Hillsborough,Orange County I NC 86 Possible Injury(C) Dry Dark-Lighted
82 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
85
lib
Large Vehicle Crashes
Sixty-two crashes involving large vehicles were reported along US 70 between Mebane and NC 751,including one fatal
crash and four B-injury crashes as well as multiple C-injury crashes. This crash rate appears to be generally proportionate
to the volume of trucks relative to total traffic. The crashes are shown in Table 13.Crashes(crashes occurring from
Palmers Grove Church Rd to NC 751 are shown in the US 70 Bus TEAAS Study in the appendix).The fatal crash involved
a truck rear-ending a vehicle leading to a multicar crash in a construction zone when traffic was stopped by a flagger near
W Hill Avenue(SR 1161).The largest cluster of truck crashes occurred in Hillsborough near Churton Street(NC 86)
including three school bus crashes.All three school bus crashes were rear ends that occurred in the morning around 7:30
am—8:30 am.
Eight crashes involving large vehicles were reported along US 70 Bus from Churton Street(SR 1009)in Downtown
Hillsborough to slightly before Palmers Grove Church Road including one A-injury crash and one B-injury crash as well
as multiple C-injury crashes.The A-injury crash involved a left-turning passenger vehicle striking another on Churton
Street(SR 1009) at US 70 Bus leading to a multicar crash including a bus.The B-injury crash involved a truck running off
the road to the left and striking a utility pole then a house near Efland Street.The largest cluster of truck crashes occurred
in Hillsborough near Churton Street(NC 86)including three school bus crashes.All three school bus crashes were rear
ends that occurred in the morning around 7:30 am—8:30 am.A table for large vehicle crashes is available in the
Appendices. .. `:,
Rail Crossing Crashes
Although no active rail lines cross US 70 in the study corridor,there are five at-grade crossings in Segment A that are in
close proximity to US 70(less than 50 feet in several instances). There have been two crashes at these locations over the
last 10 years: _
➢ Third Street
o March 2021—Passenger train traveling at 76 mph struck a car stopped on tracks in daylight. No injuries.
➢ Fifth Street
o December 2014—Passenger train traveling at 79 mph struck a van trapped between gates in daylight.
Driver killed.
`°�888888ea�&8&88888&8�`
83 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
86
lib
1.6 Environmental Context
An environmental screening was completed for the project study area utilizing existing GIS resources.This screening
analysis indicated areas of possible environmental concern, including streams and wetland areas,community resources,
and locations of hazardous waste sites.These data were obtained from a variety of sources including those listed below:
➢ Local Government GIS Departments-Alamance County,Orange County,City of Mebane,Town of Hillsborough
➢ NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis(NC One Map)
➢ NCDENR Division of Water Quality(DWQ)
➢ NC Department of Cultural Resources—State Historic Preservation Office(NC SHPO)
➢ NC Department of Environmental Quality—Waste Management(DEQ-WM)
➢ NC Department of Transportation GIS Unit
➢ NC Natural Heritage Program(NHP)
➢ NC Wildlife Resources Commission(WRC)
➢ US Fish and Wildlife Services (FWS)
Figure 28 through Figure 31 illustrate the known environmental features present within the project study area as
indicated by the environmental screening process.
This summary references environmental features that are located within the:
➢ Project corridor
➢ Project study area
➢ Vicinity of the project study area
The project corridor refers to the right-of-way,which varies between 100-124 feet wide along the corridor.The project
study area refers to a half mile buffer(5,280 feet total width)of the exiting roadway centerline, displayed as a gray dotted
line on the figures.Features within the vicinity of the project study area are located beyond the half-mile buffer,however,
have been considered to still be relevant because they will help to determine the character and needs of the corridor.
84 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
87
lib
1.6.1 Built Environment
The built environment in the study area is primarily rural residential,with agricultural farms scattered in between
(Figure 28).There are commercial,retail, and industrial developments at the eastern and western ends of the study area
and many natural areas on the east end of the corridor.Overall, the study area is low density.
A review of places of worship in the vicinity of the study area identified 27 places of worship and seven cemeteries.Five
public schools and one private school are located within the project study area,with most of the schools being located
within either Mebane or Hillsborough municipal limits.In addition,there are seven fire stations that are spread across the
corridor(including Mebane,Efland,and Orange County Fire Departments as well as Eno Fire and Rescue).The full list of
community resources is included as an Appendix item.
Other notable places of interest include the three National Register-listed historic districts(Mebane Commercial,Old
South Mebane,and Hillsborough Historic)and 14 National-Register-listed historic sites located within those districts.
Lastly,the corridor is sprinkled with numerous open spaces,parks, and natural areas,most notably,the Mebane
Community Park,Occoneechee Natural Area and Speedway,Eno River State Park and Rock Quarry, and the Duke
Forest.
1.6.2 Land Use
Historic Properties
The North Carolina State Historic Properties Office(SHPO)is responsible for surveying and designating structures and
districts of historical significance and maintains an online web viewer with more information
http:Hgis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb .
The highest level of preservation is the National Register.The second highest is the State Study List.The third level is
Determined Eligible,meaning that the properties are in the process of becoming listed on the Study List.The following
historic properties were identified within the project study area,shown in Table 22:
85 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
88
lib
Table 22: Historic Properties in the Project Area
Site Name Status* Site ID Description Year Listed
Durham Hosiery Mill No. 15 NR AM1791 1922 two-story brick and concrete textile mill 2010
Rigsbee's Rock House NR/LL OR0302 1929 Tudor Revival house 1988
White Furniture Company NR/LL AM0466 1924 furniture factory complex 1982
Occoneechee Speedway NR OR1542 1940s early NASCAR site 2002
Efland Home NR OR2815 1925 one-story hip roof T-shaped frame African American school 2018
Nash Law Office NR OR0012 1801-1807 one-story frame building 1971
Old Orange County Courthouse NR OR0014 1845 Greek Revival two-story brick courthouse 1971
St. Matthews Episcopal Church and NR OR0019 1825-1826 Gothic Revival 1971
Churchyard
Heartsease NR OR0009 Late 18th to early mid-19th century two-story frame house 1973
Ruffin-Roulhac House NR OR0017 1820 Federal/Greek Revival 1971
Sans Souci NR OR0020 1813 two-story Federal houses 1971
Eagle Lodge NR OR0007 1820 early Greek Revival Masonic Lodge 1971
Burwell School NR OR0004 1837 two-story frame house and school 1970
Ayr Mount NR OR0002 1814-1816 Georgian/Federal two-story brick tripartite house 1971
Montrose NR OR0050 19th—early 20th century Graham Family estate 2001
Mebane Commercial Historic District NRHD AM 1698 1905-1960 commercial district 2011
Hillsborough Historic District NRHD OR0077 181h-20th century county seat residential/commercial district 1973
Old South Mebane Historic District NRHD AM1508 1900-1961 residential district 2011
