|
|
|
|
April 12, 2005 | 310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410 Raleigh, North Carolina 27601 |
| North Carolina Division | In Reply Refer To: HDA-NC |
|
|
Ms. Sandy Carmany Dear Ms. Sandy Carmany: Title 23 Section 134(I)(5) and Subtitle III of Title 49 Section 5305(e)(1) of the United States Code require the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to jointly review, evaluate, and certify the metropolitan transportation process in each Transportation Management Area (TMA) at least every three years. As a result of the 2000 Census, the Greensboro Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (GUAMPO) was designated a Transportation Management Area. On January 11-12, 2005, the FHWA and FTA conducted the first onsite review of the metropolitan transportation planning process in the GUAMPO TMA. Enclosed is a copy of the report documenting the results of the certification review. The FHWA and FTA have determined that the GUAMPO TMA's metropolitan transportation planning process being conducted by the GUAMPO TMA and the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is being carried out in substantial compliance with the applicable provisions of 23 USC 134 and 49 USC 5304. Therefore, the process is hereby certified for a period of three years from the date of this letter. Please note that the report contains a number of recommendations. This certification is granted with the understanding that the MPO will consider the recommendations offered. Subsequent certification reviews will evaluate the progress made toward incorporating the recommendations into the planning process. A representative from my staff will present the results of the review at one of the upcoming Metropolitan Planning Organization's Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) meetings. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Bill Marley, Community Planner, of my staff at (919) 856-4330, extension 114, or you may contact FTA member Mr. Alex McNeil, Transportation Program Specialist, at (404) 562-3511. |
||
|
||
| Sincerely, /s/William G. Marley, III Community Planner For John F. Sullivan, III, P.E. Division Administrator |
||
|
Enclosure Cc: (with enclosure) File: |
||
| Glossary of Acronyms | 3 |
| Forward | 4 |
| Executive Summary | 5 |
| Introduction | 7 |
| Federal Review Team Members and Participants | 8 |
| Greensboro Urban Area MPO Background | 9 |
| MPO/NCDOT Coordination | 10 |
| Agreements and Contracts | 11 |
| Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) | 12 |
| Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) | 13 |
| Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)/Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) | 16 |
| Transit Planning | 17 |
| Regional Travel Demand Modeling and Land Use Planning | 18 |
| Air Quality Planning | 18 |
| Congestion Management and ITS Planning | 19 |
| Title VI and Public Involvement | 20 |
| Public Involvement Meeting/Comments | 27 |
| Certification Review Findings | 27 |
| Certification | 29 |
| ADA - | Americans With Disabilities Act |
| BOT - | Board of Transportation |
| CFR - | Code of Federal Regulations |
| CMS - | Congestion Management System |
| CMAQ - | Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality |
| CO - | Carbon Monoxide |
| EAC - | Early Action Compact |
| EJ - | Environmental Justice |
| EPA - | Environmental Protection Agency |
| FHWA - | Federal Highway Administration |
| FTA - | Federal Transit Administration |
| GTA - | Greensboro Transit Authority |
| GUAMPO - | Greensboro Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization |
| ITS - | Intelligent Transportation Systems |
| LPA - | Lead Planning Agency |
| LRTP - | Long-Range Transportation Plan |
| MAB - | Metropolitan Area Boundary |
| MIS - | Major Investment Study |
| MLI - | Minority and Low Income |
| MOA - | Memorandum of Agreement |
| MOU - | Memorandum of Understanding |
| MPO - | Metropolitan Planning Organization |
| NCDENR - | North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources |
| NCDOT - | North Carolina Department of Transportation |
| PART - | Piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation |
| PIP - | Public Involvement Policy |
| PL - | Planning Funds |
| PTI - | Piedmont Triad International Airport |
| RTDM - | Regional Travel Demand Model |
| RTOI - | Residential Transit Orientation Index |
| SIP - | State Implementation Plan |
| STIP - | Statewide Transportation Improvement Program |
| STPDA - | Surface Transportation Program - Direct Allocation |
| TAC - | Transportation Advisory Committee |
| TAZ - | Transportation Analysis Zone |
| TCC - | Technical Coordinating Committee |
| TEA-21 - | Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century |
| TIP - | Transportation Improvement Program |
| TMA - | Transportation Management Area |
| UPWP - | Unified Planning Work Program |
| USDOT - | United States Department of Transportation |
| UZA - | Urbanized Area |
| V/C Ratio - | Volume to Capacity Ratio |
Pursuant to 23 U.S.C.(i)(5) and 49 U.S.C. 1607, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) must certify jointly the Federal metropolitan transportation planning process in Transportation Management Areas (TMAs) at least every three years. A TMA is an urbanized area with a population greater than 200,000, as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. Certification Reviews generally consist of three primary activities: 1) an on-site visit, 2) review of planning products, both prior to, and during the Review, and 3) preparation of a Certification Review Report, which summarizes the Review and contains Findings, including Commendations, Recommendations, and Corrective Actions. Certification Reviews address compliance with Federal regulations, challenges, including successes, and experiences of the cooperative relationship between the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), State Department of Transportation (DOT), and Transit Operators, in the conduct of the continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive (3C) metropolitan planning process. Joint FHWA/FTA certification review guidelines afford agency reviewers flexibility in designing the Review to reflect local issues and circumstances. Consequently, the scope of Certification Review Reports varies among TMAs.
The certification review process is one of several methods used to measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the local metropolitan transportation planning process, compliance with applicable statutes and regulations, and level and type of technical assistance required to enhance and support the MPO planning process. Other activities provide opportunity for this type of review and comment, including the Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP), the multi-modal long-range transportation plan, the metropolitan and statewide transportation improvement programs, and air quality conformity determinations (in non-attainment and maintenance areas). A range of other formal and less formal contact provides both FHWA and FTA an opportunity to comment on the planning process. While the Planning Certification Review Report may not fully document those intermediate and ongoing measures, the Findings contained in the Report are based on the cumulative analysis of the entire effort.
