project management plan - nashville area mpo 109_project management plan_082214.pdf · sr 109...

PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN

SR 109 Access Management Study

August 2014

Prepared for the Nashville Area

Metropolitan Planning Organization


iProject Management Plan

TABLE OF CONTENTS1. OVERVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2. SCOPE OF SERVICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

3. PROJECT SCHEDULE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Key Milestones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

4. PROJECT TEAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Project Governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

5. COMMUNICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

External Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Internal Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

6. Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Attachment A

Attachment B

TABLESTable 3-1. Key Milestones and Deliverables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Table 5-1. Communication Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

FIGURESFigure 2-1. Project Flow Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2


1Project Management Plan

PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN

1. OVERVIEWBuilding on the work completed in the Tri-County Transportation &

Land Use Study and the SR 109 Corridor Management Agreement,

the SR 109 Access Management Study represents a unique oppor-

tunity to establish corridor-wide access management standards and

practices that will simultaneously support local, regional, and state

transportation and economic development goals.

The Nashville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) is the

lead agency and project manager, and it has retained a consulting

team, led by Nashville-based Gresham, Smith and Partners (GS&P), to

conduct the study.

The purpose of the study is to provide the MPO, state and local

community partners with a set of customized access management

strategies and a plan for coordinating access management decisions

along SR 109, stretching from SR 840 in Wilson County northward to

I-65 near the Robertson/Sumner County line. The project approach

builds on the considerable amount of planning work already

completed in the corridor and is focused on achieving the project’s

key outcome – the access management plan.

The Project Management Plan (PMP) has been developed to

guide the study process and to ensure that the project schedule is

maintained, key milestones are met, clear lines of communication are

established, and a plan for quality is addressed.

2. SCOPE OF SERVICESThe scope of services divides the SR 109 Access Management Study

into seven tasks. Collectively, the tasks describe the planning process

and technical work necessary to directly support building consensus

around the three principal elements of an access management plan,

a shared vision for the corridor, a set of access categories, and a series

of short- and medium-term improvements.

The fi rst phase of the study begins with a series of start-up tasks

describing historical, existing, and future conditions, documenting

existing access management guidelines and practices being

deployed in the study area, developing an access management

SR 109 Access Management Study2

Project Management Plan

resource kit that describes and illustrates best

management practices across a variety of

contexts, and engaging the general public

in a fi rst round of public meetings. Thus, this

phase of the study will be devoted to putting

in place the overall access management

framework, working closely with the Project

Steering Committee (PSC), stakeholders, and

the general public to defi ne the vision for the

corridor and develop an applicable set of access categories. The fi rst

of two rounds of public meetings will be used to introduce key best

practices and to gain consensus on the corridor vision and the access

categories.

The second phase of the study will focus on refi ning the resource

kit after the fi rst round of public meetings to refl ect comments on

how the best practices might be adopted specifi cally in the SR 109

corridor and more generally in the region and state. The fi nal

resource kit will be formatted for easy adaptation to a web-based

platform, and will be reviewed at the second round of public

meetings. The second round of public meetings will be used to apply

the draft access categories to the corridor and to discuss proposed

short- and medium-term improvements for areas with high crash

rates, traffi c operation concerns, or signifi cant development potential.

The third phase of the study focuses on fi nalizing and documenting

the principal elements of the access management plan – the vision,

access categories, and recommended improvements - and clearly

defi ning what was achieved and agreed upon during the planning

process. The full scope of services may be found in Attachment A.

3. PROJECT SCHEDULEThe SR 109 Access Management Study began in June 2014 and

will follow a 12-month time frame. A project schedule highlighting

individual tasks is located in Attachment B.

Key MilestonesThere are a total of 19 milestones and deliverables for this project,

beginning with the project kickoff in June 2014 and culminating

Figure 2-1. Project Flow Chart

Phase 1 – Challenges & OpportunitiesProject Management

Plan

Public Involvement

Plan

Historical, Exsiting &

Future Conditions

Existing Guidelines &

Practices

Draft Resource Kit Public Meetings:

First Round

Phase 3 – Final PlanFinal Acess

Management Plan

Final

Documentation

Phase 2 – AlternativesFinal Resource Kit Draft Access

Management Plan

Public Meetings:

Second Round



in the fi nal technical report in May 2015. The milestones and deliv-

erables are major events or reports that will play a large part in the

success of the project and will be the focus of the work eff ort. The

milestones and deliverables are shown in Table 3-1.

