Agenda - 02-16-1988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

IV. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES Alternative 1: Existing Plus Committed System The first alternative to be analyzed was the network of the existing street system plus all programmed projects. The programmed projects are included either in the 1988-1996 Transportation Improvement Program of the North Carolina Department of Transportation or in the Capital Improvement Programs of the local governments within the Urban Area. When projected 2000 and 2010 traffic demands were loaded on the Existing Plus Committed (E+C) system, capacity deficiencies were found for the entire area. Report *1 presents a detailed discussion of the deficiencies projected for 2000 and 2010. Figure 5.1 (Report *1) shows graphically the deficiencies of the E+C system. Alternative 2: Existing Plus Adopted Thoroughfare Plans The adopted Thoroughfare Plans for Durham and for Chapel Hill-Carrboro were analyzed by testing how well the totally implemented plans would handle the projected traffic volumes. The roads with existing or projected capacity deficiencies are discussed in Report *1's Chapter 5. When projected Year 2000 and 2010 vehicle trips demands were loaded onto these networks, it was found that the current adopted plans are generally adequate with some modifications. However, the areas outside of the plans, such as the area between Durham and Chapel Hill, the area north of the Eno River, the area along the I-40 corridor from the Research Triangle Park to Hillsborough, and the areas south and west of Chapel Hill and Carrboro were not included in the current plans, but have been areas of rapid growth in the last few years. The roads in these areas were found to have serious capacity deficiencies, both at present and in the future. The two-lane rural roads outside of the cities are serving as major radial arterial routes and are already carrying traffic volumes in excess of previous year 2000 projections. Many of these roads are already over capacity and will become critically deficient as growth in the Triangle continues. Though many of these areas were primarily farm land or forest when previous thoroughfare plans were designed, some are experiencing rapid urbanization. When subdivisions, shopping centers, industries, and office parks replaced tobacco fields and low density rural development, some of these roads quickly became overloaded, congested, unsafe, and undesirable. 4.1