The review process is individually tailored to address topics of significance in each Transportation Management Area. Federal reviewers prepare Certification Reports to document the results of the review process. The Reports and final actions are the joint responsibility of the appropriate FHWA and FTA field offices, and content will vary to reflect the planning process reviewed.
In order to foster public understanding and input, FHWA and FTA will continue to improve the clarity of the Certification Review Reports.
Pursuant to 23 U.S.C. (i)(5) and 49 U.S.C. 1607, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) must certify jointly the Federal metropolitan transportation planning process in Transportation Management Areas (TMAs) at least once every three years. Certification Reviews generally consist of three primary activities: 1) an on-site visit, 2) review of planning products, both prior to, and during the Review, and 3) preparation of a Certification Review Report. The FHWA North Carolina Division Office and FTA Region-4 Office conducted a joint Certification Review of the Greensboro Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (GUAMPO) transportation planning process, which included a site visit, on January 11th & 12th, 2005. Other participants in the Review included representatives from the GUAMPO, the City of Greensboro, Piedmont Authority For Regional Transportation (PART), and the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT).
The Review resulted in several Commendations and Recommendations, but contained no Corrective Actions. Commendations recognize areas in which the MPO is excelling, Recommendations contain suggestions for improving some area(s) of the planning process, and Corrective Actions contain prescriptive steps to be taken to correct or improve some part of the planning process.
The Federal Review Team identified the following Commendations:
The Federal Review Team identified the following Recommendations:
The Greensboro Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization's planning process is certified for three years from the date of this Report.
The North Carolina Division Office of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Region-4 Office conducted a joint Certification Review of the Greensboro Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization's (GUAMPO) planning process, which included a site visit on January 11th and 12th, 2005. The Review was conducted in accordance with 23 CFR Part 450 and 49 CFR Part 613, which require FHWA and FTA to jointly review and assess the metropolitan transportation planning process for all Transportation Management Areas (TMAs) at least once every three years. A TMA is defined as an urbanized area containing an urbanized population greater than 200,000, as defined by the latest decennial census. According to the 2000 Census, the GUAMPO contains an urbanized population over 200,000, which makes it subject to the TMA transportation planning requirements. This is the first Certification Review conducted for this area.
The purpose of the Review is to assess the extent of compliance with the Federal planning requirements, recognize noteworthy practices, identify problem areas, and provide assistance and guidance, as appropriate. The Review consisted of several discussions on a variety of transportation planning topics with State and local transportation officials directly involved in highway and transit planning activities of the MPO. The Review, which was held at the Greensboro Transportation Department in the Melvin Municipal Office Building, included a public involvement meeting from 5:30 to 7:30 PM on January 11, 2005, to provide the public an opportunity to offer comments on the GUAMPO transportation planning process. The meeting was fairly well attended and all comments were recorded. This report contains the findings and recommendations of the review team.
In preparation for the review, the GUAMPO provided the following to the review team members:
These items, and other supporting documents, were also available in hard copy during the review. The agenda is attached as Appendix A.
The Federal Review Team consisted of the following individuals:
Mr. Marcus Wilner, Federal Highway Administration, North Carolina Division
Mr. Bill Marley, Federal Highway Administration, North Carolina Division
Mr. Eddie Dancausse, Federal Highway Administration, North Carolina Division
Ms. Lynise DeVance, Federal Highway Administration, North Carolina Division
Mr. Alex McNeil, Federal Transit Administration, Region-4
Other participants consisted of staff from the Greensboro Urban Area MPO, the City of Greensboro, and the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), including:
Mr. Tyler Meyer, MPO Staff
Mr. Jeff Sovich, MPO Staff
Mr. Craig McKinney, MPO Staff
Ms. Peggy Holland, MPO Staff
Ms. Lydia McIntyre, MPO Staff
Ms. Kimberly Hinton, NCDOT
Mr. Anson Gock, NCDOT
Ms. Libby James, Greensboro Transit Authority
Ms. Sharon Smiley, Greensboro Transit Authority
The officially recognized members of the MPO include:
The Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) is the decision-making arm of the MPO and includes the following members:
The following entities are officially represented on the TAC:
The following Towns are also represented on the TAC (represented by the Guilford County Commissioners):
The following entities have Board members in common with the TAC:
The governing Board of the Greensboro Transit Authority (GTA) is appointed by the Greensboro City Council.
The MPO planning area covers most of Guilford County, excluding the Gibsonville, Whitsett, High Point, and Jamestown areas. The City of Greensboro Department of Transportation serves as the Lead Planning Agency (LPA). The Greensboro Urban Area Technical Coordinating Committee (TCC) consists of transportation professionals and town managers from the member jurisdictions, Piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation (PART), Greensboro Transit Authority (GTA), Piedmont Triad Airport Authority (PTI), and NC Port Authority, a break bulk staging facility serving as an inland port. The TCC reviews materials and forwards recommendations to the TAC for action.
Several operators of major modes of transportation are not represented on the MPO, including:
The voting structure is set up as follows. The City of Greensboro has 3 voting members, Guilford County has 2 voting members, and the North Carolina Board of Transportation has 1 voting member. Each vote carries the same weight; however, the TAC Chair (currently a member of the Greensboro City Council) may vote only in order to break a tie.
Commendation:
The MPO coordinator and NCDOT MPO coordinator stated that they communicate with each other weekly. The NCDOT MPO coordinator indicated that the MPO functions well with minimal need for oversight. The MPO coordinator indicated that the project development meetings were especially important, as were the annual meeting with NCDOT to discuss MPO project priorities. The cooperation between the City of Greensboro and the NCDOT Division Office pertaining to the U.S. 29 Corridor Study was highlighted as an example of cooperation with regard to shared costs. Coordination between the MPO and NCDOT was also demonstrated in the development of the regional model used in the latest Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) update. They agreed to use the latest modeling tool, TRANPLAN. The MPO and NCDOT were able to reach agreement on base year data, which was updated from 1994 to 2000; horizon years, which were also updated; and transit assumptions, including alternatives analysis. Additionally, two Memorandums of Agreement (MOAs) for travel demand modeling for regional mobility were developed.
