mpo board - gclmpogclmpo.org/wp-content/uploads/board-agenda-7-26... · 7/26/2018 · mpo board...

MPO Board Members (voting):

City of Belmont, City of Bessemer City, Town of Boiling Springs, City of Cherryville, Town of Cramerton, Town of Dallas, City of Gastonia (2),

City of Kings Mountain, City of Lincolnton, City of Lowell, City of Mount Holly, Town of Ranlo, City of Shelby, Town of Stanley, Cleveland County,

Gaston County, Lincoln County, NCDOT Board of Transportation

MPO Board

Agenda Packet

Thursday, July 26, 2018

6:30 pm

Gastonia Police Department—Community Room

200 Long Avenue, Gastonia, NC

1. Set Agenda

2. Determination of Quorum and Good Standing

3. Approval of June 28, 2018 Minutes

4. Introduction of Members and Guests

5. Public Comment

6. 2018-2027 MTIP Amendments, 2045 MTP Amendments and Air Quality

Conformity Determination

7. Performance Measures—PM2 & PM3 Targets

8. Other Business

a) P5.0 Board Subcommittee

b) CATS West Corridor Transit Study—Public Comment Opportunities

c) NCDOT Update—Division 12 Staff and TPD MPO Coordinator

d) Transit Ridership Update

GCLMPO Agenda Staff Contact: Randi Gates, Principal Transportation Planner

704.854.6604 / [email protected]

Page left blank intentionally.

2

City of Gastonia

STANLEY

CRAMERTONBELMONT

RANLO

DALLAS

UN ION RD

GAS TONDAY

SCHO O L RD

COXRD

REDBUD DR

YORK HWY

E FRANKLIN BLVD

SYOR

K RD

S NEWHOPE RD

ARCHIE W HITE

SIDE

SRD

EIGHTHAVE

S MAR IETTA

ST

E O ZA R K AVE

E GARRISON BLVD

NEAL HAWKINS RD

W GARR ISO N B LV D

KENDRICK RD

WDAVIDSO N AVE

HOFFMAN RD

BESSEMER CITY RD

NNEW HOPERD

LINWOOD RD TITMAN RD

B ROWN ST

CRAMERTON RD

W FR AN K LIN BLV DE LO N G AV E

ROBIN

WOO

D RD

DRMA RTINLKINGJRWAY

BEATY RD

FAIRVIEW DR

GAST O NIATECHNO LOGY PKWY

ARMS TRON

GFO

RDRD

^̀

HIGHLAND RAIL TRAIL

GastonCountySocialServices

QTAdditionalParking

P a r k ing

Parking

E LONG AVE

Gastonia CityPolice Dept.

N OA

KLAN

D ST

DR M

ARTIN

L KI

NG JR

WAY

MA

GN

OL I

AST

E PAGE AVE

4

BESSEMERCITY

*S:\Transportation Planning\Meeting Location Maps\MEETING LOCATION MAP CITY POLICE.mxd

Gastonia, NCMPO BOARD MEETING LOCATION:Gastonia City Police Dept.200 E. Long Ave.Gastonia, NC

^̀


4

Post Office Box 1748 150 South York Street

Gastonia, North Carolina 28053 Gastonia, North Carolina 28052

Phone (704) 866-6837 Fax (704) 869-1960

AGENDA

The MPO Board of the Gaston-Cleveland-Lincoln Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) will

meet Thursday, July 26, 2018 in the Gastonia Police Department Community Room. The Police

Department is located at 200 Long Avenue in Gastonia, NC. Dinner will be served at 5:45 PM and

the meeting will begin at 6:30 PM. The following is the agenda for the meeting:

1. Set Agenda

Presenter: Scott Neisler, MPO Board Chair

The agenda needs to be set to include adding “New” or “Other Business.”



The bylaws for the MPO require a quorum of 50% of voting members. This requires

attendance of at least nine (9) of the following members:

[ ] City of Belmont

[ ] City of Bessemer City

[ ] Town of Boiling Springs

[ ] City of Cherryville

[ ] Town of Cramerton

[ ] Town of Dallas

[ ] City of Gastonia (1/2)

[ ] City of Gastonia (2/2)

[ ] City of Kings Mountain

[ ] City of Lincolnton

[ ] City of Lowell

[ ] City of Mount Holly

[ ] Town of Ranlo

[ ] City of Shelby

[ ] Town of Stanley

[ ] County of Cleveland*

[ ] County of Gaston

[ ] County of Lincoln

*Not in Good Standing (Missed three or more consecutive meetings)

[ ] NC Board of Transportation*

According to the MPO Board Bylaws, the NC Board of Transportation member is the only

voting member that does not count towards the quorum.

3. Approval of Minutes


Review and adopt the minutes from the regularly scheduled meeting of June 28, 2018.

ACTION REQUESTED: Approve as presented.

4. Introduction of Members & Guests


All guests shall introduce themselves at this time.

5. Public Comment


Any public comment will be presented and addressed at this time. Each person desiring to

speak shall fill out a form prior to the beginning of the MPO meeting. Each person has three

(3) minutes to speak. 5



Phone (704) 866-6837 Fax (704) 869-1960

6. 2018-2027 MTIP Amendments, 2045 MTP Amendments and AQ Conformity Determination

Presenter: Randi Gates, Principal Transportation Planner

The GCLMPO’s Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP) and 2045

Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) need to be amended to reflect modifications that

have been made to the 2018-2027 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). Due to

the amendments, an air quality conformity determination is also required.

ACTIONS REQUESTED:

1. Approve 2018-2027 MTIP Amendments, 2045 MTP Amendments, and Draft Conformity

Determination Report to be released for public comment.

2. Approve a 30-day public comment period (September 1-30, 2018).

7. Performance Measures – PM2 & PM3 Targets


Federal transportation legislation requires that State DOTs and MPOs adopt performance-

based planning as a component of the metropolitan planning process.

ACTIONS REQUESTED:

1. Approve state targets for PM2 and PM3 to be released for public comment.


8. Other Business

a. P5.0 Board Subcommittee

b. CATS West Corridor Study-Public Comment Opportunities

c. NCDOT Update – Division 12 Staff and TPD MPO Coordinator

d. Transit Systems Ridership

9. Adjournment

If you have any additional items or questions regarding this agenda, please contact Randi

Gates at 704-854-6604 or [email protected], or Julio Paredes at 704-866-6980 or

[email protected].

6

mailto:[email protected]

MEETING MINUTES Gaston-Cleveland-Lincoln

Metropolitan Planning Organization (GCLMPO) Board

June 28, 2018

The scheduled Board meeting of the Gaston-Cleveland-Lincoln Metropolitan Planning Organization was held on

Thursday June 28, 2018 from 6:30 pm – 8:12 pm at the Gastonia Police Department located at 200 Long Avenue,

Gastonia, NC.

Members Present

Henry L. Beam III City of Cherryville, Mayor

Robin Conner Town of Ranlo, Commissioner

Ken Ervin City of Lowell, Council Member

Johnny Hutchins Cleveland County, Commissioner

Keith Miller City of Kings Mtn., Council Member

Scott Neisler City of Kings Mtn., Mayor, MPO Chair

Martin Oakes Lincoln County, Commissioner

Becky Smith City of Bessemer City, Mayor

Danny Sparrow Town of Stanley, Mayor Pro Tem

Martha Stowe City of Belmont, Mayor Pro Tem

Richard Turner City of Belmont, Council Member, MPO Vice-Chair

Reid Washam Town of McAdenville, Council Member

Staff Present

Randi Gates GCLMPO, Principal Transportation Planner

Julio Paredes GCLMPO, Planner

Kristen Wheeler GCLMPO, Administrative Assistant II

Guests Present

Steve Blakley Kimley-Horn, Senior Vice President

Ahmad El-Khatib NCDOT-TPD, Transportation Engineer

Dean Ledbetter NCDOT Div. 12, Corridor Development Engineer

Chris Martin Cleveland County, Planning Director

Jennifer Portanova NCDOT, State Systems Operations Engineer

Jim Walker Attorney at Law

7

Absences (x = Absent) / Not In Good Standing

1. Set Agenda


Mr. Neisler stated that it was time to set the agenda. Mr. Oakes requested to add an item, separating project

R-5859 into two (2) projects, to the agenda.

Mr. Oakes motioned to approve the agenda as amended. Mr. Turner seconded and the motion

passed unanimously.



At approximately 7:00 pm Mrs. Gates determined that a quorum had been met.

3. Approval of Minutes


Mr. Neisler opened the floor for motions to approve the May 24, 2018 minutes.

Mr. Beam motioned to approve the minutes as presented. Mr. Sparrow seconded and the motion

passed unanimously.

4. Introduction of Members & Guests


Mr. Neisler asked that all members and guests introduce themselves.

Member Jan Mar

May

Jun

City of Belmont ------ ------ ------ ------

City of Bessemer City ------ ------ ------ ------

Town of Boiling Springs ------ ------ x x

City of Cherryville ------ ------ ------ ------

Town of Cramerton ------ ------ ------ x

Town of Dallas ------ ------ x x

City of Gastonia (1/2) x ------ x x

City of Gastonia (2/2) ------ ------ x x

City of Kings Mountain ------ ------ ------ ------

City of Lincolnton x ------ x x

City of Lowell ------ ------ ------ ------

City of Mount Holly ------ ------ ------ x

Town of Ranlo ------ x ------ ------

City of Shelby ------ ------ ------ x

Town of Stanley ------ x ------ ------

Cleveland County ------ ------ ------ ------

Gaston County ------ x x x

Lincoln County ------ ------ x ------

NCDOT – Board of Transportation x ------ x x

8

5. Public Comment


Mr. Jim Walker noted that there was a large piece of property recently purchased in Charlotte and Amazon

has announced their intention of using that land for a new warehouse. Mr. Walker stated that the GCLMPO

has helped contribute to the infrastructure necessary to make this happen and that he appreciates all the

work the GCLMPO has put in. Mr. Walker stated that he hopes, as the GCLMPO continues to grow the

municipalities within it, that opportunities will come to “this side” of the river. Mr. Walker closed by thanking

the Board for their support of the I-85 widening project as well as Build a Better Boulevard.

CONSENT AGENDA

6. 2018-2027 MTIP Modifications

C-5600 STATEWIDE

VARIOUS, STATEWIDE

CMAQ PROJECTS TO

IMPROVE AIR QUALITY

WITHIN NONATTAINMENT

AND MAINTENANCE

AREAS.

