Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOUTBoard agenda 061913AGENDA Orange Unified Transportation Board June 19, 2013 7:00p.m. You can bring your laptops/tablets if you would like to use them. Conference Room 004 (LowerFloor) Orange County West Campus 131 West Margaret Lane, Hillsborough Time Item Title 7:001.Call to Order and Roll Call 7:05 7:10 2. 3. Approval of Minutes Minutes from April 17, 2013 Meeting Notes from May 22, 2013(not for approval) Consideration of Additions to the Agenda 7:15 8:00 4. 5. Regular Agenda a. Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan Implementation i.Update from John Tallmadge, Triangle Transit (TT) Director of Regional Services Developmenton the status of the Orange County Bus and Rail Investment Plan (OCBRIP) and its implementation. ii.Update from Craig Benedict, Orange County Planning Director on the Board of County Commissioner’s (BOCC) review of, and comment on TT’s implementation plans for the OCBRIP. The TT and staff materials presented at the June 18, 2013 BOCC regular meeting can be found at: http://orangecountync.gov/OCCLERKS/agenmenu.asp (and will be posted on June 14, 2013). The Granicus web stream of the June 18th meeting can be found at: http://orangecountync.gov/occlerks/granicus.asp (and is typically posted the following day). OUTBoard Action:Toreceive the updates from TTstaff and the Orange County Planning Director and provide feedback. Staff Updates a.Process for review of DCHC MPO’sdesignation of St. Mary’s Road as a regional bicycle route. b.Notes from May 9, 2013Orange Countymeeting with NCDOT and discussion of ideafor annual NCDOT meeting with OUTBoard. c. Locally Coordinated Human Service Transportation Planadopted June 2013 d.NCDOT project updates. OUTBoard Action: Receive updates 1 Time 8:20 Item 6. Upcoming Agenda Items of Interest on Other Regional Transportation Related Board Agendas OUTBoard Action:Receive information as a handout 8:257. Meeting Schedule – No July Meeting Next meeting will be August 21, 2013 OUTBoard Action: Receive information 8:308. Board Comments OUTBoard Action: Receive comments 8:409.Adjournment 2 D R A F T MINUTES1 ORANGE UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION BOARD2 APRIL 17,20133 4 MEMBERS PRESENT: Paul Guthrie, Chapel Hill Township;Jeff Charles, Bicycle Advocate; Alex Castro, Bingham 5 Township; Susie Enoch, Cheeks Township;Sam Lasris, Cedar Grove Township; Ted Triebel, Little River Township;6 Amy Cole, Transit Advocate; Annette Jurgelski, Eno Township; 7 8 MEMBERS ABSENT: Bryant Warren, Hillsborough Township; Jeff Miles, Pedestrian Access & Safety Advocate; 9 Economic Development Commission - Vacant; CfE Representative-Vacant; Planning Board Representative- Vacant; 10 11 STAFF PRESENT:Abigaile Pittman, Transportation/Land UsePlanner;Tina Love, Administrative Assistant II 12 13 AGENDA ITEM I: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL14 15 AGENDA ITEM II: APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 20,201316 APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR MARCH 20,201317 18 TheFebruary 20, 2013and March 20, 2013 OUTBoard Minutes were approved by consensus.19 20 AGENDA ITEM III: CONSIDERATIONS OF ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA21 22 AGENDA ITEM IV: REGULAR AGENDA23 Next Steps for Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Plan Adoption and Implementation.The 24 Planning staff has received authorization from the BOCC to proceed with initial SRTS 25 Action Plan adoption steps. Following adoption, the staff is recommending that the future 26 SRTS Advisory Committee be a sub-committee of the OUTBoard, supplemented by 27 additional staff as needed from the County, Orange County Schools, and the Town of 28 Hillsborough. Related documents:29 http://www.orangecountync.gov/planning/documents/CompleteFinalDraftSRTS.pdf 30 OUTBoard Action:To receive information in preparation for future OUTBoard role.31 32 Abigaile Pittmanreviewed the Safe Routes to School Plan and advised therole of advisory committee wouldbe a 33 subcommittee of the OUTBoard responsible for advocating plan implementation and assistingwith programing, 34 evaluating plan progress and assessing plan priorities. The subcommittee with include interested OUTBoard 35 member, representatives for the schools, the Town of Hillsborough, and planning staff as needed. Others will be 36 brought in as necessary, such as NCDOT regarding road improvement, etc. and consultation from engineers and so 37 forth. Staff is meeting on April 30th.38 39 Jeff Charles commented that it is a