MPO/Rural Planning Organization (RPO)/Adjacent MPO Coordination:
A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) has been entered into by the local MPOs for enhanced regional cooperation. A Boundary Structure and Governance Review was also recently conducted, which looked at existing planning boundaries. As a region, no significant changes were needed; however, open discussion between the local MPOs and RPOs is practiced in order to coordinate on projects that cross planning boundaries. For example, a two-year PTI Airport Transportation Study is underway. The Piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation (PART) sometimes takes the lead in resolving issues. The GUAMPO maintains communication with adjacent MPOs through direct staff contact, and the sharing of meeting materials and minutes. In addition, the Early Action Compact (EAC) enhances coordination and cooperation among the local MPOs and RPOs pertaining to air quality issues, especially ozone. Lastly, all local Plans will be on the same timeline during the next cycle.
Commendation:
Recommendation:
The MPO has the following cooperative agreements or MOUs in full effect that currently identify planning responsibilities for various entities in the metropolitan planning process, and are not in need of an update:
The GUAMPO Metropolitan Area Boundary (MAB) includes all of Guilford County except small portions belonging to the Burlington and High Point MPOs. There has been little expansion of the MAB from the 2000 Census defined Urbanized Area (UZA). Expansion of the MAB into the counties north of Guilford was not warranted; however, the modeling does include part of Rockingham County. The 2000 Census expanded the GUAMPO UZA to include the Town of Jamestown; however, since the High Point MPO opted to retain that portion of their former planning area, it became a TMA despite meeting the 200,000 population threshold. Some Greensboro City Limits lie within the High Point MAB, but cooperation between the two MPOs rendered it a non-issue. The boundary with the High Point MPO now aligns more closely with roadways and physical features. The boundary with the Burlington-Graham MPO was adjusted to satisfy both MPOs, and to correct ambiguities. The GUAMPO UZA has been "smoothed" for the purpose of functional classification designations.
PART provides leadership and coordination for the four regional MPOs, including land use plans, air quality conformity analysis, and strategies for prioritizing projects of regional significance across all modes. They have recently completed a survey of transit share as Phase 2 of a Major Investment Study (MIS).
The GUAMPO Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was revised two years ago; it had not been updated since 1975. The revision was prompted largely by a review of the Greensboro Transit Authority (GTA). The MOU was compiled from other areas and is designed to be consistent with Federal Highway Administration regulations. There is no weighted voting allowed by the MOU. Weighted voting was considered, but was not needed due to balance being achieved by the addition of a City and County representative. Agreements are updated primarily only in response to changing local circumstances. For example, an MOU was developed for Enhanced Regional Cooperation in response to new regulations and Federal Bills.
Commendation:
The Fiscal Year 2004-2005 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) for the Greensboro Urban Area MPO was adopted by the TAC on April 22, 2004. Development of the annual UPWP is guided by the Prospectus, which was adopted December 11, 2001. The UPWP is developed cooperatively between the MPO staff, the NCDOT MPO coordinator, and the Greensboro Transit Authority (GTA) on an annual basis. The NCDOT Public Transportation Division provides notification to the MPO and the public transit agency (GTA) of the annual allocation of federal Section 5303 and Section 5307 funds and State Maintenance and Planning funds, along with a recommended schedule and guidance for preparation of the transit portion of the draft and final versions of the UPWP. This notification is being provided in February each year as opposed to April or May in years past. MPO staff and GTA staff jointly prepare the transit portion of the UPWP. The NCDOT Transportation Planning Branch provides notification to the MPO of the annual allocation of federal aid transportation planning funds and State Planning and Research funds, along with a recommended schedule and guidance for preparation of the draft and final versions of the UPWP. MPO staff prepares the UPWP in consultation with NCDOT.
Other political jurisdictions in the MPO provide input into the UPWP development process by bringing their transportation planning needs to the MPO's attention at any time through their representative on the TAC, or by contacting MPO staff. Depending on the point in the UPWP development cycle, the nature of the planning need, and available funds, a jurisdiction's project(s) may be incorporated into the UPWP prior to adoption, or amended in subsequently.
The UPWP activities are developed, selected, and prioritized at the beginning of each UPWP development cycle. The MPO staff assesses the planning study needs for the coming year and formulates a package of appropriate MPO activities with the TCC. The activities are then refined and presented to the TAC, who then reviews the proposed planning activities, providing comments and direction for staff to make revisions. The result of this review forms the basis of the UPWP. The selected work items in the fiscal year 2004-2005 UPWP reflect the current planning priorities facing the area.
The MPO is involved in a corridor refinement study of the U.S. 29 Corridor (with NCDOT Division 7), which will close some access points and include short and long-term strategies. They are planning to begin a corridor refinement study of the Battleground Avenue/Lawndale Drive area. The MPO is also involved in feasibility studies, which help the TAC prioritize larger projects. The UPWP does not contain any planning activities not federally funded. Revisions to the UPWP are made by Resolution adopted by the TAC; however, very few have been made recently.
The MPO stated that the federal-aid planning money currently available is insufficient to meet local planning needs, despite having an unobligated balance. This is due to the increasing responsibilities placed on MPOs, together with the increasing number of MPOs among which the federal aid planning funds are distributed. The MPO has used some Surface Transportation Program - Direct Allocation (STP-DA) money to supplement its Planning (PL) money. Needs reflected in the UPWP represent only those for which sufficient federal funding is available.
