Agenda Packet 7-15-19 Work Session

Home Browse Search

MovingAhead Investment Package Alternatives May 2019 Supplemental Refinement Report 7 2 Community Input – Spring 2019 During the 30-day public comment period, the community had the opportunity to share how well they thought each of the proposed investment packages met community goals and why, as well as which of the evaluation criteria were most important to them. Participants also had the opportunity to propose their ideal investment package and share which three criteria they considered most important in creating their ideal investment package. Approximately 1,000 people participated in the various outreach activities, which included in-person and online open houses. Of those who participated, 291 surveys were submitted. Engagement also included more than 300 in person and phone conversations with community members, which ranged from shorter, informational conversations to longer, more intense discussions. 2.1.1 Community Feedback on Proposed Investment Packages The following themes emerged from the community’s preferences about the proposed investment package options: • More concerns (“Major Concerns” plus “Some Concerns”) were expressed about the lower level investment options: Enhanced Corridor and Package A • A higher number of people thought that Package B, Package C and the EmX Package “Works Well” or “Works OK” • 10% to 15% of participants felt “Neutral” or were “Not Sure” about the investment package options • Depending on the individual investment package, 22% to 34% of the respondents did not rate the packages Community opinion about how well each of the proposed investment packages work is shown in Figure 2.1. Key themes about the proposed investment packages that emerged from community feedback are: Package B showed a slim advantage over the others in amount of approval (blue) compared to amount of concern (red), even though it was tied with Package C in approval. The EmX package drew the most polarized response, with the highest numbers in both ‘works well’ and ‘major concerns’. In open-ended comments, frequently mentioned concerns included cost and the impact to trees and properties on the corridors. Frequently mentioned benefits included the best accommodation for anticipated population growth and for the safety of people walking and biking. Responses to Packages B and C were polarized as well, but less acutely. Expressions of both concern and approval were clustered around cost (still too high, but more palatable than EmX) and around corridors slated for No-Build (either appropriate or unacceptable, depending on the participant’s perspective). July 15, 2019, Joint Work Session – Item1