Old South Mebane Historic District NRHD AM2351 1900-1962 residential district 2013
Boundary Increase
Benjamin Frank Mebane House SL AM0284 1855 Greek Revival 1985
S.C. Forrest House II SL OR1409 1927 house, S.C. Forrest 1995
Ja-Max Motor Lodge SL OR3001 1952 one-story hip roof frame Miscellaneous Modernist building 2017
Orange County Courthouse SL OR0054 1953 two-story side gable brick Colonial Revival courthouse 2006
Jones Department Store SL AM 1507 1910 three-story parapet roof brick Romanesque Revival building 2000
Bridge No. 670241 DOE OR2222 1922 reinforced concrete t-beam bridge(DOT 670241) 2005
*Status:NR—National Register-listed,LL—Local Landmark,NRHD—National Register-listed Historic District;SL—Study List,DOE—Determined Eligible
86 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
89
lib
Hazardous Materials
18 gas stations were identified in the project area,each with underground storage tanks that may pose a potential
challenge for redevelopment of these parcels:
➢ Tommy's Mini-Mart-300 West Center Street,Mebane,NC 27302
➢ Foust Corner Market-509 East Center Street,Mebane,NC 27302
➢ Foust Oil Company-601 East Center Street,Mebane,NC 27302
➢ The Pop Shoppe-6300 Buckhorn Road,Mebane,NC 27302
➢ Mebane BP-7615 US 70,Mebane,NC 27302
➢ Efland Supermarket-3419 US 70,Efland,NC 27243
➢ Talbert's Mini Mart-225 Mount Willing Road, Efland,NC 27243
➢ AZ Shop N Go-2113 US 70 Business,Hillsborough,NC 27278
➢ Circle K#382-1204 US 70 Bypass,Hillsborough,NC 27278
➢ Hillsborough BP#305-1811 NC 86,Hillsborough, NC 27278
➢ Hwy 86 Amoco Food Shop-114 NC 86,Hillsborough, NC 27278
➢ Lloyd's Quickie Mart#2-110 NC 86,Hillsborough,NC 27278
➢ Quality Mart#9-1414 US 70 Bypass,Hillsborough,NC 27278
➢ Quickie Mart—225 Churton Street,Hillsborough,NC 27278
➢ Breeze Thru#30026—2300 Old Chapel Hill Road,Hillsborough,NC 27278
Carolina Propane—4630 Hillsborough Road,Durham,NC 27705
➢e�?,La Marqueta—4701 Hillsborough Road,Durham,NC 27705
Shop&Go Food Mart—4640 Hillsborough Road,Durham,NC 27705
Three other active underground storage tanks,not found on gas station properties,were also identified in the project area
servicing locations such as:
➢ Dodson's Service Center—306 West Center Street,Mebane,NC 27302
➢ Frank Efland—316 Efland-Cedar Grove Road,Efland,NC 27243
➢ Orange County Asset Management Services—600 NC 86,Hillsborough,NC 27278
One hazardous waste site,the former General Electric Mebane Operations site,now known as ABB(6801 Industrial Drive,
Mebane,NC 27302),is located approximately 0.3 miles off the US 70 corridor southwest of Mebane.In addition,one
87 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
90
lib
Brownfield site is in the project area—former Redman Industries,now known as Barber&Ross Window Company(200
Redman Crossing Road,Mebane,NC 27302)located approximately 0.2 miles off the US 70 corridor between Miles and
Efland.
aHHHH:
HHnHn.
This GIS-level screening also included active and former 1 9 and dry-cleaning sites,but no features were identified
within the project study area.
H&H&HHHo
&&H
Figure 28: Places of Interest #Ng ggS&#S &H&H
.a$�SNNNN ���.• .,,8E8Ho
0I
I -
I— I
V :
� C
.-
s. i—
v
6' MEBANE ��-�-�-- o--�� a� wr. .:; '. s' e, V r I
in I sH'..�:. HILCSBOROUGW �"•a.. ` Z
AL
,. ed' - cr•` - '7- `. - - a DURHAM.
147
E
I '
v r
W 0 Q:3 0a 0.9 Mlles
0
Legend
_ US 70 Corridor Study Buffer Airport ;Q Fire station ♦ Hazardous Waste Site —Brownfield Boundary Historic District
Q NR
_ County Boundary �_.' Cemetery Gas Station �+ Places of Worship Historic Points SLDOE
• National Register individual listing
. Municipal Boundary _ Public Library • Underground Storage TankPubic School DOE
NR and Local Landmark
Railroad Track - Private School
Determined Eligible-DOE
88 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
91
lib
Conservation punning for Protection - --`�"'--"--'----------
Orange County,NoAh Car ins
The Cane Creek Reservoir(8705 Stanford Road)near Mebane
Oaks Road south of the project area serves as a drinking
water supply for 70,000 people and is operated by the Oran ,
kd.n, E
Water and Sewer Authority(OWASA).This reservoir ,„
includes recreational opportunities,including boat rental,
fishing,nature trail and picnic areas.OWASA has acquired E o
more than 1,600 acres of land within the Cane Creek ,
Carse reek R-0,lrRake ..
watershed to protect the quality of this resource. •
� CM1ead Mirl
UnIYe ty Lake Ir zke-For additional background visit
i -
https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/drinking
water/drinking-water-protection-program/success-
stories/orange-county Legend N
Hydrology QWtar Supply Walarshad
Highways
1.6.2.1 Natural Environment
Protected Areas and Open Space,
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program(NHP)is responsible for surveying and designating properties and
easements where natural resource conservation is one of the primary management goals,also known as managed areas.
This dataset also includes several properties and easements that are not primarily managed for conservation,but that are
of conservation interest. This conservation interest ranges from properties and easements which support rare species and
intact,high-quality natural communities to those that are open spaces in places where open space is scarce.Managed
areas along the project corridor,including two dedicated nature preserves,are shown in Table 23.
89 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
92
fir►Pig
Vilb
Table 23: Managed Areas Project Area
Site Name Owner Site Type Description
Orange County Open Space Orange County Local Government Managed for multi-use—subject to extractive or overhead use
NC Division of Mitigation Services NCDEQ State Easement Managed for biodiversity—disturbance events suppressed
NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund NCDNCR State Easement Managed for biodiversity—disturbance events suppressed
Duke Forest Duke University Private Site Managed for multi-use—subject to extractive or overhead use
Eno River Duke Forest Mesic Slopes Duke University Registered Heritage Managed for biodiversity—disturbance events suppressed
Registered Heritage Area Area
Eno River Association Easement Eno River Private Easement Managed for multi-use—subject to extractive or overhead use
Triangle Land Conservancy Easement* TLC Private Easement Managed for biodiversity—disturbance events suppressed
Mountains-to-Sea Trail NCDNCR State Park Managed for multi-use—subject to extractive or overhead use
Historic Preservation Foundation NC Preserve Private Site Managed for multi-use—subject to extractive or overhead use
Classical Dedicated Nature
James M.Johnston Nature Preserve American Homes Preserve Managed for biodiversity—disturbance events proceed or are mimicked
Preservation Trust
Eno River State Park* NCDNCR State Park Managed for biodiversity—disturbance events proceed or are mimicked
Eno River Nature Preserve NCDNCR Dedicated Nature Managed for biodiversity—disturbance events proceed or are mimicked
Preserve
*Contains Land Trust Conservation or Conservation Tax Credit Property
Out of these managed areas,the Montrose Gardens,located in the Triangle Land Conservancy Easement,is identified as a
Land Trust Conservation Property,and parts of the Eno River State Park are identified as Conservation Tax Credit
Property.
In addition,three voluntary agriculture district parcels, all owned by Andres B Lloyd Jr., are in the project area west of
Hillsborough at US 70 and the I-85 connector.All the protected areas and open space in the project corridor are shown in
Figure 29.
This GIS-level screening also included land and water conservation funded properties,but no features were identified
within the project study area.