2014 2015

JuneProject

Steering

Committee

Meeting JuneDeliverable #1: Project Management Plan

Deliverable #2: Public, Stakeholder and Media

Outreach Plan and Program

MayDeliverable #8:Technical Memo

on Recommended

Strategies for Access

Management

Deliverable #9:Technical Memo on

Recommended Reforms

to Current Practices

Deliverable #10:SR 109 Access

Management Plan

SeptemberTechnical

Committee

Meeting

OctoberRound 1 of

Public Meetings

NovemberProject Steering

Committee Meeting

OctoberDeliverable #3:Technical Memo on the

Technical Analysis of

Historical, Existing and

Future Conditions

Deliverable #4:Technical Memo

on the Existing

Guidelines and

Practices

FebruaryRound 2 of Public Meetings

AprilDeliverable #5:Technical Memo on

the Benefi ts of Eff ective Access

Management

Deliverable #6:Technical Memo on Best Practices

for Access Management

Deliverable #7:Access Management Resource Kit

MarchProject

Steering

Committee

Meeting

MayDeliverable #11:Tri-fold Promotional Brochures Summarizing

the Study Findings and Recommendations

Deliverable #12:Final Technical Report

Deliverable #13:Electronic Copies of Documents and Data

Table 3-1. Key Milestones and Deliverables



4. PROJECT TEAMThere are two distinct entities with direct involvement in the SR 109

Access Management Study – the Nashville Area Metropolitan

Planning Organization and the consultant team led by Gresham,

Smith and Partners. The other members of the consultant

team include Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA), Philip B.

Demosthenes, and Younger Associates. In addition, a Project

Steering Committee will consist of members of the SR 109 Corridor

Management Committee. Members of the PSC will designate repre-

sentatives to serve on the Technical Committee, which will review

draft deliverables on a regular basis throughout the project. This

section describes the proposed project governance structure, roles

and responsibilities, and the review and approval process.

Project GovernanceSuccessful completion of the project depends on clear and

meaningful decision making about the direction of the project,

project priorities, and project deliverables. Each team member’s roles

and responsibilities are described below.

Nashville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)The MPO is the owner of the contract and project sponsor, and is

ultimately responsible for the project’s success. Specifi c responsi-

bilities of the MPO include:

• Creating and communicating the project vision

• Serving as the decision maker for policy-level concerns of the

stakeholder community

• Acting as the project’s advocate with other agencies and local

governments

• Ensuring that political and organizational obstacles to project

success are addressed in a timely manner

• Building commitment among stakeholder organizations

The role of the MPO Project Manager is to ensure that the project

is delivered according to established expectations. The Project

Manager carries out her role by:

• Acting as the MPO’s offi cial contact with the consultants,

providing direction, resources, and clarifi cation as needed

• Overseeing review and approval of all project deliverables in a

timely manner

• Serving as the internal clearinghouse for all project progress and

resolving project related issues



• Attending and/or ensuring MPO participation in all coordination

meetings, committee meetings, and public meetings

The PSC will serve as the steering committee for the study and will

support the work of the project team, providing invaluable leadership

from project start-up to the fi nal study document. The responsibilities

of the PSC members are to:

• Provide overall direction to the study

• Off er policy recommendations and provide guidance to the

study

• Serve as the primary spokesperson for their respective jurisdiction

on the study

Designated by the PSC, the Project Technical Committee (PTC)

members will review the technical work at key milestones during the

project. The PTC members will be asked to:

• Receive and review technical memoranda

• Coordinate with their respective agencies

• Provide a sounding board for the project team to prepare for

public outreach activities

Gresham, Smith and PartnersGresham, Smith and Partners (GS&P) is the lead consultant for the

contract and holds responsibility for the project and all deliverables.

