Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
44 N Trivedi: Not all projects we want points on will get them, we share the recommendation with other local towns <br /> 45 also competing for points,as well Durham. <br /> 46 <br /> 47 A. Menius: What we need is a full 100 points on key projects. So,we might have to sacrifice certain projects to <br /> 48 support others,say projects one and two and that's how the points will fall out? <br /> 49 <br /> 50 N.Trivedi:Yes.We will vie for the most points we can in the MPO and RPO in coordination and collaboration with our <br /> 51 local partners. I've presented staff recommendation, now seek yours through this public process. <br /> 52 <br /> 53 G.Woloszczuk:Why are the highway points so low for Old NC-86 improvement and US-70 improvements? <br /> 54 <br /> 55 N. Trivedi: Old 86 is a modernization project. Modernization projects have a different mathematical formula than <br /> 56 mobility. The US-70 improvements was scored using the mobility formula. Modernizing roads are scored based on <br /> 57 pavement conditions,shoulder width, and lane width. <br /> 58 <br /> 59 S.Appel:Is there a document that explains each project? For example,we just completed the US-70 Corridor Study, <br /> 60 and all agreed we didn't want to widen it to four lengths,so what is the US-70 improvements project?Does this mean <br /> 61 the US 70 project is for widening the four lanes? <br /> 62 <br /> 63 N. Trivedi: Every two years we work together to update the County Priorities prior to start of the SPOT process. <br /> 64 Current list of priorities were determined Feb 2023 and pursued accordingly. US 70 became a priority through that <br /> 65 process enabling us to pursue a multimodal study of the corridor. The score is based on the SPOT process and <br /> 66 anticipated a multimodal corridor,widening with bike/ped and transit.The widening is already approved in the CTP. <br /> 67 <br /> 68 S.Appel: Earlier it was recommended where to put points and it seems to be better for points on fewer projects. 1 <br /> 69 would like to take the US-70 improvements off the list. <br /> 70 <br /> 71 N.Trivedi:whether points are put on it or not,only two or three projects may be funded,it is based on available funds. <br /> 72 <br /> 73 S.Appel:The Hillsborough City Signal system would help with the traffic that impacts 86 and Old 86.The first four <br /> 74 NC 86 North of Hillsborough, Orange Grove Rod Extension/NC 86 Connection, Orange Grove Road with bike/ped <br /> 75 improvements,and Eno Mountain Road/Mayo St at Orange Grove R is where we should place our emphasis.Maybe, <br /> 76 NC 10 improvements. Is there a process you need from us for nominations? <br /> 77 <br /> 78 N.Trivedi: I'm requesting the OUTBoard to provide their ranking of the three lists. No motion is needed for BG MPO <br /> 79 local input point list. <br /> 80 <br /> 81 Motion for CPRPO recommendation: Accept staff recommendations with the following changes. Move item#7 <br /> 82 (e.g. MOD/Demand Response EV)to#3 and everything else down one. <br /> 83 <br /> 84 Motion:Art Menius with changes Second:G.Woloszczuk Vote:Unanimous <br /> 85 <br /> 86 Motion for DCHC MPO bike/ped,rail and transit recommendation: <br /> 87 Accept staff recommendations for DCHC MP for Bike-Ped, Rail,and Transit Mode,with the exception for Transit <br /> 88 mode,to move Go Triangle ODX Headway Reduction/Hillsborough Regional Transit Center be moved up to#1. <br /> 89 <br /> 90 Motion:Art Menius with exception Second:G.Woloszczuk Vote:Unanimous <br /> 91 <br />