Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
13 6,5- <br />Plan and Report and provide comments to staff prior to presentation of the Draft <br />Plan and Report to the Commissioners. Recommend the Draft Plan and Report <br />to the Commissioners for their consideration. <br />Selkirk expressed appreciation for the comprehensive work done by McCalip <br />in providing such a huge amount of information for the Bicycle Committee. He <br />also expressed appreciation for the enthusiasm of the committee and recognized <br />Kelly Evenson noting she had attended every meeting of the committee. <br />McCalip stated that the plan has been sent out for informal review to the North <br />Carolina Bicycle Committee members, Dr. Gene Griner and Liz Rooks, <br />Carrboro, Chapel Hill, and Durham. McCalip continued that he would send the <br />plan to all surrounding jurisdictions, state -wide planning branch, all of the <br />bicycle planning authorities that he is aware of and anyone else that the <br />Planning Board feels should review it <br />Barrows noted that she was impressed with the amount of work that had been <br />done to complete the draft plan. She asked for clarification of some of Carmen <br />Borg's work regarding things that counties can and cannot do in North Carolina <br />because of State laws. North Carolina laws prohibit counties from making road <br />improvements but they are unclear about sidewalks and trails. <br />McCalip responded that it is not clear. Durham County is requesting enabling <br />legislation authorizing the County of Durham to fund bikeways and trails. It is <br />very clear what municipalities can do. For counties, it does not specifically <br />mention pedestrian paths, bikeways and trails. <br />Selkirk noted that there were several places where roads were mentioned but <br />that sidewalks and bike paths were not specifically referenced. Several rules <br />and regulations were also mentioned. <br />Price asked the reality of the proposed bicycle transportation route, NC 86 as a <br />priority when it is a two -lane road and no space for bicycles without grave <br />endangerment. McCalip responded that is the #I desired route of cyclists in <br />Orange County to be improved for transportation between Hillsborough, Chapel <br />Hill and Carrboro. We can't improve it on our own. It has to be done by the <br />State. The overall recommendations of the Bicycle Task Force is to include <br />some provisions for more bicycle funding in the State laws and Transportation <br />Improvement Program. At this time, there is only $3M for the entire state per <br />year and that is not enough. Most of this goes to urban areas. <br />Price continued what does the Planning Board need to do to make this become a <br />reality? McCalip responded that the Board could recommend that in the <br />legislative package for Orange County delegation to General Assembly to <br />include, as Durham County did, legislation for Orange County or across the <br />state for improvements such as these. <br />Selkirk asked that McCalip review the map of proposed routes explaining why <br />those routes were selected as the primary routes. McCalip explained that this <br />plan is for bicycle transportation as opposed to bicycle recreation. He referred <br />to the profile of the cyclist in the agenda materials noting that the design cyclist <br />is usually someone who has a driver's license and knows how to operate a <br />vehicle on the road whether it be a car or a bicycle. This cyclist is going to a <br />specific destination, usually to work and the intent of this plan is to address this <br />