Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
~~ <br />Mr. Harnaday made the initial opening remarks. He stated that <br />Orange County had been allocated $234,000.00 and that the formula for <br />this allocation was based on the number of unpaved roads in the County. <br />This County currently has two hundred and fifty-one (251) miles of un- <br />paved roads. <br />John Watkins stated that twenty percent (20~) of the County's <br />allocation had been held back due to the fact that the Department of <br />Transportation was not sure that the gasoline tax revenue would meet <br />its expectation, therefore, only eighty (SO$) of the monies allocated <br />for the County was being used for the 1975-1976 Road Program, however, <br />if the funds did become available in the last quarter of the year they <br />would be allocated to the County. He continued by saying that the State <br />this year had appropriated thirty million dollars for each of the next <br />two fiscal years and that this appropriation far exceeded any amount <br />previous appropriated to the Department of Transportation. Mr. Watkins <br />reviewed new legislation that had been adapted that would affect the <br />Department of Transportation and Board of Commissioners. He made <br />specific reference to House Bill #575 that gave permissive powers for <br />subdivision streets and/or roads that were not paved. The new policy <br />would allow the Berard to levy a tax on each property owner for their <br />proportionate share of the paving cost. The property owners, however, <br />must petition the Board of Commissioner to levy the paving tax. <br />Chairman Garrett opened the 'floor for questions to the citizens <br />that were present. A discussion ensued concerning the policy of the <br />Department of Transportation in the classification of a subdivision <br />road. <br />David Wagoner of the Fairview area and persons from the Hamemont <br />area were prFSent to express their opposition to said policy. The Board <br />stated its concern of the subdivision policy and pointed out that they <br />had in previous sessions requested that the Department of Transportation <br />to reconsider its position on this matter. The Board inquired as to <br />how they could be placed on the Agenda for a State Secondary Road Council <br />meeting. They were advised to write to the Secretary of Transportation. <br />The Clerk was instructed to write a letter requesting that the Board be <br />.given a time, date, and place of the.next Secondary Road Council meeting <br />and that they be placed on the Agenda. <br />Chairman Garrett recognized Dr. D. A. Otter, Chairman of the County's <br />Bicentennial Bikeways Task Force, Dr. Otto filed a Report with the Board. <br />The subject of the Report was "Provision of Bike Lanes or Bikeways along <br />road from 5eawe1l Elementary School to Estes Drive." A discussion con- <br />cerning the feasibility versus the cost of the proposal ensued. <br />Mr. Watkins stated that monies were not available for the construction <br />of bikeways along any of the secondary roads. <br />Peggy Pollister, representing the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Parent <br />Teachers Association, requested than the Department of Transportation <br />install railroad crossing signals on the Homestead Road. She pointed <br />out that the caution light that had been installed was not sufficient, <br />in that, it began blinking when cars approached and not when trains were <br />approaching. Mr. Watkins replied that according to the standards used <br />for installing railroad crossing signals that the Homestead Road did not <br />qualify under these standards. He stated that the cost factor was another <br />reason why the signals could not be placed at the crossing. <br />There being no further business to come before the Board, the <br />meeting was adjourned. <br />Flora Garrett, Chairman <br />Betty June Hayes, Clerk <br />