The GUAMPO recently completed an update to its LRTP. The 2030 LRTP was developed between November 2003 and August 2004. The LRTP was adopted by the TAC on August 27, 2004, and took effect on October 1, 2004. The Plan update began with a kickoff in the City Depot in November 2003 and included about 60 public officials. Three rounds of public meetings were held with each round containing four meetings. The meetings were held in a variety of geographic locations and were coordinated with neighboring MPOs. Input was received via email, U.S. mail, and telephone. A consultant conducted an extensive telephone survey. The NCDOT, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), and Greensboro Transit Authority were involved in the Plan development via subcommittees.
The Metropolitan Area Boundary includes the Guilford County Courthouse National Military Park, and several Army Reserve Centers. The National Park Service and the U.S. Army Reserve are involved on a project-level basis on projects that may potentially impact their facilities. It was noted that Park Rangers weigh in on potential traffic impacts.
The seven TEA-21 planning factors played a significant role in the development of the 2030 LRTP. They influenced the development of each of the Plan's elements. When considering the economic vitality of the area, it became apparent that the Plan needed to provide improved access to underdeveloped areas where land use plans have targeted growth or redevelopment. The Plan also consistently seeks to improve safety and security for all modes. This was primarily accomplished through design recommendations, transit amenities, and provisions that promote a defined pedestrian and bicycle realm as a part of the transportation system. The movement of freight was another significant consideration, especially when identifying future highway needs and developing strategies intended to improve access to PTI Airport where the future Federal Express terminal is planned. Transportation connectivity also played a significant role as the planning process considered ways to improve the integration and transition between modes. The Plan is focused on improving system-wide connectivity and even goes beyond federal requirements by including a draft Collector Street Plan for the entire study area. The Congestion Management System and Management strategies noted in the Plan seek to maximize the efficiency and operations of transportation corridors as well as of the entire system, primarily through the use of technology and travel demand management strategies. Protection and enhancement of the environment was accomplished by conducting an earlier, system-planning level environmental screening of projects in the LRTP. This type of preliminary environmental impact screening can: 1) identify potentially serious impacts that could stop a project, 2) allow consideration of the interactions among various projects, and 3) identify and highlight issues warranting further analysis. Finally, preservation of the existing transportation system could be considered the cornerstone of the Plan. The use of technology, land use strategies, and access management tools combine to prolong the performance of the system, thereby lessening the need for extensive expansions to the planned system. The addition of the Collector Street Plan serves as further evidence of the Plan's commitment to preserving the current system by improving mobility throughout the study area, and reducing reliance on arterials and impacts to critical transportation nodes.
Freight considerations are incorporated into the LRTP in part by using surveys, which are not yet complete. The Triad area is gaining a Federal Express hub and a Dell plant, and Interstates 73 and 74, which will result in increased truck and air freight. An Airport Transportation Study is underway, and the MPO is making efforts to engage the trucking companies in the transportation planning and public involvement processes.
The 2030 LRTP is fiscally constrained. The transportation investments proposed to meet metropolitan transportation needs over the next 25 years are consistent with revenue forecasts. Conservative revenue forecasts are used. The LRTP includes only projects for which construction and operating funds can be reasonably expected to become available. Revenue forecasts were developed after a review of previous state and local expenditures, current funding trends, and likely future funding levels. The revenue forecasts involved consultation with NCDOT, GTA, and PART. All dollar figures discussed in the LRTP were analyzed in current year dollars. Figures are presented in constant dollars so that they will be fully comparable through time against a constant baseline value (the current dollar year).
Strategies for ensuring the availability of new funding sources are continually identified, evaluated, and pursued to ensure funding for future projects despite the fact that all projects (i.e., highway, transit, rail, bicycle, and pedestrian) in the transportation plan have revenues currently earmarked to cover them over the 2030 horizon year. Grant monies and authorized general obligation bonds are currently being applied to certain projects in the Plan. These funds, as well as other opportunities, will continue to be aggressively pursued in order to provide adequate financial support for future transportation projects. Suggested new revenue sources for GTA's future needs are outlined in the Mobility Greensboro Long Range Public Transportation Plan.
The LRTP includes short-range, mid-range, and long-range strategies in the form of three future horizon years: 2014, 2020, and 2030, respectively.
The 2030 LRTP is a snapshot that is a representation of transportation needs, priorities, and resources, as they are currently understood. As time passes, transportation system conditions will change, as well as the understanding of the area's needs, priorities, and resources. Future transportation plan updates will reflect these changes, but they will also build off of the public involvement, the technical analysis, and the intergovernmental coordination of the 2030 Transportation Plan effort. To that end, the 2030 LRTP is compatible with the goals and objectives of the GUAMPO.
Recommendations:
The MPO, the NCDOT, and GTA collaborate and coordinate throughout the TIP development process, which recurs on a bi-annual basis. GTA and the NCDOT Public Transit Division review capacity and planning needs for inclusion in the TIP. In the preliminary stages of the TIP development cycle, the TCC reviews the area's transportation needs and policies, based on the LRTP, as well as input from GTA, NCDOT, and other sources, to develop a list of recommended priority projects that reflects the highest priority needs that remain unfunded. The TAC, with the recommendations of the TCC, adopts a final list of priority needs. This list is then discussed in a meeting between MPO staff and NCDOT representatives to consider state and federal transportation funding issues, the status of major projects in the MPO area, and new MPO priorities and requests for program changes. This process is the primary means through which new projects are added to the TIP. After the TIP is adopted, the TAC may also adopt amendments that add in new projects, although such action is subject to funding availability and other considerations.
The TIP includes all federally funded projects and all regionally significant projects, is consistent with the LRTP, and is a fiscally constrained subset of the LRTP. Consistency between the TIP and the LRTP is ensured by analyzing traffic, funding, and air quality impacts. Plan amendments typically require about two weeks to determine consistency. The TIP is ordinarily consistent with the STIP; however, the NCDOT Board of Transportation (BOT) has adopted amendments to the STIP, which have not undergone corresponding TIP amendment action by the TAC. For example, 19 NCDOT-proposed amendments in the 2004-2010 STIP were recently scheduled for corresponding TAC TIP amendment action. The NCDOT STIP development unit is working to get the STIP/TIP amendment process in sync with the MPO TIP development schedule. STIP amendments may arise from scheduling changes, cost overruns, environmental permitting, new projects being added, etc. The NCDOT generally has been willing to accept the MPO's TIP priorities.
