East Side Highway Corridor Study

1
East Side Highway Corridor Study Public
Information Meeting March 5, 2007
2
Agenda

• Project history to date
• Context Sensitive Solutions
• Group discussion
• Comment/Question submittal

3
Project History

• Interstate system constructed 1960s/1970s
• North/south east side link discussed late
  80s/early 90s
• Feasibility Study in 2000

4
(No Transcript)
5
Identify Stakeholders
Form Project Study Group
Identify Stakeholders
Develop Stakeholder Involvement Plan (SIP)
Develop Project Purpose
Hold Initial Informational Meetings
Set Ground Rules for SIP
Hold Project Purpose Development Meetings
Develop Understanding of Project Purpose
CONTEXT SENSITIVE SOLUTIONS
Analyze Alternatives and Choose Preferred
Alternative
Conduct Alternatives Meetings
Present Alternatives Based on Project Purpose
Re-Present Modified Alternatives
Hold Alternatives Elimination Meeting
6
Project Study Group
Citizens Advisory Group
Task Groups
Environmental Issues
? ? ? ?
Drainage Issues
Agricultural Issues
7
Identify Stakeholders
Form Project Study Group
Identify Stakeholders
Develop Stakeholder Involvement Plan (SIP)
Develop Project Purpose
Hold Initial Informational Meetings
Set Ground Rules for SIP
Hold Project Purpose Development Meetings
Develop Understanding of Project Purpose
CONTEXT SENSITIVE SOLUTIONS
Analyze Alternatives and Choose Preferred
Alternative
Conduct Alternatives Meetings
Present Alternatives Based on Project Purpose
Re-Present Modified Alternatives
Hold Alternatives Elimination Meeting
Approval of Final Alternative
8
Anticipated Timeline

• Project Information Meetings - March/April 2007
• Context Audits - April 2007
• Development of Project Purpose - May/June 2007
• Develop Corridor Alts. July/September 2007
• Eliminate Corridor Alts. October/December 2007
• Approve Final Alternative March 2008

9
How do we achieve consensus?
Stage 1 Members have different perspectives.
Stage 2 Facilitator summarizes perspectives.
Active listening and discussion continue possibly
over several meetings. Members do not share
common, strong coherent ideas.
10
How do we achieve consensus?
Stage 3 A member suggests a red idea, and
benefit is clear to some.
Stage 4 Several are still uncomfortable with the
red solution. A member suggest a blue solution
and some agree .
Stage 5 Discussion continues and its suggested
that parts of both red and blue make sense.
Purple evolves. Most members are comfortable
with purple. Purple idea is approved.
11
Ground Rules

• The purpose of the Stakeholder Involvement Plan
  is to gather and duly consider input on the
  project from all stakeholders, in order to
  produce the best solutions to any problem
  identified by the process.
• All input from all participants in the process is
  valued and considered.
• The role of the stakeholders is to advise the
  Project Study Group, which will make the ultimate
  decisions on the project. A consensus of
  stakeholder concurrence on project choices is
  sought, but the ultimate decisions remain in the
  hands of the Project Study Group.
• All participants must come to the process with an
  open mind and participate openly and honestly.

12
Ground Rules

• Consensus is defined as a majority of the
  stakeholders in agreement, with the minority
  agreeing that their input was duly considered.
• All participants in the process must treat each
  other with respect and dignity.
• The list of stakeholders is subject to revision
  at any time as events warrant.
• Minutes of all stakeholder contacts will be
  maintained by the PSG, with the content subject
  to stakeholder concurrence.
• The project must progress at a reasonable pace,
  based on the original project schedule.
• All decisions made by PSG must be arrived at in a
  clear and transparent manner and stakeholders
  should agree that their input was duly considered.

13
Objectives for the Engineering Team

• We will produce a GIS-based environmental
  database.
• We will update the travel demand model to project
  traffic in the year 2035.
• We will compose a rigorous, defendable project
  purpose and need statement and logical termini
  discussion.
• We will develop accurate costing and benefit
  analysis.
• We will identify a corridor consensus amongst the
  project study group and project stakeholders
  which meet the projects stated purpose and need.
• We will present a compelling argument for funding
  justification.

14
Group Breakdown

• Agriculture Room 047A
• Environment Room 048
• Homeowners/Neighborhood Groups Room 050
• Existing Businesses 052
• Developers/Builders Room 054

15
Contact Us

• Website www.eastsidehighway.com
• E-mail address eastsidehighway_at_clark-dietz.com
• Phone [phone]