US 93: Wickenburg to Santa Maria River
Location/Design Concept Study and Environmental Studies
|
US 93: Wickenburg to Santa Maria River Location/Design Concept Study and Environmental Studies
|
|
SR 89 to Wickenburg Interim Bypass Wickenburg (SR 89) to Santa Maria River
|
Steering Committee Meeting Minutes - March 31, 1999 Location and Time: Wednesday, March 31, 1999 at 1:00 p.m. Hassayampa River Preserve Conference Room Participants:
Subject: US 93, Wickenburg to Santa Maria River Location/Design Concept Study TRACS No. H 4871 01L Steering Committee Meeting MEETING SUMMARY: 1. Introductory Comments The meeting was opened and moderated by the study manager, Bert Bertleson. Bert began by reminding the group that the purpose for the committee being formed was to provide input to the study team with emphasis on the following:
An agenda was distributed and was followed for the remainder of the meeting ( attached ). 2. School District Representation On The Steering Committee Bert was contacted by Hank Nelson, President, Wickenburg School District. The school district represents an area of over 600 square miles and felt that as an agency, should be invited to participate on the steering committee. There was discussion on whether the District represented all of the study limits, or if other school districts should be included. It was concluded that the Wickenburg District represented a significant majority of the study limits and that areas covered by other school districts, such as Congress, would be represented by the Wickenburg District president or superintendent. Bert will contact them and determine who will participate as a member and an alternate. Following this discussion, it was also agreed that membership to the steering committee should be limited to organizations existing at the time the study begins, and that the organization should represent a constituency directly affected by the result of the study. Adding members from new organizations as they may form in the future could lead to confusion and a lack of understanding on what the committee had already discussed in the past. 3. Review of Residence / Business / Customer Surveys Draft copies of the Residence/Business/Customer surveys performed by the Behavior Research Center were distributed to the committee members. Bert provided an overview of the report:
Initial feedback from the steering committee about the document included the following:
- Goldrush Days (Mid February) - Motor Cross Races An executive summary of the survey report was not available at the time of the meeting, but will be distributed to the committee members within two weeks. Committee members were asked to review the survey results and provide comments to Sverdrup by April 16. We will return the revised report and any revisions to the executive summary to the committee members as soon as our survey consultant incorporates the changes. (Sverdrup later decided that the executive summary should not be prepared until committee comments were received to ensure a more accurate summary). Bert noted that it was the intent of the Study Team to publish the final results of this survey to the public as soon as possible. After some discussion, it was agreed that the best way to distribute the information was to prepare an article for publication within the Wickenburg Sun. In addition to providing a summary of the survey results, the article will address the purpose of the location/design concept study, and a summary of how information will be presented to the public. Copies of the report will also be made available for viewing at the library and at the Town Hall. 4. Review of Issues / Concerns / Objectives At the previous steering committee meeting, each member was asked to submit a list of their issues, concerns and objectives for the bypass alignment as related to their constituents. The information received arrived in many different formats, and varying degrees of detail. Sverdrup summarized the information and placed the information into a matrix for the committee to review. Some of the representatives disagreed with the summarizations made in the document. Committee members agreed to review their agency’s response and provide any revisions to Sverdrup by the end of April. A revised matrix will be distributed at the next meeting. Some of the comments made in response to the matrix included:
5. Town of Wickenburg’s April 15, 1998 Letter Requesting Information A copy of the subject letter (and ADOT’s initial response) was distributed to the committee. Each response made by ADOT was presented to the committee. The following comments were made. #2: 2a: The study includes the review of two long-term corridor solutions (bypasses), and review of an interim improvement project. The interim improvement project does not necessarily restrict the review of a new bridge crossing. 2b: The study documents will review costs of each alternative, but cost may not be the greatest differentiating factor in the selection of the recommended alternative. Several factors influence the selection including all of the other issues addressed in the letter. #18: Truckers are more concerned with a shorter route than a timely route or necessarily a safer route. In questioning truckers, they are not concerned with the time as much as they are concerned with the shortest possible mileage. From the Town’s perspective, they are not so much concerned with the impact "to" trucking as they are with the impact "from" trucking on the community and streets. When asked if the Town/County could restrict trucks to certain routes, it was noted from both agencies that trucks can be restricted from small collector streets, but not from major arterials. The County does not typically designate any route as a truck route. #21: When land use is analyzed, current zoning should be compared to potential developments that may petition to change zoning in the future; e.g., what type of development may occur at the future traffic interchanges. #23: A copy of the noise abatement criteria should be provided for the varying receptors. It was also noted that the recommended alternative will not be designed to the minimum standards, and that the design will take advantage of topographic and contour grading features to reduce noise impacts along the corridor, but especially in sensitive noise environments. Noise can be mitigated. As a result, noise will not be a major factor is selecting the northeast vs. the southwest corridor. It will be a significant factor in recommending a specific alignment within the selected corridor. #25: ADOT’s initial response notes that interim improvements will be evaluated during the final design concept phase. ADOT has since moved up the evaluation process to the beginning of the study to determine if there are any interim improvements that can be made to quickly relieve congestion and safety issues. The town representatives agreed that a formal response to the April 15, 1998 letter was no longer necessary since the issues/questions listed would be addressed by the study. 6. Open Discussion: Several participants inquired if they could supply supporting information to Sverdrup for incorporation into the study documents. Bert noted that any information that is perceived as helpful in any way should be submitted to Sverdrup for review. All information is appreciated. ACTION ITEMS:
Next Meeting: The next steering committee meeting was scheduled for: MAY 19, 1999 from 1:00 to 5:00 p.m. Hassayampa River Preserve Possible Agenda Items:
|
|