good segueto the WalkBike NC Plan because you can’t do the SRTS Program 40 by itself, it has to be integrated into the bigger plan because of connectivity issues and you can use the SRTS to help 41 defend trying to get financing from NCDOT on the bicycle issues where they are trying to upgrade the monies. He 42 noted his cautionary point is to make sure it is not in its own bunker working on just this little issue, and talk about 43 more interconnectivity as it might relate to WalkBike NC Plans that NCDOT frees up these additional funds. It is 44 certainly a long term plan that doesn’t mean you don’t certainly do what you can around the schoolsbut make sure 45 that there is a plan for interconnectivity somewhere down the road and think it through.46 47 AGENDA ITEM V: REGULAR AGENDA48 WalkBike NC Plan –a North Carolina Statewide Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan49 WalkBike NC is North Carolina’s first statewidemaster plan to define a vision, goals 50 and strategies for improving walking and bicycling for residents andvisitors.The Plan 51 identifies current conditions for walking and bicycling in North Carolina and serves as a 52 policy guide for state agencies, local governments, and private sector interests to develop 53 a transportation system that safely and efficiently accommodates walking and bicycling.54 The review period is short and the State is only accepting comments until April 30th.55 3 D R A F T Therefore, the Plan has been pre-reviewed by OUTBoard Vice-Chair, Jeff Charles, and by 56 planningstaff member Abigaile Pittman. Related documents, including Draft Plan 57 Summary, Full Draft Plan, on-line comment form, and community engagement forum 58 (survey):http://www.ncdot.gov/bikeped/planning/walkbikenc/59 OUTBoard Action:To receive review comments suggested by Jeff Charles and Abigaile 60 Pittman, and consider recommended comments to be provided to NCDOT61 62 Abigaile Pittmanreviewed the WalkBike NC Plan noting that WalkBike NC is North Carolina’s first statewide master 63 plan to define a vision, goals and strategies for improving walking and bicycling for residents and visitors. She 64 shared the comments from staff and Jeff Charles.65 66 Jeff Charles noted that there was a lot of work put into this plan and he thinks the OUTBoard needs to give NCDOT 67 staff kudos for doing a pretty good job. He added that he thinks it’s important to tell them the positives and say ‘oh by 68 the way’ there are other things. Jeff elaborated that they took very unique approach, a good one, in that they looked 69 at economic factors, how it would improve tourism if we became a destination state for bicycling. They talked about 70 health issues, the obesity rates of young children, we rank fifth or sixth in the nation in obesity in children. They also 71 talk about economic benefits of health, safety, savings, environmental issues, increasing the use of these things. He 72 would like to come up with a general statement applauding their efforts in highlighting the need for bicycle and 73 pedestrian for all of these good reasons with the OUTBoard and staffs comments on how it can be improved.74 75 Abigaile Pittman advised that in her researchonline, that most other states have a safe routes for seniors programs.76 77 Jeff Charles noted that in the plan there is a benchmark reporting by the alliance for biking and walking from 2012. 78 Safest states to bicycle, the safest state in the US is South Dakota, North Carolina is 44th, safest state for walking is 79 Vermont and North Carolina is 41st. We are so far behind and we have to recognize they are taking an enormous 80 step forward with this new approach. 81 82 Paul Guthrie added that he thinks the plan is deficient in one way,it doesn’t sufficiently indicate that for any of this to 83 have any major long-term significance it has to integrated with the broader picture of transportation. That is 84 especially true for this county where walking and biking will be the feeders to future transportation systems. We are 85 beginning to look at the infancy of transportation systems across the entire county. One thing we can do now is to 86 beginbuilding afunding systemfor busand railtransportation.Paul references the statistic of 6.7% of residents 87 without automobiles in the report and suggested that in rural areas of the county that rate is probably higher as high 88 as 13%.89 90 Paul Guthrie suggested that the report should show examples.91 92 Jeff Charles elaborated that this is an enormous step. He noted that this is becoming a big issue in respect to 93 