Minutes 02-07-2012 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

FTA 2009 publications (see link: http://www.nbrti.orq/CBRT.html) note and Orange County staff agrees that a community should match the technology with the need based on land use and the ability to financially build and maintain. BRT-High is such a system that is complementary to these precepts in the BRT ability to remain flexible to changing conditions and locational needs including the exponential rate of green technologies. Although Orange County and the municipalities are expected to grow in population and jobs over the long term planning horizon (25± years), the estimates do not create high intensity skyscraper urban environments because of the limitations with other natural resources such as water and the costs of public services. (Attachment F) Additional Supporting Maps -(Attachments G, H, I, J) Resolution/Orange County Staff Recommendation - Attachment K is a draft resolution for the DCHC MPO Transportation Advisory Committee's consideration at its meeting tomorrow, February 8, 2012. Orange County staff is recommending changes, as shown in red, "tracked changes" format. FINANCIAL IMPACT: This action, although not the approval of a financial plan or '/z cent referendum, begins a process outlining a potential financial commitment by local (Durham and Orange Counties) state and federal governments of $1.4 billion and an ongoing 'h cent sales tax commitment from Orange County residents. Orange County's commitment to fund the transit program can only be through voter approval on November 6, 2012 or later after the legal requirements of a referendum are set earlier in the year. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board: 1. Receive the additional information; 2. Discuss and ask questions; and 3. Identify any additional materials that may be required to provide guidance to Commissioner Gordon, Orange County MPO representative on the Transportation Advisory Committee, for a proposed vote on February 8, 2012 by the DCHC MPO TAC and to provide guidance to Chair Pelissier for the Triangle Transit Board meeting on February 22, 2012. DECISIONS 4. Proceed with Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) study area known as Durham- Orange Corridor Alternate 4 from endpoints UNC to Alston Avenue (17.4 miles -$1.4 billion). NOTE: If FTA review suggests a shorter segment, the BOCC reserves the right to reanalyze its decision. 5. Proceed with LPA alignment and station suggestions of: a. UNC(D) which could allow potential future extension to the west to Carrboro b. Proceed with C-2 (Friday Center along NC 54 easterly past proposed Hillmont; aka George King Road alignment). NOTE: Extend easterly as close to I-40 for another potential P&R station if Leigh Village P&R is suppressed in NC 54 Corridor Plan. c. Consider whether a detailed study and report for a possible third alignment consistent with the Alternatives Analysis for US 15-501 from Hamilton Station to Gateway Station is warranted. (1) This alternate alignment provides another option to avoid the environmental challenges noted in C-1 and C-2 corridors along NC 54 and the federal wetlands and would bolster economic development opportunities within Orange County which would be the source of the countywide financial commitment. (2) Incorporate findings of this study into the development of the 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) which is in progress, so that this study may inform the 2-3 year New Starts application process with the most current data and community/local government mindset.