90 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
93
lib
Figure 29: Protected Areas and Open Space
lib
7
LIC i 1
� y
' 119 � �.�i✓f - � I _ _ _�-�z _ �._ - 'y�,':
_ 57
`i
I — � MEBANE
L ` `
_ HILL•58OROUGH �d ` I
s_
i
4 n '
`ate � — x.► ,f DURHAM
r l` jj147
A r >
I
rr 1. r
' F r.P. A 1. I` __'I Y i 1► -
I
■' /.
o 741
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 Miles I R . 1 (.! ►' f
Legend
US 70 Corridor Study Butter Railroad Track ii,Conservation Tax Credit Property Parks and Open Space
Orange County Park
County Boundary 0 Managed Area WAD
Other O en S ace
;,n1 P P
Municipal Boundary ®Land Trust conservation Property State Owned Land
1.6.2.2 Water Quality
The Division of Water Resources(DWR),a subset of the NC Department of Environmental Quality,is responsible for the
protection,classification and enhancement of all streams and water bodies within North Carolina.The project study area
is located within both the Neuse and Cape Fear River Basins of North Carolina(Figure 30).
91 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
94
lib
There are no fewer than 11 named stream crossings along the corridor,with designated floodplains along of them.The
Eno River is the most regionally significant stream crossed by the US 70 corridor,which flows east to converge with the
Flat and Little Rivers to form the Neuse at Falls Lake.The full lisf f hydraulic features along the corridor included is in
Table 24. ° `
The local watershed plan for Morgan and Little Creek protects 74.5 square miles of land within Orange,Durham,and
Chatham counties.More information on this Local Watershed Plan(LWP)is available here:
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation%20Services/Watershed Planning/Cape Fear River Basin/Morgan Little CK/Morg_a
n%20and%20Little%20LWP%20Fact%20Sheet%20.pdf
Table 24: Hydraulic Features in the Project Area
Stream Name Classification* Description Basin Designated
Floodplain?
McAdams Creek(Latham Lake) WS-V; NSW From source to Back Creek Cape Fear Yes
Unnamed Tributary to Mill Creek(Forest Lake) WS-II; HQW; NSW From source to 0.4 miles upstream of mouth Cape Fear No
Lake Michael WS-II; HQW; NSW Entire lake and connecting stream to Mill Creek Cape Fear Yes
McGowan Creek(Efland Millpond) WS-II; HQW; NSW From source to 0.7 miles upstream of mouth Neuse Yes
McGowan Creek WS-II; HQAW; NSW; From 0.7 miles upstream of mouth to Corporation Lake Neuse Yes
Eno River(Corporation Lake, Lake Ben WS-II; HQW; NSW; From 0.4 miles upstream of Dry Run to Lake Ben Neuse Yes
Johnston) CA Johnston Dam
Eno River C; NSW From Lake Ben Johnston Dam to SR 1561 (Lawrence Neuse Yes
Road)
Cates Creek C; NSW From source to Eno River Neuse Yes
Eno River From SR 1561 (Lawrence Road)to US 501 Neuse Yes
Stony Creek WS-IV; NSW From 0.4 miles upstream to SR 1710(Old NC 10) Neuse Yes
Rhodes Creek WS-IV; NSW From source to Eno River Neuse Yes
*C—Aquatic Life,Secondary Contact Recreation,Fresh Water;CA—Critical Area;NSW—Nutrient Sensitive Waters;HQW—High Quality Waters;WS-II—water supply for
drinking,culinary or food processing purposes in predominately undeveloped watersheds,WS-IV—water supply for drinking,culinary,or food processing purposes in moderately
to highly developed watersheds or protected areas;WS-V—water protected as water supply
92 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
95
lib
Water supply watersheds(WSW)are portions of land that drain into a reservoir that serves as a municipal drinking water
supply.The portion of land that is immediately adjacent to the water intake is designated as'critical',and the land that is
upstream of this area is designated as a'protected'water supply watershed.
.... ;
Eight water supply watershed areas are located within the t area,three of which are listed as critical areas,shown in
n6
Figure 30.
n�66666666�t,,,,�.
dx6666666�:.
��6666660:" a� aaau.
Figure 30: Water Resources in Corridor "
5 I`nb
}
x 91I
% I
i
_ v
�.a Y
F _ -- - - 'HILest oROUCH
Me13.ANL
X 1
-
Wi 1
y
4
e
�1•-¢ - _� DURHAM
t,Ypk I i
c�' r
5,
Legend
U5 70 Corridor Study Buffer Railroad Track NWI Wetland 100-year Flood NCDWQ WSWS ClassiFlcations
F-7 WS-II NSW
_ County 8ouni Stream Floadmne F--1 Water Supply Watershed Area I WS-IV N5W
500-year Flood
n Municipal Boundary Waterbody F�n Critical WSW Area
93 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
96
lib
More information on water supply planning is available at https://deq,.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-
resources/planning/water-supplyplanning.
1.6.2.3 Wildlife Resources and Natural Heritage Elements
While it is not expected that this corridor study project would directly impact plant or animal species,best management
strategies during construction must be implemented to protect aquatic habitats within and downstream of the project
study area.
The NC Natural Heritage Program(NHP)is responsible for identifying occurrences of rare plants and animals,
exemplary or unique natural communities,and important animal assemblages (see Figure 31).Collectively,these plants,
animals,natural communities,and animal assemblages are referred to as elements of natural diversity,or simply as
elements.
Some of the NHP resources that have been identified include:
➢ Easements of land managed by several agencies:
o NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund(State)
o NC Division of Mitigation Services(State)
o Triangle Land Conservation Easement(Private)
➢ Orange County Water and Sewer Authority(OWASA)Property(Local)
➢ Orange County Open Space (Local)
Six Natural Heritage Natural Areas(Name-Rating—ID)
°. o Eno River Mesic Slopes and Floodplain—General—NAID#2197
o Eno River Aquatic Habitat—Very High—NAID#980
o Poplar Ridge Slopes and Bottom—Very High—NAID#2190
o Eno River/Cates Ford Slopes and Uplands—Very High—NAID#1701
o Eno River Mountain Spleenwort and Rhododendron Bluff—General—NAID#2359
o Middle Eno River Bluffs and Slopes—Very High—NAID#455
➢ 30 Natural Heritage Element Occurrences,which are primarily Natural Communities located west of the Town of
Hillsborough.
94 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
97
lib
This GIS-level screening also included game lands;however,no features were identified within the study area.
bb.
Figure 31: Wildlife Resources in Corridor
Ix r
C,
es s7
r
JPI
H1LL•'SIiORd�GH
DURHAM
Al � I � 197
I
I
.. J 3 0 9.9 Miles
Legend
US 70 Corridor Study Buffer T Railroad Track Natrual Heritage Elements Occurences(NHEO)
Arima)
F— Municipal Boundary Natural Heritage Natural Area(NHNA) Natural Community
County Boundary Plant
95 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
98
lib
1.7 Relevant Plans
This section summarizes relevant planning and policy efforts,focusing on the most recent transportation-related plans,
and on those specific elements that affect the US 70 Corridor Study,or which could be affected by it.
1.7.1 Regional/Long Range Transportation Plans
2022 Burlington Graham Metropolitan Planning Organization Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP)
This plan addresses the aspirational transportation improvements in the Burlington-Graham Metropolitan Planning
Organization(BGMPO)area for the next 25 to 30 years. The noted recommendations within the study area include both
roadway and bicycle improvements:
➢ Modernize US 70 by adding a wider paved shoulder to improve safety and mobility—creating a transit corridor
from NC 119 to Supper Club Road.
➢ Widen NC 119 to a four-lane,divided facility;add bike lanes and sidewalk from NC 54 to Old Hillsborough
Road/Trolling wood Hawfields Road.