bicycling infrastructure because we are looking for new modes of transportation in Orange County and we are seeing 94 these scooters that can only go 30 mph in 55 mph zones and they are going to flow into the 4 foot bike lanes as 95 bailout to allow vehicles to pass them. He noted that while Segways are not going to catch on but new technology, 96 organic transit, they are 36 to 42 inches wide, so when you talk about a 4 or 5 foot lane that is a problem. He added 97 that they are also designing a truck that could carry 850 lb.loads so you could envision that being used for pizza 98 delivery or grocery delivery and meals on wheels. Jeff noted that the report cites a shift in demographics to 65 from 99 13% today to about 20% and we need to broaden the thought process forthe upright bicycles, scooters and other 100 competing technology in these four foot bike lanes we are arguing for.101 102 Abigaile Pittman added that in some communities residentstool around in golf carts.103 104 Alex Castro agreed with Jeff’s comments and staff’s comments. Alex Castro moved to approve the submitted 105 comments and the additional comments discussed at the meeting. Ted Triebel seconded the motion.106 107 Ted Triebel added that his thoughts run parallel with Alex’s and he was happy to see the work staff and Jeff did and 108 commended both. He particularly agrees with comment number 6 as going to the critical core to keep in mind going 109 forward.110 4 D R A F T 111 The OUTBoard approved the submitted and discussed comments be submitted to NCDOT for the WalkBike NC Plan 112 by consensus.113 114 AGENDA ITEM VI: STAFF UPDATES115 a.Update on staff meeting with NCDOT Rail Division regarding the three proposed 116 railroad private crossing closures in Orange County. Related documents: 117 http://orangecountync.gov/planning/RRCrossingClosure.asp118 b.Update on proposed Old Well to Jordan Lake Scenic Byway.119 c.Update on the Triangle Air Quality Report released on 4-3-13 for public comment. 120 Related documents: http://www.triangleair.org/topics.htm#transconf 121 d.Update on changes to the DCHC MPO 2040 MTP Bicycle Map based on comments by 122 Orange County Planning staff. 123 e.Update on workshop for TARPO Locally Coordinated Human Service Public 124 Transportation Plan. 125 f.Update on the upcoming development of the Eno Economic Development District 126 (EDD) Access Management Plan. 127 OUTBoard Action: Receive updates128 129 Abigaile Pittman updated the OUTBoard that she and Craig Benedict met with the NCDOT Rail Division, the NCDOT 130 Planning Branch, and their consultant, Florence and Hutchinson on March 15th to review the remaining issues and 131 questions regarding the purposed rail crossing closing. NCDOT has responded in writing and there is a letter and 132 meeting minutes included in the packet.In the spring NCDOT will be completing the environmental assessment and 133 in the summer they will be conducting traffic impact analysis for extending Byrdville Road and Walter Clark Drive at 134 NC 86. In the fall they will finalize crossing improvement in the final environment assessment document. Final 135 design and right-of-way acquisitions will begin in early 2014 and in early 2015 they will begin construction.136 137 Abigaile Pittman updated the Board on a proposed new scenic byway in the county. She noted that there are three 138 existing scenic byways in Orange County, the Colonial Heritage Highway along NC 86 north of Hillsborough; the 139 Football Road, Old Greensboro Road west of Carrboro; and the Scots-Welsh Heritage Byway, Old NC 86, Arthur 140 Minus, Orange Grove, and Dairyland Roads. Over the past two years DEAPR has worked on this byway which will 141 link downtown Chapel Hill to Jordan Lake. The proposed byway is 15 miles long and features a number of locations 142 with historical, natural, recreational, and educational values.143 144 Abigaile Pittman updated the Board on the Triangle Air Quality Report released by the DCHC MPO for public 145 comment and the TAC approved the key components at their December meeting. She noted that staff has reviewed 146 it and has no comments. 