Agenda - 02-22-1999 - d2b - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

a In brief, for this plan to be implemented as recommended herein (i.e., inter -urban county bicycling facilities), changes must be made to the amount of funding that is "earmarked" for cycling and in the way that roads, that are also bicycle routes, are planned, programmed, constructed and maintained by the North Carolina Department of Transportation. Cycling funds must become a dedicated source of funding similar to that of the Highway Trust Fund (see Section C. of the Bicycle Transportation Plan Supplement for an excerpt from the 1998 -2004 North Carolina State Transportation Improvement Program), whereby a portion of state transportation funds can only be used to build and improve bicycle routes. Also changes made at the state and regional levels will likely require commensurate changes at the local level to subdivision regulations and zoning ordinances. CURRENT PLANNING FRAMEWORK In Orange County the adopted Board of County Commissioners Goals and Objectives directs that bicycle planning be done. The FY 97 -98 Goals and Objectives include a provision (Objective 4 - Update the Transportation Element of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan) to develop a Bicycle Component to the Transportation Element of the Orange County Comprehensive Plan. Also being prepared as a result of the Board's Goals and Objectives is the development of a Joint Master Recreation and Parks Plan. It has been recommended that this new plan also contain a Recreational Bicycling Element to address the concerns of county residents about child, novice and off -road cycling opportunities. These two Bicycling Plan initiatives (transportation and recreation) will provide an excellent opportunity at the local level to institutionalize cycling into land use planning and regulatory functions. The Durham- Chapel Hill - Carrboro (DCHC) Metropolitan Planning Organization (regional transportation planning body) is currently developing a 2025 Comprehensive Transportation Plan. At this time there is little documentation on what, if any, changes will be made to the adopted 1993 DCHC Regional Bicycle Plan. However, some of the more critical comments raised by citizens (concerning the draft Goals and Objectives for the new plan) are that there are no performance measures or facility construction goals for bicycle transportation in the plan (see Section D. of the Bicycle Transportation Plan Supplement for the Transportation Advisory Committee meeting minutes for the May 13, 1998 Public Hearing on the 2025 Transportation Plan: Draft Goals & Objectives). It should also be mentioned that since the adoption of the 1993 DCHC Regional Bicycle Plan that the local governments of the Towns of Hillsborough and Chapel Hill, the City of Durham and Orange County have all adopted or are currently developing new bicycle plans for their respective jurisdictions. At the state level, from 1987 to 1997 only 28 miles of paved shoulders have been constructed by NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION out of the 78,000 miles of roadway maintained by NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (Bicvcline & Walkine in North Carolina - A Lone -Range Transportation Plan, Division of Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation, North Carolina Department of Transportation, November 1996, page 28). It should be noted that ifNCDOT were to provide the lane widths and paved shoulders as called for in their own Roadway Design Manual and Bicycle Facilities Design Guidelines (see Section E. of the Bicycle Transportation Plan Supplement) then almost every (except for one) bicycle route depicted in this plan would have its travel lanes widened and seven of the routes would have been provided with paved shoulders. At the federal level President Clinton has signed the Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st Century (TEA 21) into law. TEA 21 provides the same type of bicycle transportation facility funding opportunities with even more consideration and eligibility for funding bicycle transportation under the various transportation funding programs (see Section F. of the Bicycle Transportation Plan Supplement for a TEA 21 Summary). Once again, as in 1991, there is an opportunity to provide an increased amount of cycling transportation facilities. It should be noted that TEA 21, like its predecessor ISTEA, is more of an "enabling" legislation that will allow states to fund bicycle transportation facilities, if the Governor and the Secretary of the NORTH CAROLINA Board of Transportation so choose to do so under the enhancement and other provisions of the legislation. 4 2 73