Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
15 <br /> <br />3. Deviated Fixed Route Service Implementation Vehicles <br /> <br />Orange County Priorities in TARPO April 18, 2018 OUTBoard Recommendation <br />1. Deviated Fixed Route Service Implementation Vehicles <br />2. Old Greensboro Road Paved Shoulder <br />3. Efland-Cedar Grove Road Improvements <br /> <br />Orange County Priorities Preliminary Scores (NCDOT Data Portion) <br /> <br />Manager Recommendation <br />• The Manager recommends the Board consider the OUTBoard recommendation <br />included in Attachment 1 as the County’s ranking for submittal to TARPO. <br /> <br />Commissioner Jacobs referred to the Efland - Cedar Grove Road project, and said when <br />Hillsborough expands its reservoir it may change the roads, and asked if this will change the <br />ranking. <br />Nishith Trivedi said no, and this is ranked by DOT as a modernization project. <br />Commissioner Jacobs said if Hillsborough is going to change the road, it does not make <br />sense to make improvements until Hillsborough’s plans are known. <br />Nishith Trivedi said he would look into this. <br />Commissioner Jacobs asked if the work at I-85 and NC 86, and the widening of I-85 in <br />general, will eliminate all of the trees. <br />Nishith Trivedi said this is part of a committed funded project, and design and <br />engineering have yet to be completed. <br />Commissioner Jacobs asked if staff could find out why DOT is removing trees. <br />Commissioner Jacobs referred to information in the abstract about the BGMPO, and <br />asked if the following wording could be translated into layman’s terms: “develop a process for <br />SPOT 6.0 that considers more than just pre-preliminary scores as prerequisite for formal <br />scoring”. <br />Commissioner Rich said she was confused about this language as well, and it seems <br />that nothing ever gets funded with the BGMPO. She said this is of concern to her. <br />Nishith Trivedi said the BGMPO has a subcommittee meeting going over the SPOT 6.0 <br />process, to determine which projects to put forward. He said he will gather additional <br />information for the BOCC. <br />Commissioner Rich said NC 54 was not ranked, but was put in. She said the OUTBoard <br />did not want to put it in, due to not knowing the completion of this. She asked if there is an <br />update on the completion. <br />Nishith Trivedi said staff recommended not putting any points on NC 54 projects, since <br />staff did not submit it, and it was not part of TARPO’s. He said it was a surprise to everyone <br />when that project showed up on the SPOT process. He said a corridor study is being <br />completed on NC 54, and DOT is awaiting it. <br />Commissioner Rich asked if it is known when this study will be completed. <br />Nishith Trivedi said some time in the fall of this year. <br />Commissioner Rich asked if this study would be done on time to get into SPOT 6.0. <br />Nishith Trivedi said this can be reviewed to see if the BOCC wants to submit it for SPOT <br />6.0. <br />Commissioner Marcoplos asked if these rankings speak for themselves, or will the <br />BOCC be asked to testify on behalf of its favorite roads. <br />Nishith Trivedi went to the table on page 10 of the slides, and said the projects are <br />ranked based on the May 2nd resolution, with Old Greensboro Road ranked number 1; Efland -