Study Advisory Group Meeting #1
February 27th, 2014 – 4:00PM
Buzzards Bay Coalition, New Bedford
Agenda
•
•
•
•
•
Introductions
Study Purpose and Background
Planning Study Process
Study Advisory Group
Review Study Framework Material
–
–
–
–
Study Area
Goals and Objectives
Evaluation Criteria
Public Involvement Plan
• Next Steps
Introductions
• MassDOT
– Ethan Britland – Project Manager
• HDR Study Team
– John Weston – HDR Team Project Manager
– Stefanie McQueen – HDR Team Deputy Project Manager
– Jill Barrett (FHI) – Public Involvement
–
–
–
–
–
Jeffry Monroe – Maritime Analysis
Peter Davis – Bridge Design
Luigi Casinelli – Traffic Analysis
Pam Yonkin – Economic Development
Stephanie Dyer-Carroll (FHI) – Environmental Review
Study Purpose and Background
• Evaluate transportation and associated land use
issues, develop potential solutions, and recommend
improvements along the Route 6 Corridor
(County St. New Bedford to Green St. Fairhaven)
Study Purpose and Background
• Corridor is a primary connection between
New Bedford and Fairhaven
• Functionally obsolete swing bridge
• Bridge openings result in extensive vehicle delays
• Bridge is a constraint to marine traffic
Fairhaven Bridge Study History
• 1899: Bridge Construction Completed
• 1965-1967: Legislative Special Commission Study
for bridge replacement.
• 1978: Plan developed for new bridge to spur oil
crisis induced marine development.
• 1987: Mass Dept. of Public Works study
concluded bridge repair instead of replacement.
• 2014: MassDOT begins study of bridge
Marine Traffic - Bridge Constraints
• Existing Bridge Attributes
– Swing Span navigational width of
92 ft.
– Harbor barrier limits all vessel
breadth to 150 ft.
– Vertical Clearance of 6 feet
– Tidal Range of under 6 feet
– Depth range from 8 to 30 feet
Acushnet River
Movable Bridge Concerns
• Reliability and longevity of existing bridge
• Roadway traffic impacts due to bridge span
openings
– Time to open/close bridge impacts traffic
– Under bridge clearance impacts number of bridge
openings
• Vessel size and access constraints to upper basin
– Waterfront Industrial, Commercial and Transitional
properties in New Bedford
• Access impacts to future Whale’s Tooth Station
• Accommodations for South Coast Bikeway
Upper Basin Economic Development Opportunities
MassDOT Planning Study Process
A Phased Action Plan
• Short-Term – Actions that can be advanced immediately
or within 1-2 years
• Medium-Term – Actions in which implementation
planning and/or design are expected to take 3-8 years
• Long-Term – Alternatives that require additional
resources or design/permitting time to implement (9-20
years)
Study Advisory Group
• Invited representatives of study area interest organizations to
participate:
– Municipal, state and federal government
(elected officials and staff)
–
–
–
–
–
–
Study area neighborhood associations
Bicycling advocates
Regional planning and transit agencies
Environmental/water resources interests
Recreational interests
Port development interests
• Role of the Group
– To provide input to the team on the study process and
alternatives
– Act as conduit for information/issues with representative
organization
Study Framework: Draft Study Area
Study Framework: Goals and Objectives
Draft Goals of the study include the following:
• Improve transportation mobility, connectivity, and safety
within the study area and regionally;
• Maximize economic development through
improvements to the New Bedford/Fairhaven Bridge;
and
• Identify feasible alternatives for short, medium and long
term improvements in the corridor.
Study Framework: Goals and Objectives
DRAFT Objectives of the study include the following:
• Facilitate economic opportunities for water dependent
industries in the New Bedford Harbor upper basin that
may result from project alternatives
• Improve existing bridge operational speed and
reliability to reduce delay and travel time for vehicular
and marine traffic
• Reduce impacts to local
roadway traffic due to bridge
span openings
Study Framework: Goals and Objectives
DRAFT Objectives of the study include the following:
• Improve pedestrian and bicycle mobility and connectivity
in the corridor and regionally
• Minimize potential impacts to the community and
environment from selected improvements
• Support and ensure consistency with established local
goals and regional plans
• Develop feasible short, medium and long term
implementation plans for selected improvements
DRAFT Evaluation Criteria
Economic Development Opportunities
Number of businesses impacted
Value of business
Economic development impacts
Number of jobs
Shipper cost savings
Bridge Operations
Bridge opening times
Minutes per bridge closure
Vertical clearance
Feet of vertical clearance
Horizontal clearance
Feet of horizontal clearance
Esitmated number of daily bridge openings
Number per day
Transportation Impacts
Corridor intersections level of service (LOS)
Operational functionality
Corridor volume to capacity ratios
50th and 95th percentile queues
Average roadway travel time along corridor
Travel time
Average roadway delay
Average vessel delay
DRAFT Evaluation Criteria
Safety
Compliance with ADA requirements
Bicycle/pedestrian delay
Pedestrian and bicycle mobility and connectivity
Provision of bicycle facilities
Provision of pedestrian facilities
Conformance with AASHTO and MassDOT standards
Vehicular safety
Delay to emergency vehicle access
Environment
Impact to coastal resources (sq. ft.)
Environmental impacts
Impact to wetland resources (sq. ft.)
Impact to natural resources
Community
Impact to protected and recreational open space
Community impacts
Impact to historical/archeological resources
Impact to cultural resources
Visual
Visual impacts
DRAFT Evaluation Criteria
Alternative Feasibility
Cost
Capital and maintenance costs
Construction duration
Impacts to abutting land owners
Construction phase impacts
Impacts to Marine traffic
Impacts to vehicular traffic
Right of way impacts
Permanent and temporary right of way impacts
Public Involvement
• Variety of options for public
involvement
• Study information available in
multiple formats
• Study Team responsive to
inquiries
• Inclusive and sensitive
approach to outreach
Outreach
• Study Advisory Group
(6 to 8 meetings)
• Public Informational Meetings (3 meetings)
• Fact sheets/bulletins
• Project Website (address coming soon)
• Future Meeting announcements via Email
Study Schedule
Fairhaven Bridge Corridor Study
Project Schedule
Months
TASK
1. Project Scoping (Study Area, Goals and Objectives)
2. Existing Conditions & Issue Evaluation
3. Alternatives Development
4. Alternatives Analysis
5. Recommendations
6. Final Report
Public and Stakeholder Participation
Public Informational Meeting =
Stakeholder Advisory Group =
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Next Steps
• Finalize Study Framework
(Goals/Objectives, Study Area, Evaluation Criteria, and
Public Involvement Plan)
• Existing Conditions
–
–
–
–
Interviews with Upper Basin abutters/maritime users
Data Collection
Development of vehicular traffic model
Profile future corridor users
(traffic, marine, transit, bike/ped.)
– Identify issues and constraints
• Next SAG Meeting (April)
• Public Meeting (Mid to late April)
Questions?
Comments and feedback can be emailed to
jbarrett@fhiplan.com