Response to Public Involvement Inquiry
Topic: Public Involvement

---

Here is the response to my February 22, 2006 Inquiry

---

To: Peter Kleeman
From: Angela Tucker
Date: March 6, 2006
Reference: Route 250 Interchange Project; Public Participation; Purpose and Need; Alternative Selection

Peter:

Thank you for your e-mail of February 22, 2006 regarding: 1.) public involvement in Steering Committee meetings, 2.) the project Purpose and Need document, and 3.)compliance with current federal project development requirements.

As you know, the Steering Committee’s current position is that the public will be provided an opportunity to comment on Steering Committee meeting agenda items, at the end of each meeting, time permitting. Be assured, we will always attempt to have time available for public comments. As noted at the March 2, 2006 Steering Committee meeting, the matter of public involvement in the Steering committee meetings will be discussed at the next Steering Committee meeting, tentatively scheduled for April 20, 2006.

At the second Steering Committee meeting on January 11, 2006, we had intended to divide the Steering Committee into two groups to review the preliminary interchange concepts. We also intended to have a third group for public attendees. Each of the three groups was to include Project Team members to facilitate the discussions. It was anticipated that each group would summarize and report their comments back to the full Steering Committee. However, time did not permit this approach and you were invited to join with the Steering Committee in providing comments. In the future, when reviewing alternatives, we intend to follow this format and will provide a separate work table for the public, facilitated by members of the Project Team, to review and comment on the range of interchange alternatives, and the detailed interchange alternatives/ recommended interchange alternative.

The role of the Steering Committee is noted on slides 11 to 14 of the November 3, 2005 meeting presentation and slides 4 to 7 of the January 11, 2006 meeting presentation, all of which are included on the project website. A major component of that role is to assist the Project Team in facilitating and enhancing the public involvement effort. It is clear that the public involvement process, including the public workshops, meetings with those most directly affected by the project, the project website, etc. will significantly benefit from Steering Committee input. The material to be presented at the initial Citizen Informational Meeting has been enhanced thanks to the efforts of the Steering Committee members at last week’s meeting. We have encouraged the Steering Committee members to attend and be involved in the Citizen Informational Meetings and to experience first hand, public comments and recommendations.

The Steering Committee is free to reach a consensus and make recommendations on various aspects of the project, should they choose to do so. If they choose to make comments or recommendations about the project, we will advise the public of these comments. However, project decisions are NOT the responsibility of the Steering Committee, but rest with the City of Charlottesville, VDOT and FHWA. Informed project decisions will consider public input, along with that of the Project Team, Steering Committee and the Environmental Resource and Regulatory Agencies.

The Project Team is in compliance with current federal statutes and regulations. In fact, we will exceed those requirements by conducting public meetings at each key milestone of the project development process. We are currently in the phase of the project that involves collecting pertinent information and data, preparing for our initial public meeting and developing key themes for the draft Purpose and Need, and project Goals and Objectives, along with the starting point for preliminary Interchange Concepts. The key themes of the draft Purpose and Need are noted in the Steering Committee meetings information, included on the project website. You are welcome to provide comments on those themes, at your convenience.

The initial kick-off Citizen Informational Meeting is scheduled for Thursday, March 23, 2006 from 4:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. at the Senior Center. Citizen Informational Meeting #1 will include the presentation of the following types of information for discussion with and comments from the public:

* Purpose of Citizen Informational Meeting #1
* Draft Purpose & Need – Key Themes
* Draft Goals & Objectives
* Environmental Coordination Process
* Public Involvement Initiatives
* Initial Environmental Inventory
* Traffic Analysis/Travel Demand Modeling/Long Range Plan
* Context Sensitive Urban Design
* Project Design Challenges
* Interchange Concepts – Starting Point – October 2000 Report
* Refined Preliminary Interchange Concepts – 2006
* Project Schedule/Next Steps

The draft Citizen Informational Meeting #1 material was reviewed with the Steering Committee at the March 2, 2006 meeting. You were provided with a copy of that material, as were the other members of the public in attendance. The material has also been placed on the project web site and will be available for public comment until Thursday, March 9, 2006. The material will then be refined, placed on the project website and presented at the March 23, 2006 Citizen Informational Meeting. The notice for Citizen Informational Meeting #1 will indicate the availability of meeting material. Based on the comments we receive at the initial Citizen Informational Meeting on these and others items, the Project Team will develop a draft project Purpose and Need statement which will be placed on the project web site for public comments and also made available to the environmental resource and regulatory agencies and to the Steering Committee for comments.

The draft Purpose and Need will also be presented at the Citizen Informational Meeting #2, along with a potential range of Interchange alternatives. The Purpose and Need will be a living document, and it will be refined as appropriate through the project development/ NEPA process. Following Citizen Informational Meeting #2, the Project Team will meet with the environmental resource agencies to review the draft Purpose and Need, the potential range of alternatives and the methodologies and level of detail required in the evaluation of each alternative. Following the meeting with the resource agencies, the Range of Interchange Alternatives to be evaluated in detail will be determined. This Range of Interchange Alternatives will be evaluated over the summer and presented at Citizen Informational Meeting #3 in the fall. This detailed evaluation of Interchange Alternatives will be included in the draft environmental document, which may include a preferred alternative.