➢ Widen Mattress Factory Road to a four-lane, divided facility;add bike lanes and sidewalk from Washington
Street to Rock Quarry Road.
➢ Realign Mattress Factory Road to allow for safer railroad crossing and improve mobility;extend on a new
location as a four-lane, divided facility with sidewalks and bike lanes.
Numerous pedestrian accommodations are recommended in the Mebane municipal limits.On the US 70 corridor,the
plan recommends a side path from Supper Club Road to Mattress Factory Drive and a wider,paved shoulder to
modernize the roadway,and create a transit corridor from NC 119 to Supper Club Road.
The plan also proposes urban bus corridors throughout downtown Mebane and along US 70 as well as a fixed guideway
transit system along US 70 east of Third Street.
96 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
99
lib
2020 Burlington-Graham Metropolitan Planning Organization Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP)
This plan identifies the planned transportation improvements in the Burlington-Graham area through the year 2045.The
plan identifies US 70 as a major transportation corridor and key to the economic vitality of the region.Projects along the
study corridor include:
➢ Orange-Alamance Bus Connector,which would provide hourly transit services between major activity centers in
Hillsborough,Efland,and Mebane.
➢ Hillsborough-Mebane Commuter Rail Connector, which,if approved, could include a new commuter rail station
in Mebane.
➢ I-40 and US 70 integrated corridor management.
➢ Advanced signal technology upgrades along US 70.
The plan also proposes numerous bicycle,pedestrian, and transit improvements adjacent to the US 70 corridor
throughout downtown Mebane.
2017 Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization Comprehensive Transportation Plan
(CTP)
This plan identifies the planned transportation improvements in the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan
Planning Organization(DCHC MPO)area through the year 2040.The notable recommendations along the US 70 corridor
include:
➢ Widen US 70 to a four-lane, divided facility with a dedicated bike lane and sidewalk from the I-85 connector to
US 70 Business.
➢ Improve the existing I-85 connector/US 70 interchange to create a full movement interchange.
➢ Widen Churton Street(US 70/NC 86)to a four-lane facility with a raised median,bike lanes,and sidewalks.
2022 Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP)
This plan identifies the planned transportation improvements in the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan
Planning Organization(DCHC MPO)area through the year 2050.The plan focuses on transit corridor development,
major roadway access management,and Complete Streets designs.
97 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
100
lib
1.7.2 Statewide Transportation Plans
bb.
NCDOT Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan, "WalkBike NC" (2013)
The State Division of Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation convened stakeholders and community members statewide
to review and update the State's bicycling routes(among other objectives).The plan adopted an alternate alignment of the
MST that takes the route south of US 70,just east of the study corridor, at Trollingwood Road and back up toward US 70
at Mt.Willing Road.
1.7.3 Countywide Transportation Plans
2011 Orange County Unified Development Ordinance (Updated 2015)
Orange County has adopted zoning classifications and subdivision regulations to protect the natural environment and to
promote compatible development of land.The Unified Development Ordinance(UDO)was originally adopted in 2011
and has been updated as recently as 2015.The UDO includes the following relevant items:
➢ The Ordinance outlines an Overlay District called the Efland-Cheeks Highway 70 Corridor(ECOD)for U.S.70
and Efland Cheeks Highway containing the parcels adjacent to highway 70 within the Cheeks townships.The
District outlines the requirement for all conversion of non-residential land uses and any non-residential land
disturbing activity to be reviewed then permitted by the Planning Director.
➢ The ordinance allows for mixed--but compatible--land uses by permit that enhance and protect the existing
single-family land uses. Non-residential uses within the Highway 70 Corridor Overlay District are limited to
professional office and similar institutional uses and shall not make up more than 40%of the corridor,outside of
the pre-designated commercial areas.
➢ All lots shall be granted at least one ingress and egress point per road front unless access can be provided through
some internal means. Minimization of the total number of driveways along US 70 is desirable.The plan
recommends shared driveways or other access management techniques.
98 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
101
lib
➢ Where US 70 and 1-85 intersect constitutes the Eno Economic Development District that allows for a wide range
of non-residential uses with limited higher density residential uses.
o�.
2008 Orange County Future Land Use Map (amended 2012)
The future land use plan balances environmental constraints and community needs by accommodating a particular
combination of compatible land uses and relating them to current zoning classifications.There are three basic land use
categories(Developed,Transition,and Rural)and several overlays (watershed protection).
Properties along the corridor and within the Orange County jurisdiction predominately fall into one of the five following
zoning classifications:
➢ Agricultural Residential(AR)-Agricultural activities and associated residential and commercial uses
predominate. '01 hmoaaot_
➢ Rural Residential(R1)-Identifies rural areas to be developed as low intensity and low density residential.
➢ Public Interest District(PID)-These lands are considered valuable for recreational and research purposes and are
afforded special treatment.
➢ Economic Development(EDB,EDE,EDH)-Identifies areas along major transportation corridors that may be in
proximity to 10-Year or 20-Year Transition areas of the County which have been specifically targeted for
economic development activity consisting of light industrial,distribution,flex space,office,and service/retail
uses.
➢ Commercial Industrial Transition Activity Node for Office/Research and Manufacturing(O/RM)-Identifies
areas changing from rural to urban in form and density.A full range of commercial and industrial activities
would be appropriate and allowed.
The amended Future Land Use Map determines the following recommendations for the US 70 corridor:
➢ The majority of the parcels located along the corridor from the ETJ boundary eastbound to Harding Street fall
within the 10 Year Transition land use distinction.Where Efland Cedar Grove and US 70 intersect is considered
the Commercial-Industrial Transition Activity Node.After N Lloyds Dairy Road to the end of the ETJ for
approximately 2,000 feet is designated as Agricultural Residential.
For more information on the location(s)of Orange County zoning and future land use boundaries visit
https://www.orangecountync.gov/1238/Comprehensive-Land-Use.
99 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
102
lib
2006 Orange County Efland-Mebane Small Area Plan
The Small Area Study analyzed the defined area and made recommendations regarding housing,community services,
transportation,open space, and land use and economic features.
The plan makes references to the Orange County Land Use Plan and provides the following recommendations:
➢ Medium and higher intensity commercial development that would be most appropriately served by a centralized
water and sewer system should be located within the US 70/I-85 corridor from the Efland community to the
extraterritorial planning jurisdiction of Mebane.
➢ Established activity nodes in the Cheeks Township,two of which are in the US-70 Corridor.These nodes are the:
I-85/Buckhorn Node(Economic Development) and the Miles North Node(Commercial-Industrial Transition)
located at the intersection of US 70 and Buckhorn Road.
➢ Encouragement of stricter enforcement of the speed limits along US 70.
2014 Orange County Comprehensive Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2030
The Orange County Comprehensive Parks and Recreation Master Plan identifies facilities,parks,and trails for expansion,
improvement,and creation across Orange County by 2030.Key recommendations include:
➢ A proposed segment of the MST is planned to cross the study corridor at the confluence of Cane Creek and the
Haw River.
➢ The Orange County trail segment is planned to parallel Cane Creek north from the Alamance County line to the
Town of Hillsborough where the trail follows the Eno River westward.
➢ The plan recommends that the county and other stakeholders develop a master plan to facilitate the completion of
the trail segment and consider the location of a node or way station on county or OWASA land to provide basic
hiking services.
