An important component of the CSS process is the development of a Community Working Group (CWG).
CWG members serve as representatives of the public or stakeholders. These representatives will attend meetings where topics discussed range from existing transportation problems to what resources are important to the community.
CWG Meeting #1 – Introduction to the EA Process
CWG meeting #1 was held on October 28, 2010. All volunteers who filled out CWG application forms were invited to attend. At the meeting, the EA process was introduced, including the major milestones and timeline. The importance of CSS and the role of the CWG were discussed.
Each CWG member present introduced themselves and stated what interest area they represent. Members explained how they would communicate with those that they represent. Each member placed a sticker on a large aerial map of the study area to show where they live and work. The purpose of these activities was to ensure that a wide range of interest areas and geographic areas are represented. The CWG members discussed what additional interest areas should be represented.
The interest areas represented by the CWG members include:
- Agriculture
- Bicyclists
- Business
- Developers/Real Estate
- Economic Development
- Education
- Emergency Services
- Environmental
- Government
- Homeowner/Resident
- Labor
- Law Enforcement
- Parks
- Soil and Water Conservation District
- Transporation/Regional
- Utilities
The exhibits displayed at the meeting are available below:
EA Process
EA Schedule
Advisory Groups Hierarchy
CWG Ground Rules
To view the notes from the meeting click here.
CWG Meeting #2 – Purpose & Need Overview and Alternative Brainstorming
CWG meeting #2 was held on December 7, 2010. An overview of the ESH project was presented to begin the meeting. The history of the ESH, the major milestones of the EA, and the EA timeframe were discussed. An update on the Origin-Destination (O-D) Survey was presented, including a preliminary summary of responses to the questions on the survey cards.
Next, the project team presented an overview of the Purpose & Need (P&N) development. The Problem Statement and engineering analyses form the basis of the P&N. A Problem Statement was developed using stakeholder input during the Corridor Study. Engineering analyses used in the P&N development include population and employment growth forecasts and traffic data analysis.
The CWG members were then invited to brainstorm corridor locations in small groups and draw preliminary corridors on aerial photographs showing the project study area. The CWG members were instructed that for this exercise there were no constraints on corridor location. The evaluation criteria will be discussed in detail at a future CWG meeting and will include adherence to the P&N, engineering feasibility, and social/environmental resource impact minimization.
The slides presented at the meeting are available here.
To view the notes from the meeting click here.
CWG Meeting #3 – Engineering Concepts, Environmental Regulations, and Continued Alternative Development
CWG meeting #3 was held on January 25, 2011. A summary of PIM#2 and the next steps in the Purpose & Need development were presented. The project team then presented a series of slides describing engineering terminology and concepts considered in roadway design. Next, a series of slides discussing environmental and cultural resources within the study area, and the law and regulations protecting each resource was presented.
The CWG members were invited to continue the alternative development process begun at CWG meeting #2. Aerial maps showing the preliminary corridors developed during CWG#2 in addition to the location of cultural (e.g., schools, parks, historic sites) and environmental resources were distributed. The resource information presented was preliminary and will be updated as data collection continues and new information becomes available. The members split into two groups and were encouraged to refine the preliminary alternatives developed at CWG#2 and develop new alternatives based on the engineering criteria and environmental information presented at the meeting and shown on the map.
At the next CWG meeting, members will have the opportunity to continue to refine corridors. Additional alternatives developed by the project team and the alternatives developed during the Corridor Study will be presented for review. Corridor screening criteria will be presented for input.
The handouts distributed at the meeting are available below:
Engineering Terms and Concepts
Environmental 101
The slides presented at the meeting are available here.
To view the notes from the meeting click here.
CWG Meeting #4 – Alternative Consolidation
CWG meeting #4 was held on March 10, 2011. A summary of the February 15, 2011, NEPA/404 merger meeting was discussed. The project team received concurrence from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and various state and federal resource agencies on the Purpose & Need (P&N). Concurrence signifies that the project team can move forward with alternative evaluation.
The project team presented a series of slides describing the population and employment forecasts, including data trends and sources. The forecasts presented were draft numbers based on the newly released 2010 Census data and final forecasts will be available after further coordination with McLean County Regional Planning Commission MCRPC.
Next, a series of slides discussing the alternative analysis evaluation process were shown.
The alternatives that were drawn by hand by members at the previous CWG meetings were compiled electronically by the project team and presented for review. The members, as a group, discussed the alternatives and consolidated alternatives that met the same intent as similar corridors, had the same termini, or were located in the same general area.
At the next CWG meeting, the alternative evaluation criteria will be discussed and members will have the opportunity to continue to refine corridors.
The slides presented at the meeting are available here.
To view the notes from the meeting click here.
CWG Meeting #5 – Alternative Evaluation Process
CWG meeting #5 was held on April 14, 2011. The alternatives previously developed by the CWG and the Project Study Group were presented. The project team discussed additional alternatives to be evaluated, including an east-west only alternative, a transit alternative, and a Transportation Systems Management alternative.
Next, the project team presented a series of slides showing the process for screening and eliminating alternatives. The process includes the following five steps:
1. Initial Screening Evaluation
2. Purpose & Need Evaluation
3. Macro Analysis Evaluation
4. Alignment Analysis Evaluation
5. Environmental Assessment
The proposed criteria used for evaluation at each step were presented. The CWG members were invited to comment on the criteria, and to propose additional criteria to be considered.
At the next CWG meeting, the results of the first three levels of screening will be discussed.
The slides presented at the meeting are available here.
To view the notes from the meeting click here.
CWG Meeting #6
CWG meeting #6 was held on June 29, 2011. An update on recently published socio-economic data was presented. Next, the results of the first three steps (Initial Screening, Purpose & Need Evaluation, Macro Analysis Evaluation) of the alternative evaluation were discussed.
The alternatives eliminated during each of the three steps were reviewed. The alternatives remaining under consideration after the Macro Analysis were discussed. The CWG members provided input on the evaluation process and remaining alternatives.
At the next CWG meeting, the results of the fourth step in the alternative evaluation process, the Alignment Analysis, will be discussed.
To view notes from the meeting click here.
CWG Meeting #7
CWG meeting #7 was held December 1, 2011. An update on recently published socio-economic data was presented. Next, the results of the fourth step of the alternative evaluation process, the Alignment Analysis, were discussed.
The resource criteria considered and the alternatives eliminated during the Alignment Analysis were reviewed. The four alignments remaining under consideration after the Alignment Analysis were discussed. The CWG members provided input on the evaluation process and remaining alternatives.
Next, roadway facility type was discussed. Three roadway options for the ESH were evaluated: arterial, freeway, and expressway.
To view notes from the meeting click here.
CWG Meeting #8
CWG meeting #8 was held June 6, 2013. An update on recently published socio-economic data was presented. Next, a presentation was given, which was the same presentation that was given at PIM#5 on June 19, 2013. The CWG members were asked to give input on the presentation and on the remaining two alternatives. The members were encouraged to attend the PIM, notify their neighbors and people they represent, and submit comments on the remaining alternatives.
To view notes from the meeting click here.
Did you know ...