ADD ENGINEERING, RIGHT

OF WAY, CONSTRUCTION,

OPERATIONS AND

IMPLEMENTATION IN FY 20

NOT PREVIOUSLY

PROGRAMMED, AT REQUEST

OF TRANSPORTATION

PLANNING BRANCH.

ENGINEERING

FY 2018 - $817,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2018 - $204,000 (S(M))

FY 2019 - $1,664,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2019 - $416,000 (S(M))

FY 2020 - $817,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2020 - $204,000 (S(M))

RIGHT-OF-WAY

FY 2018 - $817,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2018 - $204,000 (S(M))

FY 2019 - $1,664,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2019 - $416,000 (S(M))

FY 2020 - $817,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2020 - $204,000 (S(M))

CONSTRUCTION

FY 2018 - $4,902,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2018 - $1,225,000 (S(M))

FY 2019 - $9,983,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2019 - $2,496,000 (S(M))

FY 2020 - $4,901,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2020 - $1,226,000 (S(M))

IMPLEMENTATION

FY 2018 - $817,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2018 - $204,000 (S(M))

FY 2019 - $1,664,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2019 - $416,000 (S(M))

FY 2020 - $817,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2020 - $204,000 (S(M))

OPERATIONS

FY 2018 - $817,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2018 - $204,000 (S(M))

FY 2019 - $1,664,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2019 - $416,000 (S(M))

FY 2020 - $817,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2020 - $204,000 (S(M))

$41,221,000

9

C-5601 STATEWIDE

VARIOUS, CMAQ PROJECTS

TO IMPROVE AIR QUALITY

ACROSS MULTIPLE

NONATTAINMENT AND

MAINTENANCE AREAS. ADD

ENGINEERING, RIGHT OF

WAY, CONSTRUCTION,

OPERATIONS AND

IMPLEMENTATION IN FY 20

NOT PREVIOUSLY

PROGRAMMED, AT REQUEST

OF TRANSPORTATION

PLANNING BRANCH.

ENGINEERING

FY 2018 - $117,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2018 - $30,000 (L)

FY 2019 - $239,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2019 - $60,000 (L)

FY 2020 - $118,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2020 - $29,000 (L)

RIGHT-OF-WAY

FY 2018 - $117,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2018 - $30,000 (L)

FY 2019 - $239,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2019 - $60,000 (L)

FY 2020 - $118,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2020 - $29,000 (L)

CONSTRUCTION

FY 2018 - $703,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2018 - $176,000 (L)

FY 2019 - $1,433,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2019 - $358,000 (L)

FY 2020 - $704,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2020 - $176,000 (L)

IMPLEMENTATION

FY 2018 - $117,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2018 - $30,000 (L)

FY 2019 - $239,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2019 - $60,000 (L)

FY 2020 - $118,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2020 - $29,000 (L)

OPERATIONS

FY 2018 - $117,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2018 - $30,000 (L)

FY 2019 - $239,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2019 - $60,000 (L)

FY 2020 - $118,000 (CMAQ)

FY 2020 - $29,000 (L)

$5,922,000

Mr. Martin Oakes questioned if all of the projects listed under C-5600 were to address air quality and

Mrs. Gates explained that, yes, all CMAQ projects address air quality.

Mr. Ervin motioned to approve the consent agenda as presented. Mr. Oakes seconded and the

motion passed unanimously.

REGULAR AGENDA

7. I-85 Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) Presentation

Presenter: Jennifer Portanova, State Traffic Systems Operations Engineer, NCDOT

Ms. Portanova presented on the Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) project along I-85 in Mecklenburg

and Gaston Counties from Exit 10 to Exit 33. ICM is a way of better managing traffic using existing infrastructure

and all of the roadway network rather than one roadway only. To manage congestion on that particular

portion of I-85 NCDOT hopes to use traveler information, signal system timing and various other tools in tandem

to optimize the flow of traffic.

10

Solutions can range from high tech, high cost technology, message boards and software to low tech, manual

solutions that can be activated at will. For I-85 NCDOT will first deploy low tech solutions to address incidents

and how to most effectively manage those. Though the original plan was to implement the ICM plan several

years prior to the I-85 widening project, the project being moved up in the TIP will afford the opportunity for

the plan to be used prior to, during and following the completion of construction.

ICM has been used for years in hurricane evacuations and construction projects but has not been tested as

thoroughly for preventive use, as it will be for I-85, so NCDOT hopes to show its usefulness in everyday situations.

NCDOT found that there are roughly ninety-four (94) signals along this specific section of I-85 but only about

eight (8), in Belmont and Gastonia, are coordinated. NCDOT hopes to coordinate all the signals as part of

the process to flush traffic that would be shifted from I-85 to US-74 during an incident or construction.

Though coordinating with multiple agencies and implementing the technology necessary will be a challenge,

the fact that North Carolina owns all the freeways and arterials simplifies the management. The project will

use CMAQ funding to add cameras in Gastonia, on US-74, two (2) new overhead message boards to help

with traveler information, signal timing plans, setting up protocols and developing response plans.

Implementation is tentatively scheduled for spring 2019.

Ms. Portanova stated that overhead message signs and, ideally, GPS routing will be used to deliver directions

to travelers. If people aren’t using GPS for their commute then overhead messages will alert people of a

better route being available. Certain apps, such as Waze, can be used in tandem with these other options

to keep up with traffic in real-time.

A short discussion regarding the current resurfacing of I-85 ensued, followed by a question and answer portion

of the presentation.

8. SPOT P5.0 Local Point Assignment—Regional Impact Tier


Mrs. Randi Gates noted that it is time to assign local input points to the Regional Impact Tier projects. The

point assignments are the same as presented at the May meeting where the point assignments were

approved to release for public comment. A 15-day public comment period was held from May 25 – June 8,

2018 as well as three (3) public meetings, one (1) in each county. An interactive map was available on the

GCLMPO website where comments were also received. Over seventy-five (75) comments were received and

GCLMPO staff replied to each.

Multiple negative comments were received regarding project H171317, the NC-273 widening in Mt. Holly. The

GLCMPO is not proposing to add input points to that project as it did not score high enough in the Local Input

Point Methodology to receive points from the MPO. The comments have been shared with NCDOT Division

12 which could change their stance on adding points to the project.

The subcommittee has recommended the assignment of 100 (maximum) Regional Impact local input points

to the top eighteen (18) projects in the Regional Impact tier based on the ranking process. No deviations

from the process are recommended at this tier.

Two Statewide Mobility projects were not fully funded in P5.0, and thus are eligible for consideration of

Regional Impact local input points. The subcommittee recommended that local input points should not be

applied to these projects because the assignment of local input points to these projects would encourage

the use of a substantial portion of Regional Impact funds to be spent on Statewide Mobility projects if funded

in the STIP.

Mr. Martin Oakes noted that on the interactive map when there is an intersection and road project marked

together you can only see one (1) of the projects and that there may be a presentation issue. Mrs. Gates

responded that Mr. Julio Paredes will look into this issue.

11

Mr. Johnny Hutchins inquired who makes up the subcommittee that ranked the projects. Mrs. Gates explained

that the subcommittee is made up of members of the TCC; staff, planning directors and sometimes city and

town managers from all three (3) counties. Mr. Hutchins then stated that in previous years a subcommittee of

the TCC submitted projects to a subcommittee of the Board before the project rankings were decided

because the TCC, nor any of its subcommittees, have decision-making power for the Board. Mrs. Gates

explained that the subcommittees of the TCC make recommendations to the TCC who in turn make

recommendations to the Board but the Board has the final say.

Mr. Neisler inquired if there was a deadline by which the SPOT P5.0 Local Point Assignments for the Regional

Impact Tier have to be submitted or if there is time for the Board to convene a subcommittee of its own to

review the points allocations. Mrs. Gates noted that all assignments must be uploaded into the SPOT 5.0

system by July 27, 2018 which is the day after the July Board meeting; it was timed to bring to the June Board

meeting to ensure that staff could meet the deadline even if there were technical or other unexpected issues

with the system.

Mr. Richard Turner asked if cascading projects such as H170691(NC 273/South Point Rd. Intersection

Improvements), or projects that were submitted by Division 12, would have a good chance of getting support

and/or funding in the Division Needs Tier. Mrs. Gates noted that she can only speculate but typically projects

are supported by whomever submits them. Mrs. Gates deferred to Mr. Dean Ledbetter to continue to address

project H170691 further. Mr. Ledbetter said that, at the time, no Division Needs points are allotted for project

H170691 unless public comment or other cascading projects were to change. Mr. Turner then asked why

Division 12 would submit the project but not plan to support it in the Division Needs tier. Mr. Ledbetter

explained that, though they submitted and fully supported it in the Regional Impact tier, the project’s

quantitative score from the State is not high enough that additional support from either the MPO or Division

12 would get it funded and there are other projects in the Division tier where the points from Division 12 could

have more impact. The final outcome of this discussion was that the Board would like to have its own

subcommittee review the point assignments in the Division Needs tier.

Mr. Martin Oakes requested that the Board remove the 100 local input points from project R-5859 (NC 16

Business Widening), due to the lower quantitative score. A discussion regarding how to reassign those points

for maximum impact ensued, including the option of donating the points to a neighboring MPO. Ultimately

the Board decided to add the points taken from project R-5859 to project H170792 (NC 273/Lucia Riverbend

Hwy. Intersection Improvements).

Mr. Oakes motioned to approve the responses to the public comments received. Mr. Ervin

seconded and the motion passed unanimously.

Mr. Oakes motioned to approve local input point assignments for Regional Impact tier projects

with the amendment of removing the 100 local input points from project R-5859 and adding them

to project H170792. Mr. Sparrow seconded and the motion passed unanimously.

9. CTP Map Amendment


Mrs. Randi Gates stated that the GCLMPO received a formal request from the Town of Dallas to amend the

CTP maps for pedestrian facilities and on-street bike facilities along NC 279. Design has started on the already

funded NC-279 widening project from downtown Dallas and into the Gastonia area. The Town of Dallas would

like bike lanes and sidewalks added to this project; in order for NCDOT to consider that request the project

must be on the GCLMPO’s CTP map. The GCLMPO has worked with the Town of Dallas, Gaston County and

the City of Gastonia to make sure all three (3) jurisdictions involved approve the amendment. Amending the

GCLMPO’s map does not require that the facilities be added so there is no monetary commitment expected

from any of the communities at this time. For the sake of ease and cost savings, the ideal time to add these

bike and pedestrian facilities would be during the widening of NC-279.

Mr. Hutchins motioned to approve the CTP Map Amendment as presented. Mr. Oakes seconded and

the motion passed unanimously.

