Browse
Search
OUTBoard agenda 111914
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange Unified Transportation Board
>
Agendas
>
2014
>
OUTBoard agenda 111914
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/26/2018 11:40:20 AM
Creation date
3/26/2018 11:39:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
11/19/2014
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Document Relationships
OUTBoard minutes 111914
(Message)
Path:
\Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active\Orange Unified Transportation Board\Minutes\2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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
D R A F T <br />Chuck Edwards: That reflects in the list.112 <br />113 <br />Abigaile Pittman: Thenext topic on the agenda isa discussion of the status of any state discussions/projects related 114 <br />to the feasibility of using existing triangle region railway infrastructure for commuter rail purposes as part of a multi-115 <br />modal transportation system.Ms. Pittman showed the Board a copy of the 2008 commuter rail capacity study done 116 <br />by HNTB. 117 <br />118 <br />Chuck Edwards: I tried to get information about this topic before tonight’s meeting and failed.119 <br />120 <br />Paul Guthrie: I was on the task force that looked at the Hillsborough Rail Station. There was a lot of conceptual 121 <br />planningabout the railroad right-of-way. Is anyone paying attentionto the fact that we have a 300-foot right-of-way 122 <br />through the county that could be used for transportational purposes?123 <br />124 <br />Ed Lewis: I had an opportunity to attend the TSS (Traffic Separation Study) workshop.125 <br />126 <br />Paul Guthrie: At some level, this project is not going to move becauseyou ask but for a lot of other reasons. As this 127 <br />position comes out, this could be a good time for an opportunitythat this couldbecome the key ingredient in 128 <br />beginning anintegrated transportation system in this county.129 <br />130 <br />Alex Castro: The Research Triangle Foundation which is doing a revamping of the RTP, in their presentation, they 131 <br />have two commuter rail stations, one which will provide shuttles to RDU airport. 132 <br />133 <br />Abigaile Pittman: The next topic of discussion is issues related to private street conversions for acceptance into the 134 <br />state maintained system.Typical issues are people in subdivisions with private streets and the burden of maintaining 135 <br />that over years, and then they decide they want the state to take over maintenance of the state.136 <br />137 <br />Chuck Edwards: The process starts when the developer has to make a decision as to whether he wants to pursue 138 <br />state maintained or privately maintained roads. The bottom line is if they choose state maintained, it has to be 139 <br />designed by our standards. DOT is involved in the beginning.Once we sign off, the developer will take it, develop it 140 <br />and sellhomes. Once he meets a certain threshold of a certain house count per mile he can petition the road for 141 <br />state maintenance. There are times when usually the homeowners want to pursue state maintenance for a private 142 <br />road. The issues are the private roadshave a private right-of-way so it is not eligible for that alone. So there has to 143 <br />be a conversion. The typical issue that we deal with is school stops. School buses won’t go down a private road. 144 <br />There are moderate subdivisions that are built to the design and construction standards of a state maintained road, it 145 <br />is a matter of replating the private to public but we have learnedthat can create issues with the county as to whether 146 <br />that developer was trying to circumvent the subdivision regulations.147 <br />148 <br />Abigaile Pittman: There is problem ifthe road has been constructed to our Class B standards and they have to 149 <br />overcome issues such as the placement of utilities, road widening, ditching, and encroachments. It is almost 150 <br />impossible to overcome and sometimes the maintenance cost on those roads becomes a huge burdenon the 151 <br />property owners. 152 <br />153 <br />Chuck Edwards: The Class B road, we sometimes refer to those as a glorified driveway and it isnot be feasible to 154 <br />bring them upto our standards.155 <br />156 <br />Abigaile Pittman: Another topic for discussionis if there are available resourcesfor minor improvements at problem 157 <br />sites/intersections within the county.I have been in discussion with Orange County School Districts regarding several 158 <br />sites. There are issues with intersections to their driveways, wherethey need minor improvements to help the flow of 159 <br />traffic. We have a list of improvements, what do I do with that list and arethere any available funds?160 <br />161 <br />Chuck Edwards: There is a group within our traffic engineering branch called Municipal School and Transit 162 <br />Assistance (MSTA)and their purpose is to help school systems solve existing problems and avoid future ones. 163 <br />Funding is fairly low at this point butthere are ways to get funding and you need to ask.164 <br />165 <br />Ted Triebel: One that comes immediately to mind is the Cameron ParkElementary and St. Mary’s Road;has that 166 <br />been looked at?167 <br />5 <br />ReturntoAgenda
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.