Voluntary Agricultural Districts -Alamance and Orange Counties
Both Alamance and Orange Counties participate in a program for Voluntary Farmland Preservation.These programs aim
to promote and encourage the preservation of farmland in the rural portions of the county,where agricultural uses
predominate,by means which are voluntary,rather than regulatory.Designating land as a Voluntary Agricultural District
100 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
103
lib
(VAD)is the mechanism for this protection.The minimum acreage required for a VAD is 5 acres for horticulture use, 10
acres for agricultural use,and 20 acres for forestry use.Once designated as an agricultural district,the property is
considered a conservation easement that prohibits non-farm use for a period of 10 years.Agricultural districts,once
designated,are eligible for preservation grants from federal, state,and local funding sources.
More information may be found at:
➢ Alamance County https:Halamance.ces.ncsu.edu/
➢ Orange County http://www.orangecountync.gov/departments/deapr/voluntary agricultural districts.php
Many VADs are located around the corridor.There are 4 Voluntary Agricultural District parcels along the project
corridor,all located north and south of the US 70/I-85 connector interchange for a total of 271.49 acres.
1.7.4 Municipal Transportation Plans
City of Mebane Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (2015)
The City of Mebane's Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan communicates the blueprint for making bicycling and
walking an integral part of daily life in Mebane.The plan lists several priority projects in and around downtown Mebane
that recommend the construction of a sidewalk or shared use path as well as intersection improvements in various
locations.One priority project within the project study corridor,Fifth Street at Center Street/US 70 Business and Norfolk
Southern Railroad Crossing, recommends high visibility crosswalks,and upgraded curb ramps,as well as pedestrian
signals and other pedestrian safety measures(rubber sectional crossing,automatic gates,etc.).
2017 Mebane by Design Comprehensive Land Development Plan
The Mebane by Design Comprehensive Land Development Plan is intended to be used by the City of Mebane and County
partners to guide land development decisions.It is a long-range guide for public policy decisions concerning the overall
growth and development of the Mebane community,and it focuses on the physical growth and development of Mebane
and the study area.In relation to the US 70 corridor,the plan calls for:
➢ Improved pedestrian access across major streets,including US-70.
➢ Improved Transportation Demand Management(TDM)through public transportation.
101 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
104
lib
➢ Detailed guidance on the development of the Downtown District,including along and adjacent to Center Street
(US 70).
➢ Renewed mix-use land use policies for downtown,including the'Village Concept'that has been deployed
elsewhere in Mebane,and higher densities to encourage active transportation.
➢ Sidewalk connectivity along and across US-70,public arts, and connecting NC-119 Bypass to US-70 and
downtown with bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
2008 Mebane Unified Development Ordinance (updated 2021)
Mebane has adopted zoning classifications and subdivision regulations to protect the natural environment and to
promote orderly growth and development.The Unified Development Ordinance was originally adopted in 2008 and has
been updated as recently as 2021.Properties along the corridor and within the Mebane jurisdiction fall into one of 4
zoning classifications:
➢ Heavy Manufacturing(HM)—relates to land suitable for manufacturing,industrial and warehousing uses.
➢ Residential District(R-6,R-8,R-10,and R-20)—relates to varying densities of suitable housing development.R-20
districts may or may not have access to municipal water and sewage.
➢ Commercial District(B-1,B-2,and B-3)—relates to businesses that serve the needs of nearby residents,from
neighborhood commerce to the central business district.
➢ Office and Institutional(0&1)—relates to light commercial and high-density residential uses and serves the
Mebane business sector.
More specific zoning definitions and information is available at https:Hcityofinebanenc.gov/unified-development-
ordinance/.
2018 Mebane 2040 Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Mebane's 2040 Comprehensive Transportation Plan(CTP)is for the City of Mebane in Alamance and Orange Counties.
The plan is multi-modal,covering roadway,public transportation,and bicycle and pedestrian travel.The plan lists the
following projects associated with the US 70 corridor:
➢ Realign the northern terminal of Mattress Factory Road to improve the existing at grade crossing on Washington
Street,as the existing configuration does not accommodate heavy vehicles and limits connectivity to US 70 across
the railroad.
102 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
105
lib
➢ Improve safety for pedestrians along Woodlawn and Moore Roads to improve access to the Holt Street Park and
crossing of US 70.
A
2018 Mebane NC Railroad Traffic Separation Study
The Mebane Traffic Separation Study(TSS)focuses on eight(8) existing at-grade roadway-railroad crossings along a 5-
mile span through downtown Mebane to determine the need for improvements and/or elimination of public at-grade
crossings to improve safety and mobility for motorists,pedestrians,rail passengers,and train crews.The TSS evaluated
the rail line in Mebane that crosses various streets, as well as any planned or programmed railroad and roadway
improvements within the study area.The relevant recommendation include:
➢ Improve pedestrian connectivity between US 70 and Washington Street.
➢ Numerous configuration changes at crossing locations and adjacent intersections.
➢ Establish median and pedestrian refuge island on 5th Street with new crosswalks at 5th Street and Washington.
➢ Establish new pedestrian crossings at 1St Street and 2nd Street,including overpass and underpass options.
2018 Mebane Downtown Vision Plan
The Mebane Downtown Vision Plan was created to align the community and economic need of Downtown with City
officials',local business owners', and residents' visions.The Vision Plan illustrates the potential for nearly 850,000 square
feet of new residential and commercial uses in Downtown, and it includes the following recommendations:
➢ An 8'two-way bike path with a curbed buffer on Center Street(US-70),lane reconfiguration,and street trees.
➢ Connecting sidewalks on Clay,Center(US-70),3rd,and 5th Streets.
➢ Improved pedestrian connectivity from Ruffin to Washington to 2nd Street,in coordination with the development
of the Kingsdown property.
2022 Mebane Fifth St Improvement Impact Study
The City of Mebane analyzed potential traffic impacts of the proposed Fifth Street and Washington Street Intersection
Improvement project.Analysis includes volume development,capacity analysis,safety assessment,and multimodal
evaluation results due to the planned geometrics modifications and resulting travel pattern changes at the Fifth Street and
Washington Street intersection and six other adjacent intersections,including intersections with Center Street(US-70).
Notable findings included:
103 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
106
lib
➢ Recommendations include new sidewalk connections,new raised medians,further monitoring for signalization
and other crash modifications safety improvements at Fifth/Jackson.
➢ The study did not examine traffic impacts of a shopping center in development for Fifth/Washington.
➢ The signalized Fifth Street and Center Street intersection is projected to operate at LOS B during both the AM and
PM peak hours,with or without the roadway project,under both the 2025 and 2035 conditions.
➢ The signalized Fourth Street and Center Street intersection is projected to operate at LOS A during both the AM
and PM peak hours under the Existing conditions.It is projected to operate at LOS B under both the 2025 No-
Build and Build conditions, and at LOS B or C under 2035 No-Build and Build conditions.
➢ Based on travel demand analysis,traffic volumes are expected to continue to increase in the study area(5-10%by
2025,20-25%by 2035)due to ambient growth and background developments, despite that completion of NC 119
Bypass is expected to result in 9-14%traffic reductions at the Fifth Street and Center Street intersection.
2022 GoTriangle Mebane Park-and Ride Feasibility Study
The GoTriangle Mebane Park-and Ride Feasibility Study was launched in March 2022 to investigate potential new
locations for a permanent or leased park and ride facility in Mebane.A pool of potential parcels was identified,evaluated
for viability,and narrowed based on their ability to meet the study goals and objectives identified by GoTriangle and key
stakeholders.The preferred purchase site is located on Washington Street, across the railroad tracks from US-70 in East
Mebane.The plan includes conceptual development at the preferred site including parking facilities,amenities,and a
driveway to service the residences.The site currently has access to a water line,but no sewer mains.Orange County is
considering expanding utilities north of the interchange. In addition,the parcel was chosen in part because it has no
signalized intersections between the proposed site and I-40/85.
