Triangle Public Transportation Coordination and Consolidation Projects

Triangle Regional Transportation Development Planning Project

Public Involvement Plan:

As indicated in the RFP and in our proposal, the first deliverable as part of Triangle Regional Transportation Development Plan was to draft a Public Involvement Plan for the study that incorporates specific ideas and activities. Alternatives and options for the Public Involvement Plan were discussed with those in attendance at the initial Steering Committee meeting on September 20, 2005.

At that meeting there was consensus that providing an opportunity for a wide range of stakeholder input was an integral part of preparing an implementable plan. The specific elements of that plan included:

• Frequent meetings with the Steering Committee, especially to discuss draft and final copies of technical memoranda. In that regard, the Urbitran team committed to schedule and meet with the Steering Committee each time the team was in the area, currently scheduled at a minimum of five times during the course of the study.
   
  
• Approximately three meetings with a larger Stakeholder Group consisting of affected agency and organization members. The first of these was scheduled for the October 18 - 21 team visit. Although it was anticipated that this type of meeting bringing together representatives from all three counties would be of value, there was the realization that the potential for future meetings could be influenced by the input received at the first meeting.
   
  
• The consultant team also has requested as its next priority initial meetings with the Commission Board Chairs and the County Managers in order to provide additional input from their perspectives regarding the directions and goals for the study.
   
  
• Following the calendaring of those meetings, the team would then meet with the remaining members of the Steering Committee (not including the transit administrators who were interviewed during the September visit). In addition, we will solicit input from the three administrators regarding any other stakeholders they would recommend for inclusion in the interview process.
   
  
• There was also indication from affected parties that meeting with the Transit Advisory Boards would also be logical and those meetings will be arranged as feasible based on the study progress and other meetings subsequently scheduled by the consulting team. Since it is our understanding that the TABs meet on a regular basis, we will create a schedule of those meetings and incorporate into our overall meeting schedule. In addition, we will solicit input from the chairs and administrators regarding potential key times for briefings and presentations.
   
  
• Three other types of stakeholder meetings were discussed and will be scheduled. The first to meet with representatives of sponsoring agencies, such as senior and health services. The second to provide input from riders of the various systems, potentially working through the agencies and/or the TABs. Another technique for obtaining rider input would be through drop-in sessions at various locations served by the transit programs. Finally, to ensure that input was solicited from agencies or organizations not represented at the "table", including TTA, CAT, DATA and Chapel Hill. We would note that study team members have already conducted an extensive conversation with John Claflin of TTA.
   
  
• Regarding information dissemination, there were two specific electronic information distribution techniques discussed, that will be implemented.
   
  
  • One would be access to the Urbitran ftp site which would allow Steering Committee members to preview and review work products as they were developed.
     
    
  • The second would be an information site available to the general public and accessible through the Triangle J website, which would include study updates and memos, reports, etc.
     
    
• It was further discussed that additional stakeholder communication would also be disseminated through existing information channels from various agencies and groups. Plus additional mailings or meetings would be considered based upon the collective feedback regarding the Public Involvement Plan as described above.
   
  
• In addition, the Urbitran team recognizes that meetings with policy makers may be iterative and presentations may be requested at various Commission Chair and County Board meetings, including at the conclusion of both technical memos and the executive summary and there may be need for more formalized public meetings as the results of the study are developed.
   
  

As we reinforced in our proposal, having a strong Public Involvement Plan can help assure that various interests and perspectives are recognized and included in the study. Further, that these interests and perspectives can provide a framework from which to build consensus towards findings and recommendations. We further reinforce our commitment to frequent and straightforward communication to ensure that all parties are equally informed.