OUTBoard agenda 011613 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

OUTBoard Action:Develop and approve list. Abigaile Pittman discussed the annual work plan and the list staff created as a recommendation and noted several projects and emerging issues including: Research and provide recommendations on the implementation of the CTP which goes to public hearing on January 24th and will hopefully be adopted by the spring of 2013, Collector Street Planreview and recommendations with an emphasis on economic development areas, Safe Route to School (SRTS) Strategic Action Plan adoption and implementation, Planning for new transportation technology (electrical vehicles, etc.), Enhanced regional transportation planning efforts, Pursuit of funding sources for transportation projects, Revisit Rules of Procedure to address township representation, and in the event OPTremains within the auspice of Orange County Government, then additional amendments will be required to comply with State regulations regarding transportation services and operational duties. Pau Guthrie asked that the word planning be removed from number 5 because there will be some operational issues pop up that we should have a legitimate question on. Sam Lasris questioned how that goal could be pursued. Paul Guthrie responded that the OUTBoard should keep its toe in on the implementation of transportation activity which is going to be the big deal down the road and part of it is planning now but as this money begins to kick in between Durham and Orange County, you will start seeing some manifest things. Some of the earliest things are going to be bus service. Routes, structures, and those become key in the long haul because one of the key ingredients of that bus structuring is to build the customer base at certain locations where future transportation of a different mode, more rapid transportation,will be able to have a fixed customer base ready to make a transfer from bus to light rail or commuter rail, etc. Craig Benedict added that when the Commissioners passed 3resolutions concerning moving forward with the ½ cent sales tax, they mentioned therural routes and rural representation of how to tie in to potential east/west route and maybe how to bring in Cedar Grove and Whitecross. I think they are going to be looking to a Board such as this as these monies are put forward to how they can best bespent andhow to build the rider base. Alex Castro suggesteda language change to number 4-Review of new transportation related technologies and assess suitability for employment to meet transportation requirements within Orange County. For example, smart phones have GPS functions so we can use smart phones to locate a transportation requirement and match it with a transportation source. He referred to another revision that hebrought up at the beginning of the meeting:Review the Orange County Master Aging Plan 2012-2017 Strategies involving transportation and mobility and provide recommendations. Here we have a list of strategies that pertain to transportation and mobility and we as perform transportation planning we can comment on it and come up with suggestions. I think that serves two purposes and shows that we are doing something and we are working with others and advancing something. Craig Benedict: Technologies are good. It took me three and a half years to upgrade the new demand response software and it is still not what I want. I would want the mobile based which is somewhat like the smart phones so there ismore mobile technology within the vans. I think in order to be more efficient in the future, anduse the technology that is available, I would love an advocate of the OUTBoard andmy OPT manager to get into developing a strategic planof IT, where the needs meets technology. Alex Castro: What I’ve just brought up is being used. It’s already in the initial use in the San Francisco Bay Area. What I am talkingabout in our case is applying it to the mobility issues of the disabled and seniors in the rural part of ReturntoAgenda