Hillsborough Future Land Use Plan / March 11, 2013; revised June 9, 2014
The Hillsborough Future Land Use Plan was adopted as part of the Hillsborough Comprehensive Plan and is subject to
amendments following the procedure established in the Unified Development Ordinance(UDO).
Important changes shown in the plan are a new mixed-use area north of the future train station,mixed residential
neighborhoods in the urban service area,on the outskirts of the existing town limits,and employment,suburban office,
and neighborhood mixed use areas on either side of 1-40.
Traveling eastward along the U.S.70 corridor from the Town limits,the majority of land uses consist of Residential and
Mixed-Use categories.This land uses are typically more conducive to pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure:
104 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
107
lib
➢ Neighborhood Mixed Use(1.1 miles),from Town boundary to US 86.
➢ Mixed Residential Neighborhood(0.6 miles),from US 86.
➢ Small Lot residential uses(1.7 miles),Starting at Orange County High School until Crawford Road.
➢ Retail Services(0.7 miles)being located at major intersections.
➢ Other land uses along the corridor include Rural Living(0.56 miles)and Permanent Open Space(0.2 miles).
0� m o
2015 Hillsborough Vision 2030
Vision 2030 is a comprehensive policy document that documents existing conditions in the Town and identifies strategies
to sustain Hillsborough's small-town nature and'sense of place',support economic and cultural diversity,promote
sustainability,improve connectivity,and implement the plan.The plan describes the history of the town,and existing
demographics,natural features,recreation,transportation,land use,tax base and revenue,public utilities,tourism and
economic development,and regional coordination.
The 2030 Vision Plan outlines the strategic goals and strategies for guiding the town officials through the next wave of
future growth and aims to accomplish the adopted vision statement for the Town listed in the budget and strategy map.
The plan's strategic goals include ensuring that future development is compatible with the special character of
Hillsborough,conserving natural and environmental resources, and implementing sustainable practices in the
management of local resources. Strategies identified to achieve these goals include:
➢ Develop policies to encourage affordable housing,business retention,workforce development, and business
recruitment.
➢ Conserve natural and environmental resources by working with local advocacy organizations to protect known
resources and improve development regulations to encourage the preservation of existing tree canopy.
➢ Continue to support and encourage sustainable practices in public and private development by creating a local
definition of and best practices for sustainable development and developing local metrics like distances to basic
services and annual water use to monitor change over time.
➢ Improve community connectivity by identifying preferred north-south alternatives to Churton Street,
reestablishing Amtrak train service in Hillsborough,implement the Community Connectivity and Parks and
Recreation Master Plans,and develop alternative transportation options.
➢ Develop a policy or process to renew outdated policies or planning documents.
The Vision Plan additionally notes Town commissioners are looking for alternatives improvements for providing
connectivity for South Churton Street to NC 86 and US 70.North-south traffic is primarily the focus of this goal,stating
that bottlenecking along Churton Street has pushed the town to look at other alternatives.
105 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
108
lib
Residential developments north of Hillsborough are moderated and carefully approved to try and relieve traffic pressures
through Downtown as well as reduce the burden of new units on the existing water and sewer system which is current
reaching capacity.
2007 Hillsborough Parks and Recreation Master Plan (updated 2014)
The plan is founded on a comprehensive study of the Town's recreational needs and includes an inventory of existing
facilities,a needs assessment, and recommendations to guide the development of recreation facilities.
The plan aims to meet the Town's recreational needs by providing recreational facilities in each of the Town's 16 park
districts,using the Town's natural and historical heritage,and providing safe,convenient,and efficient travel ways for
non-motorized transportation for all people in Hillsborough.
Recommendations are organized into four categories 1)Organized Sports,2)Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities,3)Social
Equity,and 4)Partnerships with Regional and Local Organizations,with additional recommendations for each of the
park districts.Some recommendations are broad,like promoting the inclusion of pedestrian and bicycle amenities in
development projects and coordinating with Orange County and other municipalities on regional recreation planning.
Specific recommendations include:
➢ Campaign with NCDOT for a safe pedestrian crossing at the intersection of US 70 and Orange High School Road.
➢ Providing pedestrian and bicycle paths along US 70.
➢ Investigate opportunities to open a pedestrian connection along Latimer Street between Hayes and Durham
streets and between West King Street and Kings Highway Park.
➢ Recommend to Orange County the installment of a public park on the un-built lot behind the Orange County
Planning and Agricultural Building.
➢ Investigate opportunities to preserve the Nash Mill site and promote its use for public recreation.
➢ If the Elizabeth Brady Road Bypass is built,provide wide outside lanes and sidewalks on both sides of the road.
➢ Promote additional greenway projects,including Cates Creek and the MST connector trails.
2009 Hillsborough Community Connectivity Plan (updated 2017)
The Hillsborough Community Connectivity Plan inventoried existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities and makes
recommendations for improvements to create a network of safe, accessible,and convenient options for alternative modes
of travel in Hillsborough.
106 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
109
lib
Goals relevant to this plan include enhancing local and regional connectivity and increasing safety and accessibility.The
plan also identified key destinations and barriers to connectivity,such as bridge crossings and high traffic roadways.
n.
The Connectivity Plan includes recommendations for sidewalk construction and maintenance,new crosswalk locations,
bicycle facilities and routes, and greenways.The plan highlights the need for updating the sidewalk ordinance and
connecting sidewalk fragments built by developers,pedestrian safety improvements, and increasing accessibility to parks.
Key recommendations for the U.S. 70 Corridor include:
➢ Paved and marked bicycle lanes to be implemented on US 70/Cornelius Street and US 70A from Old NC 86 to
Meadowlands Drive.
➢ Additional bicycle lanes are recommended on a section of North Churton Street between Corbin Street and US 70
Bypass.
➢ Construction of new sidewalk/shared use path infrastructure along US 70 (in Town limits)and US 70 from Forest
Ridge to Meadowlands Drive
➢ Update the Orange County Bike Plan to incorporate additional bike routes for the US 70/I-85 Connector.
➢ It also outlines design policy for sidewalks,bike lanes,crosswalks,greenways and shared use paths,and trails
and footpaths.
2006 Hillsborough Churton Street Strategic Plan
The Churton Street Strategic Plan was developed to create a strategic plan for the future design and development of
Churton Street, an important economic and cultural corridor for the Town.The plan aims to provide recommendations to
improve the appearance of Churton Street and adjacent properties,increase private investment along the corridor,
improve wayfinding,mobility, and access for users of the corridor.
The plan provides recommendations for transportation improvements,corridor revitalization,and signage.Specific
recommendations include:
Transportation and Open Space
➢ Give the corridor a boulevard treatment with planted median where feasible north and south of downtown.
➢ Improve the corridor with modern roundabouts at key intersections, striped bike lanes where feasible,continuous
sidewalks along corridor, and minimized curb cuts,traffic signals,and left turns where feasible.
➢ Connect to parks,create pedestrian plazas and mini parks along the corridor,and add a bicycle path on Exchange
Park Lane.
107 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
110
lib
➢ Encourage a planned location of a transit station and park and ride lot at the newly realigned US 70 Business and
Orange Grove Road.
➢ Work with Duke Power to develop a policy that will facilitate the burying of utility lines as substantial
development and redevelopment takes place in the corridor.