Thank you for your comments. We look forward to meeting with the public on March 23rd to present, discuss and receive their comments on the initial project information.

Cc:
All Steering Committee Members
All Project Team Members

---

posted by Peter T. Kleeman - techniquest@netscape.net

Response to Public Involvement Inquiry
Topic: Public Involvement

---

Here is the response to my February 22, 2006 Inquiry

---

To: Peter Kleeman
From: Angela Tucker
Date: March 6, 2006
Reference: Route 250 Interchange Project; Public Participation; Purpose and Need; Alternative Selection

Peter:

Thank you for your e-mail of February 22, 2006 regarding: 1.) public involvement in Steering Committee meetings, 2.) the project Purpose and Need document, and 3.)compliance with current federal project development requirements.

As you know, the Steering Committee’s current position is that the public will be provided an opportunity to comment on Steering Committee meeting agenda items, at the end of each meeting, time permitting. Be assured, we will always attempt to have time available for public comments. As noted at the March 2, 2006 Steering Committee meeting, the matter of public involvement in the Steering committee meetings will be discussed at the next Steering Committee meeting, tentatively scheduled for April 20, 2006.

At the second Steering Committee meeting on January 11, 2006, we had intended to divide the Steering Committee into two groups to review the preliminary interchange concepts. We also intended to have a third group for public attendees. Each of the three groups was to include Project Team members to facilitate the discussions. It was anticipated that each group would summarize and report their comments back to the full Steering Committee. However, time did not permit this approach and you were invited to join with the Steering Committee in providing comments. In the future, when reviewing alternatives, we intend to follow this format and will provide a separate work table for the public, facilitated by members of the Project Team, to review and comment on the range of interchange alternatives, and the detailed interchange alternatives/ recommended interchange alternative.

The role of the Steering Committee is noted on slides 11 to 14 of the November 3, 2005 meeting presentation and slides 4 to 7 of the January 11, 2006 meeting presentation, all of which are included on the project website. A major component of that role is to assist the Project Team in facilitating and enhancing the public involvement effort. It is clear that the public involvement process, including the public workshops, meetings with those most directly affected by the project, the project website, etc. will significantly benefit from Steering Committee input. The material to be presented at the initial Citizen Informational Meeting has been enhanced thanks to the efforts of the Steering Committee members at last week’s meeting. We have encouraged the Steering Committee members to attend and be involved in the Citizen Informational Meetings and to experience first hand, public comments and recommendations.

The Steering Committee is free to reach a consensus and make recommendations on various aspects of the project, should they choose to do so. If they choose to make comments or recommendations about the project, we will advise the public of these comments. However, project decisions are NOT the responsibility of the Steering Committee, but rest with the City of Charlottesville, VDOT and FHWA. Informed project decisions will consider public input, along with that of the Project Team, Steering Committee and the Environmental Resource and Regulatory Agencies.

The Project Team is in compliance with current federal statutes and regulations. In fact, we will exceed those requirements by conducting public meetings at each key milestone of the project development process. We are currently in the phase of the project that involves collecting pertinent information and data, preparing for our initial public meeting and developing key themes for the draft Purpose and Need, and project Goals and Objectives, along with the starting point for preliminary Interchange Concepts. The key themes of the draft Purpose and Need are noted in the Steering Committee meetings information, included on the project website. You are welcome to provide comments on those themes, at your convenience.

The initial kick-off Citizen Informational Meeting is scheduled for Thursday, March 23, 2006 from 4:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. at the Senior Center. Citizen Informational Meeting #1 will include the presentation of the following types of information for discussion with and comments from the public:

* Purpose of Citizen Informational Meeting #1
* Draft Purpose & Need – Key Themes
* Draft Goals & Objectives
* Environmental Coordination Process
* Public Involvement Initiatives
* Initial Environmental Inventory
* Traffic Analysis/Travel Demand Modeling/Long Range Plan
* Context Sensitive Urban Design
* Project Design Challenges
* Interchange Concepts – Starting Point – October 2000 Report
* Refined Preliminary Interchange Concepts – 2006
* Project Schedule/Next Steps

The draft Citizen Informational Meeting #1 material was reviewed with the Steering Committee at the March 2, 2006 meeting. You were provided with a copy of that material, as were the other members of the public in attendance. The material has also been placed on the project web site and will be available for public comment until Thursday, March 9, 2006. The material will then be refined, placed on the project website and presented at the March 23, 2006 Citizen Informational Meeting. The notice for Citizen Informational Meeting #1 will indicate the availability of meeting material. Based on the comments we receive at the initial Citizen Informational Meeting on these and others items, the Project Team will develop a draft project Purpose and Need statement which will be placed on the project web site for public comments and also made available to the environmental resource and regulatory agencies and to the Steering Committee for comments.

