| |
| FHWA > Federal-aid Program Administration > Major Projects > Project Management > Marketing Mega Projects and Public Trust |
| Major Projects
|
From Community Involvement to the Final Product
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Survey Stage | Analysis | Profiling |
|---|---|---|
| Researchers conduct exploratory interviews relating to transportation and construction issues to gain insight into the segment group's attitudes, motivations, and behavior. The researcher prepares a questionnaire and collects data on attributes of the product or service. | The researcher applies factor analysis to the data to remove highly correlated variables built on the implementation of the project's relevant issues. It then applies cluster analysis to create a specified number of maximally different segments. | The researcher creates a profile establishing a summary of the history, preset conditions, and anticipated future of an area. It provides an overview or series of snapshots of the area and is used as a basis for identifying potential impacts of a proposed transportation action. |
The bases for market segmentation in a mega project deals explicitly with understanding the profile of the effected groups. This would involve researching the profile of the community segment, the business segment, and the traveling public segment. Breaking down the population and demographic characteristics; the economic and social history characteristics; and the physical characteristics is important (Brock, et al., 1996). Since the development and implementation of a mega project involves a significant impact on all the stakeholders involved in the process, care and attention must go into understanding the type of effects that the project will have on the environment and also understanding how each proliferate group will be affected by the whole process. This is where examining the major segmentation variables is essential, such as:
Population and Demographic Characteristic
Economic and Social History Characteristics
Physical Characteristics Relating to Community Activities
This market segmentation analysis phase plays an important role in formalizing how best to market the attributes most significant to the public's needs. For instance, identifying the concepts that are important to the business segment and understanding why it is important is a valuable tool. A marketing scheme can be created to outline all the components significant to that business group. Whereas, identifying the concepts that are important to the community is just as useful in understanding that community's needs. In the past, the consequences of transportation investments on the market segments involved have often been ignored or introduced near the end of the planning stage. By introducing the proposed marketing tools in the overall marketing plan, the developers, architects, and planners can effectively use the segmentation analysis to create a plan optimum to the public's goals.
Positioning is the act of designing an offering and image to occupy a distinctive place in the target market's mind. Because mega projects are specialized in market segmentation, positioning a mega project is unique and not typical of most commercial marketing campaigns and positional analysis strategies. One way to create a successful positioning strategy in a mega project marketing campaign is to highlight the benefits, needs, and solutions of the improved roadway. By defining the need for the project, the public is able to perceive the project as an identifiable concept, which gives the marketing campaign a sustainable advantage in its public- and community-relations objectives. Promoting a marketing strategy before the public is prudent to the success of the overall project. How the project is seen in the beginning, middle, and end stages is what eventually creates added value and customer appreciation. One of the goals of the campaign will be to increase awareness of the effects of transportation actions on the human environment and emphasize that impacts deserve serious attention in the project planning and development stages.
Finding the right attribute to promote in the positioning process is key to the success of the whole marketing scheme. This involves understanding the needs and the wants of the project from the public. At this stage of the marketing process, significant segmentation research and market analysis should have already been conducted, thereby giving the marketing campaign relevant material on the groups that will be affected by the mega project initiative. In the case of the community segment, business segment, and the traveling public segment, the focus will be on how to satisfy and meet the needs of the community during the construction process. How will the quality of life be affected? Again, each segment will have different expectations and will need to be differentiated. This is the difference that delivers a highly valued benefit to a sufficient number of people. When analyzing how the impact of the project will affect the existing structure and life of the people, which is ultimately how solutions will be proposed, it is good to keep in mind the following guideline:
Understanding what is the perceived impact on the quality of life can help in creating the final solutions and positioning the project in such a way it can overcome negative issues associated with previous mega projects in the public's eye. Distinguish the impact categories when deciding on the type of problems that can be significant in the scope of the project. The impact categories can sometimes be used for each of the market segments in the plan, or the categories can be developed specifically for each segment's situation (Brock, et al., 1996).
