OUTBoard agenda 011619 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

29 Approved 11/7/2018 52 this morning and got a copy of the plan. We have more copies of the plan and it's available on our website. 1 53 would be happy to talk with you after the meeting and show you some of the safety improvements suggested for 54 that very area. In addition, the City adopted its own transportation plan. The limit of our jurisdiction is Buckhorn 55 Road. Widening of Buckhorn for safety improvements including intersection improvements is identified in this 56 plan as a priority project. The City cannot afford to do that project, it is well beyond our means. We would have 57 to rely on state funding and again this is an unfunded project that we would like to pursue that would be entirely 58 separate process from what Nish is doing here this evening or that Orange County is considering. These are 59 unfunded projects that would have to have a totally separate public participation and design process that would 60 come in the future should the project be funded. 61 62 Resident: So what is long range goal here in terms of the future? 63 64 Cy Stober: We actually had a meeting yesterday about how to acquire state funds to do these two projects. 65 Best case scenario would be that the projects would be nominated for state funding in spring 2019. That will be 66 a one year process of consideration by the state so we won't even know for over a year. After that point, should 67 they be funded, there would be a design and public participation process that last another year to 2 years and 68 then construction would begin. The first year of construction, the public doesn't see anything, nothing happens. 69 The fastest track that we could see anything would be 4 years from now roughly. The soonest you would hear 70 something is 18 months from now about whether the state has funded anything and if it is this project, how you 71 can participate to make sure your concerns are heard. We know there are concerns about impacts to the 72 churches on Buckhorn and of the 3 sketches that have been done so far, avoid the churches there. 73 74 Resident: What about the homes? 75 76 Cy Stober: There is one sketch that avoids all homes and then two others that do not. We need your input to 77 help us decide the best sketch. We don't have a favorite, Orange County has two sketches that they don't like 78 and the one they do like is the one that does not impact any homes. They sent us a letter to that effect. 79 80 Resident: It still would be an impact, noise, getting out of their homes with a bridge. How close would it be near 81 the homes. There would be some impact. So as a homeowner there I would like to know now what would be 82 the foreseen impacts if I remain there. 83 84 Nish Trivedi: Right now it is not in the plan, if it is funded by the state it is in a ten year window. If within the first 85 five years it is guaranteed to be built. 86 87 Resident: I'm not asking about the process about when it will be built, I am asking about the study. If you did a 88 study and it was a holistic study then you should know the impact it would cause. You have 194 people in the 89 Cheeks Crossing Township that you are going to impact. What were the results in terms of if you did this, what 90 would be the impact on the people who remain living in that community? 91 92 Cy Stober: We simply cannot answer that question at this time because a design has not been determined. 93 94 Resident: So you did a transportation study and you don't know the impact it is going to have on the community 95 in which you are going to put the road through? You did a transportation study, you had transportation 96 engineers you had environmental engineers and there is no results on how that would impact the 194 people 97 that live there. There were no results? 98 99 Nish Trivedi: In the 2017 study, that area was not studied. That is why we are saying additional study is 100 required. 101