My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
AG 1999 06 21
CabarrusCountyDocuments
>
Public Meetings
>
Agendas
>
BOC
>
1999
>
AG 1999 06 21
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2002 6:00:16 PM
Creation date
11/27/2017 11:49:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting Minutes
Doc Type
Agenda
Meeting Minutes - Date
6/21/1999
Board
Board of Commissioners
Meeting Type
Regular
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
487
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Somme. fy <br /> <br />Goal <br /> <br />A comprehensive mobility system <br />Objectives <br />lourney-to-work trips <br />Local service <br />Fare box return <br />Phase in of service <br />Land use guidelines <br /> <br />Community and System Context <br /> <br />Logical questions posed during the consideration of hansit system configuration relate to what <br />other communities are doing in terms of transit services and what it costs to provide those <br />services. With what other communities can the Concord / Kannapolis Urbanized Area be <br />compared in terms of size and transit system investments? What have other communities <br />chosen to do to help influence community development through transportation services and <br />mobility enhancement? <br /> <br />While_con~ari~ops with other systems in other locations are instructive~ no one other system <br />~till absolutely replicat,e' the Concord / Kannapolis area and its relationship with <br />_Cha;r, lotte/Mecldenburg County or the mix of emplo]/ment, shopping, educational and <br />recreational attracti,o,,ns in the area. What is important in any comparison, are the trehds <br />among potential peer operations and the ways in which those peers have addressed <br />opportunities to serve their constituents. <br /> <br />The attached tables present some community and system comparisons for urbanized areas <br />within North Carolina and nationally. Some caution should be exercised when making <br />comparisons, however, because there are many factors that influence service patterns, system <br />productivity, and cost of services. <br /> <br />Socioeconomic <br /> <br />The population of Cabarrus County grew by 15.2 percent from 1980 to 1990. This outpaced <br />national growth (9.8 percent) and North Carolina growth (12.7 percent) but was lower than <br />growth in Mecklenburg County (26.5 percent). Rowan County grew by 11.5 percent while <br />Gaston County, to the west of Mecklenburg, grew 7.7 percent during the same period. By <br />1996, the population in Cabarrus County had reached almost 114,000. (The Rowan County <br />population by 1996 had reached 12It000. H_owever, the maiorit¥ of the population lives. <br />outside of the study area. 1996 populationsfor China Grove and Landis were 3,1~25 and 2g16 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.