| Economic Conditions | Mobility and Access | Land Use | Displacement and Safety | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Community / Traveling Public / Businesses | Business and Employment Impact | Pedestrian and Bicycle Access | Land-Use Patterns | Effect on Neighborhoods |
| Traveling Public / Businesses | Short-term Impact | Public Transportation | Compatibility with Plans | Residential Displacement |
| Businesses / Community / Traveling Public | Business Visibility | Vehicular Access | Use of Public Facilities | Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety |
| Community / Business | Tax Base | Crime | ||
| Community | Property Values | Emergency Response | ||
| Community / Traveling Public | Displacement of Public Facilities |
Some of the issues to study based on the level of impact includes "Land Use" and how the construction process would affect farmland, the environment's eco system, or will it have adverse affect on changes in land use and density. In the "Economic Conditions" category, issues that may be relevant are: Will the proposed action encourage businesses to move to other areas or close? How will the local economy be affected by the construction activity? Or homeowners may want to know what the effect of the project will be on increased or decreased property values. In regards to "Mobility and Access," there may be concerns with how the project affects non-motorist access to businesses, public services, schools, and other facilities and how will the project affect access to public transportation. These are all adequate questions that will be posed by concerned citizens. And finding the solutions and communicating those solutions effectively is all part of the overall marketing strategy. Once questions have been raised and solutions have been resolved, the mega project can be positioned in a proper arena to promote the goals and objectives.
A way of measuring issues in the positioning stage deemed high in priority, which could be shown by creating a perceptual map. This could also help outline the focus of the marketing plan. A perceptual map is a statistical analysis used to find out what the most important attributes are, or in the case of a mega project, issues relevant to the identifiable segments involved. The measurements involved in the map places the most weight at 1.0 and the least significant weight at 0.2. The scale model demonstrates how certain factors can be rated.
Figure 1. Marketing Positioning Perceptual Map
Market segmentation and positioning analysis are part of the procedures that help identify impact assessment processes, which involve problem-solving and generating solutions. Developing the impact assessment that responds to the public's concerns is one of the most important steps in the marketing strategy. There are four primary methods for dealing with how the mega project will impact the public (Brock, et al., 1996). Shown below are examples of specific solutions that can address a particular market segment's concerns.
Avoidance - Do not apply so an impact does not occur.
Minimization - Modify the project to reduce the severity of an impact.
Mitigation - Undertake an action to alleviate or offset an impact so that it replaces resources.
Enhancement - Create attractive features for the project that fit within the environment.
Although, project design options are typically based on engineering standards, the marketing process of mega projects is to understand the relevance of integrating the concerns and issues from the inception of the project. The public's involvement is playing a critical role in their support for the project. A consensus on the qualities of projects and the characteristics of the highway development process can integrate transportation facilities with communities and the environment.
Projects are classified, as mega projects only when there is a dire need of it, as they involve a lot of research, time and money. From its conception to its completion it could take over a decade. Mega projects get their funds from Federal Highway funds, Congress and from the respective State Departments of Transportation.
As the project proceeds through its life cycle, the communication methods used in the beginning might not be pertinent anymore and so are required to be updated for effective communication. The PI team should constantly monitor and oversee the communication plan to achieve the anticipated goal. The PI team should (Strategic Plan, 2001) -
The public expects to receive accurate and concise information from the project officials and have no interest in frivolous government spending on various advertising campaigns. Informational advertisements on television would be preferred over "feel good" campaigns. The SATCH advertising campaign started by the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) for the I-15 project was a failure as it was a "feel good" campaign as opposed to an informational one. The regional public disliked it and the officials received a lot of negative feedback from them. This advertising campaign was halted immediately and from then on only the informational (project-related) advertisements were televised.
It is important to involve the public in the project at the beginning of the planning stage. During the Woodrow Wilson Bridge (WWB) planning stage, there was information gathered concerning whether a draw-type bridge would be desirable versus other types of bridges, such as a span bridge. Out of the public response of over 350 ideas, the main alternatives were delineated and then examined. Those ideas formed the basis for creating the proposals leading to the creation of the drawbridge that is currently under construction.
One of the ways to involve public is through meetings that could be like the town hall meetings, which are typically very informal. They give out more general information to the public than specifics. The meetings could be conducted close to the neighborhood so that they are at a walk able distance to the public. Public can be informed about the meetings through flyers in the mail. The basic concepts of the plan could be discussed and public can be asked to opine on the same. Open Houses can be another form of meeting to gather public opinion. For the Woodrow Wilson Bridge project, FHWA was the leading agency for the open houses along with two other contractors. Public attendance at the open houses will be driven by the topic. After the meetings, surveys should be mailed out to the public to check their satisfaction levels.
The construction office location could have exhibits on walls, physical models, and 3D models that could be changed if need be as physical models are more static and cumbersome to change. These offices can remain open to the public on few days of the week for walk through traffic. Handouts with project logos can be given out to the public to increase their project awareness. It is important to have a great facilitator to facilitate things and resolve public raised issues immediately.
The committee dealing with the public must be very reactive, more proactive, more engaging and more responsive, and involved with the public. There could be one person or a group of knowledgeable people assigned to respond to the public calls that come through the telephone or the website. They could be answering the phone calls to give out precise project specific information. Email messages can be sent out to the public with project updates.