12

10. City of Gastonia BUILD Grant—Letter of Support


Mrs. Randi Gates noted that the City of Gastonia, City of Lowell and Gaston County are jointly applying for a

BUILD grant; a federal grant that replaced the TIGER program. The application submitted last year was not

funded so has been edited and will be resubmitted. The project being submitted is a boulevard-like facility

to connect Lineberger Rd. via an above grade crossing of I-85 to NC-7 in Lowell. This connection would open

over 400 acres of developable land. Once the land is developed east-west connections will be made from

Main St. in Lowell at Exit 22 on I-85 to Aberdeen/Cox Rd. The project is included in the CTP. A letter of support

from the MPO is being requested. The MPO will also seek resolutions of support from the three (3) government

agencies that have partnered on the project.

Mr. Hutchins motioned to approve the City of Gastonia BUILD Grant Letter of Support as presented.

Mr. Turner seconded and the motion passed unanimously.

11. New Business – Splitting Project R-5859

Mr. Martin Oakes stated that Lincoln County would like to split R-5859 (NC 16 BUS Widening) into two (2)

separate projects for submittal into the next round of prioritization (P6.0). The project as it is currently scoped,

from Fairfield Forest Road to NC 73 does not score well. Mr. Oakes believes that if the project is split into two

segments: a) NC 73 to Unity Church Road and b) Unity Church Road to Fairfield Forest Road, the project will

score much higher and have a better chance at getting funded.

Mrs. Randi Gates noted that she, Mr. Richard Permenter and Mr. Mark Stafford, the NCDOT Division 12

Engineer, spoke after the March Board meeting about this issue and decided that in advance of the next

round of prioritization, staff would test score this project as two separate segments. Ms. Gates introduced Mr.

Dean Ledbetter, the new Corridor Development Engineer for NCDOT Division 12. She noted that his role was

created to help the more rural areas develop projects that are going to score better prior to submittal during

prioritization. Mr. Ledbetter, Ms. Gates, and representatives from Lincoln County will look further into this

project as two separate segments.

Mr. Oakes motioned to approve requesting NCDOT split project R-5859 into two (2) projects as

presented. Mr. Turner seconded and the motion passed unanimously.

12. Other Business

a. CMAQ Grant Award—Gaston County

i. Mrs. Randi Gates received notification at the end of May that the project the GCLMPO

submitted for the FY19 CMAQ funding was awarded. This project will add sidewalks along

Neal Hawkins Rd. to connect to Martha Rivers Park. A total of 1.48 million dollars from CMAQ

was awarded and Gaston County will provide a 20% local match of roughly $372,000.00 for

a total project cost amount of 1.86 million dollars. Design will begin in FY19 with construction

beginning in FY20.

b. NCDOT Update – Division 12 Staff and TPD MPO Coordinator

Mr. Dean Ledbetter had the following updates:

i. I-5000 is about 27% complete. Scheduled completion date November 2019.

ii. I-85 milling and paving from Exit 22 to Mecklenburg County is still ongoing. There will be

some nighttime lane closures.

iii. Right of way is complete for the passing lane project on NC-279 and construction is set to

begin this year.

iv. R-5712 (NC 16 BUS / Unity Church Road/Triangle Circle Intersection Improvements) design

in underway.

Mr. Ahmad El-Khatib had the following updates:

i. Any CTP amendments that were approved since the 2017 adoption are slated to be

before the NC Board of Transportation at the December meeting.

c. Transit Systems Ridership

Provided for information only.

13

13. Adjournment

There being no further business Mr. Neisler opened the floor for motions to adjourn.

Mr. Beam motioned to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Sparrow seconded and the motion passed

unanimously.

14



Phone (704) 866-6837 Fax (704) 869-1960

Agenda Item #6

To: Board Members and Interested Persons

From: Randi P. Gates, AICP, Principal Transportation Planner

Date: July 26, 2018

Subject: 2018-2027 MTIP Amendments, 2045 MTP Amendments and AQ Conformity

Determination

BACKGROUND: The GCLMPO’s Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP) needs

to be amended to reflect the following modifications that have been made to the 2018-2027

State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).

I-5719GASTON

COUNTY

I-85, US 321 TO NC 273. WIDEN TO EIGHT

LANES. (COORDINATE WITH I-5713)

ACCELERATE ROW FROM FY 22 TO FY 21

AND CONSTRUCTION FROM FY 24 TO FY

21.

RIGHT-OF-WAY

FY 21 - $18,800,000 (T)

FY 22 - $18,800,000 (T)

FY 21 - $ 2,900,000 (T)

CONSTRUCTION

FY 21 - $10,750,000 (T)

FY 22 - $51,062,000 (T)

FY 23 - $51,063,000 (T)

FY 24 - $51,063,000 (T)

FY 25 - $51,062,000 (T)

$255,500,000

U-5821GASTON

COUNTY

NC 279 (NEW HOPE RD), SR 2478

(TITMAN RD) TO SR 2435 (UNION-NEW

HOPE RD). WIDEN TO 4-LANES.

COST INCREASE EXCEEDING $2 MILLION

AND 25% THRESHOLDS

RIGHT-OF-WAY

FY 19 - $36,400,000 (T)

UTILITIES

FY 19 - $ 3,300,000 (T)

CONSTRUCTION

FY 21 - $ 8,950,000 (T)

FY 22 - $ 8,950,000 (T)

$57,600,000

B-5961GASTON

COUNTY

SR 1421 (MARYS GROVE RD), REPLACE

BRIDGE 350097 OVER UT OF MUDDY

FORK CREEK.

PROJECT ADDED AT REQUEST OF

STRUCTURES MANAGEMENT UNIT

RIGHT-OF-WAY

FY 20 - $ 67,500 (STBGOFF)

CONSTRUCTION

FY 21 - $675,000 (STBGOFF)

$742,500

I-5916CLEVELAND

COUNTY

I-85, SOUTH CAROLINA LINE TO GASTON

COUNTY LINE. PAVEMENT

REHABILITATION.

ACCELERATE CONSTRUCTION FROM FY

23 TO FY 21 AT REQUEST OF DIVISION

CONSTRUCTION

FY 21 - $5,294,000 (NHPIM)

$5,294,000

In addition to the MTIP amendments, the GCLMPO’s 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP)

needs to be amended to reflect the change in scope of the NC 279 Widening Project (U-5821).

The adopted 2045 MTP indicates a widening to 3-lanes. The 2045 MTP also needs to be amended

to reflect the accelerated timeline of the I-85 Widening Project (I-5719).

15



Phone (704) 866-6837 Fax (704) 869-1960

An air quality conformity determination is also required due to the Clean Air Act’s requirement

that an MPO’s plans and programs conform to the purpose of the state implementation plan (SIP)

for achieving air quality standards. Conformity to the purpose of the SIP means that the

transportation activities will not cause new violations of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards

(NAAQS), worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS.

As required by the GCLMPO’s Public Participation Process, the MTIP amendments, MTP

amendments and draft Air Quality Conformity Determination Report will be released for public

comment from September 1 – 30, 2018. In addition, there will be at least three public comment

opportunities for the general public to review and comment on the documents. MPO staff is

currently working to schedule the public meetings.

TCC ACTION: Recommended approval as presented.

BOARD ACTIONS REQUESTED:

1. Approve 2018-2027 MTIP Amendments, 2045 MTP Amendments, and Draft Conformity

Determination Report to be released for public comment.


ATTACHMENTS:

1. 2045 MTP Amendments

2. Metrolina Area Transportation Conformity: Pre-Analysis Consensus Plan (8-Hour Ozone)

16

TIP Project Reason for 2045 MTP Amendment County STI TierTIP ID

Project Length

(mi)

Preliminary ROW Date

Preliminary Construction Date

Programmed Amount (2018-2027)

Current MTP Horizon Year

Recommended MTP Horizon Year

I-85 WideningThe project is being accelerated. Accelerate ROW from FY 22 to FY 21 and construction from FY 24 to FY 21.

Gaston Statewide I-5719 9.8 2021 2021 $257,509,000 2025No change requested to

MTP Horizon Year

NC 279 WideningThe project scope has changed from widening to a 3-lane to widening to a 4-lane. The cost has also increased due to the change in scope.

Gaston Division U-5821 3.8 2019 2021 $57,600,000 2025No change requested to

MTP Horizon Year

Anticipated Adoption: October 25, 2018

Modify MTP Project Details

17


18

Metrolina Area Transportation Conformity: Pre-Analysis Consensus Plan (8-Hour Ozone)

June 22, 2018

19

Prepared Cooperatively Between the

Charlotte Regional Transportation Planning Organization, Cabarrus Rowan Metropolitan Planning Organization, the Gaston Cleveland Lincoln Metropolitan Planning Organization and

the Rocky River Rural Planning Organization North Carolina Department of Transportation

and the Federal Highway Administration

Metrolina Area Transportation Conformity:

Pre-Analysis Consensus Plan June 22, 2018

The Charlotte Regional Transportation Planning Organization (CRTPO) and the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT-representing rural portions of the Metrolina maintenance area are proposing the following plan and procedures to conduct a transportation conformity analysis. This plan is being submitted to the interagency consultation partners for soliciting consensus before commencement of a full-scale transportation conformity analysis. The plans and procedures may be revised as the MPO’s and NCDOT proceed with the analysis. After consensus is reached; notification of changes will be made to the interagency consultation partners. Metrolina Area MPOs (for this conformity process):

Charlotte Regional Transportation Planning Organization (CRTPO) Cabarrus Rowan Metropolitan Planning Organization (CRMPO) Gaston Cleveland Lincoln Metropolitan Planning Organization (GCLMPO)

Donut Areas: Rural portion of Union county outside of the MPO area

The following pollutants will be included in this conformity determination:

1997 8-Hour Ozone 2008 8-Hour Ozone

Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) and Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP)

1. Existing Land Use and Demographics: For CRTPO, CRMPO, GCLMPO and rural (donut) Union County

Staff collected data as outlined in Attachment A. An economist was contracted to produce population, household, and employment estimates in five-year increments from 2010 to 2050 using a top down approach. The Regional partners then applied local knowledge to finalize the county totals in their areas and produce the Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) level base year data. CRMPO also applied local knowledge to produce their TAZ level projections. CRTPO and GCLMPO used the Metrolina CommunityViz Model 16v1.0 as a base year data management tool and applied the model to develop TAZ level projections. The Metrolina CommunityViz Model was developed under contract to the Centralina Council of Governments and City Explained, Inc.