The latest TIP was adopted June 25, 2003. As the policy body of the MPO, the TAC approves the TIP. As the Governor's designee, the North Carolina Secretary of Transportation approves the STIP. The TIP is revised by the TAC through amendments adopted by resolution in regularly scheduled public meetings. Generally, there are more transit amendments than highway amendments.
Projects in the TIP are selected for implementation in that all projects listed in the first three years of the TIP are considered committed and will be advanced for implementation, subject to funding availability, conformity determination, etc. The number of unfunded projects listed in the TIP is kept to a minimum. The MPO receives an annual list of projects from the NCDOT for which Federal funds have been obligated during the previous year. This allows the public to better understand which projects are being implemented.
Recommendations:
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and NCDOT Public Transit Division work with the MPO to advance the transit planning agenda. The Piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation (PART) coordinates a regional bus service within the GUAMPO as well as the adjacent three MPOs in High Point, Winston-Salem, and Burlington.
The Greensboro Transit Authority (GTA) participates actively in the "3C" planning process, and has a good working relationship with the MPO. The MPO's long-range transportation plan is multi-modal, and the GTA has provided input into its development. The GTA has a 10-year Master Plan with Phase I consisting of visioning and outreach, and Phase II consisting of capital needs assessment and implementation. Prior to the Master Plan, service had deteriorated; now, a new transit depot has opened. Service frequency will increase soon when additional vehicles and resources are acquired. Ridership has increased steadily in the past year. Service to the area universities will begin in 2005 featuring service until 3:00 AM Thursday through Sunday. This additional service is expected to generate over 300 additional riders per day.
The MPO makes Section 5303 metropolitan planning funds available for short-range transit planning. Additionally, the GTA is well aware of flexible funding as an option. The GTA stated that it received a CMAQ Grant for purchasing additional equipment and for funding a park and ride lot.
One area of concern lies in the TIP amendment process. There are generally more transit amendments than highway amendments. GTA is striving to have projects and funding moved into the funded area of the TIP as opposed to the unfunded area. Too many transit amendments for small changes are causing delay in TIP development and delivery, creating the potential for funding lapses.
Notwithstanding the area of concern, the FTA and FHWA noted that, overall, the Greensboro Transit Authority (GTA) functions well and has an experienced general manager.
Recommendation:
The Piedmont Authority for Regional Transportation (PART) was created in 1997 to coordinate much of the travel demand modeling and land use planning for the GUAMPO as well as the surrounding three MPOs. It is made up of seven counties, four cities, and four MPOs; it also includes nineteen representatives on its Board, representatives from the area airports, two NCDOT Board members, and the TAC Chairs. PART maintains a close connection with the MPO processes.
PART assists the overall Piedmont Triad region by clearing inconsistencies and barriers brought about by the fact that the Triad region lies in three of North Carolina's 14 highway districts and is subjected to three Equity Formulas in the distribution of State funding. PART provides four primary functions to the GUAMPO and the Triad region as a whole: 1) coordination of 21 jurisdictions' adopted land use policies, 2) coordination of air quality planning by getting all affected jurisdictions on the same schedule, 3) coordination of highways of regional interest, and 4) providing socio-economic forecasting for the regional model. The model is expected to be complete by the next round of plan updates. The base year of 2002 has been established, horizon years have been identified, and socio-economic forecasts by Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) are nearly complete. Lastly, the Piedmont Triad Partnership was formed to help determine future development activities. It encompasses a 12-county region and is comprised of members from the public and private sectors.
Recommendation:
The Greensboro MPO currently has a conforming 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and a 2004-2010 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) conformity determination (1-hour ozone) on the MPO's 2030 LRTP and the 2004-2010 TIP were made on October 1, 2004. The MPO's next LRTP update and conformity determination (1-hour ozone) is due October 1, 2007.
The Triad area, which includes the Greensboro MPO, was designated non-attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard, but the effective date of designation has been deferred until September 30, 2005, due to the fact that the Triad area is currently part of an Early Action Compact (EAC). As long as the Triad area meets the EAC milestones and there are no legal challenges to the EAC process, the Greensboro MPO will only have to demonstrate conformity for the 1-hour ozone standard as part of its maintenance plan.
Guilford County was recently designated for the PM2.5 standard. The effective date of the designation is April 5, 2005, and a conformity determination for the PM2.5 standard will be due on April 5, 2006. The Greensboro MPO is working on educating its TCC and TAC members on the PM2.5 standard and associated implications. In the April-May 2005 timeframe, there will be a joint FHWA/EPA PM2.5 conformity training session offered to educate the newly designated PM2.5 areas in North Carolina. The interagency consultation meeting to begin the PM2.5 conformity process for Guilford/Davidson Counties will take place in the May/June 2005 timeframe.
The Greensboro MPO is currently working on a new regional travel demand model that will cover the entire Triad area (Guilford, Alamance, Forsyth, and parts of Davie, Stokes, Davidson, Rockingham, Orange, and Randolph Counties). The work on the model will be completed in early 2006.
Recommendations:
As a result of being designated a Transportation Management Area (TMA) by the 2000 U.S. Census, the Greensboro Urban Area MPO had to develop a Congestion Management System (CMS). The MPO created a study team to coordinate the CMS development with the LRTP update. Management strategies helped anticipate future facility needs. The need to improve intersections and to relieve congestion on freeways was one key outcome of the exercise. The CMS developed by the MPO is based heavily on the existing travel demand model. Future CMS updates will be coordinated with LRTP updates.
ITS projects planned include a new signal timing system to be functional by 2008, installation of cameras on Interstate highways, variable message signs, a regional ITS Architecture for the Triad area, a regional travel demand management center, a vehicle assistance patrol, and the new 511 phone system for up-to-date information on traffic accidents and congested areas.
