DATE: September 25, 2003

DATE OF MEETING: September 17, 2003

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

ATTENDED BY:

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 Introductions/Committee Overview

Don Lyford of the NHDOT brought the meeting to order and asked that all present give their names and the organizations/group for which they represent.

Don then discussed the committees that have been assembled for the project and distributed a list of the members of each committee. He then distributed the guidelines for the CATF that describes the role of this committee along with its authority. Copies of these two documents are included with these minutes.

2.0 Selection of CATF Chairperson

Don mentioned that a chairperson is needed. It was decided at the end of the meeting to wait until the next meeting to elect a chairperson. Don mentioned that this committee does not necessarily need a vice-chairperson and that a secretary would not be needed.

3.0 Project Overview and History

Don outlined the major steps of the project. This project is currently in Part A where a reasonable range of alternatives must be determined and a Purpose and Need developed. Part A is scheduled to run through the Fall of 2004. Part B would then continue the study of alternatives and prepare an environmental document culminating with a project necessity and a Public Hearing. The Public Hearing should be in 2007. Final design would then begin with construction beginning in 2010.

Don then discussed the history of the Bow-Concord Study. The first Study was concluded in 1992 where extensive highway improvements were proposed. The results of this study were not well received by the surrounding communities. The Concord 2020 efforts also studied I-93 and made some recommendations for the vision of I-93 in Concord. Some of the recommendations from The Concord 2020 report will be studied further in this project. Finally, the reconstruction of Exit 13 was completed with the understanding that I-93 could be widened in the future. Exit 13 will accommodate three lanes in each direction.

4.0 Project Development Process

Ansel Sanborn of the NHDOT made a presentation on the Project Development Process to be undertaken on this project He stated that the Bow-Concord project is currently on the Planning Step.

Ansel then presented two concepts for the process. The first is the ?NEPA Driven Process? which is the process as defined in the NEPA law. This is the traditional way projects have been done. He then presented the ?Community Driven Process? where there is much more public input at the early stages of a project. This is also referred to as ?Context Sensitive Solutions?. The hope is that the proposed transportation solution fits with the overall context/vision that the community has for itself. Fortunately, the three surrounding communities to the project, Concord, Bow and Pembroke, are all in the midst of their master plan updates. The vision input necessary for this project is the same as that needed for the master plans. The ultimate goal is for the solution to be jointly developed between the NHDOT and the stakeholders to ensure a project that is successful from all perspectives.

Pat Sherman commented that the Bow-Concord Project presents a special opportunity because the NHDOT is serious about working with communities.

5.0 Study Methodology

Rick Woidt of McFarland-Johnson (M-J) began by presenting the consultant team that will conduct the study

Rick described the limits of the project and the constraints of the study. Exit 13 is a constraint, as is the limitation of I-93 to a maximum of six lanes. Rick then described a list of Transportation Considerations for the study. Many of these were concepts that came from the Concord 2020 study while others are concepts being considered by other stakeholders.

Gene McCarthy of M-J then presented the Engineering/System Planning scope of the project. He stated that the work to date has been mostly data collection, base plan preparation and modeling.

Steve Lawe of Resource Systems Group (RSG) then gave an in depth presentation on the scope of the transportation modeling for the project. Steve discussed the model being used, the model process, model operation, and how the model will be used for the Bow-Concord Project. The main points concerning the model are that it has been enhanced to be a person based model not vehicle based so that it can model mode choice. Also, the model contains updated population data from the 2000 census and employment data from the state.

Steve used an example to illustrate what can be expected from the model. Eric Anderson asked if the model could assess the impact of tolls. Steve stated that the model can because it assesses incentives and disincentives such as time and cost.

Bill McGonagle asked if the model can assess the change in housing demand in the region if an improved infrastructure allows people to commute a longer distance. Steve explained that the model will show the transportation effects on a proposed land use scenario. He also explained that our team includes Russ Thibeault of Applied Economic Research (AER) who will perform a qualitative analysis of the impact of a proposed alternative on land use and development.