20

Data sources include the following:

• 2010 Census data; and 2014 / 2015 Census Estimates• 2010-2014 American Community• Survey• 2015 InfoUSA employment data;• Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, Ninth Edition;• 2010 Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) data• Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data;• Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) data;• area school system data;• building permit data;• tax data;• zoning; and• land use plans

2. MTP Model Validation (Base) Year:2015

3. MTIP Years: 2018-2022

4. MTP Horizon Year: 2045

5. MTP Travel Demand Intermediate Years:

a. 2008 O3 Maintenance SIP: 2025 (MTP)*/2026* (regional emissions analysiscomparison) & 2035

*The 2025 and 2026 project lists are identical. There are NO additional projects that come online in 2026.The MPO’s will keep the 2025 HY project list in their MTP’s but provide an explanation in the conformitydetermination report (CDR) that the project lists are identical for both 2025 (MTP) and 2026 (regionalemissions analysis-REA). 2026 is used in the CDR-REA because it is a 2008 Ozone SIP budget year and anMRM model run year (no interpolation) comparison

21

6. Transportation Conformity Analysis Years (1997 and 2008 8-Hour Ozone) The Tables below summarize transportation conformity analysis methods and years for the different parts of the Metrolina non-attainment/maintenance areas. Specific conformity year information is listed in the following tables:

1997 O3 Maintenance SIP Emission comparison years

County

Area model status

Area emissions

budget status

Emissions analysis source 20252 (modeled)

2035 (modeled)

2045 Horizon

(modeled) Mecklenburg-Union MPO/Rocky River RPO MVEBs (all of Mecklenburg and Union County in the maintenance area)

Modeled all

1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan MRM1

O3 O3

O3

Cabarrus Rowan MPO (Cabarrus and Rowan County in the maintenance area)

Modeled all

1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan MRM1 O3 O3 O3

Gaston Urban Area MPO/Lake Norman RPO (Gaston Iredell (part) and Lincoln County in the maintenance area)

Modeled all


1. The baseyear of the MRM is 2015

2. 2025 is a SIP MVEB for NOx and VOC

22

2008 O3 Maintenance SIP

Emission comparison years

County

Area model status

Area emissions

budget status

Emissions analysis source 20262 (modeled)

2035 (modeled)

2045 Horizon

(modeled) Charlotte Region TPO-Rocky River RPO MVEB (all of Mecklenburg and portions of Union and Iredell County in the maintenance area)

Modeled all


Cabarrus Rowan MPO (portions of Cabarrus and Rowan County in the maintenance area)

Modeled all


Gaston Cleveland Lincoln MPO (portions of Gaston and Lincoln County in the maintenance area)

Modeled all


3. The baseyear of the MRM is 2015

4. 2026 is a SIP MVEB for NOx andVOC

23

Additional table notes and explanations: County:

1997 Ozone: The Metrolina area is maintenance for the 1997 Ozone Standard which consists of 6 whole counties and 1 partial counties (Mecklenburg (MUMPO), Union (MUMPO), Union (RRRPO-donut), Gaston (GMPO), Cabarrus (CRMPO) Rowan (CRMPO), Lincoln (LNRPO) and Iredell (LNRPO-partial).

2008 Ozone: The Metrolina area is maintenance for the 2008 Ozone Standard which consists of 1 whole county and 6 partial counties (Mecklenburg (CRTPO), Union (CRTPO-partial), Union (RRRPO-donut), Gaston (GCLMPO-partial), Cabarrus (CRMPO-partial) Rowan (CRMPO-partial), Lincoln (GCLMPO partial) and Iredell (CRTPO-partial).

*Note: a dount area is an area outside the MPO boundary but within the non-attainment/maintenance area. Model Status: Mecklenburg, Union, Cabarrus, Rowan, Gaston, and Lincoln, plus one partial county (Iredell) are completely within the Metrolina Regional Model (MRM) boundary. Emissions analysis years:

• 1997 8-hour Ozone Standard Maintenance SIP: 2025 (modeled) 2035 (modeled) & 2045 (modeled)

• 2008 8-hour Ozone Standard Maintenance SIP: 2026 (modeled) 2035 (modeled) & 2045 (modeled)

Emission analysis source: The VMT and speeds for the regional emissions analysis (REA) will be derived from the MRM. Emission Comparison Years:

Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget Test o 1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance SIP: (Gaston, Mecklenburg, Cabarrus, Rowan,

Union, Lincoln, and Iredell-partial) 2025 (modeled-compare to 2025 MVEB), 2035 (modeled- compare to 2025 MVEB), and 2045 (modeled-compare to 2025 MVEB)

o 2008 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance SIP: (Gaston-partial, Mecklenburg, Cabarrus-

partial, Rowan-partial, Union-partial, Lincoln-partial, and Iredell-partial, 2026 (modeled-compare to 2026), 2035 (modeled- compare to 2026 MVEB), and 2045 (modeled-compare to 2026 MVEB)

List of Specific Conformity Years

1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance SIP Horizon: 2045 a. 1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance SIP MVEB Years: 2013 & 2025

24

b. Emission comparison years (NOx and VOC): 2025 (modeled), 2035 & 2045

2008 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance SIP Horizon: 2045 a. 2008 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance SIP MVEB Years: 2014 & 2026 b. Emission comparison years (NOx and VOC): 2026 (modeled), 2035 & 2045

7. Non-attainment / Maintenance Counties: 1997 8 Hour Ozone Maintenance Area: Gaston, Mecklenburg, Cabarrus, Rowan, Union,

Lincoln, and Iredell (partial) 2008 8 Hour Ozone Maintenance Area: Gaston Co. (partial)., Mecklenburg Co., Cabarrus

Co. (partial), Rowan Co.(partial), Union Co.(partial), Lincoln (partial), and Iredell Co. (partial)

8. Land-Use Demographics Projections/Forecast:

Land-use demographic projections for the region were developed using both a top-down and bottom-up approach.

An economist was contracted to develop regional and county level population, household, and employment projections for 5-year increments from 2010 to 2050 through a top-down forecasting approach. The economist’s forecasting model is based on the metropolitan growth of 43 mid-sized US regions and calibrated to trends and capture rates in the Metrolina region over the past 40 years. Refer to the METROLINA REGIONAL DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC DATA AND DATA FORECASTS (DRAFT REPORT), December 12, 2012, by Stephen J. Appold, PhD for more detailed information. MPO and RPO staff then applied local knowledge reflecting current local policies and plans to finalize county-level control totals for 2025, 2035, and 2045.

TAZ level 2025, 2035, and 2045 population, household, and employment data was projected for CRTPO and GCLMPO through a top-down /bottom-up forecasting approach using the Metrolina CommunityViz Model 16v1.0. CRMPO applied local knowledge through a manual process to allocate projected data to the TAZ level. For both approaches, data inventoried for the base year was used as quantitative inputs to the process of deriving projections. Qualitative inputs to the projections to both processes include future land use plans, building permits data, transportation plans and other capital improvements plans (such as water and sewer extensions and schools construction), and other factors limiting development (such as soils, floodplains, and water supply watershed regulations). Refer to the Draft Metrolina CommunityViz Model 16v1.0 Technical Document, June 14, 2016, by Matt Noonkester, AICP, City Explained, Inc. for detailed information. 9. Travel Demand Model: Metrolina Regional Model (MRM) The regional travel demand model is a four-step model developed for a 2-state, 12- county (9 whole, 3 partial) region (refer to Attachment B). The modeling area encompasses 4 MPOs and 1 RPOs. As described previously, a multitude of land use and demographic data was collected as input into the model. Additional data collected includes transit and highway network data as well as multiple travel surveys. Transit data collected includes routes, headways, and travel times. Refer to Attachment C for the highway network data dictionary. Following is a list of the travel surveys completed:

25

2001 (Freeway) and 2013 (non-freeway and freeway) External Travel Survey; 2012 Household Travel Survey; 2013 On-board Transit Survey of Express and Local Buses and South Corridor Light Rail

Transit (LRT) Survey and Counts; 2010 Inrix Speed Data; and 2013-2016 Vehicle Classification Counts

10. Mode Split / Mode Choice:

The nested logit mode-choice model is structured similar to the Houston-Galveston Area Council’s regional travel model. Nesting and mode constants were developed using CATS’s on-board ridership survey conducted in 2013.

Transit paths include in-vehicle travel time, out-of-vehicle time (walking / driving and waiting), transfers, and direct cost (fare, parking). Four trip purposes are modeled. For the Home-Based Work, Home-Based-Other, and Home-Based University trip purposes, the potential transit Council’s regional travel model. Nesting and mode constraints were developed using CATS’s on-board ridership survey conducted in 2013. Walk, drive, and drop-off approaches are handled in the nesting structure. Parking is provided at selected suburban stations. The mode choice model was developed under contract with AECOM Consult

11. Local Street Count & VMT Estimate: Vehicle miles of travel (VMT) – the sum of the distance that each vehicle travels during a specified period (day, year, etc.) – is the most typical measure of the level of travel in an area. Like most statistics, it is still impossible to actually measure. To do so, all vehicles would have to be monitored all day. The most common method of estimating VMT uses traffic counts. We have a large count database from CDOT, NCDOT, and SCDOT including counts from 2000 – 2016. Each count will be factored to the base year (2015). Average Daily Traffic volumes will be factored to Average Weekday volumes. The adjusted base-year weekday counts are then aggregated by County and functional class. The average (mean) volume for each county / functional class will be multiplied by the number of road miles to obtain VMT. For future year estimates, the travel demand model, calibrated to the base year counts and VMT, will provide VMT for thoroughfares (VMT = assigned volume * length).

Local streets make up 60%-70% of the roadway miles, but a much smaller fraction of VMT. Most serve to accumulate traffic from neighborhoods. The bulk of the trip is then made on thoroughfares (that are modeled). Few local streets are included in the model. Counts are sporadic and usually concentrated on local streets experiencing traffic problems. Many of the local streets are represented by zonal centroid connectors in the model. We will use the centroid connectors times 2 to better approximate actual local VMT. VMT derived with this method compares favorably with local VMT estimated using street miles and assumed volumes. The centroid method provides a better method of relating VMT to high growth TAZs.

12. Rural (Donut) Area Projects

26

The rural areas do not develop long range transportation plans like the MPOs. The rural area projects that are included in the conformity regional emissions analysis (REA) come from the State TIP. It is NCDOT’s position that projects that are in the State TIP and have right of way or construction phases scheduled in the first seven years should be included in the REA. In addition, for rural areas adjacent to an MPO the MPO may extend projects outside their boundary to a logical terminus. The MPO may include the portion outside of their MPO boundary in the financial element of their MTP.