The GS&P Principal-in-Charge is ultimately responsible for the

consultant’s performance on the project. Responsibilities of the GS&P

Principal-in-Charge include:

• Establishing project goals relative to the scope of work for the

consultant team

• Defi ning team members’ roles and responsibilities

• Assisting with facilitation of public meetings and supporting

client and elected offi cials/stakeholder group meetings

• Addressing client’s policy-level concerns

• Approving study development and review

The role of the GS&P Project Manager is to ensure that the project

is delivered according to established expectations. The Project

Manager carries out its role by:

• Acting as the consultant’s offi cial contact with the MPO

• Monitoring production and quality assurance/quality control of

all project deliverables

• Managing and communicating with all subconsultants and

vendors

• Managing the review and approval process of consultant work

products

• Developing and distributing project status reports



Technical Teams have been identifi ed for the project. Their role is to

produce the team’s interim and fi nal work products. Technical team

responsibilities include:

• Working closely with client project management to ensure

project expectations are completely understood

• Developing interim and fi nal work products while meeting the

project’s schedule, budget, and quality goals

• Ensuring deliverables have followed project review and approval

process

• Coordinating with client, technical teams, and committee

members as necessary

• Maintaining a repository of the technical team’s information and

documentation

• Identifying issues and risks and taking action, in conjunction with

GS&P Project Manager, to resolve or avoid them.

Review and Approval ProcessThe review and approval process identifi es the types of approvals to

be made, the individuals and organizations responsible, and expected

approval timing. The process consists of four review levels:

Figure 4-1. Team Organization Chart

TASK 2Public Outreach, Stakeholder, and Media Outreach

Task Leader

Lindsay Puckett, AICPGS&P

Kevin Tilbury, AICPCynthia Frear

GS&P

Stephen Stansbery, AICPKHA

Sharon Younger, PhD

Younger Associates

TASK 3Technical Review and

Analysis of historic, Existing and Future

ConditionsTask Leader

Kevin Tilbury, AICPGS&P

Patrick Leap, PEAndrew Gaskins

GS&P

Allison Fluitt, PE, AICPKHA

TASK 4&5Existing Guidelines

and Practices & Access Management Resource

KitTask Leader

John Houghton, AICPGS&P

Phil DemosthenesPD

Patrick Leap, PELindsay Puckett, AICP

GS&P

David Coode, AICPChristopher Rhodes, PE

KHA

TASK 6Corridor Specifi c Access

Management PlanTask Leader

Kevin Tilbury, AICPGS&P

Jay Bockisch, PE, PTOEPatrick Leap, PE

GS&P

Phil DemosthenesPD

Christopher Rhodes, PEStephen Stansbery, AICPTimothy White, PE, PTOE

KHA

TASK 7Final Documentation

Task Leader

Lindsay Puckett, AICPGS&P

Patrick Leap, PEAndrew Gaskins

GS&P

Phil DemosthenesPD

Allison Fluitt, PE, AICPStephen Stansbery, AICP

KHA

Nashville Area MPOAnna Emerson

Project Manager

Principal-in-ChargeMarshall Elizer, PE, PTOE

GS&P

Project ManagerJohn Houghton, AICP

GS&P

Project Coordination CommitteeTDOTTDEC

Nashville MPOSumner County

Wilson CountyCity of GallatinCity of LebanonCity of Portland

Nashville Area MPOMichael Skipper

Executive Director



1. Technical Team Review: Work product is submitted to GS&P

Project Manager after review and approval by the Technical Team

members.

2. GS&P QA/QC Review: GS&P Project Manager and one off -team,

senior GS&P professional review work product and request

revisions or approve. GS&P Project manager submits work

product to MPO Project Manager.

3. MPO Project Manager Review: MPO Project Manager reviews

work product and requests revisions or approves submission to

the PTC. Work deliverables require only MPO Project Manager

approval. Target: Complete review within fi ve working days.

4. Project Technical Committee Review: PTC members review work

deliverables and submit comments. The MPO Project Manager

will coordinate with the PTC members. Target: Complete review

within ten working days.

5. COMMUNICATIONHaving a clear plan for communication is important to the success

of any project. The following sections outline GS&P’s strategy for

communication on the SR 109 Access Management Study.