147 148 Abigaile Pittman noted that the DCHC MPO 2040 MTP written report was released and approved back in December 149 2012 but the maps were released a few weeks ago and they had a mess of names for projects without real 150 descriptions and complicated financial spreadsheets but no maps. She reported that the bike map had several 151 issues and planning staff made comments to DCHC MPO TAC and as a result TAC approved changes to plan last 152 Wednesday when they met. Abigaile further noted that this is a compromise as some parts they wouldn’t change 153 and some they did. 154 155 Jeff Charles noted that in his communications he agreed that it is a good compromise regarding Old NC 86.156 157 Sam Lasris asked about the route alternative to NC 86 N around Coleman Loop Rd and Abigaile offered to bring all 158 the maps to the next meeting for the OUTBoard’s review of the changes.159 160 Abigaile Pittman advised the OUTBoard on the workshop for TARPOfor locally coordinated human services 161 transportation. The workshop will be held on April 16th from 9 am to noon at Southern Human Services in Chapel 162 Hill. She advised it will focus on the needs of rural Orange and Chatham Counties as part of the larger TARPO 163 region and will not focus on the urban transit services provided by Chapel Hill Transit or Triangle Transitbut more 164 rural services provided by Orange Public Transit and Chatham Transit Network. This plan ensures that transit 165 5 D R A F T systems and other transportation providers in the region remain eligible for certain federal funds. Abigaile noted this 166 plan is required by law in order to get federal funds and is needed to identify the specific areas of need for individuals 167 with disabilities, seniors, and low income.168 169 Alex Castro advised that he will be attending and will put together a report for the OUTBoard.170 171 Abigaile Pittman updated the OUTBoard regarding the Eno EDD Access Management Plan that she will be heading 172 up and noted the plan will provide better transportation system and capacities to serve the US 70 and Hwy 10 area. 173 Staff will be asking approval to move forward at the May 7 BOCC meeting. Abigaile noted she anticipates that the 174 OUTBoard will review that plan in September and make comments for the BOCC.175 176 AGENDA ITEM VII: UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS OF INTEREST ON OTHER REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION RELATED 177 BOARD AGENDAS:178 OUTBoard Action:Receive informationas handout.179 180 Abigaile Pittman gave the OUTBoard handouts to review at theirconvenience.181 182 Jeff Charles asked about coordinating with Durham City/County planning for connectivity in bike plans. 183 184 Abigaile Pittman will look into that and get back to Jeff.185 186 AGENDA ITEM VIII: LISTING OF ITEMS FOR APRIL 17,2013MEETING187 OUTBoard Action:Receive information188 189 Abigaile Pittman advised the OUTBoard that a transportation planner has been hired to fill the vacancy created when 190 Darcy Zorio left to take a job at Triangle Transit.His name is Bret Martin and he will start on May 20th and will attend 191 the May OUTBoard meeting.192 193 The OUTBoard moved, secondedand unanimously approved to change the MayOUTBoard meeting from 194 Wednesday, May 15th to Wednesday,May 22nd.195 196 AGENDA ITEM IX: BOARD COMMENTS197 OUTBoard Action:Receive comments198 199 AGENDA ITEM X: ADJOURNMENT200 201 The meeting was adjourned by consensus.202 203 Items for future meetings:204 205 x Send Jeff Charles the recommend route to be used as an alternative to St. Mary’s Road 206 x Bring the Bike Maps to the May meeting207 208 6 D R A F T MEETING SUMMARY1 ORANGE UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION BOARD2 MAY 22,20133 4 MEMBERS PRESENT: Paul Guthrie, Chapel Hill Township;Jeff Charles, Bicycle Advocate; Alex Castro, Bingham 5 Township; Sam Lasris, Cedar Grove Township6 7 8 MEMBERS ABSENT: Andrea Rohrbacher, Planning Board Representative; Bryant Warren, Hillsborough Township; 9 Amy Cole, Transit Advocate;Susie Enoch, Cheeks Township; Ted Triebel, Little River Township; Jeff Miles, 10 Pedestrian Access & Safety Advocate; Annette Jurgelski, Eno Township; EconomicDevelopment Commission - 11 Vacant; CfE Representative-Vacant;12 13 14 STAFF PRESENT:Abigaile Pittman, Transportation/Land UsePlanner;Bret Martin, Transportation Planner; 15 Tina Love, Administrative Assistant II 16 17 18 AGENDA ITEM I: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL19 20 Staff, new member introduction, Bret Martin.21 22 23 AGENDA ITEM II: APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,201324 25 Moved to June meeting due to lack of a quorum26 27 28 AGENDA ITEM III: CONSIDERATIONS OF ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA29 30 Alex Castro: I attended the TARPO workshop and have provided a summary that I have distributed tonight. 