13. VMT Adjustments:No VMT adjustments are used.

14. Motor Vehicle Emissions BudgetsTwo ozone maintenance areas are included within the seven-county Metrolina area:

a. 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Maintenance AreaThe North Carolina portion of the Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill Moderate Nonattainment Areafor the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS was redesignated as attainment on December 2, 2013 withan effective date of January 2, 2014. The area includes six full counties (Cabarrus, Gaston,Lincoln, Mecklenburg, Rowan, Union) and one partial county (Iredell). The maintenance SIPfor the area includes the NOx and VOC MVEBs for three budget areas shown in the tablesbelow.

NOx Budgets: 1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS

Budget Area MVEB Year

Comparison Years & MVEB (kg/day) 2026 2035 2045

Cabarrus Rowan MPO (Cabarrus, Rowan) 2025 11,953 11,953 11,953

Gaston Urban Area MPO/ Lake Norman RPO (Gaston, Iredell (part), Lincoln)

2025 12,541 12,541 12,541

Mecklenburg Union MPO/ Rocky River RPO

(Mecklenburg, Union)

2025 35,728 35,728 35,728

27

VOC Budgets: 1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS



Cabarrus Rowan MPO (Cabarrus, Rowan) 2025 6,510 6,510 6,510

Gaston Urban Area MPO/ Lake Norman RPO (Gaston, Iredell (part), Lincoln)

2025 7,047 7,047 7,047


(Mecklenburg, Union) 2025 17,378 17,378 17,378

b. 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Maintenance Area. The Charlotte-Gastonia-Salisbury, North Carolina Marginal Nonattainment Area for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS was redesignated as attainment on July 28, 2015 with an effective date of August 27, 2015. The maintenance plan was revised, with modifications to the NOx and VOC MVEBs, with an effective date of October 15, 2015. The maintenance area consists of 1 whole county and 6 partial counties (Mecklenburg (CRTPO), Union (CRTPO-partial), Union (RRRPO-donut), Gaston (GCLMPO-partial), Cabarrus (CRMPO-partial) Rowan (CRMPO-partial), Lincoln (GCLMPO partial) and Iredell (CRMPO-partial). Motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) were established for three sub-areas within the Metrolina area which are generally defined by MPO jurisdictional boundaries. The MVEBs are show in the table below.

NOx Budgets: 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS



Cabarrus Rowan MPO 2026 3,749 3,749 3,749 Gaston Cleveland Lincoln

MPO 2026 2,996 2,996 2,996


2026 9,946 9,946 9,946

28

VOC Budgets: 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS



Cabarrus Rowan MPO 2026 3,762 3,762 3,762 Gaston Cleveland Lincoln

MPO 2026 2,755 2,755 2,755

Mecklenburg Union MPO/ Rocky River RPO 2026 9,690 9,690 9,690

15. Control Strategies: Emission reduction credits will be taken for the following on-roadmobile SIP commitments or Federal programs. Currently there are no TCMs in the Metrolina AreaSIPs.

Strategy Methodology/Approach I/M Program Accounted for in the MOVES model Tier 2/Tier 3 vehicle’s Emission Standards Accounted for in the MOVES model Low Sulfur Gasoline and Diesel fuels Accounted for in the MOVES model Heavy Duty Vehicle Rules 2004 and 2007 Accounted for in the MOVES model Low RVP Gasoline Accounted for in the MOVES model On board vapor recovery Accounted for in the MOVES model

16. MOVES Model Settings: The following model-input parameters will be used in theconformity analysis.

1997 Eight Hour Ozone Standard Maintenance Area*: Cabarrus, Gaston, Lincoln,Mecklenburg, Rowan, Union and Iredell (partial)

2008 Eight Hour Ozone Standard Maintenance Area*: Cabarrus (partial), Gaston (partial),Lincoln (partial), Mecklenburg, Rowan (partial), Union (partial) and Iredell (partial)

MOVES Model (MOVES2014a)

MOVES Model Settings: The following MOVES model-input parameters will be used in the conformity analysis performed by DAQ.

Parameter Details Data Source a. Emissions Model Version(s): (MOVES2014a) or latest

b. Emission Model Runs: Typical Summer Weekday (NOx and VOC)

c. Evaluation month: July (NOx and VOC)

d. Time Periods: VMT and speeds modeled for 4 daily travel periods

29

(see item #24 below) will be processed according to USEPA guidance to generate hourly speed and VMT distribution data in the required MOVES input formats.

e. Pollutants Reported: NOx, VOC

f. Emissions Budget Years: 1997 NAAQS: 2025 (NOx and VOC)

2008 NAAQS: 2026 (NOx and VOC)

g. Emissions Analysis Years: 1997 NAAQS: 2025, 2035 and 2045 2008 NAAQS: 2026, 2035 and 2045

h. Temperature and Relative Humidity: 1997 NAAQS: July 2010 monthly average

24-hour temperature and relative humidity profiles from the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport (KCLT). 2008 NAAQS: July 2014 monthly average 24-hour temperature and relative humidity profiles from the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport (KCLT).

i. Vehicle Classes: 13

j. VMT mix: Statewide mix based on 2016 data using the method

in the August 2004 USEPA Guidance.

k. Speed Distribution: Regional Model MRM18v1.1

l. Source type (vehicle type) age distribution: The latest available 2016 vehicle registration data provided by NCDOT, which also includes a breakdown of the number of vehicles by model year, will be used to create the required source type age distribution input file for each county. As per EPA guidance, the source type age distribution will not be projected for future years.

m. I/M Program: The following I/M program parameters will apply: compliance rate = 96%, waiver rate = 5% with an exemption for vehicles from the 3-year latest model years.

n. RVP: July 9.0 psi for all counties

o. Source Type (vehicle type) Population: Vehicle population estimates will be developed for each future modeling year based on the latest available 2016 vehicle registration data provided by NCDOT. This data includes the total number of registered vehicles by county, divided into nine source type categories. The data will first be reorganized into thirteen source type categories (i.e. passenger cars, light commercial trucks, combination long-haul trucks, etc.) as required for MOVES2014a. These source type population estimates will then be projected for each required modeling year, using the same base and future year-county human population data that were used in the TDM model, according to the following formula:

30

Total Vehicle Population future year = Total Vehicle Population base year * (Human Populationfuture year / Human Population base year)

p. Strategies: None

17. Emissions analysis units, conversion factors, significant figures, rounding andtruncating conventions:Units= Kilograms or GramsGrams to tons conversion factor= Divide x grams by 907184.7 to get tonsRound to 2 decimal places

18. CMAQ Projects: Not Applicable

19. Regionally Significant Projects (Federal and Non-Federal): Not Applicable

20. List of Exempt Projects and Non-Regionally Significant Projects (Federally Funded):Not Applicable

21. Conformity Schedule: (A draft conformity schedule has been developed and is providedas an attachment to this document)

22. Conformity Determinations: Two organizations will be responsible for makingconformity determinations in two distinctive parts of the Metrolina non-attainment/maintenance areas:

i. The CRTPO within its metropolitan area boundary (MAB) -all ofMecklenburg County and parts of Union and Iredell County

ii. The CRMPO within its metropolitan area boundary (MAB)iii. The GCLMPO within its metropolitan area boundary (MAB) -iv. The NCDOT for the rural areas are comprised of the parts of Union County

that are outside of any MPO MABEach of these responsible organizations must make a conformity determination for its respective area in order for all of the areas to be designated in conformity.

The following resolutions will be needed for this conformity process: • CRTPO/CRMPO/GCLMPO

o 2045 MTP amendment adoptiono 2018-2022 TIP amendment adoptiono Conformity Determination for the 2045 MTP amendmento Conformity Determination for the 2018-2022 TIP amendment

• NCDOT Conformity Determination for the donut area of Union

23. Other Any reference to York County in this document has been removed since EPA has madethe 8-hour ozone designations. Although a portion of York County, South Carolina wasdesignated as part of the bi-state Charlotte 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, they are allowedto demonstrate transportation conformity independent of the North Carolina portion of thisnonattainment area. Therefore, the planning assumptions and methodologies used for the

31

York County, South Carolina portion of this nonattainment area is reflected in a separate transportation conformity determination that is generated by the Rock Hill-Fort Mill Area Transit Study Metropolitan Planning Organization.

The techniques used for this conformity process are the following: VMT and speed will be done for 4 times of day (the 4 times of days are summed

for the regional emissions analysis)• 6:30 am - 9:30 am• 9:30 am - 3:30 pm• 3:30 pm - 6:30 pm• 6:30 pm - 6:30 am

o For the MOVES modeling component, the times of day will consist of whole hours andare as follows:

• 6:00 am – 9:00 am• 9:00 am - 3:00 pm• 3:00 pm - 6:00 pm• 6:00 pm - 6:00 am

32



Phone (704) 866-6837 Fax (704) 869-1960

Agenda Item #7


From: Randi P. Gates, AICP, Principal Transportation Planner

Date: July 26, 2018

Subject: Performance Measures – PM2 & PM3 Targets

BACKGROUND: Federal transportation legislation requires that State DOTs and MPOs adopt

performance-based planning as a component of the metropolitan planning process:

A key component of the process is the establishment of federal performance measures.

Within each performance category, a series of performance measures has been identified

at the federal level.

State DOTs and MPOs are required to define targets that correspond with each identified

measure.

In most cases, NCDOT establishes the target first, then the MPO has 180 days to establish

its targets. The congestion mitigation targets are an exception – NCDOT and GCLMPO are

both due at the same time.

GCLMPO adopted the state’s targets for PM1 (Safety) on January 25, 2018.

GCLMPO concurred with the preliminary targets for the Peak-Hour Excessive Delay (PHED)

and the Percent Non-SOV Travel as part of PM3 as set forth by NCDOT on March 22, 2018.

NCDOT established its targets for PM2 & PM3 on May 18, 2018, thus the GCLMPO’s targets

for PM2 & PM3 are due no later than November 14, 2018.

Federal regulations (23 CFR Part 490) require States to set targets for interstate and non-interstate

National Highway System (NHS) pavement condition, NHS bridge condition, travel time reliability,

freight reliability, and emissions reduction.