Stakeholder participation is very important in the whole process. It is important to identify stakeholders beforehand itself and involve them in all the stages of the project. The WWB had four stakeholder participation panels in their design phase. Each of these panels consisted of members from various communities like the ADA, disability, bicyclist, minority, elected officials etc. Each panel had about 15 to 20 members and one PR person. Depending on what the topic was at the time, the appropriate people were there to respond to concerns. They agree on the charter and met twice every month. They had about 90% of their panel member participation in their meetings.
In a recent interview with the UMUC Study Team (February 11, 2004), the FHWA Major Projects group identified some projects that have been able to sustain a high level of public trust and confidence, such as the Denver Transportation Regional Expansion (T-REX) project and the Woodrow Wilson Bridge (WWB) project. The Central Artery project, also known as the "Big Dig" in Boston, has been identified as a project with a less than successful level of public trust and confidence. Although a much smaller project, the Springfield Virginia Interchange project was also cited as a project that is less than successful in handling the public. Does this mean that the so-called successful projects have done everything right? This study indicates that is not the case. There are varying opinions about what is working and what is not working from different partners involved in the projects.
Mr. Thomas Sorel, the FHWA Major Projects Group Leader in a March 11, 2004 interview, remarked that a mega project could last as long as 20 years and the need to focus on the project life cycle that includes the planning, environmental, design and construction, and operations stages.
T-REX set reasonable goals early on in the project.
It was no accident that the first goal was putting the community first. While cost, schedule and quality are all very important - T-REX recognized early on that goals are meaningless if the project brings the metro area commuter traffic to a standstill. They also realized that the most effective way to handle the number one goal "to minimize inconvenience to the community, motorists and the public" is through extensive communications. There's no denying that construction activity affects traffic, but T-REX does their best to make it as painless as possible.
T-REX dedicated itself to address public information issues through the life of the project, not just at the planning stage. The SECC Public Information Plan (Section 1.8.2 Public Information Role Definition) defined this role: "The contractor's public information staff will deal with coping issues throughout the life of the project. For example, road or lane closures cut through traffic issues, traffic delays, business access, commercial vehicle restrictions and emergency response agency issues."
According to the T-REX Fact Book (2004), the majority of the T-REX project is being constructed using the design-build delivery method. Design-build allows for a single contractor team to design and build the entire project for a predetermined price, under the oversight of Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and the Denver Regional Transit District (RTD). If the traditional design-bid build approach was utilized, this large and complex project could take 20 years or more to build. In a traditional approach, the design plans would be completed first, and then contractors would bid on and build sections one at a time. This type of arrangement does not allow for fluid direction and control when obstacles and changes are eminent. Above all, it allows for little public input.
With the selected contractor Southeast Corridor Constructors (SECC), the design-build approach created a faster and less expensive project, with many opportunities for innovation. Another benefit is that it is somewhat open ended and more easily allows for public input and possible mitigation and therefore public acceptance and buy-in. CDOT and RTD provided preliminary engineering design and requirements as part of the Request for Proposal. Southeast Corridors Constructors (SECC), the design-build contractor, used the preliminary plans to complete the design. Construction and design now take place simultaneously. For example, SECC can demolish a bridge and order construction materials, while completing the final design for the new bridge structure. Examples of previously successful design-build construction include the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail Line in New Jersey, the Foothills Transportation Corridor in Santa Ana, Calif., the Alameda Transportation Corridor in Los Angeles, the E-470 toll road in Denver and the I-15 reconstruction project in Salt Lake City.
Figure 2. T-REX logo
To minimize the possibility for the media or special interests to provide terminology that can be less than flattering to a project, the T-REX project used a "branding" strategy that provided a moniker or handle the public could easily remember and associate with the project. The Southeast Corridor Public Information Plan (n.d., Section 1.8.1.1.1 Strategies) for T-REX made branding preeminent for one of the three objectives: "To brand the project in a manner, which will resonate with the community as a project with which they can identify and understand its benefits. The T-REX name was well thought out before the project was even underway that helped to provide a catchy name the public could use before they thought of one themselves that could be a lot more negative. Additionally, the logo (Source: http://www.trexproject.com) was provided to the media even before the contractor was selected. It also helped the public identify with it and kept other negative type of images from being likely to replace it.
