HomeMy WebLinkAboutOUTBoard minutes 052108Approved 6/18/08
Page 1 of 2
MINUTES 1 ORANGE UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION BOARD MEETING 2 MAY 21, 2008 3
4 MEMBERS PRESENT: Sam Lasris (Chair), Cedar Grove Township; Nancy Cole Baker (Vice Chair), Pedestrian Access 5
Advocate; Jan Grossman, Bicycle Transportation Advocate; Bryn Smith, CFE Representative; Eric Tillman, EDC 6
Representative; Julian (Randy) Marshall, Bingham Township; Paul Guthrie, Chapel Hill Township; Pascale Mittendorf, 7
Hillsborough Township; Karen Barrows, Little River Township 8 MEMBERS ABSENT: Alice Gordon, Board of County Commissioners; Al Terry, Transportation Services Board Representative; 9
Dawn Brezina, Eno Township 10
11 STAFF PRESENT: KAREN Lincoln, Transportation Planner 12
13 OTHERS PRESENT: Pat Strong, Triangle J. COG; Jamal Alavi, NCDOT Transportation Planning Branch 14
15 I. Call to order and roll call 16
17
Commissioner Gordon and Dawn Brezina have notified staff of conflicts with attending tonight’s meeting. 18
19 II. Consideration of additions to the agenda 20
21
III. Board Comments/Updates 22
23 IV. A. Approval of Minutes of March 19, 2008, meeting 24
25
Paul Guthrie noted that his name was not spelled consistently throughout the minutes. Bryn Smith stated that the minutes 26
format was still not as the board had directed. 27
28 MOTION: To approve with corrections made by Guthrie. Seconded by Marshall. 29 VOTE: Unanimous 30
31
B. Approval of Minutes of April 16, 2008, meeting 32
33 MOTION: made by Guthrie. Seconded by Marshall. 34 VOTE: Unanimous 35
36
V. Comprehensive Transportation Plan Presentation (CTP) 37
38
Jamal Alavi, NCDOT Transportation Planning Branch, gave a presentation on North Carolina’s Comprehensive Transportation 39
Plan. The main points of his discussion included the relationship between the CTP, the Long Range Transportation Plan and 40
the Transportation Improvement Program, benefits of a CTP and final products of a CTP. 41
42
Major benefits of a CTP include more reliable project delivery through a common long-range vision for facilities between 43
NCDOT, MPOs, Rural Planning Organizations, and local governments and a better integration of land use with transportation 44
planning. 45
46
He passed around an example of a CTP that includes: 47
• The adoption sheet that included who (local jurisdictions, Board of Transportation, etc.) adopts the plan; 48
• Three maps denoting existing facilities, facilities that need improvements and proposed new facilities for 49
highway, bicycle, and rail and public transportation modes (procedures for developing a pedestrian plan are in 50
progress); and 51
• a Technical Report that includes information on existing and proposed travel conditions, facilities, right-of-way, 52
etc. 53
54
Approved 6/18/08
Page 2 of 2
Tillman asked where private transportation providers are included in the CTP. Guthrie stated that private transportation 55
providers are part of the public transportation system. Alavi agreed. Lincoln stated that the maps are for planned 56
infrastructure and where service would be provided, and does not designate the service providers. Both private transportation 57
providers and “public” transportation systems would serve those needs. 58
59
Guthrie asked if it is legitimate to include the means of transportation as opposed to infrastructure for transportation in the 60
CTP. Alavi indicated that it is legitimate. 61
62
Grossman asked if facilities like the proposed Mountains to Sea Trail would be included. Alavi responded that those facilities 63
should be included. 64
65
Alavi stated that local jurisdictions must have a current land use plan that has been adopted (or updated) in the past five 66
years, or be in the process of developing or updating a land use plan in order for NCDOT to work with the area to develop a 67
CTP. 68
69
Lasris asked how NCDOT projected future conditions for areas that are currently undergoing change, i.e. Buckhorn and Eno 70
EDDs). Alavi stated that the projections are based on current land use plans, that’s why the local area must have a recent 71
land use vision before NCDOT undertakes assisting with the development of a CTP. 72
73
Lasris asked how soon NCDOT could assist Orange County with development of a CTP. Alavi indicated that staff should talk 74
with NCDOT and NCDOT would assign a staff person to work with the county as soon as possible, which would be in at least 75
6 months. Strong noted that the 6-month timeframe is inconsistent with NCDOT’s previously stated availability for this project 76
to the Triangle Rural Planning Organization. Alavi said that keeping staff has been an ongoing problem with the NCDOT. 77
78 VI. Draft Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element 79
80
The board expressed dissatisfaction with the draft Transportation Element, noting that its comments had been included as an 81
appendix and were not evident in the element itself. Tillman noted that the draft does not include private transportation 82
providers as the OUTBoard had submitted in comments. Mittendorf noted that the draft did not include a pedestrian goal. 83
84
Guthrie reiterated that the draft is not forward looking and does not present a vision based on climate change and other 85
factors that should be addressed. He asked if the OUTBoard could write its own Transportation Element and take that to the 86
Board of County Commissioners. He stated that the June 4 deadline to get comment to the Planning Board does not allow 87
enough time to address all the issues. 88
89
Baker stated that the board should talk with Commissioner Gordon to let her know the board’s concerns and how to proceed. 90
The board agreed and asked staff to inquire of Commissioner Gordon for 2-3 dates and times she would be available. The 91
board members will respond as to their availability and staff will arrange a meeting. 92
93 VII. Future Agenda Items 94
95
Baker stated that the board should go forward with all the things it has been discussing and suggested that the board divide 96
into several groups to study the various issues. Smith said that the Commission for the Environment has such 97
subcommittees and it also has break out sessions at meetings for the committees to work on items. 98
99
Baker suggested that staff make a list of priorities land divide those into appropriate groups for the next meeting. Marsha ll 100
suggested using the CTP components to develop a work schedule for next year. The group agreed by consensus. 101
102 VIII. Adjournment 103
104 MOTION made by Marshall to adjourn. Seconded by Guthrie. 105 VOTE: Unanimous 106
_________________________
Sam Lasris, Chair