External CommunicationThe MPO has primary responsibility for external communication.

External communication may include contact with agencies, the

press, or the general public. GS&P will provide support to and

undertake external communications at the direction of the MPO.

If the MPO directs GS&P to undertake external communications, GS&P

will use the following protocol. In situations where sensitive or offi cial

project information is being disseminated, GS&P will seek review and

approval from the MPO in advance. In situations of basic commu-

nication where no critical information is disseminated, prior review

and approval from the MPO is not necessary; however, GS&P will

coordinate with the MPO on such communication where feasible and

appropriate. Specifi c conditions involving prior review and approval

are delineated in Table 5-1.

Internal CommunicationIn an eff ort to streamline communication and eliminate confusion for

the MPO, GS&P has implemented a single point of contact approach

to internal communication. The MPO may use the point of contact

for all matters related to the study, whether they be technical or

administrative/procedural. Additionally, the MPO may refer outside

individuals to the point of contact.



• Primary point of contact – The GS&P Project Manager will serve

as the single point of contact for GS&P.

• Alternate point of contact – The GS&P Project Professional or

task leader will serve as the alternate point of contact in the event

that the primary point of contact is unavailable or for regular task

communications.

Unless directed otherwise, GS&P will use the MPO’s Project Manager

for the study as the MPO’s point of contact. All internal communi-

cation from the consulting team will fl ow through this individual.

6. DATA COLLECTION

Gresham, Smith and Partners will coordinate public data collection

through the MPO. GS&P will initiate and manage data collection

according to the following procedures:

• Identify data requirements – including data requirements for all

subconsultants

• Develop data needs table – including data needs by subject

matter, type of data (GIS, plan, other), intended use of data, and

any specifi c issues

• Coordinate with MPO – including data requests and data sharing

agreements; obtain data only from sources agreed upon

• Manage and maintain project data – including data fi les

associated with specifi c tasks and major deliverables

The following will be a target of the data collection eff ort:

• Inventory of existing plans and policies

• Inventory of existing capital budget and programs

• Land use/parcel information

• Transportation system and networks

Table 5-1. Communication Plan

Basic Communication – Review and Approval from the MPO is not necessary.

• Data requests

• Status updates

• General coordination

• Meeting notifi cation

Dissemination of Information – Review and approval from the MPO is necessary.

• Press releases

• Press interviews

• Project deliverables

• Interim project materials

• Meeting materials

• Web page content

• Communication with public offi cials and general public



• Information about other public infrastructure systems

• Natural resources and environmental features

• Socio-cultural assets and resources

• Population and employment estimates and forecasts

Other data not listed above may be required as part of the study.

ATTACHMENT AScope of Services

SR 109 Access Management Study Page 1

SR 109 ACCESS MANAGEMENT STUDY NASHVILLE AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION This scope of services describes the work necessary to provide the Nashville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and state and local community partners with a with a set of customized access management strategies and a plan for coordinating access management decisions along State Route 109 stretching from I‐40 in Wilson County northward to I‐65 near the Robertson/Sumner County line. Our team’s project approach builds on the considerable amount of planning work already completed in the corridor and is focused on achieving the project’s key outcome – the access management plan. TASK 1. PROJECT MANAGEMENT/COORDINATION 1.1 Project Management Plan Gresham, Smith and Partners (“CONSULTANT" hereafter) will be responsible for internal project organization and coordination with the MPO Project Manager. The CONSULTANT will prepare a project management plan that will outline coordination, roles, and study schedule. The plan will include:

• An organizational chart of the project team and a description of roles and responsibilities for consultant and subcontractor team members;

