Browse
Search
OUTBoard minutes 012010
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange Unified Transportation Board
>
Minutes
>
2010
>
OUTBoard minutes 012010
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/31/2018 3:53:28 PM
Creation date
5/31/2018 3:53:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
1/20/2010
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Advisory Bd. Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
Approved 2/17/10 <br />2 <br />Brady Road. She also advised that the money cannot just be shifted from one item to another, as all projects must 56 <br />go through the MPO process for adding projects to the TIP. She noted that NCDOT has been very encouraging, and 57 <br />is interested in the alternatives the local area wants but everything must be handled through the MPO using the 58 <br />newly developed Strategic Planning Office of Transportation’s evaluation/prioritization criteria. 59 <br /> 60 <br />Karen Lincoln said Commissioner Gordon asked her to relate the discussion at the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro 61 <br />(DCHC) Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) meeting regarding the regional priority list for bicycle projects. 62 <br />She noted several projects of great interest, like Homestead Road, were not on that list because the MPO rated it as 63 <br />a highway project because it also included turn lanes and the thinking is that there is more money for highway 64 <br />projects than for bike and ped. The TAC discussed the need for more funding for alternative transportation projects, 65 <br />as the State has adopted a Complete Streets Policy and currently bicycle and pedestrian projects are allotted very 66 <br />little transportation funds. The TAC voted to send a letter to the North Carolina Department of Transportation 67 <br />explaining the Metropolitan Planning Organization’s position that places greater emphasis on bicycle and pedestrian 68 <br />facilities for mobility within urbanized areas verses the Department of Transportation’s priorities to improve roads for 69 <br />mobility from region to region or city to city. 70 <br /> 71 <br />The other item that Commissioner Gordon wanted to relay was in regard to newspaper articles detailing President 72 <br />Obama’s plan to reevaluate public transportation policy. The new policy will rescind budget restrictions that focus 73 <br />primarily on how much a project shortened commute times compared to its cost and consider “how much transit 74 <br />helps the environment, how much it improves development opportunities and how it makes our communities better 75 <br />places to live”. This could result in more money for transit projects. 76 <br /> 77 <br />Karen Lincoln also advised the members that the facilities at Southern Human Services will not be able to the Board 78 <br />for meetings. The other option is to use a smaller room or use the Seymour Center. 79 <br /> 80 <br />The consensus was to use the Seymour Center. 81 <br /> 82 <br /> 83 <br />IV. Approval of Minutes 84 85 <br />The OUTBoard approved the minutes from December 16, 2009 with corrections by affirmation. 86 <br /> 87 <br /> 88 <br />V. Orange County Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) 89 90 <br />Karen Lincoln noted that this item is going to the Commissioner on February 2, 2010 and she requested the Board 91 <br />endorse an option for in regard to NC 86 so she can confirm it to the BOCC. 92 <br /> 93 <br />Motion: Randy Marshall moved to approved option to show NC 86 as a Strategic Highway Corridor on the 94 <br />Comprehensive Transportation Plan highway map and include in the technical report a plan for phased interim 95 <br />improvements in the NC 86 corridor. Seconded by Bryn Smith. 96 <br /> 97 Vote: Unanimous 98 <br /> 99 <br /> 100 <br />VI. Proposed Ordinance Amendments for Drive-thru Facilities 101 102 <br />Karen Lincoln noted the comments the members had made about their opinion on drive-thrus was attachment 2. 103 <br />Base on those statements she came up with some recommendation. 104 <br /> 105 <br />Sam Lasris noted that he had provided a handout of research done by UPS on air quality, gas savings, etc. He also 106 <br />handed out one from www.fueleconomy.gov and a handout of an excerpt from The New Yorker. 107 <br /> 108 <br />Nancy Baker asked if option four would require a Special Use Permit (SUP). 109
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.