The draft Purpose and Need will also be presented at the Citizen Informational Meeting #2, along with a potential range of Interchange alternatives. The Purpose and Need will be a living document, and it will be refined as appropriate through the project development/ NEPA process. Following Citizen Informational Meeting #2, the Project Team will meet with the environmental resource agencies to review the draft Purpose and Need, the potential range of alternatives and the methodologies and level of detail required in the evaluation of each alternative. Following the meeting with the resource agencies, the Range of Interchange Alternatives to be evaluated in detail will be determined. This Range of Interchange Alternatives will be evaluated over the summer and presented at Citizen Informational Meeting #3 in the fall. This detailed evaluation of Interchange Alternatives will be included in the draft environmental document, which may include a preferred alternative.

Thank you for your comments. We look forward to meeting with the public on March 23rd to present, discuss and receive their comments on the initial project information.

Cc:
All Steering Committee Members
All Project Team Members

---

posted by Peter T. Kleeman - techniquest@netscape.net

Public Involvement in Project Development
Topic: Public Involvement

---

Here is an inquiry sent to the Route 250 Bypass / McIntire Road Steering Committee chair concerning the lack of opportunity for the public to participate in the development of project Purpose and Need or selection of alternatives for consideration as required.

---

From: Peter T. Kleeman
To: Angela Tucker; Owen Peery
Cc: Ivan Rucker (FHWA)
Sent: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 16:39:42
Subject: Route 250 Interchange Project: Public Participation; Purpose and Need; Alternative Selection

Angela Tucker, City of Charlottesville project manager
Owen Peery, RK&K Engineers project manager

The Route 250 Interchange Steering Committee does not include any opportunity for input from the public, which appears to be not in compliance with Federal Highway Statues. I am bringing this concern to you and to our local FHWA Community Planner, Ivan Rucker, for your consideration along with another request that the Steering Committee agendas be revised to include opportunities to participate particularly when discussion on purpose and need, and study alternatives are being addressed. I am providing you material I believe is particularly appropriate for your consideration now as these items have already been addressed at committee meetings without Federally required public participation opportunities. The material provided below is from the Highway section of the United States Code (23USC139) that was just enacted into law in the SAFETEA-LU legislation in section 6002 of that act.

The specific section of the US Code of interest here is entitled: Sec. 139: Efficient environmental reviews for project decisionmaking. In this code section the requirement that the public be invited to participate in development of the purpose and need statement, and determination of the range of alternatives to be considered in the environmental review. By not allowing public participation in these discussions I believe you are not in compliance with this section of the US Code.

I have included below the text of 23USC139 Subsection (f) that directly addresses the need for public involvement in the currently ongoing activities of the steering committee that are - in spite of my several requests - being denied.

I have copied this email to Ivan Rucker so that he too will be aware of my concern that current activities being carried out by the City of Charlottesville in its role as a lead agency in this Federal-aid Highway project appear not to not be in compliance with current Federal law.

I look forward to discussing this matter with you further and request that a partial solution to this apparent non-compliance would be to include opportunities for matters from the public on all upcoming committee agendas. In addition, I recommend that interested members of the public be provided opportunities to participate in purpose and need discussions and discussions on selection of project alternatives when those items are the order of business of the committee or any subcommittees that may be formed for these purposes in the future.

Sincerely, Peter Kleeman

---

23USC139
...
(f) Purpose and Need.--
(1) Participation.--As early as practicable during the environmental review process, the lead agency shall provide an opportunity for involvement by participating agencies and the public in defining the purpose and need for a project.
(2) Definition.--Following participation under paragraph (1), the lead agency shall define the project's purpose and need for purposes of any document which the lead agency is responsible for preparing for the project.
(3) Objectives.--The statement of purpose and need shall include a clear statement of the objectives that the proposed action is intended to achieve, which may include--
(A) achieving a transportation objective identified in an applicable statewide or metropolitan transportation plan;
(B) supporting land use, economic development, or growth objectives established in applicable Federal, State, local, or tribal plans; and
(C) serving national defense, national security, or other national objectives, as established in Federal laws, plans, or policies.
(4) Alternatives analysis.--
(A) Participation.--As early as practicable during the environmental review process, the lead agency shall provide an opportunity for involvement by participating agencies and the public in determining the range of alternatives to be considered for a project.
(B) Range of alternatives.--Following participation under paragraph
(1), the lead agency shall determine the range of alternatives for consideration in any document which the lead agency is responsible for preparing for the project.
(C) Methodologies.--The lead agency also shall determine, in collaboration with participating agencies at appropriate times during the study process, the methodologies to be used and the level of detail required in the analysis of each alternative for a project.
(D) Preferred alternative.--At the discretion of the lead agency, the preferred alternative for a project, after being identified, may be developed to a higher level of detail than other alternatives in order to facilitate the development of mitigation measures or concurrent compliance with other applicable laws if the lead agency determines that the development of such higher level of detail will not prevent the lead agency from making an impartial decision as to whether to accept another alternative which is being considered in the environmental review process.

---

posted by Peter T. Kleeman - techniquest@netscape.net