• A final scope of work with a detailed description of major tasks and deliverables; • A schedule and budget for each major task and requested deliverable; • A description of the project management protocol for quality control procedures and client

progress reports; • A list of project participants and the expected level of participation (e.g., MPO staff, project

committee members, agency partners, etc.); • An assessment of local data and information needed to carry out the scope of services, and a

corresponding data collection plan. 1.2 Project Kickoff Meetings The CONSULTANT will meet with appropriate MPO staff to discuss the task‐specific schedule, establish ground rules and project expectations within the confines of the scope and fee, exchange relevant information and documents, initiate requests for other necessary data, and to explain administration of the contract. An in‐house kick‐off for the CONSULTANT team members is also included. 1.3 Monthly Progress Reports and Meetings The CONSULTANT will submit to the MPO brief monthly progress reports outlining the work completed to date and an updated schedule of the tasks remaining for timely completion of the project. The CONSULTANT will also attend regular progress meetings with MPO personnel to discuss project status and project issues. 1.4 Project Coordination This task includes overall project management, liaison with the MPO and team members, and written documentation as appropriate for all meetings that are not specifically addressed elsewhere in this


Scope. Communications and coordination with other federal, state, and local agencies will be closely coordinated with the MPO and documented. The CONSULTANT’s Project Manager will be responsible for project coordination and communication of issues under this task. Deliverable #1: Project Management Plan Figure 1. Project Flow Chart

TASK 2: PUBLIC, STAKEHOLDER, AND MEDIA OUTREACH PLAN 2.1 Public, Stakeholder, and Media Outreach Plan The CONSULTANT will prepare an outreach plan in cooperation with the MPO. The plan is intended to provide opportunities for the public, stakeholders, and the media to participate in the formation of the study’s recommendations. The plan will address:

• Outreach Coordination—The CONSULTANT will facilitate all meetings, prepare all meeting materials, and document public and stakeholder comments throughout the process, including synthesizing findings from public involvement conducted by local agencies during recent and ongoing comprehensive planning activities throughout the study area based on readily available data and information produced by others.

Phase Three - Final Plan

Final Access Management Plan Final Documentation

Phase Two - Alternatives

Final Resource Kit Draft Access Management Plan Public Meetings: Second Round

Phase One - Challenges & Opportunities


Public Involvement Plan

Historical, Existing & Future

Conditions

Existing Guidelines & Practices Draft Resource Kit Public Meetings:

First Round


• Meetings—The plan will list potential meeting materials and present recommended meeting formats, potential time of day, and locations. In addition, the plan will specify lead roles at the meetings and that each meeting will be documented and made available on the project website. Project Coordination Committee Meetings (5 meetings). The project coordination

committee will consist of members of the SR 109 Corridor Management Committee. Public Meetings (4 meetings). Two rounds of two meetings. The first round will focus

on the corridor vision and discuss how access management can help achieve that vision through improved operational performance and safety. The second round of public meetings will present the draft access categories for the corridor and also identify potential short‐ and medium‐term improvements that address access management “hotspots”.

Elected Officials & Stakeholder Group Meetings – The CONSULATANT will make up to seven (7) presentations to elected officials after the second round of public meetings or prior to finalizing the study. We will also conduct up to six (6) meetings with stakeholder groups. These may be presentations and/or working sessions with property owners, residents, and businesses along the corridor or with larger groups such as chambers of commerce, neighborhood associations, or non‐profit organizations representing a variety of interests, especially traditionally underserved populations.

• Outreach and Engagement Strategies—Strategies include:

The CONSULTANT will work with the MPO and the project coordination committee to develop a database of stakeholders and interested parties that will be supplemented throughout the life of the project. This database will be used primarily for meeting notices.

Use of the MPO website and social media: The CONSULTANT will work with the MPO by providing periodic updates for posting on the MPO project study webpage and social media at key project milestones, such as in advance of and following public meetings and when study deliverables are available.

Press releases and newspaper advertisements: The CONSULTANT will develop drafts for the MPO to coordinate with press and publications.

Environmental Justice populations: The CONSULTANT will work to ensure that minority and low income populations receive meeting notifications and that meeting locations are readily accessible.

Deliverable #2: Public, Stakeholder, and Media Outreach Plan and Program TASK 3: TECHNICAL ANALYSIS OF HISTORICAL, EXISTING, AND FUTURE CONDITIONS 3.1 Data Collection The CONSULTANT will compile historic, base year, and forecast year data to describe the conditions and trends for the study area. We will then work with the MPO to identify a set of transportation and land use performance measures and performance targets that the steering committee finds acceptable within the framework of the goals and objectives identified in local, regional, and statewide plans.