The MPO is undertaking a number of safety projects. Conversion of some intersections to roundabouts is under consideration as well as conversion of some city streets to two-way. Accident data from the City's Engineering Department is being analyzed to identify intersections with high crash incidences. GDOT is conducting a Bicycle/Pedestrian Awareness Program. The City has an aggressive sidewalk construction policy whereby locations are identified to add sidewalks, including ADA ramps. Site plan reviews also incorporate sidewalks where feasible. Effort is also made to include sidewalks on NCDOT projects. Local jurisdictions must formally request sidewalks and maintain them once constructed. Citizens may also petition the city for sidewalk construction.
Recommendations:
The TAC last revised the MPO's Public Involvement Plan on January 31, 2001. The revision was initiated by the need to document the TIP amendment and adoption process subject to the public involvement standards, the inclusion of newly incorporated towns in the public involvement process, the inclusion of alternate media, i.e., website and email, and the inclusion of major and minor amendments to the Thoroughfare Plan.
The Public Involvement Plan does not state goals, but rather specifies a series of policies and procedural requirements (in addition to any applicable federal requirements) that must be adhered to when the MPO takes any of the following actions: 1) Adoption of the Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program; 2) Major amendment of the Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program; 3) Amendment of the Long Range Transportation Plan; or 4) Amendment of the Public Involvement Plan. The MPO reported that participation at public meetings has been good, that they have received many hits on their website, and that email and postcards have provided abundant public response. In addition, media relations are good, including the use of cable television. The MPO further stated that project selection priorities were validated by telephone surveys and by comments received by meeting attendees.
The public is afforded the opportunity to participate in the planning process during the development of key planning documents, including the UPWP, LRTP, and TIP. The process for developing the LRTP included extensive public involvement opportunities. The TIP development process includes public involvement opportunities at several key times. Development of the UPWP provides opportunity for public involvement only at the publicly held TCC and TAC meetings, during which adoption is considered.
The effectiveness of the Public Involvement Plan is evaluated on an as-needed basis. The Public Involvement Plan was originally adopted on May 18, 1993, and has been subsequently revised on August 30, 1994, July 18, 1995, May 15, 1996, May 20, 1997, January 21, 1999, and October 31, 2000. It is recommended that the MPO document the public involvement evaluation process.
The public involvement process is proactive in that the Public Involvement Plan aims to ensure that the public is involved in the transportation planning process and that input is gathered and duly considered in the decision-making process. Public involvement efforts are scaled to an appropriate level to ensure that people have a meaningful opportunity to affect plans, programs, and projects at meaningful stages of the process. For example, the LRTP update was a major effort and as a result the public involvement process was expanded.
The public involvement process includes consideration of the needs of people traditionally underserved by transportation systems, including MLI households, through specifying that additional strategies for informing and involving low income and minority communities will be used in addition to conventional measures. At a minimum, these will include targeted mailings to the transit operator's community organizations mailing list. Additional strategies will be tested, documented, and evaluated for inclusion in future Public Involvement Plan updates.
The public involvement process is consistent with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 by using the following strategies in implementing its Public Involvement Plan:
1) Holding public meetings at ADA accessible facilities
2) Holding public meetings at facilities located in minority communities
3) Advertising public comment notices and public meeting announcements in minority-targeted media
4) Stating in advertisements that foreign language translation services are available upon request
5) Stating in advertisements that handicap adaptive materials/equipment are available upon request
6) Making public review and comment materials available at ADA accessible facilities located in minority communities
7) Using GTA's list of Title VI contacts for mass distribution of postal and electronic mailings
The MPO also has a Speakers Bureau, which is used in outreach efforts. For example, the Speakers Bureau was used to conduct home visits at the homes of people affected by the Greensboro Urban Loop project.
Commendation:
Recommendations:
Minority and low-income (MLI) populations are identified through a Residential Transit Orientation Index (RTOI). This is an effective tool used within the transit industry for identifying residential areas with a high propensity to use transit. The most recent RTOI compares Census block groups from the 2000 Census data within the GTA service area with respect to five key demographic variables associated with transit usage: 1) the elderly population, 2) the youthful population, 3) population in poverty, 4) zero vehicle households, and 5) residential density. The RTOI for the City of Greensboro shows that most transit-oriented locations lie in the northeast and southeast quadrants of the city, with few areas in the eastern portion. The results indicate that all areas of the community with a high propensity to use transit are being served.
Past, current, and future projects have been plotted via Mobility Greensboro, the long-range public transportation plan for the City of Greensboro, which shows a trend analysis to help determine future projects and service enhancements. There are no current or planned projects that will negatively impact MLI areas, and no such areas that will be denied the benefits of planned projects.
The service is evaluated weekly, monthly, quarterly, and yearly for productivity and cost effectiveness by a service planning committee. The committee consists of the City's Public Transportation Division Management staff and GTA Management staff. Service evaluations on each route include the monitoring of passengers per hour, passengers per mile, fare box recovery, and net cost per passenger. All new service requests involve the following process:
To help determine the needs of the MLI populations, a rider advisory panel was developed to improve communications among GTA and its users, as well as to obtain valuable input from riders representing various quadrants of the city. The majority of the panel members are classified within the MLI population. Additionally, several members of the panel are disabled and elderly users of the fixed route bus service.
To address Title VI complaints, the City of Greensboro/Greensboro Transit Authority conduct reviews with each department in accordance with its equal employment/affirmative action plan to monitor efforts to ensure employment neutrality with regard to race, sex, age, religion, handicap, and national origin. The City has no pending lawsuits alleging discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in its transit services.