The main points stressed concerning the design year model are that employment, land use and transportation infrastructure for the design year 2030 need to be assumed before the model can be completed. It will be important that all participants work towards reaching a consensus on these future assumptions.

Pat Sherman asked how the traffic information would be explained to the public. It was discussed that numbers and tables would be used but that visual simulations could also be used with aerial photographs to give a real life feel to the traffic.

Gene continued with a discussion of the traffic analyses that would be conducted for the existing and proposed roadways. He stated that RSG would provide volumes that would be analyzed and described by a Level of Service (LOS). The LOS is a simple letter designation A to F that depicts the driving conditions of the roadway.

Jed Merrow of M-J next presented the environmental scope of the project. Jed stated that one of the differences in this project is that the evaluation of environmental impacts or benefits is being considered earlier in the process. Traditionally the environmental effects would be assessed after the development of alternatives. For the Bow-Concord Project the intent is to evaluate the environmental consequences during the development of alternatives, so that alternatives that have excessive environmental impact and no chance of being permitted can be ruled out early on. Jed also mentioned that the resource agencies are being involved earlier in the project.

Jed went on to describe the process of collecting the data in two ways where certain resources would be evaluated on a broader scale to determine the effect on the context of the resource. Other resources would be evaluated on the direct impact to them by an alternative.

Jed finished his presentation by stating he hopes to view this project more by the potential benefits and enhancements to the environment rather than the impacts. He believes the opportunities include improving access to the Merrimack River, improving recreation trail connectivity, enhancing aesthetics, and preserving riparian habitat.

Pat Sherman asked about archaeological investigations. Jed explained that Victoria Bunker is on our team to perform archaeological investigations and Liz Hengen is on our team for historic investigations.

Gene McCarthy completed this discussion by describing the Completion of Phase A. Phase A will develop a Purpose and Need Statement and a Reasonable Range of Alternatives that will be described in a Summary/Classification Report.

6.0 Public Participation Process

Rick Woidt began the Public Participation discussion by describing the tasks that M-J currently has in its scope. These include public meetings, a newsletter, a website and a project design center. The project design center is envisioned to be a mobile station that can be set up at different venues or events to present the project to the public.

Bill McGonagle asked how the other communities would become involved with the process. Rick stated that the hope is that the CNHRPC would take the lead on this coordination. Steve Buckley later stated that his experience working on the CNHRPC is that it is extremely difficult getting the other communities involved. He stated that the outlying communities do not actively participate in the current process for nominating projects through the Transportation Advisory Committee. The hope is that this project, which may propose widening I-93, will create interest.

Ansel Sanborn next described the collaborative process that is planned for this project. The hope is to get the public interested in this project early enough to avoid surprises at the last minute. The plan is to include the Bow-Concord Project in other transportation public presentations. The plan with the City of Concord is to have this project as one piece of a large public meeting that presents the master plan, opportunity corridor and other city projects. The hope is that the public will be more inclined to show up if they know they can get all the information they need at one meeting and not have to show up for multiple meetings. The hope is also to use this approach in Bow and Pembroke. Ansel presented slides that the City's consultant prepared that outline their approach and schedule. The first meeting of their Master Plan Coordinating Committee is October 9 with a public Community Forum on November 15.

7.0 Proposed Project Schedule

Rick presented the proposed schedule that shows project completion in Fall 2004.

8.0 Discussion

Pat Sherman asked about the scope of the transit component of the project. Rick explained that TranSystems is on our team and their role is to advise on providing an adequate corridor to preserve the rail corridor through Concord.

9.0 Public Comments/Input

There were none.

10.0 Next CATF Meeting

No date or time was set. It was decided that the meeting should occur before the planned public meeting on November 15. It was decided to have members respond to an e-mail message as to times they could attend.


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