Those performance measures and targets shall be used to evaluate the various access management strategies that will be developed for the customized plan as part of Task 6. The following will be included in the analyses:

• Economic and market conditions; • Land use and development patterns; • Travel demand and transportation system performance; • Environmental features and conflicts; • Local planning practices; • Natural resource conservation efforts

The CONSULTANT will also compile data and plans from a variety of sources. The following will be a target of the data collection effort:

• Inventory of existing policies and plans; • Inventory of existing capital budget and programs; • Land use/parcel information; • Transportation system and networks; • Information about other public infrastructure systems; • Natural resources and environmental features; • Socio‐cultural assets and resources; • Population and employment estimates and forecasts.

The CONSULTANT will be responsible for obtaining, organizing, and analyzing this information, however, cooperation will be provided by the MPO and other public agencies, as needed. Other data not listed above may be required as part of the analysis. Special attention will be given to reviewing consistency between the Tri‐County’s Preferred Vision for Growth & Development, local plans, and planned transportation investments along the corridor. The CONSULTANT will augment the information from those plans with information gathered from research that may provide insight into pending real estate development or economic activity within the study area that could affect the corridor’s future trajectory. Deliverable #3: Technical Memo on the Technical Analysis of Historical, Existing, and Future Conditions TASK 4: DOCUMENT & ASSESS EXISTING ACCESS MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES AND PRACTICES The CONSULTANT will investigate, document, and evaluate current access management strategies being deployed in the area. The investigation will cover, at a minimum, the following:

• TDOT’s preliminary engineering and final design plans for roadway or intersection improvements not yet implemented along the corridor;

• TDOT’s process to grant or deny access permits along state routes including the application process, the evaluation process, and the degree to which local communities or stakeholders are involved in the permitting process;

• State or local traffic control measures or ITS deployed to manage traffic along the corridor;


• State or local safety measures deployed to reduce vehicular or pedestrian crashes; • County or municipal policies that set parameters for land uses along the corridor; and • County or municipal regulations that affect the design and placement of development.

The CONSULTANT will review plans and documents as well as actual access permitting or land use cases along this corridor or similar corridors in the area. Through field visits, we will capture where access management is working and not working with photographs and measurements. For the purposes of reviewing TDOT’s permitting process, the analysis will not be limited to the SR 109 corridor. We will conduct personal interviews with staff associated with each of these processes as needed. Deliverable #4: Technical Memo on the Existing Guidelines and Practices TASK 5: DEVELOP ACCESS MANAGEMENT RESOURCE KIT The CONSULTANT will prepare an access management resource kit that describes and illustrates best practices across a variety of contexts. We will begin documenting best practices for the study immediately – including evidence of benefits, lessons learned, and typical treatments, policies, regulations, and standards – with an eye toward introducing key best practices at the first round of public meetings. The resource kit will include, at a minimum:

• Evidence of the benefits of access management for mobility, accessibility, safety, economy, environment, and other relevant community objectives;

• A discussion of major pitfalls or traps to avoid in the pursuit of access management; • Illustrations and discussion of common access management treatments; • Examples of land use guidelines that aid in managing travel demand or undesirable traffic

patterns; • Examples of multi‐agency coordination practices; • Model codes and ordinances that affect urban form and function; • Recommendations for identifying problems and measuring success; • A illustrated glossary of key terms and acronyms; • References to additional resources.

We will refine the resource kit after the first round of public meetings to reflect comments on how the best practices might be adopted specifically in the SR 109 corridor and more generally in the region and state. We will then review the resource kit in conjunction with draft access categories and recommended improvement at the second round of public meetings. The final resource kit will be formatted for easy adaptation to a web‐based platform, which will we will also provide. Deliverable #5: Technical Memo on the Benefits of Effective Access Management Deliverable #6: Technical Memo on Best Practices for Access Management Deliverable #7: Access Management Resource Kit – bound hard copies and original electronic files; an interactive web version also is desirable


