Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
47 County. While towns were invited to engage in the process, town projects are not part of this plan and <br /> 48 will be addressed independently by the town. J. Mayo also questioned whether the aim was to prepare <br /> 49 for future SPOT submissions. Nish responded that the objective is to consolidate into a single,enhanced <br /> 50 document, building upon previous efforts. SPOT considerations will follow at a later stage. <br /> 51 <br /> 52 b. Short Range Transit Plan <br /> 53 M. Adams with Nelson Nygaard provided an update on the plan. R. Marshall asked about how people <br /> 54 could get more information and better qualify for Demand Response. M. Adams informed that the plan <br /> 55 recommends improvements to messaging and marketing: Transit Information Campaign and Improve <br /> 56 Demand Response booking. J. Mayo shared concern of Orange County transit tax used in Alamance <br /> 57 County. N. Trivedi explained it was part of Continuation of Existing Services, discontinuing Orange- <br /> 58 Alamance and starting a Circulator. Funding for Mebane Circulator is an ongoing discussion. <br /> 59 <br /> 60 c. 2024 Safe Routes to School Plan <br /> 61 N.Trivedi provided an update on the plan.G.Woloszczuk asked about the two-mile radius around Chapel <br /> 62 Hill Carrboro schools where some of it may be outside town jurisdiction. N.Trivedi explained this could <br /> 63 be part of a future update of the plan. J. Mayo offered to share the Chapel Hills Safe Routes to School <br /> 64 program. Future works could include addressing the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction and entire school <br /> 65 districts rather than just a 2-mile radius. <br /> 66 <br /> 67 A. Cole and N.Ziemba asked about current school policies and programs while M. Hughes asked about <br /> 68 potential infrastructure. N.Trivedi explained schools are aware of the Federal requirements for the Safe <br /> 69 Routes to School program and they have their own approaches. They were involved in the planning <br /> 70 process. T. Green discussed the potential for a Safe Routes to School Champion as a future option. <br /> 71 County staff will continue researching how we can improve messaging through a Safe Routes to School <br /> 72 Coordinator similar to that in Chapel Hill and other local jurisdictions. <br /> 73 Infrastructure in North Carolina is challenging, with towns having more opportunities than Counties. <br /> 74 Rural areas require more local and federal commitment towards improving such infrastructure. Plans <br /> 75 like this and others help establish local support so that other funding opportunities could be made <br /> 76 available like SPOT,Transit Tax and other transportation related sources.OUTBoard members and public <br /> 77 citizens emphasized the critical importance, current demand and lack of resources for the most <br /> 78 vulnerable walking and bike population in the County. R. Marshal explained the significance of school <br /> 79 busses as a safe means of travel to and from schools. <br /> 80 <br /> 81 AGENDA ITEM 6. STAFF REPORT/UPDATES <br /> 82 a. MPO, RPO, and NCDOT <br /> 83 N.Trivedi provided update on Orange Grove Road's future Professional Engineering work to be done by <br /> 84 WSP. <br /> 85 <br /> 86 b. 5310 Grant—Go Orange and 3ADAVehicles <br /> 87 N.Trivedi updated everyone on grant applications submitted to DCHC MPO in coordination with <br /> 88 Department on Aging <br /> 89 <br /> 90 AGENDA ITEM 8:ADJOURNMENT <br /> 91 OUTBoard meeting was adjourned at 7:56 p.m.The next meeting is scheduled for September 30, 2024. <br />