Orange County NC Website
Item 3.a <br /> DRAFT 9 <br /> 323 Nish Trivedi: As Matt said, it's better to segment these sections out. Right now, I'm listing it as the entire corridor as a <br /> 324 County concern/priority. Staff recommends using traffic count and crashes as the criteria for separating those segments. <br /> 325 It's listed as the entire corridor because we are recommending the entire corridor be a priority for the County for now and <br /> 326 future SPOT cycles. By breaking the corroder down into segments, each segment has a better chance of receiving a <br /> 327 higher score. <br /> 328 <br /> 329 Matt Day: The reason for segmentation is to cut down the cost to improve its score. <br /> 330 <br /> 331 Nish Trivedi: I will keep the board updated as to what segment will be. Prior to MPO/RPO submitting it to NCDOT, they <br /> 332 will go through a 30-day public review period before their policy boards adopts the final project submission list. <br /> 333 <br /> 334 Eric Broo: Does the DOT look at pedestrians and bicyclists when it comes to accidents? <br /> 335 <br /> 336 Nish Trivedi: Yes. Safety was a criteria in SPOT 5.0 and it was based on 20% crash density, 20% crash severity, 20% <br /> 337 critical crash rate, and 40% safety benefits. In SPOT 5, it accounted for 10% of the total score in Statewide, Region, and <br /> 338 Division. This criteria is expected to be carried forward with SPOT 6.0 <br /> 339 <br /> 340 Eric Broo: That includes vehicle and bicycle interactions? <br /> 341 <br /> 342 Nish Trivedi: NCDOT keeps record of all reported crashes, the crash data includes whether it involved pedestrian, cyclist, <br /> 343 or animal, as well as hitting a pole, object or rear ending someone. <br /> 344 <br /> 345 Nish Trivedi: Your current recommendation is to remove curb and gutter, have 11-foot travel lanes, and a four-foot paved <br /> 346 shoulder increased to five,and I will find the standard cross section NCDOT uses. Should I remove sidewalks as well? <br /> 347 <br /> 348 Heidi Perry: I think so. <br /> 349 <br /> 350 Eric Broo: If there is a school or community center in the future where there should be a sidewalk, I think it would be <br /> 351 reasonable to include that portion as a sidewalk. <br /> 352 <br /> 353 Nish Trivedi: Before we complete with TARPO, I want to mention the two projects that were mentioned for widening. As <br /> 354 Matt mentioned earlier, NC-86 is part of the adopted Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP). I haven't been given <br /> 355 direction on whether we're updating the CTP or not. The CTP calls for NC-54 and NC 86 to be widened. <br /> 356 <br /> 357 Matt Day: To provide a little background, NCDOT used to have a policy that was considered NC-86 as a strategic highway <br /> 358 corridor. Under the policy, NCDOT required that all plans had to show NC 86 as a four-lane expressway from Hillsborough <br /> 359 up to Virginia. That policy was removed a few years ago and we no longer have to show it as a four-lane express way. It <br /> 360 was never justified based on the volume of traffic. Recently, when the MPO did their CTP, it did not show a widening of <br /> 361 their section of it, so the RPO portion picks somewhere probably a couple miles north of Hillsborough. <br /> 362 <br /> 363 Heidi Perry: We should look at what the population growth is for that part of the county. <br /> 364 <br /> 365 Matt Day: If there's some question about whether that project is necessary, you have on opportunity to request that DOT <br /> 366 do an update to the plan to decide if that project is something that is based on updated forecasts, is necessary from the <br /> 367 traffic prospective, or something that can be removed from the plan. <br /> 368 <br /> 369 Nish Trivedi: What do I need to do to request that from NCDOT? <br /> 370 <br /> 371 Matt Day: Have the Board of Commissioners make a request to the RPO and then the RPO can make a request to DOT. <br /> 372 1 think Nish was also going to talk about the widening of 54. The current CTP shows widening only being necessary out to <br /> 373 Orange Grove Road, but a recent corridor study suggested it needed to be widened all the way to Graham so that's <br /> 374 another thing you would want to go back and revisit in the plan. <br /> 375 <br />