31 32 33 AGENDA ITEM IV: REGULAR AGENDA34 a)Review of St. Mary’s Road as a regional bicycle route –A segment of St. Mary’s 35 Road between US 70 Bypass and the Durham County line was identified) On-Road 36 Bicycle Facilities map. The Planning staff asked that this designation be removed in 37 favor of a preferred alternative consistent with Orange County’s approved bicycle 38 routes. The DCHC TAC opted to “Maintain St. Mary’s Road as a regional bicycle 39 route in the MTP for the time being. As part of the DCHC MPO Comprehensive 40 Transportation Plan (CTP), review other regional route alternative to St. Mary’s Road. 41 If a route other than St. Mary’s road is selected, amend the MTP to reflect the 42 preferred regional route”.43 b)Prioritization of Orange County transportation projects from approved plans. (Note: 44 Staff will provide a summary table at the meeting that includes new and old projects.)45 OUTBoard Action:To review materials and provide input to staff on the preferred 46 regionalbicycle route.47 48 Abigaile Pittman: Reviewed Abstract on page 7.49 50 7 D R A F T Jeff Charles: I don’t ride St. Mary’s Road, it is too dangerous. Because of the nature of the road, it is not used by 51 cyclist. I started asking myself how we can get them not to do this. There are drainage ditches on either side that 52 needs to be extended, thereareembankments you would need to cut into - big money. The preferred route would be 53 going up to Lawrence to St. Mary’s to New Sharon Church. That is how we get to that area.54 55 Sam Lasris: What is the Durham argument for it?56 57 Jeff Charles: This is the MPO.58 59 AbigailePittman: They want to connect dots(locations). I will need to bring it back to the OUTBoard in June for a 60 quorum. Your choices are to endorse the St. Mary’s/Sharon Church/Guess Road route or endorse St. Mary’s or you 61 can nothing.62 63 Paul Guthrie: We can’t endorse because we don’t have a quorum. We can ask the question of, was there a cost 64 comparison? We know there was not.I think we can send a message that we have real concerns.65 66 Jeff Charles: This is reflective of a number of issues we are having. I am not convinced the MPO has cyclists at 67 heart. If they are doing this, they are not taking cycling serious. I think you should Invite Dale McKeel to an 68 OUTBoardmeeting.69 70 Bret Martin: The MTP went through a conformity determination and sometimes whether they have reasons or not, 71 they don’t want to go through the red tape to make an amendment to the MTP. 72 73 Abigaile Pittman: However, they did make some other changes. 74 75 Paul Guthrie: We should send them a message that the board has problems with this and it needs to be sorted out.76 77 Paul Guthrie:The OUTBoard hasthe ability to talk to the BOCC and give its best advice. 78 79 AbigailePittman: I have no problem inviting DaleMcKeel to a meeting with the OUTBoard, or Chuck Edwards. Next 80 month we have a full agenda so why don’t we discuss at the meeting in June topics for Chuck Edwards. I will talk to 81 Tom Altieri about an appeal for St. Mary’s Road. I would like Dale McKeel to be at the meeting when we vote on this 82 issue.83 84 AbigailePittman: In your packet on page 17, there are copies of materials addressing project prioritization I would 85 like to reviewthis.Bret and I will continue to expand this table by category and try to keep track with status 86 information so we will be ready for the MPO’sfuture official project prioritization process.87 88 89 AGENDA ITEM V: STAFF UPDATES90 a.Strategic Mobility Formula and Prioritization91 b.Project updates from NCDOT.92 OUTBoard Action:Receive updates.93 94 AbigailePittman: Reviewed slides.95 96 Paul Guthrie: IsProject 5318 still happening?97 98 Sam Lasris: They are putting in new culverts and tearing up the edges of the road for about 10 yards and 99 resurfacing. I guess in anticipation of 86 being widened.100 101 8 D R A F T AbigailePittman: I have handouts for other projects. One is the locally coordinated Human Services Transportation 102 Plan that has to be approved before the first of July to get ourfederalfunding and mobility manager. Matt Day with 103 TARPO did a great jobon the public forum and the draft plan. We are on schedule.104 105 106 AGENDA ITEM VI: Upcoming Agenda Items of Interest on Other Regional Transportation Related Board 107 Agendas108 OUTBoard Action:Receive information as a handout.109 110 111 AGENDA ITEM VII: MEETING SCHEDULE –JUNE 21ST –TRIANGLE TRANSIT PRESENTATION –NO JULY MEETING112 OUTBoard Action:Receive information113 114 115 AGENDA ITEM VIII: BOARD COMMENTS116 OUTBoard Action:Receive Comments117 118 119 AGENDA ITEM IX: ADJOURNMENT120 121 The meeting was adjourned122 123 9