Browse
Search
CFE 111300
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Commission for the Environment
>
Agendas
>
2000
>
CFE 111300
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/7/2019 5:02:35 PM
Creation date
1/7/2019 5:00:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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
Os <br /> Rafalow noted that the newspapers say we have the third worst air quality in <br /> the nation and that contradicts the response to his question . Bonk replied <br /> that based on the models that the federal government uses to assess the air <br /> quality, we are doing ok . In terms of the violations of the ozone standard , <br /> which occurs during the summer months , the last summer was rainy and <br /> cooler resulting in not as many violations as the previous year . Violations tend <br /> to be weather related . Most of the problems are occurring in Wake County <br /> where the population is greater and there is more traffic congestion . We are <br /> not sanctioned because of what exist today, we are sanctioned based on how <br /> well we are expected to we meet air quality standards in the future . <br /> Tucker asked if there was an ozone monitor in Orange County, and if not, are <br /> there are plans for one . She also asked if the MPO is actively involved in <br /> preparing state implementation plans . Bonk said there is no ozone monitor in <br /> Orange County and that the MPO reviews the plans . Saunders added that <br /> DENR is responsible for both items . Bonk noted that there is a monitor for <br /> particulate matter at UNC . Although Orange County would not be considered <br /> a non - attainment county, under the new regulations it would be classified as <br /> a non - attainment county based on monitoring results . That means that there <br /> is a higher level that we have to achieve . There are no sanctions imposed <br /> just from being classified as non - attainment as long as we have a plan that <br /> takes care of the future problems . <br /> Fortmann asked for more information on the Long Range Plan . Saunders <br /> noted that we have an adopted 2025 Long Range Plan and it conforms with <br /> all state and federal requirements . In the process of developing the plan , <br /> there are over 57 identified alternatives that we want to test on a model . <br /> Additional funds have been spent on model enhancement . In February, a <br /> federal certification team was were pleased , but pointed out areas that need <br /> more attention , such as the environmental justice issue . It is a plan that <br /> does not assume any additional funding in 20 + years , is conservative , and <br /> meets the attainment Issue . By having the three -year review process , <br /> continual matching of the plan with the local land use plan is an advantage to <br /> seeing the advantage of controlling sprawl in the community . <br /> Okun question how the DCHC and " CAMPO " ( Capital Area Metropolitan ) MPOs <br /> were established . Bonk explained that the MPOs are created by census areas <br /> defined as urbanized . In 1990 , according to census figures, there was fairly <br /> wide gap between Durham and Raleigh along US 70 and the RTP . In theory <br /> the 2000 census , if beginning from scratch , would include all in the same <br /> MPO . However, because we have existing MPOs , there is a grandfather <br /> clause that allows us to remain separate . <br /> DRAFT CFE 10/09/00 Minutes Page 5 of 10 <br /> L :\Carol\CFEMIN\OCT2000CFErevised by rich. doc <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.