DATE: November 19, 2003

DATE OF MEETING: November 3, 2003

LOCATION OF MEETING:
New Hampshire Department of Transportation
John O. Morton Building
1 Hazen Drive, Concord, NH

ATTENDED BY:

Name	Affiliation
Philip Hastings	City of Concord
Tom Raffio	City of Concord
Bill McGonagle	City Council, City of Concord
Jim Bouley	City Council, City of Concord
Steve Buckley	CNHRPC
Mike Tardiff	CNHRPC
Pat Sherman	Concord 2020
Howard Moffett	Concord 2020
Roger Hawk	City of Concord, CDD
Don Lyford	NHDOT
Ansel Sanborn	NHDOT
Mark Hemmerlein	NHDOT
Subramanian Sharma	NHDOT
Rick Woidt	McFarland-Johnson
Jed Merrow	McFarland-Johnson
Gene McCarthy	McFarland-Johnson
Fred Mock	McFarland-Johnson
Steve Lawe	Resource System Group

MEETING MINUTES:

The Agenda for the meeting is attached and the meeting generally followed the Agenda. These minutes are formatted to follow the Agenda Items.

1.0 Selection of CATF Chairperson

After much discussion it was decided that the community/organization where the CATF Meeting was being held would have their representative chair the meeting. Jim Bouley and Bill McGonagle agreed to share the responsibilities when meetings were held in Concord. Jim Bouley agreed to chair this meeting.

2.0 Approval of Meeting No. 1 Minutes

The minutes from Meeting No. 1 were approved as submitted.

3.0 MasterPlan Concord Community Forum No. 1

Gene McCarthy gave an overview of the role this project will play at the November 15 MasterPlan Concord Community Forum. He explained that the forum is meant to have a “trade show” feel with booths for each master plan committee. This project will also have a booth set up with maps and information about the project. The MasterPlan organizers have asked that members of the CATF from Concord attend the meeting and be willing to staff the booth to engage the public.

In addition, there will be three presentations made in another room. The Opportunity Corridor Project and the transportation consultant for the MasterPlan will be making presentations. They have also asked that this project make a presentation. Don, Ansel and Gene will make the presentation. Gene will work with the MasterPlan staff to coordinate the presentation.

Ansel added that the “trade show” would be held in the Activity Room at Rundlett Middle School. There will be an introductory presentation by Dano Weisbord of CLF Ventures followed by ten minute revolving presentations by each of the eight city committees. The committees will present lists of concerns they have developed and then listen to the public to get opinions and feedback. At the end of the morning there will be a facilitated discussion about concerns and issues heard by each committee.

4.0 Base Year Traffic Volumes

A figure was distributed containing a schematic map of the project area showing peak hour traffic volumes along I-93 for the Base Year 2000. Gene McCarthy explained that the volumes are preliminary because the base year model has not been approved. He used the segment of I-93 between Exits 13 and 14 as an example to illustrate that in 2000 I-93 was at capacity in the PM peak hour.

The discussion then focused on creative ways in which traffic information could be presented to the committee and the public. Levels of service could be shown with video clips of traffic at the different service levels. Colored maps could be prepared with red lines showing roadways with Level of Service F (failure).

Several committee members asked that other local street volumes be added to the figure. Gene explained that the volumes on I-93 were presented because they are based upon actual counts and will not change drastically. Once the model has been approved, all major streets in the area will have their traffic volumes included on the figure.

The question was posed whether the traffic volumes would be ready to present at the November 15 Community Forum. Gene stated that if the model were ready the numbers could be presented. Steve Lawe stated that the model might be approved in time.

5.0 Future Year Modeling Process

Gene explained that the future year model couldn’t be generated without specific land use and population data for each traffic zone in the model. The model has over 250 traffic zones and data is needed for each. The goal is for the I-93 Future Year Transportation Model to incorporate all of the planning efforts currently under way. Therefore, the alternatives developed can be evaluated using a tool that includes the latest planning conducted for the surrounding communities.

The discussion focused on the land use projections. Steve Lawe stated that the land use assumptions are the key to any future model. However, the goal is that collectively a set of land use assumptions would be developed and utilized to develop the model. The model would then be evaluated to see if any adjustments would need to be made. When specific alternatives are evaluated using the model the land use can be adjusted to account for improved access to a particular area. The first step is still to develop the base land use assumptions for the future.

Bill McGonagle stated that it would be helpful to have a future model run utilizing current land use and zoning. This could be used as a basis for the master plan committee to evaluate how to plan for the future. Steve Buckley mentioned that the smaller communities would not be able to provide the same level of data as will Concord, Bow and Pembroke. Steve Lawe stated that current data will be used and that there is a consultant on the study team to evaluate land use throughout the model. The hope is that the RPC can help in obtaining this data. Mike Tardiff stated that many of the land use plans for the outlying communities have already been done. He believes the Technical Review Committee (TRC) should work on compiling the set of land use assumptions to be used in the model for this project. Steve Buckley mentioned that the assumptions should be presented to the towns so that they are aware of the numbers being used. It was decided that Steve would discuss the project at an RPC Meeting and let the towns know about the project and that they can become involved if desired.

6.0 Project Purpose and Need Discussion

Gene explained that the project team is looking to get input from the committee on their concepts for the need and purpose of the project. The Purpose and Need is one of the main objectives during the Phase A portion of the project. A request was made to see examples of other Purpose and Need statements. Ansel explained that the Purpose and Need can be broader that simply discussing highway improvements needed in the corridor. Concerns about aesthetics and rail preservation can be included along with concerns about safety and congestion.

It was decided that examples of other Purpose and Need statements would be made available for review. A Draft Purpose and Need will be developed and distributed before the next CATF meeting.

7.0 Project Alternatives Discussion

There was no specific discussion of project alternatives. It was determined that alternatives would be developed over the next several months and discussed at subsequent CATF meetings. Gene McCarthy mentioned that the committee should be prepared to spend considerable time discussing Exit 14 and 15. These two exits handle a great deal of traffic but have many geometric deficiencies that need to be addressed.

8.0 General Discussion

The project web site should be up very shortly. The web site will be used to post information and meeting minutes.

9.0 Public Comments/Input

There were none.

10.0 Next CATF Meeting

It was decided that the next meeting should occur at the beginning of January. The Purpose and Need will be discussed as well as discussion of alternatives. It was decided to have members respond to an e-mail message as to times they could attend.

Subsequent to the meeting it was determined that not enough progress has been made on the traffic model to warrant having a meeting in January. The next meeting will be scheduled for early February.

Submitted by,
Gene McCarthy, P.E.
McFarland-Johnson, Inc.