Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
21 <br /> Commissioner Greene said she understands that by right is a good thing to attract <br /> potential developers, and she will not argue with the deletion of the proposed roads, but she <br /> finds reducing connectivity to be concerning. <br /> Commissioner Marcoplos referred to page 3, where it says alternative transportation is <br /> included (cycle and pedestrian) as well as a 5-foot sidewalk or a wide paved shoulder. He <br /> asked if the shoulder would also be 5 feet wide. <br /> Craig Benedict said it is 4-5 feet for an on road bike lane; and if bikes are going to ride <br /> on a sidewalk it has to be 8 feet wide. He said in the County there are cross-sections of roads, <br /> but the sidewalks would likely not go in unless Mebane, etc. annexed it. He said DOT will not <br /> maintain sidewalks. <br /> Commissioner Price referred to the purple sections, where it says "further analysis," and <br /> asked if this could be defined. <br /> Craig Benedict said that is, for example, a possible traffic separation study that the rail <br /> authority and DOT has been working on to say whether Buckhorn Road should be widened in <br /> this area or a bridge be built over the road. He said further analysis is required. He said <br /> roundabouts and full intersections have also been considered. <br /> Commissioner Price asked if the ones to the east could be clarified, near Efland-Cedar <br /> Grove. <br /> Craig Benedict referred to the map, pointing out Mt. Willling Road, which is presently 2 <br /> lanes, but is recommended to be 80 feet wide in the future (15-20 feet wider on either side of <br /> the existing roadway corridor). He said if a development comes in, with over 800 trips/day, the <br /> developer must complete a traffic impact study, and if this study says more than one access <br /> point is required, then the developer must comply, per the UDO. <br /> Commissioner Price said she encourages roundabouts. <br /> The Board agreed by consensus to schedule the Plan on the March 7t" meeting for <br /> Board action. <br /> 6. Regular Agenda <br /> a. Orange County Transportation Priority List for SPOT 6.0 / FY 2022-2031 STIP <br /> The Board considered voting to approve a resolution endorsing lists of Orange County <br /> transportation projects to the Burlington-Graham Metropolitan Planning Organization (BGMPO), <br /> Triangle Area Rural Planning Organization (TARPO) and Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro <br /> Metropolitan Planning Organization (DCHC MPO) for Strategic Prioritization of Transportation <br /> (SPOT)/Strategic Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). <br /> Nishith Trivedi said a copy of the SPOT 6.0 presentation is at the Commissioners' <br /> places, and in an effort to save time, he will review the key points presented in the abstract. <br /> The main points are: <br /> • NCDOT and MPO/RPO are about to start the next round of SPOT process and we must <br /> identify potential projects for submission to MPO/RPO by March. That is why this is time <br /> sensitive. <br /> • Each MPO/RPO has unique processes for selecting limited number of projects they can <br /> submit to NCDOT and they must complete their work by this summer. <br /> • You have three attachments with maps, one for each MPO/RPO with a list of potential <br /> projects, with staff and OUTBoard recommendations. <br /> • All previous County Priorities for SPOT 5.0 are being carried forward as highway <br /> projects rather than bike/ped projects and 6 new potential projects have been identified: <br /> o US-70 widening due to high crash incidents, increasing traffic, and strategic <br /> freight corridor <br /> o NC-86 widening from north of Hillsborough to Caswell County <br />