HomeMy WebLinkAboutOUTBoard Minutes - June 17, 2024 ORANGE UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION BOARD MEETING MINUTES
Monday June 17th, 2023, 6:30 pm
131 W. Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC 27278
1 Attendance: Members Present
2
3 Jamie Crandell Eno Township
4 Natalie Ziemba Cedar Grove Township
5 Roy Schonberg Chapel Hill Township
6 Erik Legg Cheeks Township
7 Micheal Hughes At Large
8 Joshua Mayo At Large
9 Amy Cole At Large
10 Sherry Appel At Large
11 Randy Marshall Bringham Township
12 Art Menius Little River Township
13 Todd Jones At Large
14 Gregory Woloszczuk-Chapel Hill Township
15 Kelly Milligan Business Officer
16 Jamale Wiley Transit Operations Manager
17 Nishith Trivedi Transportation Director
18
19 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER
20 The meeting was called to order and the roll was taken.
21
22 AGENDA ITEM 2: CONSIDERATIONS OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA. None.
23
24 AGENDA ITEM 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS. None.
25
26 AGENDA ITEM 4.APPROVAL OF MINUTES
27
28 AGENDA ITEM 5. OUTBoard Agenda
29
30 5.a.SPOT Process Summary/Scores. Nish provided detail review of SPOT process and County project
31 scores, based on the mathematical formula and state law. Local input are the points given by MPO and
32 Division to improve the score of local priorities.
33 G.Woloszczuk:When you talk about our hundred points, I thought we had a pool that has been spread
34 between the projects?
35 N.Trivedi:They are each project can only receive a maximum score of 100.While they may get 100 local
36 input points,that only equates to a small percentage of the total score. In Region,they account for 30%of
37 the maximum score and in Division 50%.
38 G.Woloszczuk: So, it's a finite set of points that can distributed between the 19 projects, so we are
39 spreading the points across 19 projects. So, say we want to have fifteen projects we can apply more points
40 to the other projects.
41 N.Trivedi:Yes but you can't provide more than 100 points per project.
42 G.Woloszczuk:Would it be better off to add more points to certain projects so we can get them overthe finish line?
43
44 N Trivedi: Not all projects we want points on will get them, we share the recommendation with other local towns
45 also competing for points,as well Durham.
46
47 A. Menius:What we need is a full 100 points on key projects. So,we might have to sacrifice certain projects to
48 support others,say projects one and two and that's how the points will fall out?
49
50 N.Trivedi:Yes.We will vie forthe most points we can in the MPO and RPO in coordination and collaboration with our
51 local partners. I've presented staff recommendation, now seek yours through this public process.
52
53 G.Woloszczuk:Why are the highway points so low for Old NC-86 improvement and US-70 improvements?
54
55 N. Trivedi: Old 86 is a modernization project. Modernization projects have a different mathematical formula than
56 mobility. The US-70 improvements was scored using the mobility formula. Modernizing roads are scored based on
57 pavement conditions,shoulder width,and lane width.
58
59 S.Appel:Is there a document that explains each project? For example,we just completed the US-70 Corridor Study,
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
61 the US 70 project is for widening the four lanes?
62
63 N. Trivedi: Every two years we work together to update the County Priorities prior to start of the SPOT process.
64 Current list of priorities were determined Feb 2023 and pursued accordingly. US 70 became a priority through that
65 process enabling us to pursue a multimodal study of the corridor. The score is based on the SPOT process and
66 anticipated a multimodal corridor,widening with bike/ped and transit.The widening is already approved in the CTR
67
68 S.Appel: Earlier it was recommended where to put points and it seems to be better for points on fewer projects. 1
69 would like to take the US-70 improvements off the list.
70
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.
72
73 S.Appel:The Hillsborough City Signal system would help with the traffic that impacts 86 and Old 86.The first four
74 NC 86 North of Hillsborough, Orange Grove Rod Extension/NC 86 Connection, Orange Grove Road with bike/ped
75 improvements,and Eno Mountain Road/Mayo St at Orange Grove R is where we should place our emphasis. Maybe,
76 NC 10 improvements. Is there a process you need from us for nominations?
77
78 N.Trivedi: I'm requesting the OUTBoard to provide their ranking of the three lists.
79
80 Motion for CPRPO recommendation: Accept staff recommendations with the following changes. Move item #7
81 (e.g.MOD/Demand Response EV)to#3 and everything else down one.
82
83 Motion:Art Menius with changes Second:G.Woloszczuk Vote: Unanimous
84
85 Motion for DCHC MPO recommendation:
86 Accept staff recommendations for DCHC MP for Bike-Ped, Rail,and Transit Mode,with the exception for Transit
87 mode,to move Go Triangle ODX Headway Reduction/Hillsborough Regional Transit Center be moved up to#1.
88
89 Motion:Art Menius with exception Second:G.Woloszczuk Vote: Unanimous
90
91 R.Schonberg: Under DCHC Highway what is#3 Orange Grove Rd?
92 N.Trivedi:Adding a middle turning lane on Orange Grove Rd to qualify for NCDOT's complete streets.
93
94 Motion to accept as written for DCHC MPO highway projects,with the exception of moving projects#8(Old NC-86
95 improvements)and#9(US 70 improvements)above#6(Chapel Hill Citywide Signal System)and#7(Hillsborough
96 Citywide Sinnal System).
97
98 Motion:Roy Schonberg with exceptions Second:Art Men ius Vote:one oppose
99
100 Dissent-S.Appel: Disagrees with moving the US 70 improvements up in ranking.
101
102 5. b.Transportation Multimodal Plan:
103 N.Trivedi: presented the County's TMP and collected feedback from OUTBoard members.
104
105 A.Menius:What are the point?
106
107 N.Trivedi:They are intersection and operations improvements like traffic signal.The transit points stops and other
108 transit access. Data is in GIS format,which is state approved.We work with MPO, RPO,and other agencies to
109 pursue the projects.
110
111 A. Menius:The public survey numbers were not adding up.
112
113 N.Trivedi: I will request consultant check the math.
114
115 AGENDA ITEM 6:STAFF REPORT/UPDATES
116
117 6.a. Non STIP
118 N. Trivedi: discussed the Non-STIP project status and asked how often they would like to review it. OUTBoard
119 requested quarterly.Going forward, it will be done quarterly.
120
121 AGENDA ITEM 8:ADJOURNMENT
122 OUTBoard meeting was adjourned at 7:35 p.m.The next meeting is scheduled for June 10, 2024.