Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
<br /> <br />6 <br />Nancy Baker: This is a compilation of a lot of different groups in the County, Town, etc. Is this from DOT? <br />Karen Lincoln: No, DOT hasn’t seen this yet. <br /> <br />Nancy Baker: What is the party that has compiled this list? <br /> <br />Karen Lincoln: The MPO. <br /> <br />Randy Marshall: Is it objective? <br /> <br />Karen Lincoln: Yes. <br /> <br />Randy Marshall: Local priorities should take a higher significance. For example Orange County 1st priority is rated <br />30th and Durham County’s 13th priority is rated 4th. There seams to be something wrong. <br /> <br />Robert Peterson: This is only one tool that they are using. <br /> <br />Randy Marshall: This obviates local jurisdiction priorities. <br /> <br />Karen Lincoln: This is required by Federal Legislation for MPO. The priority list must include a quantitative ranking <br />of projects based on some criteria used to measure the effectiveness of each project to achieve MPO goals. The <br />local jurisdictions (TAC members) look at the list and see where their projects fall. They still say this is something that <br />we really need and they will reorder these accordingly. This is the combined regional priority list. Orange County <br />projects are funded thru division 7, which is separate money from division 5. Anything in Durham, we are not <br />competing with. <br /> <br />Jan Grossman: We are competing with Greensboro. <br /> <br />Robert Peterson: The point is we still want this to reflect our number one priority. <br /> <br />Karen Lincoln: The connectively points were given for the connectivity to existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities <br />and there are none in the rural areas, and that is why we are not scoring as high as bicycle and pedestrian projects in <br />the municipalities. <br /> <br />Jan Grossman: Why is it that items #35, NC 86, and #46, Old NC 86, only have 2 points, and are not listed as <br />arterial roads? <br /> <br />Karen Lincoln: They are major roads, but this is by the federal functional classification. <br /> <br />Jan Grossman: Why is item #22, Old NC 86, an arterial road and items #35 and #46 collector roads? <br /> <br />Sam Lasris: That is the same road. <br /> <br />Karen Lincoln: That is a good observation. I’ll check on it. <br /> <br />Robert Peterson: Some of the thoughts are maybe we could check the data we submitted. <br /> <br />Pat Strong: I’m hearing concerns that you are having. I’m wondering if you could go thru this and come up with a <br />composite list of concerns that could be submitted to the DCHC TCC. <br /> <br />Robert Peterson: That is a good idea. Why is it not part of our project to have a bike lane to the school? <br />