To address environmental justice concerns, the City of Greensboro/Greensboro Transit Authority have adopted the following goals/service enhancements over the next 5 years:
Greensboro's long-range public transportation plan, Mobility Greensboro, was developed to ensure the participation of agencies, special interest groups, and citizens in the development of a vision for public transportation over the next 5 to 10 years. Several public involvement techniques were used to ensure active participation from the community at large. Special informational and direct involvement techniques used to involve the minority communities in the long range planning process included the following:
These strategies have proven effective in that the public involvement process has generated service enhancements, which ultimately resulted in increased ridership.
Members of the riding public are encouraged to attend GTA Board meetings to address the Board on concerns. The GTA Board consists of nine members appointed by the City Council. The current racial makeup of the Board is one black female, three white males, three white females, and two black males. With regard to disabilities, two members are visually impaired and one member is mobility challenged. Members serve a 3-year term and must be bona fide adults maintaining a permanent residence within Greensboro's corporate limits. Meetings are held monthly.
There is also an ADA Paratransit subcommittee (STAC), which meets quarterly. The committee is responsible for reviewing the paratransit and fixed route bus service provided by the Authority to ensure it is provided to all persons on a non-discriminatory basis.
Additionally, to engage in dialogue with MLI communities, staff meets with various neighborhood associations monthly to address concerns and provide updates on any changes to the service.
The Senior Operations Planner generally takes the lead in the public involvement process; however, each planner participates in the facilitation of selected public meetings and meets regularly with neighborhood associations. The City of Greensboro has a Facilitator's Group that is attended regularly by the Transportation Planner. The group seeks opportunities to improve participants' knowledge and facilitation skills in an effort to better assist individuals and groups in their work. Other opportunities for professional development are provided through the Institute of Transportation Research and Education in Raleigh, NC.
One impediment to working with MLI groups is the language barrier for non-English speaking groups; nevertheless, GTA attempts to address this barrier by working closely with organizations that work closely with special needs groups. Through appropriate education and communication, GTA strives to provide a quality public transportation service that is safe, reliable, and accessible to the entire community.
The appropriate time to ensure an MPO's compliance with Title VI, and to substantiate the MPO's self-certification, is during the metropolitan planning certification review. The purpose of this part of the review is to examine the MPO's efforts to address environmental justice (EJ) and nondiscrimination with regard to transportation impacts resulting from the planning process. Efforts will be examined regarding identification of minority and low-income communities and their needs, identification of benefits and burdens, and effective engagement of minority and low-income citizens in the transportation planning process.
The demographic information presented by GUAMPO was based on 2000 Census block group data and was individually mapped by low-income status, minority status, and Hispanic status. It was explained, however, that the minority status map equated to African Americans only, and there were no data depicting minorities other that Hispanics and African Americans. It is commendable GUAMPO specifically mapped its two largest minorities; however, it is recommended that all minorities somehow be taken into account. This may be achieved by using an "other minority" category that consists of those minorities that are neither Hispanic nor African American. GUAMPO also overlaid all current and future projects on each of the three demographic maps. This process readily depicted all of the minority and low-income (MLI) areas that may be impacted by those projects.
GUAMPO set the parameter that only block groups that had 50% or more MLI would be flagged for analysis of environmental justice issues. With regard to minorities, FHWA and FTA guidance does not define the size of a minority population; however, it does indicate that a minority population cannot be eliminated from consideration because it is very small in size. Other considerations could include how well established the community is, the longevity of the community, the cohesiveness of the community, etc.
GUAMPO must also take care not to omit from consideration those MLI communities that may be split between two block groups - the size of the MLI community may be small in each block group, but may be significant when the two block groups are added together. Additionally, the 50% threshold results in the non-analysis of those MLI communities that have "high" percentages such as 35-49%. We therefore request GUAMPO reconsider the 50% threshold and its sole use for warranting the analysis of environmental justice issues.
GUAMPO also developed an Impact Matrix that identifies, among other things, the potential environmental justice impacts of all roadway projects for both horizon years 2014 and 2020. Additionally, the matrix forecasts the expected severity of each project's impact as minor, moderate, or major, based on the type of project. This is a very good step toward identifying potential EJ issues early in the planning process.
GUAMPO has not yet developed a method for ensuring or measuring service equity. Nevertheless, GUAMPO indicated that, based on their knowledge of the planning area, there is an even distribution of transportation services. It is important, however, to develop a way to measure or confirm that the current and planned transportation networks do, in fact, provide service equity.
Regarding public involvement, GUAMPO's efforts to engage MLI community members have been limited. GUAMPO does utilize a Title VI mailing list that was developed by the Greensboro Transit Authority, and they place flyers on buses. GUAMPO also uses Black newspapers, and they communicate with Black leaders about transportation planning issues. They currently do not place ads in the local Hispanic newspaper, but indicate they plan to do so in the future. They do, however, have a Spanish-speaking staff member, which is a great resource for engaging the Hispanic community.
GUAMPO indicated that overall attendance at public meetings has been good; however, MLI attendance has not been documented. Additionally, GUAMPO does not currently have a public involvement evaluation process in place. We recommend that GUAMPO document MLI attendance and develop an evaluation process so that they can gage the effectiveness of their MLI public involvement strategies.
Commendations:
Recommendations:
The public was invited to a special public meeting on Tuesday, January 11, 2005, for the purpose of fulfilling the public involvement portion of the Certification Review. The public notification and meeting participants are attached as Appendix B. A significant number of individuals attended the meeting and many planning issues were discussed. One comment addressed the conformity issue with regard to ramifications if the MPO were to fail to meet conformity. Another comment addressed citizen concern for the environment given the growth predicted for the Triad area. Another comment praised the MPO public involvement process and the ability to solicit community input. The speaker also pointed out the need to advance roadway projects to decrease congestion. Another attendee commented on the fact that the Triad will become the freight logistics hub for the state, and stated there is too much emphasis on roads and not enough on transit, and the need to improve railroads for freight transportation and transit. Another speaker stated that the public involvement process provides adequate opportunity for citizen input, but suggested that it could be improved. This speaker also commented that he supports efforts to get a 95% return on the federal gas tax. The Guilford County Planning Director stated that the MPO is very inclusive in involving the County in the process, and that the greatest challenge is in engaging citizens early in the planning process. The GTA Public Transit Manager stated that the planning process is consistent and effective, and that the greatest challenge for GTA is that transit needs exceed available funding.