Land Use and Economic Development
➢ Update future land use maps and amend development regulations to encourage land uses that will break up
existing commercial strip development patterns.
➢ Plan for expected future development in the Waterstone area and the redevelopment of northern part of Churton
South district into a transit-oriented community.
➢ Ask the Economic Development Commission to assist in business recruitment and to highlight available
properties along the Corridor.
➢ Undertake a market study for the corridor to identify opportunities for economic development within the
corridor and help the town focus recruitment efforts and infrastructure investments.
US 701 Cornelius Street Corridor Strategic Plan 12007
The US 70/Cornelius Street Corridor Plan provides a vision for future development and redevelopment of the US 70
Corridor to address land use,transportation, crime and code enforcement,and site plan and design issues.Phase 1 of the
Plan recommends 8-foot-wide, asphalt shared-use paths along the far edge of the right of way on both sides of the road
from the western town limits to the NC 86/NC 57 intersection.Relevant recommendations include:
Connectivity
➢ Four-lane divided highway with a central planted median and shared-use paths on either side.
➢ Paved shared-use paths are at least 8-feet wide and are separated from the roadway by planted medians.
➢ High-visibility crosswalks are recommended at key intersections.
➢ Traffic-calming strategies are recommended for internal streets in new developments.
➢ Bicycle racks and pedestrian amenities are recommended at commercial and multi-family developments.
Transportation
➢ Widen US 70/Cornelius Street to a four-lane divided highway with a planted median and with a bikeway or
greenway path along both sides for bike and pedestrian use.
➢ Encourage pedestrian connectivity along US 70 and among development sites as well as requiring pedestrian
connectivity internal to development sites.
108 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
111
lib
➢ Encourage bike and pedestrian amenities like bike racks and benches at commercial and multi-family
development sites.
➢ Provide crosswalks where sidewalks and greenway paths facilitate and encourage crossing.
➢ Enhance connectivity and safety by connecting and rerouting side streets.
Economic Development
➢ Identify the ideal land uses for parcels along the US 70 Corridor and establish coherent and comprehensive
processes to encourage redevelopment.
➢ Encourage the 70 Corridor community to establish a Community Development Corporation with a for-profit
development arm.
➢ Establish a small-scale mixed-use district or permitting process,revised parking requirements for commercial,
office,and institutional uses,and access management standards.
➢ Create flexible parking standards that encourage shared parking by mixed-peak uses and that encourage
alternate modes of transportation.
Hillsborough NC-86 Connector Study
The purpose of the NC 86 Connector Study was to identify feasible alternatives for connectivity in the area south of the
Town,generally bounded by Eno Mountain Road,NC 86, and I-85.
The project team reviewed existing plans;conducted rail crossing analysis;identified constraints and opportunities for
implementation of a new connection; developed feasible and constructable alternatives for a proposed connection and
provided planning-level cost estimates.
As part of the two-phased corridor study,the project team provided preliminary structural design for a bridge within the
resource-sensitive area.The desired connection involved traversing an area with a stream prone to flooding,major power
transmission towers, and an active railroad with future realignment plans.The study coordinated all communications
and reviews with the NCDOT Rail Division and NC Railroad.This project required ongoing and open communication
with the Town,local stakeholders,NCDOT Rail Division as well as the NCRR.
'°�88888$ea�'9��99�9898�"
Hillsborough Comprehensive Sustainability Plan I In Progress
Hillsborough is currently in the process of creating a comprehensive sustainability planning initiative that will set
community priorities and guide priority actions for years to come.The plan will guide future development and the
109 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
112
lib
transition to 100%clean energy,balancing environmental stewardship,resiliency,and racial justice with smart growth
that will allow for a thriving economy and a great quality of life for the residents of Hillsborough.
56.
The foundation of the plan involves reviewing,updating,and compiling existing strategic plans with sustainability as the
lens.Led by a series of public engagement events,the process will develop the plan goals and objectives;set the criteria
for establishing priorities;incorporate climate action and resiliency into the new plan;and create benchmarking and
tracking systems for the plan elements.
Plan elements focus on community connectivity,future land use,parks and recreation,rail station planning, corridor
planning,and climate action.A major priority for the Town is multimodal connections,for which the project team has
been evaluating opportunities and feasibility with safety and resiliency at top of mind.The plan elements are listed with
in the 8 main chapters:Town Government&Public Services,Land Use&Development,Environment&Natural Systems,
Transportation&Connectivity,Social Systems&Public Space,Housing&Affordability,Economic Systems&Tourism,
and Climate&Energy.
The plan's transportation and connectivity chapter outline and unifies recommendations listed in the Town's other
controlling plans,with specific future pedestrian and bike facilities planned to be included on the segments of US 70
within the Town's jurisdiction.Other key recommendations include an update of the Town's UDO and Zoning
Classifications, as well as an implementation plan for unifying the other controlling plans within the Town.
1.7.5 Other Plans, Studies, Policies, and Documents
Final E-B-M Access Management Plan (AMP)/April 2, 2019
This plan is a combination of the original adopted 2011 E-B-M AMP;2017 Transportation Study;and County Planning,
City of Mebane,and public comments.It is a long-range transportation vision for the area illustrating roadway alignment
and corridor width necessary to serve future land uses and address traffic impact as development occurs.
The vision of this plan is that the area will retain the core village area that will be the center of community life.An
efficient multi-modal transportation system will operate in the area and commercial and light industrial uses both in the
planning area and nearby will provide job opportunities to area residents.There will be a mix of housing types and sizes
that will be economically accessible to a broad spectrum of working people.Parks and greenspace will be connected by a
system of greenways that will allow people to enjoy a high-quality outdoor environment while also serving as corridors
for wildlife migration.
110 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
113
lib
Findings and recommendations specific to the US 70 corridor include:
➢ AMP update recommendations that may impact US-70 or adjacent properties and intersections.
➢ Require right-of-way dedication-based on the"Street Cross-Section Requirements"below-for all development
throughout the Planning Area and acquire necessary easements for infrastructure improvements.
➢ Work with NCDOT to pursue funding to advance the following improvements:
o Install a traffic light at high frequency crash intersections to ensure safety for all users and assist traffic
flow.
o Install a crosswalk with a flashing light at key intersections in the planning area.
➢ Consider a provision that any development having ingress/egress in the Planning Area either construct its fair
share of recommended improvements or provide payment in lieu of such improvements.
➢ Work with developers,the Orange County Economic Development Department,and Orange County Planning
and Inspection Department to implement access management recommendations.
➢ Identify and promote transportation projects in the planning area to respective planning organizations and
NCDOT.
➢ Pursue NCDOT SPOT Safety projects for key intersections throughout the planning area.
➢ Support NCDOT's Complete Streets Policy,which was being updated at the time this Plan was prepared,to
address multi-modal travel and protect pedestrian and bicycle circulation around residential subdivisions and
commercial areas.
➢ Take transit services into consideration as the E-B-M AMP is implemented.Currently,Orange County
➢ Public Transportation operates one route in the planning area called
➢ Intersection improvements for US-70 include:
o West bound left turn lane.
o East bound right turn lane.
o Northbound right and left turn lane.
o Recommendations include a roundabout at US-70/1-85 Connector.
2019 Eno New Hope Plan
The goal of this project is to provide an actionable plan for ensuring wildlife habitat connectivity across the landscape of
the Eno River and New Hope Creek-Jordan Lake watersheds through minimizing the impacts from future land uses
changes.
