Browse
Search
OUTBoard agenda 112019
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange Unified Transportation Board
>
Agendas
>
2019
>
OUTBoard agenda 112019
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2020 10:16:44 AM
Creation date
2/4/2020 10:15:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
11/20/2019
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.
/
78
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
D R A F T <br />5 <br />213 <br />Nish Trivedi: The South portion is in the ETJ. Not where the bridge and the fencing is. 214 <br />215 <br />Heidi Perry: I would like to know what the state law is.216 <br />217 <br />Tom Altieri: I’m happy to submit with the highlighted section of the state law that we received the town.218 <br />219 <br />Heidi Perry: Maybe I’ll just ask somebody like Sig Hutchinson how Wake County gets all their stuff maintained because 220 <br />it’s not all in any particular community.221 <br />222 <br />Todd Jones: Regarding the schools being funding partners for all of this, there’s two main sources of funding for the 223 <br />school system. The state provides funds that are very strictly earmarked to teachers and some facilities and then the 224 <br />County and its generosity provides a lot of funds to the schools and presumably that would be the only area we had 225 <br />some flexibility and discretionary use of funds, so whether it’s the County paying directly or the County paying the 226 <br />schools money, the schools turnaround and say hey we’re partners. It’ s all essentially from the same bucket of money.227 <br />228 <br />Heidi Perry: In 2010, there was a pedestrian bridge that was submitted for funding from NC DOT and my understanding 229 <br />was that it had scored well but that DOT pulled it because there were no sidewalks on either end of it and they weren’t 230 <br />going to build a bridge that didn’t connect to something. I have a couple of the letters from 2010, but I don’t have the 231 <br />whole chronology of that, but I’d love to see it. I’d love to see how it scored and what year and then when it was pulled 232 <br />from consideration. Which was in 2010. Amy did a very nice presentation at DCHC/MPO a couple years ago that laid 233 <br />out some of the things she’s talked about today, and I think it would be good to have that as part of the stuff that you’re 234 <br />looking at. I’m going look and see if I can find other examples around the state. I don’t know what that law is. Maybe 235 <br />you should show to the people at NC DOT and ask them how they interpret it. I just think that other places have236 <br />managed to build things that are outside of city limits, so either Orange County is very specifically different in that they 237 <br />have a policy that they won’t maintain sidewalks or greenways and, if that’s the case, Orange County needs to work on 238 <br />their policy, or other places have figured out to do it and we need to figure out what they’ve done to make it work.239 <br />240 <br />Heidi Perry: I think the focus probably should be: How do we have a safe route to the school. As Todd said, the cost 241 <br />and how we pay for it should not be a part of the study. There are different mechanisms that can help pay for things,242 <br />but I think somebody has to actually take responsibility for apparently the maintenance of it.243 <br />244 <br />Art Menius: I think it has to be solved politically. I don’t think it’s going to get solved logically or administratively.245 <br />246 <br />Erik Broo: It would just be nice to have this come back to us with, here’s how we can get Hillsborough to think 247 <br />differently. Here’s how we can make these examples in Onslow County good things that we might use in making an 248 <br />argument.249 <br />250 <br />Heidi Perry: And Todd’s argument about some of these kids, you give them away to get to school safely without a car 251 <br />and it gives their whole family more freedom plus there are studies that show people who arrived to school walking or 252 <br />biking are more attentive in class. It’s healthier for the kids too.253 <br />254 <br />Tom Altieri: I think the study could include what are those critical path policy issues that need to be identified and the 255 <br />maintenance is one of them. Thank you for your comments.256 <br />257 <br />AGENDA ITEM 5B: MPO/RPO AND NCDOTUPDATES –NISH TRIVEDI258 <br />259 <br />Nish Trivedi: Burlington/Graham Metropolitan (BGMPO) is moving forward with their MTP update. They have created a 260 <br />universal list of projects. Their student committee met yesterday to go over the project selection process and how they 261 <br />were to select projects for the new MTP. They are waiting on the Piedmont Triangle Regional model to be updated and 262 <br />that should be done at the end of this month. I will give you an update on those projects as the model input as they get 263 <br />to the point of giving public information for that. Two MPO’s and TARPO have passed a The Title VI program. Title VI 264 <br />being the nondiscrimination policy that is done by executive order that all transit providers have to follow being 265 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.