The Federal Review Team, consisting of staff from the Federal Highway Administration and the Federal Transit Administration, issues this certification. The Greensboro Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization is certified for three years from the date of this Report.
| 9:30 - 9:40 | Welcome and Introductions | Marley/Wilner |
| 9:40 - 10:00 | Certification Overview, Review of Schedule, and General Discussion | Marley |
| 10:00 - 10:30 | MPO Overview/Update - Metropolitan Area Boundary/MOU/Voting Structure | Sovich/Meyer |
| 10:30 - 10:40 | Break | |
| 10:40 - 11:40 | Coordination: MPO/NCDOT and Regional Mobility | Wilner |
| 11:40 - 1:00 | Lunch | |
| 1:00 - 1:50 | UPWP | Marley |
| 1:50 - 2:40 | LRTP/Financial Planning | Wilner |
| 2:40 - 3:30 | TIP/STIP | Marley |
| 3:30 - 3:40 | Break | |
| 3:40 - 4:30 | Public Involvement | Marley |
| 4:30 - 5:30 | Prepare for Public Involvement Meeting | |
| 5:30 - 7:30 | Public Involvement Meeting J. Douglas Galyon Depot 300 East Washington Street |
Marley/Wilner |
| 8:30 - 9:30 | Transit Planning | Alex McNeil |
| 9:30 - 10:15 | Air Quality | Eddie Dancausse/ Matt Laurita |
| 10:15 - 10:30 | Break | |
| 10:30 - 11:30 | Title VI/Environmental Justice | Lynise DeVance |
| 11:30 - 1:00 | Lunch/Review Team Meeting | Wilner/Marley |
| 1:00 - 2:30 | Other Emphasis Areas - CMS/ITS/ Safety/Bicycle-Pedestrian /Environmental Stewardship/Self-Certification |
Wilner/Marley |
| 2:30 - 2:45 | Break | |
| 2:45 - 3:30 | Presentation of Review Team's Preliminary Findings and Discussion |
Wilner/Marley |
Note: The MPO may prepare a presentation for any subject(s) prior to the Question and Answer portion.
The Greensboro Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (GUAMPO) invites you to a public hearing regarding the GUAMPO transportation planning process. Representatives from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will conduct the hearing as part of a triennial certification review of the GUAMPO transportation planning process.
The public hearing is being held to provide an opportunity for interested citizens to comment on GUAMPO's transportation plans, programs, and services and how effectively they meet the needs of the area.
You are welcome to attend or submit written comments if you live or conduct business within Guilford County, except for the Burlington, Gibsonville, High Point, Jamestown or Whitsett areas.
The meeting will be held from 5:30pm to 7:30pm on Tuesday, January 11,2005. The meeting will take place in the J. Douglas Galyon Depot, located at 300 East Washington Street in downtown Greensboro.
Please submit written comments by February 11,2005 to:
| Attn: MPO Certification Greensboro Urban Area MPO PO Box 3136 Greensboro, NC 27402-3136 |
or | guampo@greensboro-nc.gov |
If you are disabled and need special assistance, please contact the offices of the Greensboro Urban Area MPO at least 48 hours before the hearing at (336) 373-4368 or guampo@greensboro-nc.gov.
For more information please contact the Greensboro Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization at:
Phone: (336) 373-4368
Email: guampo@greensboro-nc.gov
Or visit: www.greensboro-nc.gov/gdotJplanning/mpo/
From: Sovich, Jeffrey [Jeffrey.Sovich@greensboro-nc.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 3:55 PM
Subject: Public Hearing Announcement
Dear Interested Parties,
The Greensboro Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (GUAMPO) invites you to a public hearing regarding the GUAMPO transportation planning process. Representatives from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will conduct the hearing as part of a triennial certification review of the GUAMPO transportation planning process.
The public hearing is being held to provide an opportunity for interested citizens to comment on GUAMPO's transportation plans, programs, and services and how effectively they meet the needs of the area.
You are welcome to attend or submit written comments if you live or conduct business within Guilford County, except for the Burlington, Gibsonville, High Point, Jamestown or Whitsett areas.
The meeting will be held from 5:30pm to 7:30pm on Tuesday, January 11, 2005. The meeting will take place in the J. Douglas Galyon Depot, located at 300 East Washington Street in downtown Greensboro.
Please submit written comments by Friday, February 11, 2005 to:
| Attn: MPO Certification Greensboro Urban Area MPO PO Box 3136 Greensboro, NC 27402-3136 |
or | guampo@greensboro-nc.gov |
If you are disabled and need special assistance, please contact the offices of the Greensboro Urban Area MPO at least 48 hours before the hearing at (336) 373-4368 or guampo@greensboro-nc.gov.
For more information please contact the Greensboro Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization at:
Phone: (336) 373-4368
Email: guampo@greensboro-nc.gov
Or visit: www.greensboro-nc.gov/gdot/planning/mpo/
You may view the official public notice for this hearing at:
http://www.ci.greensboro.nc.us/gdot/planning/MPO/PDF%20Files/Cerificatio n%20Review%20Hearing%20Ad.pdf
Thank you,
Jeff Sovich, AICP
MPO Planner
Greensboro Department of Transportation
300 West Washington Street
P.O. Box 3136
Greensboro, NC 27402-3136
Tel. (336) 373-2903
Cell (336) 382-7048
Fax. (336) 412-6171
List of Participants
Sandy Carmany
Ed Widman
Edgar G. Phillips
Mark E. Kirstner
Heidi H. Galanti
Steve Glayson
Allen Pursor
Jean Black
Richard Black
Larry Owens
Bob Harner
Harry Flatch