TASK 6: DEVELOP CORRIDOR SPECIFIC ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN The final corridor access management plan will be the logical outcome of the step‐by‐step and iterative study process. In effect, the principal elements of the final plan – the vision, access categories, and recommended improvements – will have been identified and publicly reviewed by the end of the second round of public meetings. With consensus on the key elements, we will use this task to finalize the recommendations and develop an action plan for all of the participating agencies. Final Recommendations Following the three‐part framework established at the outset of the study, the final plan will clearly define what was achieved and agreed upon during the planning process. It will lay out:

• A Shared Vision for the Corridor – The shared vision will confirm the long‐term land use, transportation, and growth plan for SR 109. Relying on local plans and the regional vision captured in the Tri‐County study, the illustrated corridor vision will depict how the corridor’s land uses, general character, and transportation system change over the length of SR 109. The vision will set the stage for the access management plan’s goals, objectives, performance measures, and access categories.

• Access Categories – Putting into practice the vision for the corridor, the access categories will establish the overall access management framework for the corridor based on the development and transportation context. On a corridor map, color‐coded categories will visually identify corridor segments of different performance and provide a way to easily view their length and frequency. The categories will address the following basic standards and guidelines:

Roadway design and capacity – alignment and optimal cross‐sections Levels of access ‐ full or partially controlled or conventional access Access points – intersecting street and driveway location, spacing, and design Medians – median type (full opening, directional, left‐in only, restrictive) and median

opening spacing

• Recommended Improvements – While the access categories reinforce the corridor vision by establishing the long‐term access management framework, the recommended improvements will focus on short‐ and medium‐term improvements. We will identify priority issues and areas for access management improvements prior to the second round of public meetings, and reviewing possible solutions during those meetings. The recommended improvements will span a full array of issues and “hotspots” along the corridor, including: Roadway design enhancements and treatments – for example, consolidated driveways,

medians, intersection geometry, turn lanes, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities Traffic management and operations – traffic signal timing and coordination, integrated

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), and Traffic Impact Study (TIS) requirements Land development planning – land use plans, zoning ordinances, and subdivision

regulations


Governance – access permit process including appeal process, interagency coordination, performance monitoring, and funding

Deliverable #8: Technical Memo on Recommended Strategies for Access Management Deliverable #9: Technical Memo on Recommended Reforms to Current Practices Deliverable #10: SR 109 Access Management Plan – 25 bound hard copies and original electronic files TASK 7: PREPARE FINAL DOCUMENTATION & ELECTRONIC FILES The CONSULTANT will develop a promotional brochure and a final technical report on the study’s findings and recommendations. The final technical report will incorporate information from the technical memorandums and include supporting documentation from analyses and modeling. In addition, we will present findings and recommendations to the SR 109 Corridor Management Committee, the MPO Technical Advisory Committee, and Executive Board, and to the local planning commissions and/or legislative bodies representing the jurisdictions participating in the study (at the discretion of the local planning director and budget availability). All documents will be provided in PDF and the native editable version (Word, Illustrator, Publisher, InDesign, etc.). Data will be provided in an agreed upon format to ensure that the MPO and its partners are able to access the information after the completion of the CONSULTANT’S effort. All GIS data will be provided to the MPO in a format compatible with ESRI software. Deliverable #11: 250 full‐size tri‐fold promotional brochures summarizing the study findings and recommendations Deliverable #12: 25 hard copies of the final technical report Deliverable #13: Electronic copies of documents and data

This page has intentionally been left blank.

ATTACHMENT BDetailed Project Schedule


Project Schedule

Task 1: Project Management Plan

Task 2: Public, Stakeholder, and Media

Outreach Plan

Task 3: Technical Review & Analysis of

Historic, Existing and Future Conditions

Task 4: Document & Assess Existing Access

Management Guidelines and Practices

Task 5: Develop Access Management

Resource Kit

Task 6: Develop Corridor Specific Access

Management Plan

Task 7: Prepare Final Documentation &

Electronic Files

Steering Committee/Corridor Management Commitee Meetings Public Meetings

Technical Committee Meetings Major Deliverables

TaskAprilJune SeptAugJuly MarchNov DecOct Jan Feb

2014 2015

May

0 0

0