NCDOT’s 2018 targets for PM2 & PM3 are as follows:

Performance Measure 2 Year Target

1/1/2018 – 12/31/2019

4 Year Target

1/1/2018 – 12/31/2021

PM2:

Interstate Pavement Condition (Good) 37.0 %

Interstate Pavement Condition (Poor) 2.2 %

Non-Interstate NHS Pavement Condition

(Good)

27.0% 21.0%

Non-Interstate NHS Pavement Condition

(Poor)

4.2% 4.7%

NHS Bridge Condition (Good) 33.0% 30.0%

NHS Bridge Condition (Poor) 8.0% 9.0%

33



Phone (704) 866-6837 Fax (704) 869-1960

The emission reduction measures for peak-hour excessive delay per capita and percent of non-

SOV travel were agreed upon in a coordinated manner with SCDOT, Cabarrus-Rowan MPO,

Charlotte Regional Transportation Planning Organization, Gaston-Cleveland-Lincoln MPO, and

Rock Hill-Fort Mill Area Transportation Study.

Performance Measure 2 Year Target

1/1/2018 – 12/31/2019

4 Year Target

1/1/2018 – 12/31/2021

PM3:

Interstate Level of Travel Time Reliability 80.0% 75.0%

Non-Interstate NHS Level of Travel Time

Reliability

70.0%

Interstate Truck Travel Time Reliability 1.65 1.70

CMAQ – Percent of Non-Single Occupant

Vehicle (SOV) travel

21.0% 21.0%

CMAQ – Annual Hours of Peak-Hour Excessive

Delay (PHED) per Capita

34.0

CMAQ - On-Road Emission Reduction from

CMAQ Projects

CO: 11.522 kg/day

VOC: 0.252 kg/day

NOx: 2.360 kg/day

CO: 23.044 kg/day

VOC: 0.504 kg/day

NOx: 4.720 kg/day

TCC ACTION: Recommended approval as presented.

BOARD ACTION REQUESTED:

1. Approve state targets for PM2 and PM3 to be released for public comment.


ATTACHMENT:

1. NCDOT Performance Targets Handout

34

What is Transportation Performance Management (TPM)

A strategic approach that

uses system information

to make investment and

policy decisions to

achieve transportation

system performance goals

� NCDOT has an existing data-

driven TPM process that

includes Strategic Transportation

Investments (STI) and

tracking of organization and

system performance.

� TPM is intended to create a

data-driven process within

transportation planning and

programming, answering:

where do we want to go,

how are we going to get there,

what will it take, and

how did we do?

MAP-21 (2012) established the Federal framework for TPM and the

FAST Act (2015) codified the process and requirements for USDOT, State

DOTs, transit providers, and MPOs.

1

35

TPM-Related Rules Regulatory Chapter

Statewide and Non-Metropolitan

Planning; Metropolitan Planning

23 CFR 450 & 771,

49 CFR 613

Safety Performance Measures

(PM1)

23 CFR 490

(Subpart A & B)

Highway Safety Improvement

Program (HSIP)23 CFR 924

Highway Asset Management Plans

for NHS23 CFR 515 & 667

Pavement and Bridge Condition

Measures (PM2)

23 CFR 490

(Subpart A, C & D)

Performance of the NHS, Freight,

and CMAQ Measures (PM3)

23 CFR 490

(Sub. A, E, F, G, H)

Transit Asset Management Rule 49 CFR 625, 630

Establishes goals and TPM

framework

Highway Safety:Data collection, reporting,

target setting and

programming approach

Highway Assets:Data collection, reporting,

target setting and

programming approach

System Performance:Reporting and target setting

for highway mobility, freight,

and emissions

Transit Assets: Data collection, reporting,

target setting and

programming for FTA recipients

MAP-21 & FAST Act – TPM Rulemakings

TPM Rules for USDOT:

� Establish measures; identify data sources;

define metrics

� Report to Congress

� Stewardship and oversight

TPM Rules for States & MPOs:

� Interagency coordination

� Establish targets

� Support national goals and consider

measures and targets in long range plans

� Report progress to USDOT (States)

2

36

TPM Target Setting Organization

Establish

baseline

Analyze

trends

Factors

and risks

Target

parameters

Forecast

performance

Set roles/

responsibilities

Define target

purpose

Benchmark

to peers

Consider

stakeholders

Technical Process

Business Process

In October 2017, NCDOT Transportation Planning Division (TPD) started to compile data and

organize internal and external partners to address the TPM requirements. The process included

regular coordination with a Work Group and Subject Matter Experts as well as collaboration

with FHWA to confirm requirements and with Metropolitan Planning Organizations to ensure

their role within the process. This integrated approach helped develop targets - based on the

latest available data and federal guidance - to support a technical and business process. NCDOT

leadership provided strategic direction to staff at key milestones.

Task Jan Feb March April May June

Agency

Assessment

Target Setting

Approaches

Recommended

Targets

Documentation

Briefings

Work Group Meeting Briefings (External / Exec) Target submission to FHWA

NCDOT TPM Process ReportBriefings (BOT)

SME readiness and data interviews

Target collaboration, initial targets

Target finalization

37

4

TPM Target Setting Process

Assess…

Evaluate Possible

Targets…

Recommend

Targets….

Document…

Baseline NCDOT preparedness,

current practice, data and tool gaps

Performance trends, internal and

external factors, analysis tools, future

projections, target setting process

2 & 4-year numerical targets,

leadership and stakeholder review,

refinement and rationale

Steps, decisions, process

evolution/documentation

This process supports a transparent, repeatable, and engagement based approach

understood by NCDOT stakeholders, including the MPOs. It enables approach

streamlining into the future – as the federal process is continuous, with system

performance tracking occurring annually and target setting revisited biannually.

38

National Highway

System

(relevant system

for PM2 and PM3

measures and

targets)

NCDOT

maintained

system

5

Primary Roads

Secondary Roads

National Highway

System (NHS)

NC Designation

Route Miles

% NHS

Route Miles

Primary 13,785 30%

Secondary 64,831 0.3%

Interstate 1,340 100%

Total 79,956 7%

Note: values rounded for approximation

System Definition

7.0% NHS route mile share of total NCDOT maintained miles

39

2019 and 2021 statewide targets set2019 and 2021 statewide targets set

FY2018 targets adopted

Targets set annually

TPM (FHWA & FTA) Measures & Targets

17 total FHWA measures (PM1, 2, 3)

o Describes the applicability of the measures

o Identifies data needed to support measures

o Includes target due dates

o Describes performance period, reporting

requirements and timeline

o Defines significant progress determination

Final Rules (FHWA – 23 CFR 490)

States Set

Targets By

NCDOT Status

PM1 – Safety

(5 measures)Aug. 31, 2017

Completed – 2018 targets established in

Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)

PM2 – Pavement/Bridge

(6 measures)May 20, 2018

Completed – Pending submission to FHWA,

NCDOT set 2-year and/or 4-year targets

PM3 – System Performance

(6 measures)May 20, 2018

Completed – Pending submission to FHWA,

NCDOT set 2-year and/or 4-year targets

Transit Assets Jan. 1, 2017Completed – 2017 targets and Transit Asset

Management Plan

Performance measure: an

expression based on a metric used

to establish targets and to assess

progress toward targets

Target: a quantifiable level of

performance or condition to be

achieved within a time period

�

�FTA

FH

WA

PM1 - Highway Safety

Performance Measures

1. Number of fatalities

2. Fatality rate (per 100

million VMT)

3. Number of serious

injuries

4. Serious injury rate (per

100 million VMT)

5. Number of non-

motorized fatalities and

serious injuries

PM2 – Pavement/Bridge Performance

Measures

6. % of pavements on the Interstate system in

good condition

7. % of pavements on the Interstate system in

poor condition

8. % of pavements on the non-Interstate NHS

in good condition

9. % of pavements on the non-Interstate NHS

in poor condition

10. % of NHS bridges classified as in good

condition

11. % of NHS bridges classified as in poor

condition

PM3 - System Performance / Freight /

CMAQ Performance Measures

12. % of person miles on the Interstate

system that are reliable

13. % of person miles on the non-Interstate

NHS that are reliable

14. % of Interstate mileage providing for

reliable truck travel times

15. Annual hours of peak-hour excessive

delay per capita

16. Percent of non-single occupant vehicle

travel

17. Total emissions reduction (CMAQ

projects)

��

6

40

Interstate Pavement Condition (Good)

7

Ap

pro

ac

hA

ssu

mp

tio

ns

•Funding stability

•State-driven targets, not Federal budget

allocations

•Overall Interstate VMT growth and truck VMT

growth

•Maintain balance, levels of percent good v. fair

Ad

dre

ssA

cc

ou

nta

ble

•Will review progress and can adjust target at

mid-point of first 4-year performance period

(2020, based on 2018 and 2019 performance).

•The first performance period - January 1st, 2018

through December 31st, 2021

•NCDOT transition to full-extent data collection in

2017, enabling improved performance tracking.

•Pavement Management Unit, Division of

Highways

•Note, the actual 2-year condition (2018 and

2019) will become the baseline condition for

the first performance period for this measure.

4-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2021)

37.0%

PM2 Measure: Performance Trend:

% of Interstate

pavement in Good

condition

Percentage of Interstate pavement

in “Good” condition:

Total interstate lane miles in good

condition based on IRI (measure of

pavement smoothness), cracking

percent, and rutting or faulting. All

condition metrics must exhibit good

to classify pavement as good.

Federal guidance is still being

reviewed for measure/metric

computational analysis and

application. NCDOT

completing transition to full

extent data collection to

support IRI elemental data

review.

50%

60%

70%

80%

2013 2014 2015 2016

Interstate Pavement Condition (Good)

•Understand measure definition and underlying

data (including data collection methods).

•Evaluate trend, external factors, and internal

factors impacting future performance.

41

Interstate Pavement Condition (Poor)

8

4-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2021)

2.2%


% of Interstate pavement in

Poor condition

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

2013 2014 2015 2016

Interstate Pavement Condition (Poor)

Ap

pro

ac

hA

ssu

mp

tio

ns

•Funding stability

•State-driven targets, not Federal budget

allocations

•Overall Interstate VMT growth and truck VMT

growth

•Maintain balance, levels of percent good v. poor

Ad

dre

ssA

cc

ou

nta

ble






•NCDOT transition to full-extent data collection in

2017, enabling improved performance tracking.


Highways

•Federal threshold (minimum): If more than 5%

of Interstate pavement is rated in Poor

condition for any year, the State must obligate

NHPP funds and transfer STP funds to improve

pavement.





Percentage of Interstate pavement

in “Poor” condition:

Total interstate lane miles in poor

condition based on IRI (measure of

pavement smoothness), cracking

percent, and rutting or faulting. If

one condition metric exhibits poor,

the segment is classified as poor

pavement.

Target set below minimum 5%

federal threshold for “poor”

condition. Federal guidance is

still being reviewed for

measure/metric


application. NCDOT




review.

