to: Roger L. Stancil, Town Manager
from: J.B. Culpepper, Planning Director
David Bonk, Long Range and Transportation Manager
subject: Public Forum on the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro MPO 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan
date: September 8, 2008
The purpose of tonight’s public forum is to review the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan Alternatives Analysis (Attachment 1) and receive comments from Town Advisory Boards and the public. The Council has been asked to provide a recommendation to the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Transportation Advisory Committee by October 8, 2008.
Federal regulations require the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization (DCHC MPO) to update the Urban Area Long Range Transportation Plan every three years. The Long Range Transportation Plan includes all roadway, transit, bicycle and sidewalk improvements anticipated to be implemented for a minimum period of 20 years. The Plan must be based on projections of socioeconomic data to the adopted design year, in this case 2035 and must balance anticipated revenues with projected expenditures.
On November 6, 2006, http://townhall.townofchapelhill.org/agendas/2006/11/06/8/ and November 20, 2006, http://townhall.townofchapelhill.org/agendas/2006/11/20/2a/, the staff provided the Council with information on the anticipated process for developing the 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan and related socioeconomic projections. On December 6, 2006, the Council approved the Chapel Hill 2035 socioeconomic projections, http://townhall.townofchapelhill.org/agendas/2006/12/04/13/.
The Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan is being developed in conjunction with the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization. Because both urban areas are part of the same air quality conformity area they must analyze their respective plans using the same regional transportation model. This modeling analysis utilizes the socioeconomic projections from both urban areas in assessing the impact of various transportation alternatives.
On August 13, 2008 the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Transportation Advisory Committee released the analysis of transportation network and socioeconomic scenarios for public comment and set a public hearing for September 10, 2008. On October 8, 2008 the Committee will approve one or more preferred alternatives to be analyzed. The preferred alternatives will incorporate elements of some or all of the alternatives currently being evaluated. The results of the Preferred Alternatives analysis will be provided to the Transportation Advisory Committee on December 10, 2008. At that time the Committee will be asked to approve a final 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan.
The 2035 Alternatives Analysis evaluates the performance of different transportation networks, which include different combinations of highway and public transit investments, to meet the travel demands generated by the projected 2035 population and employment within the region. Each alternative has been evaluated against a range of measures of effectiveness (MOE). These measures of effectiveness evaluate the ability of the transportation networks to maintain mobility while promoting the use of alternative modes of transportation, meet environmental targets and are cost effective. While all the different transportation networks have been evaluated against the adopted 2035 socioeconomic projections several of the networks have also been analyzed using variations of the socioeconomic projections to assess the potential impact of land use changes on regional mobility.
The Alternatives Analysis (Attachment 1) includes all the information related to the descriptions of the transportation networks, socioeconomic projections and the results of the evaluation of each alternative. We have included in Attachment 2 several tables and maps from the larger Alternative Analysis. We believe these materials provide summaries of the more detailed information included in the Alternatives Analysis Report.
Alternative Transportation Systems
The 2035 Alternatives Analysis includes the evaluation of four different primary transportation networks. These include:
A more detailed description of these alternatives networks, Summary of Transportation Systems (Alternative 2) is provided in Attachment 2, page 1-5. Page references are from the original Alternatives Analysis (Attachment 1).
In addition to these networks, the Alternatives Analysis includes the Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP), which is not fiscally constrained and includes more transportation projects than could be undertaken given anticipated resources through 2035. The inclusion of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan is required by state transportation regulations. Also included in the analysis is the Existing Plus Committed network (E+C). This network is not included in the Summary table but in is used in the Alternatives Analysis for comparison purposes in the Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) table. The existing plus committed network includes only those transportation projects currently programmed for construction or any public transit services operating by December, 2008.
Alternative Land Use Scenarios
The evaluation of the transportation alternatives includes several different land use alternatives. These include:
The table of the 2035 Land Use Scenarios (Attachment 2, page 5-2) provides a more detailed description of these alternatives. The population and employment tables, page 5-4, includes a summary of the percentage of employment and housing modified in each land use scenario.
