1. Alternatives Analysis Orange County OUTBoard September 19 th, 2012

2. What is DCHC MPO? What is 2040 MTP? What is Alternatives Analysis? How to understand the data provided for the Alternatives Analysis Next steps Presentation Outline

3. Durham-Chapel Hill Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization Responsible for long range transportation planning in Durham City and County, and Parts of Orange County and Chatham County. Federal mandate – MPO must plan use of federal transportation funding Project must be in MPO plan to receive state or federal funding (CTP, MTP and TIP) Policy Board -- Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) composed mostly of local elected officials. 3 What is the DCHC MPO?

4. 4

5. Metropolitan Transportation Plan (Minimum 20 Year Plan) Comprehensive Transportation Plan (30+ Year Needs) TIP (7 Year Plan) Collector Street Plan

6. Lists highway, transit and other transportation projects to address future transportation deficiencies through year 2040. Assumptions – based on future land use, population and employment. Fiscal Constraint – Anticipated revenues must cover anticipated project costs. Funding -- Projects must be in MTP to receive state and federal funding (via Transportation Improvement Program – TIP) Used for Planning e.g., In development review, use MTP to reserve right-of-way for future highway and fixed guideway projects 6

7. 7 1. Goals and Objectives 2. Socioeconomic Data (population and employment forecasts) 3. Deficiency Analysis 4. Alternatives Analysis 5. Preferred Option 6. Draft MTP 7. Air Quality Conformity We are Here! Aug.-Oct. 2012 Oct.-Dec. 2012 Dec. 2012 Jan.-Apr. 2013 8. Federal Approval By June 2013

8. What – Set of highway and transit projects, and land use assumptions that produce transportation scenario for year 2040 Why – Compare impact of different projects and sets of projects on meeting transportation demand. Inform development of final MTP and CTP When – Release in August 2012 Public input (e.g., workshops, public hearing) in August, September and early October 2012 Alternatives Analysis

9. Alternatives Analysis (cont.) Land Use/Network Highway Intensive Transit Intensive Moderate CommPlanYes All-in-Transit NoYes We will compare 5 different Alternatives Each Alternative had the following: Land Use Scenario Transportation Network Alternative

10. 10 Alternatives Analysis -- Land Use Scenarios We start with Guide Totals Population Employment

11. Alternatives Analysis -- Land Use Scenarios Community Plan Based on local comprehensive plans Used in Deficiency Analysis (June 2012) All-in-Transit Based on local comprehensive plans, plus… Additional and enhanced transit oriented development Additional development attraction to rail and premium transit

12. Alternatives Analysis -- Land Use Scenarios Orange County Dwelling Units Community PlanAll-in-Transit

13. Alternatives Analysis -- Land Use Scenarios Orange County Employment Community PlanAll-in-Transit

14. Alternatives Analysis -- Transportation Networks Highway IntensiveTransit IntensiveModerate Highway 2035 LRTP CTP highway projects 410 new lanes miles $3.9 billion highway costs 2,979 total lane miles in network Basically, 2015 and 2025 tier No 2035 tier or CTP highway projects 120 new lanes miles $1.2 billion highway costs 2,842 total lanes miles in network Basically, 2035 LRTP (minus some minor highway projects) 261 new lanes miles $2.5 billion highway costs 2,737 total lanes miles in network Transit Current bus transit No rail transit 2,028 bus transit line miles (Triangle) Current bus transit County plans (based on ½ cent sales tax) LRT between Durham and Wake (instead of CRT) LRT and CRT extensions in Orange County CRT addition between Cary and western RTP All Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) in Chapel Hill 2,646 bus transit line miles (Triangle) 69,354 transit service miles (Triangle) 260 miles of rail transit alignment (Triangle) Current bus transit County plans (based on ½ cent sales tax) LRT and CRT (based on Locally Preferred Alternative) MLK Blvd Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) in Chapel Hill 2,882 bus transit line miles (Triangle) 66,211 transit service miles (Triangle) 75 miles of rail transit line (Triangle)

15. Alternatives Analysis -- Transit Intensive Only highest priority highway projects 2015 and 2025 tiers from 2035 LRTP East End Conn. I-40 and I-85 in Orange Co. US 70 and I-85 in Durham Co. NC 54 in Durham Co. 120 new lane miles $1.2 billion est. highway cost Highways

16. Alternatives Analysis -- Moderate Basically 2035 LRTP Plus.. I-40 HOV/HOT Northern Durham Parkway US 15-501 Freeway Conversion NC 147 widening NC 54/US 15-501 Bypass (Chapel Hill) 261 new lane miles $2.5 billion est. highway cost Highways

17. Alternatives Analysis -- Highway Intensive Basically 2035 LRTP Plus CTP highway projects Plus.. I-40 (ext.), I-85 and NC 147 HOV/HOT US 15-501/Manning interchange NC 751 in Chatham Co. US 70 bypass widening (Hboro) 410 new lane miles $3.9 billion est. highway cost Highways

18. Alternatives Analysis -- Highway Intensive Current bus transit No rail transit Transit

19. Alternatives Analysis -- Moderate Plus… bus transit in county plans LRT and regional rail based on LPA MLK Blvd bus rapid transit (Chapel Hill) Transit

20. Alternatives Analysis -- Transit Intensive Plus… LRT Durham to Raleigh LRT and CRT extensions in Orange Co. CRT: Cary through western RTP Addt/ bus rapid transit in Chapel Hill Transit

21. Triangle Regional Model Output Performance Measures Travel Isochrones Travel Time Congestion Maps (V/C) Alternatives Analysis -- Triangle Regional Model Output Currently running the two Transit Intensive Alternatives, again. Results available early next week.

22. Alternatives Analysis -- Performance Measures (VMT & Peak Speed)

23. Alternatives Analysis -- Performance Measures (Mode Share)

24. Alternatives Analysis -- Moderate Network (boarding/alighting by stop) All-in-Transit land use scenario provides about 25% increase in rail boardings/alightings.

25. Alternatives Analysis -- Transit Intensive (boarding/alighting by stop) Station boarding/alighting is generally low west and north of UNC campus (above red line in table) Caveat – The Transit Intensive network must be run again to correct highway network. These values could change.

26. Alternatives Analysis Output – Travel Times

27. Alternatives Analysis Output – Travel Times

28. Alternatives Analysis Output – Travel Times

29. Alternatives Analysis Output -- Congestion Maps - Moderate In Moderate, clears up congestion on many major roads, but congestion persists on I-40, NC 147, NC 54 and US 15-501.

30. Alternatives Analysis Output -- Congestion Maps – Highway Intensive In Highway Intensive, congestion persists on many of the same corridors.

31. Alternatives Analysis Output -- Congestion Maps – Transit Intensive In Transit Intensive, congestion (still) persists on many of the same corridors.

32. Are there certain projects and policies that should be promoted? Invest more on Roadways or Transit? Invest more on roadway widenings or hotspots (e.g., intersections with long delays)? Invest more on local bus service or fixed guideway service (e.g., rail transit)? Use traditional revenue sources only or increase local taxes (e.g., sales tax, real estate transfer tax)? What are your preferences? Given the limited budget, and projected areas of congestion, where do we invest our money? 32

33. 2040 MTP -- Next Steps Develop the Preferred Option (release in October 2012) Get public feedback on the Preferred Option (October through December 2012) Approve draft 2040 MTP (December 2012)