42

Non-Interstate NHS Pavement Condition (Good)

9

2-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2019)

4-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2021)

27.0%


21.0%% of non-Interstate NHS

pavement in Good condition




application. NCDOT




review. Influence of any data

“noise” is magnified on Non-

Interstate (impacts larger

number of miles).

% of non-Interstate NHS

pavement in Good condition

25%

35%

45%

2013 2014 2015 2016

Non-Interstate NHS Pavement

Condition (Good)

Percentage of Non-Interstate NHS

pavement in “Good” condition:

Total non-Interstate NHS lane miles

in good condition based on IRI

(measure of pavement smoothness),

cracking percent, and rutting or

faulting. All condition metrics must

exhibit good to classify pavement as

good.

Ap

pro

ac

hA

ssu

mp

tio

ns

• Interstate system analysis concerns are

magnified for the non-Interstate NHS network

•Restrictive use of chip seal treatment

•Difficult to keep good facilities “good” and to

accurately track

•Timing and gaps of data collection and reporting

Ad

dre

ssA

cc

ou

nta

ble






•8.5% invalid data influence on trend analysis and

target setting.


Highways

•For non-Interstate pavement targets, FHWA will

make a determination of significant progress at

the midpoint and end of the first performance

period.





43

Non-Interstate NHS Pavement Condition (Poor)

10

2-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2019)

4-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2021)

4.2%


4.7%




application. NCDOT




review. Influence of any data

“noise” is magnified on Non-

Interstate (impacts larger

number of miles).

0%

2%

4%

2013 2014 2015 2016

Non-Interstate NHS Pavement

Condition (Poor)

Percentage of Non-Interstate NHS

pavement in “Poor” condition:

Total non-Interstate NHS lane miles

in poor condition based on IRI

(measure of pavement smoothness),

cracking percent, and rutting or

faulting. If one condition metric

exhibits poor, the segment is

classified as poor pavement.


pavement in Poor condition


pavement in Poor condition

Ap

pro

ac

hA

ssu

mp

tio

ns

• Interstate system analysis concerns are

magnified for the non-Interstate NHS network

•Restrictive use of chip seal treatment

•Timing and gaps of data collection and reporting

Ad

dre

ssA

cc

ou

nta

ble






•8.5% invalid data influence on trend analysis and

target setting.

•Pavement Management Unit, Division of Highways

•No minimum threshold requirement.

•For non-Interstate pavement targets, FHWA will make a determination of significant progress at the midpoint and end of the first performance period.





44

NHS Bridge Condition (Good)

11

Ap

pro

ac

hA

ssu

mp

tio

ns


data, including differences with NCDOT Bridge

Health Index (BHI).

•Evaluated trend, external factors, and internal


• Includes all NHS bridges and culverts over 20 ft.

in length.

•NCDOT responsible for the collection of all

bridge condition data necessary to set targets.

•Targets consistent with findings of

Transportation Asset Management Plan (TAMP)

analysis and evaluation of bridges consistent

with Federal measure.

Ad

dre

ssA

cc

ou

nta

ble




•The first performance period - January 1st,

2018 through December 31st, 2021

•Structures Management Unit, Division of

Highways

•Takes into account the number of NHS bridge

replacements expected over next 10 years.

•No minimum threshold requirement.

2-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2019)

4-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2021)

33.0%


30.0%% of NHS bridges by deck

area in Good condition

Percentage of NHS bridges by deck

area classified in “Good” condition:

Total deck area of NHS bridges and

culverts where all components

(deck, superstructure, substructure

for bridges) are assigned a condition

rating of “Good” or better based on

annual inspections, compared to

total NHS bridge deck area.

Percent of NHS bridge deck

area in good condition has

steadily decreased since 2013.

Federal approach is different

and more stringent compared

to NCDOT Bridge Health

Index, which tracks by

structure and average

condition (and shows an

improving trend since 2013). 30%

40%

50%

60%

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

NHS Bridge Condition (Good)

% of NHS bridges by deck

area in Good condition

45

NHS Bridge Condition (Poor)

12

Ap

pro

ac

hA

ssu

mp

tio

ns


data, including alignment with NCDOT %

Structurally Deficient Bridges measure.

•Evaluated trend, external factors, and internal


• Includes all NHS bridges and culverts over 20 ft.

in length.

•NCDOT responsible for the collection of all bridge condition data necessary to set targets.

•Targets consistent with findings TAMP analysis and evaluation of bridges consistent with Federal measure.

•Target influenced by NCDOT 2030 goal and BMIP strategy

Ad

dre

ssA

cc

ou

nta

ble






•Structures Management Unit, Division of

Highways

•Federal threshold (minimum): If more than 10%

of NHS bridge deck area is rated in Poor condition

for three consecutive years, the State must

obligate NHPP funds for eligible bridge projects on

the NHS.

2-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2019)

4-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2021)

8.0%


9.0%% of NHS bridges by deck

area in Poor condition

Percentage of NHS bridges by deck

area classified in “Poor” condition:

Total deck area of NHS bridges and

culverts where one component

(deck, superstructure, substructure

for bridges) is assigned a condition

rating of “Poor” based on annual

inspections, compared to total NHS

bridge deck area.

Percent of NHS bridge deck

area in poor condition has

decreased since 2013. The

Federal approach is

comparable to the NCDOT

percent Structurally Deficient

bridges measure, enabling a

comparison in performance

trends.

% of NHS bridges by deck

area in Poor condition

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

NHS Bridge Condition (Poor)

46

Interstate Travel Time Reliability

13

Ap

pro

ac

hA

ssu

mp

tio

ns

•Focus on analysis-driven approach, resulting in

simple, objective target setting process.

•Considered external and internal factors

impacting 2- and 4-year performance including

VMT growth, work zones and current project

completions, and potential benefits of incident

management / ITS strategies.

•Targets consistent with average annual 5-yeartrend of 1.5% per year decline through 2019, andsteeper decline through 2021.

•Continued VMT growth outpaces other factorsthat might change trend direction.

•Maintains conservative stance given external andinternal factors.

Ad

dre

ssA

cc

ou

nta

ble






•Traffic System Operations, Transportation

Mobility and Safety, Division of Highways

•FHWA will not make a significant progress

determination for reliability measures.

2-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2019)

4-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2021)

80.0%


75.0%Interstate percent of person

miles traveled that are

reliable

Interstate percent of person

miles traveled that are

reliable

Interstate LOTTR (Level of Travel

Time Reliability):

Reliability measure (based on 80th

percentile travel time v. 50th

percentile travel time, sourced

from in-vehicle GPS and mobile

sources) is combined with person

miles traveled to estimate the

percent of person miles traveled

that are reliable.

Since 2013, Interstate LOTTR

in North Carolina has steadily

decreased by 1.0% to 1.5%

annually. This trend is

primarily impacted by

continuing VMT growth and

traffic incidents, and can also

be impacted by work zones.80%

85%

90%

95%

100%

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Interstate LOTTR - % of person

miles traveled that are reliable

47

Non-Interstate NHS Travel Time Reliability

14

Ap

pro

ac

hA

ssu

mp

tio

ns





VMT growth, work zones and current project

completions, and potential benefits of incident

management / ITS strategies.

•Targets consistent with maximum past 5-year

trend of 3.9% per year decline through 2021.

•Continued VMT growth outpaces other factors

that might change trend direction.

•Maintains conservative stance given external and

internal factors.

Ad

dre

ssA

cc

ou

nta

ble






•Note the data vendor, collection, and process

shift in 2017.





4-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2021)

70.0%


Non-Interstate NHS percent

of person miles traveled

that are reliable

Non-Interstate NHS LOTTR (Level

of Travel Time Reliability):

Reliability measure (based on 80th

percentile travel time v. 50th

percentile travel time, sourced

from in-vehicle GPS and mobile

sources) is combined with person

miles traveled to estimate the

percent of person miles traveled

that are reliable.

Since 2013, Non-Interstate

NHS LOTTR in North Carolina

has steadily decreased by

2.9% to 3.9% annually. This

trend is primarily impacted by

continuing VMT growth and

traffic incidents, and can also

be impacted by land use

decisions and weekend travel.

* Note: 2016 to 2017 data shift a

result of FHWA vendor change

and data expansion, not change

in performance.

70%

80%

90%

100%

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Non-Interstate NHS LOTTR

*

48

Truck Travel Time Reliability (Interstate)

15

Ap

pro

ac

hA

ssu

mp

tio

ns





work zones and project completions, weigh

station locations, incident management, and

truck volumes.

•Targets consistent with maximum past 5-year

trend of 3.4% per year increase through 2019

and increasing trend through 2021.

•Related to decrease in LOTTR performance (TTTR

focuses on the ratio, not the percent of travel).

•Maintains conservative stance given external and

internal factors.

Ad

dre

ssA

cc

ou

nta

ble






• Increased data coverage in 2017 is primary

driver for performance change





2-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2019)

4-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2021)

1.65


1.70Interstate truck travel time

reliability index

Interstate TTTR (Truck Travel Time

Reliability):

Reliability measure based on the

worst 95th percentile truck travel

time v. 50th percentile truck travel

time, sourced from in-vehicle GPS

and fleet date) is averaged across

the length of all Interstate

segments.

Since 2013, Interstate TTTR in

North Carolina has steadily

increased by 1.7% annually.

This trend is primarily

impacted by continuing truck

VMT growth and traffic

incidents, and can also be

impacted by work zones.

Interstate truck travel time

reliability index

1.30

1.50

1.70

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Interstate Truck Travel Time

Reliability

*

*2016 to 2017 data shift a result

of FHWA vendor change.

49

Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality – Non-SOV

16

Ap

pro

ac

hA

ssu

mp

tio

ns •Rapid population growth of the previous 4-years

within the region will continue at a similar pace.

•STIP and TIP projects in the pipeline are unlikely

to change the performance trend.

• Impact of managed lanes and transit expansion

on SOV travel are uncertain; impacts are unlikely

to be significant in the next two or four years.

Ad

dre

ssA

cc

ou

nta

ble






•Transportation Planning Division, Chief Deputy

of the Secretary’s Office


determination for CMAQ measures.

2-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2019)

4-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2021)

21.0%


21.0%Non-SOV travel in the

Charlotte urbanized area

Percent of Non-Single Occupant

Vehicle (Non-SOV) travel:

Percent of personal commute trips

that occur by non-SOV mode within

applicable urbanized areas (UZA).

Applicable UZAs are: areas with

population > 1 million, areas with

NHS mileage, and areas in non-

attainment or maintenance for

criteria air pollutants.

Since 2013, commute trip

non-SOV mode share in the

Charlotte urbanized area has

trended slightly downward,

per the U.S. Census 5-year

estimates in the American

Communities survey.