Transportation Systems and Land Use Scenarios
The Combinations of Transportation Systems and Land Use Scenarios table, page 1-4, summarizes which combinations of transportation systems and land use scenarios have been analyzed using the triangle regional transportation model. All of primary 2035 transportation networks were analyzed with the Baseline 2035 socioeconomic projections. The Buildout projection was used in conjunction with the Comprehensive Transportation Plan system, while the Constrained land use projection was used to analyze the Intensive Highway alternative. The Corridor and Transit Node land uses were analyzed with each of the primary transportation networks.
Measure of Effectiveness
The Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) tables, pages 2-3 through 2-8, summarizes the results of the transportation modeling analysis, comparing the results in several categories against performance targets adopted by the Transportation Advisory Committee. The Existing Plus Committed transportation network is also included in the Measures of Effectiveness tables.
The Evaluation Measures tables provide a detailed summary of the analysis using the triangle regional model. We have included the analysis of various transportation networks using the Baseline socioeconomic projections, pages 2-10 and 2-11. The full set of evaluation measures are included in Attachment 1.
Capacity Deficiency Analysis
Beginning on page 2-23 of the Alternatives Analysis (Attachment 1) is a series of maps showing the projected levels of pm peak hour congestion along the transportation networks of the alternatives. The analysis includes the identification of four levels of congestion. The maps included in the Alternatives Analysis provide information for the entire regional network. We have provided a more detailed set of maps showing the results of the analysis for the Chapel Hill-Carrboro area. These maps are included in Attachment 2.
We have also included two maps in Attachment 2, Projected 2035 Daily Traffic, Fixed Guideway Alternative and Highway Intensive Alternative. These maps provide the projected daily traffic volumes along major transportation corridors and includes the recently released 2007 daily traffic volumes for comparison.
Financial Assessment
The Alternatives Analysis also includes an estimate of anticipated revenues and expenditures for each of the transportation network alternatives. The Preliminary Revenue and Cost Estimates table, page 3-2 (Attachment 2) includes a comparison of costs and revenues for the primary transportation networks. Pages 3-3 and 3-4 provide a more detailed summary of revenues from various funding sources.
We have identified below several key issues and a preliminary analysis of the impact of the various alternatives on Chapel Hill.
Key Issues
The Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Urban Area staff will conduct a public workshop on the 2035 Alternatives Analysis at the Chapel Hill Library on September 9, 2008 between 4:00 pm and 7:00 pm.
The Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Transportation Advisory Committee will receive public comment on the various transportation alternatives on September 10, 2008. The continued evaluation of these alternatives will result in the development of one or more preferred alternatives. The preferred alternative(s) may incorporate elements of each of the individual alternatives currently being analyzed. It is anticipated that the Transportation Advisory Committee will release one or more preferred alternatives on October 8, 2008 for public comment. The Transportation Advisory Committee is expected to receive the analysis of the preferred alternatives on December 10, 2008 and approve a final 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan at that time.
Planning Board: The Planning Board is expected to complete their review of the 2035 Alternatives Analysis at their September 16, 2008 meeting. We will provide the Council with the Board’s recommendation at the September 22, 2008 Council meeting.
Transportation Board: The Transportation Board is expected to complete their review of the 2035 Alternatives Analysis at their September 11, 2008 meeting. We will provide the Council with the Board’s recommendation at the September 22, 2008 Council meeting.
Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation: That the Council discuss the 2035 Alternatives Analysis and receive public comment. We will return on September 22, 2008 with specific recommendations for the Council’s consideration. If the Council believes this topic warrants a more detailed discussion, we suggest the Council schedule a work session for Monday, October 6, 2008. This would allow the Council to provide a recommendation to the Transportation Advisory Committee by Wednesday, October 8, 2008.