111 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
114
lib
Recommendations relevant to US 70 include encouraging the redesign of the I-85/US 70 to incorporate bridge designs that
allow wildlife to cross safely under the bridge and that allow pedestrian passage along any existing or planned trail-
system connectors.
2008 Eno Economic Development District Small Area Plan (amended 2009)
The Eno Economic Development District(EDD)Area Small Area Plan comprises of a focus area of approximately 942
acres and serves as the unification of previous plans while outlining recommendations made in the following topic areas:
Water and Sewer,Intergovernmental Issues,Land Use and Zoning,Transportation,Housing,Parks,Recreation and Open
Space,Communications,Other Recommendations,Potential Strategic Growth and Rural Conservation(SGRC)Program,
and Plan Updates,Implementation.
Relevant recommendations for the 1-70 corridor include supporting the proposed future improvements by NCDOT that
will redesign the 1-85/US 70 interchange and to develop a US 70 and secondary roads Access Management Plan to manage
traffic.
2022 Bringing Eno River State Park to Downtown Hillsborough
This project aims to acquire a group of parcels located near downtown between US 70 and 70A as park space.The
collection of parcels makes up over 200 acres of preserved open space to be added to the Eno River State Park.
Once added,the Eno River state park will comprise of over 4.7k acres connecting to Durham and other parts of Orange
County.Relevant findings include:
➢ Within the properties are approximately 4 miles of walking trails and 2.8 miles of river and tributary frontage.
➢ Two National Registry of Historical Places registered sites can also be located within the properties.
➢ The sale is being facilitating by the Eno River Association with 23%of the land value to be donated by the
preservation trust with the rest to be raised over the next fiscal years through public and private sources.
112 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
115
lib
Mountains-to-Sea (MST) North Carolina State Trail Master Plan (2015)
The vision for the MST is an off-road hiking trail connecting Clingmans Dome on North Carolina's western border to
Jockey's Ridge State Park on its eastern Outer Banks.In this master plan,the NC Division of Parks and Recreation(DPR)
remains focused on moving forward to connect these trail limits.
The MST segments 10-12 are included in the US 70 corridor study area. Segment 10,named Haw River Trail,joins the
Haw River Trail at the Guilford-Alamance County line and extends south along the Haw River Trail to Cane Creek and
follows Cane Creek North into Orange County.Segment 11 runs from the Alamance County line to the Occoneechee
Mountain State Natural Area just near the Town of Hillsborough limits.Segment 12 follows the Eno River through the
Town of Hillsborough,Occoneechee Speedway, and sections of Eno River State Park to Falls Lake.All these segments are
classified as mid-term to long-term in planning priority.
A Landscape Plan for Wildlife Habitat Connectivity in the Eno River and New Hope Creek Watersheds (2019)
Recognizing that the Eno River and New Hope Creek-Jordan Lake watersheds are home to ecologically
important habitats supporting a rich diversity of plant and animal species,this plan identifies actions to preserve and
enhance connectivity within and between wildlife habitats.Development and climate change cause habitat fragmentation
and loss.To survive,animal species must be able to move within and between remaining high-priority wildlife habitats.
Functional ecosystems require a connected network of habitats and corridors for movement.In addition to sustaining
diverse wildlife populations, such connections can benefit water quality,native plants,working farms and forests, and
public health and safety.
This plan helps ensure wildlife habitat connectivity throughout the Eno River and New Hope Creek-Jordan Lake
watersheds.The objectives most relevant to the US 70 Corridor Study involve guidance for decision-making related to
land protection,land-use,and transportation. Three basic principles associated with this effort are:
➢ Protect conservation priorities,including large natural areas and sensitive habitats.
➢ Buffer these areas from suburban and urban development.
➢ Connect these natural areas across the landscape to reduce habitat fragmentation.
113 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
116
lib
The table below identifies criteria for barrier roads and potential crossing locations,while the map identifies critical
wildlife crossing locations in Segments C,D,and E of the US 70 Corridor. This information will help guide design
recommendations in the US 70 Study.
4rtttttr:
Habitat guild Barrier road characteristics Potential crossing locations
Stu'face width>26 feet
General wet-wesie hardwood forests Shoulder curb present Intersections between barrier
Median barrier or curb present
(Four-toed salaznattder) Sniped median present roads and srreants
Traffic volume>2000
Surface width`X 26 feet
Shoulder cm-6 present
Dry-wet hardwood and mixed forests Intersections between barrier
Median barrier or curb present
(Eastern box turtle.salamanders) Striped median present roads and streams
Traffic roluule 2:2000
Sparsely settled minted habitats Speed limit 60 miles per hour Intersections between barrier
(nrediunr-sized
rumh;.snake) Median barrier present roads and streams
Traffic volume>10.000 Bridges over non-barrier roads
NINO
114 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
"
117
Vhb-
'1�791FTM
Protected areas(NCNHP2019b) overlaid on habitat corridors
(showing US 70 Study Corridor) -�
1
• -
.ANA
7 w + y , �k
t `
K
r IL
Protected Areas
Habitat-Corridor Network mA ik
-Highest Connectivity Value
M Higher Connectivity Value
High Connectivity Value � �•- �� _ x
Local or alternative network '
Unranked
Not connected
Project Area
County a
River it �
Lake l
Mayor Road
Adapted from A Landscape Plan for Wildlife Habitat Connectivity,2019
115 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
118
lib
1.8 Public Input
n.
The project team has solicited public input on this project by including a stakeholder team which is composed of
community and business leaders and will provide feedback throughout the project.The project team has created a
website,www.us70west.com,that provides project updates and facilitates public input.There are two rounds of
scheduled public workshops,the first of which begins in March 2023.The project team also conducted interviews with
several key stakeholders along the corridor.
1.8.1 Stakeholder Interviews
As part of the Public Involvement Plan,the project team solicited interviews from groups that possessed specialized
knowledge of the US 70 corridor.Interviews were conducted over the phone during December 2022.Interview subjects
were selected based on their subject matter specialization and ability to complement the study steam and existing data
sources.These sources included public safety,education, and real estate and development perspectives.Major findings
from these discussions are identified below.
➢ US 70 is often used an alternate route to I-85.
➢ Wildlife crossings are often seen along the corridor and are important to consider in further recommendations.
➢ Vehicle crashes are often seen along the corridor,most notably at West Hill Avenue in Hillsborough and 5f Street
in Mebane.
➢ There is an existing pedestrian use of the US 70 corridor,particularly for hiking and biking activities near Haw
River,Downtown Mebane,and Hillsborough's connection to the MST corridor.
➢ Speed limits should be considered for lowering in various areas of the corridor.
➢ There is a safety concern for the corridor,particularly at railroad crossings,including improvements to the I-85
connector.
116 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report
119
lib
1.8.2 Community Workshops
Community workshops will occur in two rounds with three sessions per round.The sessions are scheduled for locations
that balance the geography of the corridor and are intended for—but not limited to—the general public and affected
populations.The first round of community workshops is scheduled for March 2023,and the second round is scheduled
for late summer 2023.Workshop content will inform the community about identified deficiencies,and to confirm that the
Study Team has captured the concerns,needs,and vision of the community as the project team proceeds with developing
project alternatives and recommendations.Feedback and responses from the first round of public workshops will be
incorporated into subsequent project reports.
1.8.3 Community Events
Three Community Events throughout the project area will be attended to further engage the public and solicit input.
These events will be held XXX
1.9 Appendices
Rose and Associates Existing Economic Conditions Summary Brief
Traffic Count Data
Level-of-Service Analysis Reports
Crash Data&Analysis
Environmental Screening Summary
117 US 70 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions Report