Non-SOV travel in the


•Applicable States and MPOs must set single, unified targets for the UZA.

•Considered external and internal factors impacting 2- and 4-year performance including VMT and population growth.

•Trend data sourced from the U.S. Census Bureau, American Communities Survey.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Charlotte UZA - Non-SOV Mode Share

50

Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality – PHED

17

Ap

pro

ac

hA

ssu

mp

tio

ns •Rapid population growth of the previous 4-years

within the region will continue at a similar pace.

•STIP and TIP projects in the pipeline are unlikely

to change the performance trend.

•Minor benefits from project completions likely

offset by new work zone impacts.

Ad

dre

ssA

cc

ou

nta

ble










4-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2021)

34.0


Annual hours of excessive

delay per capita in the


Annual Hours of Peak-Hour

Excessive Delay (PHED) per Capita:

Where excessive delay is the added

time spent in congested conditions

(20 mph or 60% of posted speed

limit) within applicable urbanized

areas (UZA). Applicable UZAs are:

areas with population > 1 million,

areas with NHS mileage, and areas

in non-attainment or maintenance

for criteria air pollutants.

From 2014 to 2017, annual

PHED per capita in the

Charlotte UZA has steadily

increased. Data is sourced

from sourced from in-vehicle

GPS and mobile sources

through FHWA vendor.

•Applicable States and MPOs must set single, unified targets for the UZA.

•Considered external and internal factors impacting 4-year performance including VMT and population growth.

•Applies only to weekday peak periods (selected worst performing 4-hour peak period, 3-7 pm).

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2014 2015 2016 2017

Charlotte UZA - Annual PHED per Capita

3-7pm peak period

51

Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality – Emissions

18

Ap

pro

ac

hA

ssu

mp

tio

ns •Yearly emission benefits are highly variable

dependent on project type and project delivery

•CMAQ project applications from 2016-2019

show improved emission benefits compared to

the 2014-2017 authorized projects that informed

target setting.

Ad

dre

ssA

cc

ou

nta

ble




•CMAQ project schedules and authorization

dates are uncertain and may change future

targets based on data available at a later time.





2-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2019)

4-Year Target(1/1/2018 – 12/31/2021)

CO: 11.522 kg/day

VOC: 0.252 kg/day

NOx: 2.360 kg/day


Total emissions reduction in

Charlotte maintenance area

On-Road Emission Reduction from

CMAQ Projects:

Total cumulative average daily

emission reduction for applicable

criteria pollutants for each MPO

within an air quality non-

attainment or maintenance area

boundary. Individual MPO targets

are summed to establish the

statewide target.

Emission benefits are highly

variable from year to year and

are dependent upon the CMAQ

projects selected and

implemented by local programs.

•Measures cumulative 2-year and 4-year emission

reductions for CMAQ funded projects

•Targets are set for the portion of the State and for

each MPO within the maintenance area boundary

•Each MPO sets its own target; the State target is

the sum of the MPO targets

Total emissions reduction in

Charlotte maintenance area

CO: 23.044 kg/day

VOC: 0.504 kg/day

NOx: 4.720 kg/day

Pollutant Low High

CO 5.76 17.36

VOC 0.13 2.75

NOx 1.18 8.20

2014-2017 Range (kg/day)

Source: CMAQ Public Access System - State DOTs enter project information into

the system by March 1 for each CMAQ project funded in the previous Federal

fiscal year.

52

19

For more information, contact:Daryl Vreeland, Transportation Planning Division Alpesh Patel, Cambridge Systematics

[email protected] [email protected]

Ongoing TPM Process and ReportingThe TPM process is continuous, requiring annual data submittals through Federal data systems

and bi-annual review of performance and targets, both at the State and MPO level.

The TPM process is integrated with the

statewide and metropolitan

transportation planning and

programming process. MAP-21 and the

FAST Act establish planning

requirements for State DOTs, MPOs,

and transit operators that integrate

TPM with the adoption of STIPs/TIPs

and Long-Range Transportation Plans

(LRTPs) / Metropolitan Transportation

Plans (MTP).

53


54


56



Phone (704) 866-6837 Fax (704) 869-1960

Agenda Item #8d


From: MPO Staff

Date: July 26, 2018

Subject: Area Transit Systems Ridership Update

Gastonia Express Bus Ridership Trends

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Avg.

Jan 4,795 5,094 5,574 5,577 4,426 3,873 4,451 4,382 3,581 3,588 2,881 3,131 3,021 3,698

Feb 4,500 4,749 5,613 5,306 4,553 4,279 4,213 4,266 3,372 3,155 3,386 3,155 3,289 3,686

March 5,096 5,284 5,881 5,527 5,407 4,844 4,161 4,165 3,348 4,021 3,754 3,614 3,587 4,043

April 4,177 5,175 6,427 5,386 5,077 4,370 4,031 4,205 3,444 3,882 3,303 2,833 3,391 3,854

May 5,323 5,705 6,440 4,859 4,666 4,530 4,240 4,328 3,544 3,349 3,249 3,002 3,623 3,920

June 5,068 5,522 7,020 5,221 5,163 4,419 3,857 3,858 3,743 3,584 3,473 3,090 4,019

July 4,713 5,776 7,408 5,206 5,343 3,982 4,172 4,181 3,791 3,461 2,974 2,623 4,020

Aug 5,681 6,745 6,775 4,838 5,371 5,394 4,978 4,221 3,821 3,597 3,571 3,210 4,384

Sept 4,996 5,760 7,038 4,880 4,870 4,692 3,490 3,987 3,487 3,246 3,194 2,597 4,069

Oct 5,164 6,743 6,932 5,104 4,644 4,608 4,616 4,271 3,083 3,657 3,293 3,194 4,284

Nov 4,680 5,637 5,245 4,252 4,013 4,273 4,144 3,493 3,083 3,222 3,043 2,676 3,695

Dec 3,863 4,296 5,158 4,248 3,574 3,689 3,541 3,256 3,312 2,790 2,594 2,465 3,343

57



Phone (704) 866-6837 Fax (704) 869-1960

Gastonia Transit Bus Ridership Trends

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Avg.

Jan 21,934 23,796 23,296 18,436 20,498 19,373 23,798 24,202 22,764 23,221 16,892 15,917 13,451 20,583

Feb 19,725 19,472 23,455 18,380 20,138 21,338 24,528 24,566 20,422 18,732 19,743 18,203 15,082 20,291

March 22,782 23,637 21,433 18,187 22,883 24,003 25,551 24,064 22,049 21,326 20,556 19,460 16,246 21,706

April 20,556 21,339 22,823 19,405 22,148 22,433 23,422 23,536 22,982 21,499 19,417 15,478 15,574 20,816

May 23,652 24,006 23,628 19,869 20,807 22,642 24,206 23,646 23,811 20,223 17,714 17,203 15,767 21,321

June 23,096 22,961 24,896 21,042 23,417 25,090 23,884 22,960 23,768 24,080 19,812 16,711 15,287 22,077

July 21,377 23,083 26,136 21,595 22,615 18,130 23,293 24,473 24,587 22,129 18,026 14,844 21,691

Aug 24,811 25,308 25,428 21,800 24,432 26,746 28,223 27,164 26,897 21,844 20,474 18,129 24,271

Sept 22,378 22,159 24,539 22,236 24,182 23,770 25,028 24,238 22,522 21,622 19,990 16,398 22,422

Oct 24,067 25,273 26,136 23,169 24,243 24,116 30,064 26,942 24,971 22,237 19,939 17,577 24,061

Nov 22,316 22,328 17,665 20,858 23,266 22,779 25,818 21,852 19,708 19,466 18,542 15,441 20,837

Dec 22,125 21,529 18,637 22,037 22,532 24,134 23,661 22,630 22,014 21,420 17,569 14,321 21,051

58



Phone (704) 866-6837 Fax (704) 869-1960

Transportation Administration Cleveland County Transit Bus Ridership Trends

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Avg.

Jan 5,073 4,249 5,511 4,965 4,950

Feb 3,856 5,198 5,383 5,105 4,886

March 5,469 5,484 5,906 5,494 5,588

April 5,404 4,938 5,102 5,377 5,205

May 5,121 4,991 6,087 5,471 5,418

June 5,637 5,690 6,153 5,263 5,686

July 4,853 5,503 5,740 5,522 5,405

Aug 4,877 5,347 6,525 6,945 5,924

Sept 5,297 5,554 5,943 5,303 5,524

Oct 5,891 5,750 5,919 5,860 5,855

Nov 4,768 4,945 5,906 5,377 5,249

Dec 4,684 4,867 5,523 4,715 4,947

59



Phone (704) 866-6837 Fax (704) 869-1960

Transportation Lincoln County

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Avg.

Jan 6,008 5,144 4,162 5,001 4,914 5,046

Feb 5,807 4,258 4,892 5,001 5,527 5,097

March 6,317 5,787 5,494 5,943 5,810 5,870

April 7,117 5,592 5,079 5,000 5,859 5,729

May 7,081 5,080 5,100 5,699 5,855 5,763

June 6,492 5,662 4,887 5,784 5,631 5,691

July 6,223 5,658 5,387 4,948 5,144 5,472

Aug 6,161 5,481 5,298 5,629 5,945 5,703

Sept 5,849 5,735 5,176 5,266 5,185 5,442

Oct 7,912 6,025 5,210 5,532 5,956 6,127

Nov 6,186 4,637 4,769 5,179 5,174 5,189

Dec 5,767 5,149 4,854 4,922 5,094 5,157

60



Phone (704) 866-6837 Fax (704) 869-1960

Gaston County ACCESS

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Avg.

Jan 11,368 11,760 8,859 9,067 8,229 9,857

Feb 10,295 8,900 10,623 9,929 9,666 9,883

March 12,379 11,939 11,245 10,777 9,448 11,158

April 12,299 12,215 11,379 9,197 9,270 10,872

May 11,927 11,559 11,945 10,914 9,831 11,235

June 10,136 11,080 10,527 9,353 8,350 9,889

July 11,819 10,872 9,923 8,340 8,517 9,894

Aug 11,780 10,831 9,328 10,332 9,981 10,450

Sept 11,661 11,161 9,705 10,032 8,943 10,300

Oct 13,838 13,022 10,607 10,502 9,025 11,399

Nov 10,583 10,016 8,988 9,422 8,658 9,533

Dec 10,176 10,615 8,985 8,597 7,475 9,170

61


62

mpo board - gclmpogclmpo.org/wp-content/uploads/board-agenda-7-26... · 7/26/2018 · mpo board...

Documents