Browse
Search
Minutes 02-07-2012
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Minutes - Approved
>
2010's
>
2012
>
Minutes 02-07-2012
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/2/2012 2:17:31 PM
Creation date
5/2/2012 2:17:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/7/2012
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Document Relationships
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Agenda
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 4a
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 4b
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 4c
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 5a
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 5c
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 5d
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 5e
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 5f
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 5g
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 5h
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 5i
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 5j
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 5k
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 5l
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 5m
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 7a
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 7b
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 7c
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 7d
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 7e
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 8a
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 8b
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 8c
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012 - 8d
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
Agenda - 02-07-2012-13 (1)
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2012\Agenda - 02-07-2012 - Regular Mtg.
ORD-2012-003 Amendment to Orange County Code of Ordinances Regarding Weapons
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2010-2019\2012
ORD-2012-004 Amendments to Unified Development Ordinance Text (UDO /Zoning 2011 -06
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2010-2019\2012
RES-2012-011 Resolution Recognizing February 28, 2012 as Spay Neuter Day USA
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2010-2019\2012
RES-2012-012 Resolution approving Motor Vehicle Property Tax Releases/Refunds
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2010-2019\2012
RES-2012-013 Resolution approving Property Tax Releases/Refunds
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2010-2019\2012
RES-2012-014 Resolution approving Applications for Property Tax Exemption/Exclusion
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2010-2019\2012
RES-2012-015 Resolution Amending Chapter 18, Article V, Sections 18-151 Through 18-155 of Orange County Code of Ordinances Regarding Weapons
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2010-2019\2012
RES-2012-016 Resolution Supporting An Application to the LGC for its approval of a financing agreement for Elementary School #11 and Other County Capital Projects and Refinancing of Existing Obligations
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2010-2019\2012
RES-2012-017 Resolution Amending the Comprehensive Land Use Element Map 2030 (CP-2011-05) Efland Area
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2010-2019\2012
RES-2012-018 Resolution Amending the 2030 Comprehensive Plan
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2010-2019\2012
RES-2012-019 Resolution Adopting BOCC Advisory Board Policy and Repealing the Conflicting Provisions of All Prior Advisory Board Policies and Resolutions
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2010-2019\2012
RES-2012-020 Resolution to Approve the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) for the Durham Orange County Transit Corridor
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2010-2019\2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Analysis guidelines. Regardless, the White Paper makes the case that the 15-501 alignment <br />should have been included in the Alternatives Analysis. He said that the Alternatives Analysis <br />also did not involve state resource agencies with known interests in critical natural areas. He <br />encouraged the County Commissioners to not put this sales tax on the ballot until and unless <br />they are comfortable with the information and alternatives that have been provided and until <br />everyone's voices are heard. <br />Glenn Wilson agreed with John Wilson's comments. <br />Damon Seils is from Carrboro. He said that the Locally Preferred Alternative is a product of <br />years of study, numerous public presentations, and thorough consideration by town and County <br />staff, local elected officials, and regional transportation bodies. There has been some discussion <br />about studying various transit enhancements for 15-501. He said that he is confident that all <br />parties can work together to study this separate issue. He said that the issues with 15-501 <br />should not prevent the Board from sending this to the next stage in the process. <br />Harry Johnson is a UNC School of Law student and he is part of a coalition of UNC-Chapel Hill <br />students who urge the County Commissioners to put this transit tax on the ballot in November. <br />He has lived in Orange County for three years and he cannot wait for better transit and rail <br />service in Orange County. He said that improved service on 15-501 should be encouraged, but <br />should not hinder this process from going forward at this time. He said to focus on the plan that <br />has been approved by Triangle Transit for the past seven years. <br />Stewart Boss is also a UNC student and a part of a student coalition that supports the transit tax. <br />He said that he is from Charlotte where there is transit and light rail and he has seen that it can <br />work. He feels that the proposal has been fairly studied and he would like to see it come for a <br />public vote in November. <br />Jeffery Greene is a resident of the Orange County section of Meadowmont. He supports the <br />draft LPA recommended by the MPO's Technical Coordinating Committee last month. He said <br />that investing monies into a rail line is an unquestioned positive. He said that this should not be <br />difficult to implement. <br />Jeff Schmidt is a resident of Cedar Grove. He made reference to the resolution in the packet and <br />said that light rail transit has a greater potential to promote economic growth. He gave an <br />example of Indianapolis, which just passed a transportation plan, which included significant rail. <br />He said that the resolution needs to be modified to include significant additions to bus <br />transportation from here to Durham County. He said that asking for another tax increase would <br />not be good at this time. <br />Ted Triebel lives in Caldwell. He said that the issue is funding support. He referred to an article <br />in the News and Observer on February 1St that indicated that local dollars should be a sure thing <br />before proceeding. He said that there needs to be some clarity before this moves forward. <br />Chair Pelissier said that tonight the only decision before the Board is to vote on the locally <br />preferred alternative. She said that the full plan would come back before the public for comment <br />in the near future if they decide to put it on the ballot. The entire plan does involve buses as well <br />as the potential light rail. Next week there will be a work session to discuss these issues related <br />to the plan. <br />Craig Benedict said that the resolution is from the Durham-Chapel Hill MPO. The words <br />in red are wording that Orange County staff heard at the TCC but this wording was not <br />incorporated into the MPO-TAC resolution. Over the last few days, the MPO staff understands <br />that this is language that Orange County may want. He made reference to page 7, which lists <br />decision points. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.