The T-REX Public Information Team and representatives from SECC (contractor) public information staff work together as a single unit to assure consistency of communication and approaches. The T-REX PI team provides the oversight and communicates the broader construction picture and long term philosophies, as well as the vision and progress issues raised by the public, media, government officials, business owners, etc. However, the SECC PI team deals with the day-to-day "coping" issues for the public. They address issues with road/lane closures and other traffic issues as well as commercial vehicle restrictions and emergency response agency issues. Together, the T-REX and SECC PI Teams convey the following strategies:
Co-location of the staff of PR persons that are involved with the project cited as an important factor in helping to keep communications with the media and public accurate and consistent. SECC and the Transportation Expansion Project team are co-located in several buildings along the project. Engineers, designers and other staff members from the contractor's team and the T-REX Project team shared office space throughout the life of the project. This facilitates better communication and faster problem solving and conflict resolution. The PR staff of CDOT and SECC is also in the same location that allowed for face-to-face communications.
In a February 24, 2004, interview with the University of Maryland University College (UMUC) Study Team, Carl Gotschall, the Central Artery Tunnel (CA/T) Project Administrator indicated the Massachusetts Highway Department started the Central Artery project in 1982 - but was not properly prepared and somewhat overwhelmed by the complexity of the task. Performance measures went awry at first and were not handled right. Consultant groups were hired, but they lacked the experience to correctly manage the situation as well. The CA/T was not forthcoming about projecting the scope of the project and informing the public of what obstacles had to be overcome. At one point the project was sold as the solution to fix everyone's problems. One website, the History Channel.com (retrieved April 21, 2004), cites that the original elevated six-lane highway, known as the Central Artery, was built in the 1950s as a state highway that ran through the center of downtown Boston. Homes and businesses were demolished to make way for the highway, displacing more than 20,000 residents. The highway had no breakdown lanes, too many sharp curves, and too many points of access and exit. The structure of the artery created a 40-foot-high divide between Boston's North End and the downtown commercial and financial districts.
Even before it was finished, officials realized that the artery was a mistake and halted construction to study the best way to complete it. Eventually, the last leg of the artery was turned into a tunnel. The artery was quickly choked beyond capacity. Today, traffic sits at a standstill for up to ten hours a day, making it one of America's most congested highways.
To try and find a solution to the worsening traffic condition in late 1969, the Boston Traffic Commissioner pursued the idea of widening the tunnels that fed the Central Artery. By 1982, the planning started for the Big Dig and funding first came available by 1987. Construction began in 1991 and by 1995 the first milestone for the Big Dig, the Ted Williams tunnel, was completed. Today, Boston's Big Dig is the most complex and expensive highway project ever undertaken in the United States. The city is replacing an outdated highway infrastructure with a new state-of-the-art highway system, most of which will be underground or underwater. The re-estimated eighteen-year, eleven-billion-dollar project consists of two major components: the new eight-to-ten-lane underground expressway and the extension of I-90 (the Massachusetts Turnpike) from its current end-point south of downtown Boston, through the Ted Williams Tunnel, to Logan Airport. Five major new highway interchanges and a two-bridge crossing of the Charles River are also being built. When it is completed, the Big Dig (officially known as the Central Artery/Tunnel Project) will reconnect downtown Boston with its waterfront neighborhoods and the historic North End.
Although the Massachusetts Highway Department (MHD) is the nominal recipient of federal-aid highway funds, state legislation in 1997 creating the Metropolitan Highway System transferred responsibility for the CA/T Project from the MHD to the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority (MTA). The state's CA/T Project Management Team is a blend of MTA staff and personnel representing Bechtel/Parsons-Brinckerhoff (B/PB), the joint venture overseeing day-to-day operations. In all there were over 50 turnpike employees working with over 1,100 venture employees and over 5, 000 other employees working at the same time. This approach, combining the two entities to form an integrated team, may have assisted in the delivery of the CA/T Project, but also contributed to problems in oversight at the federal and state levels and raises serious questions about the acceptability of such private/public management teams. Misplaced public trust occurred in early 2000, when the Division Administrator did not take steps to correct financial irregularities, resulting in embarrassment to the FHWA and a loss of public trust and confidence.
Since 1916, the FHWA has developed a long history of relying on a strong federal/state partnership in carrying out its oversight role. FHWA's oversight approach to state transportation is through developing relationships based on mutual trust, fairness, respect, cooperation, and communication. Although the FHWA makes federal-aid highway funds available to the States, each state is responsible for managing and developing its projects, subject to federal oversight. According to a Federal Task Force on the Boston CA/T Project, the FHWA's long history of strong federal/state partnerships failed. On the one hand, the FHWA failed to maintain an independent enough relationship with the state to adequately fulfill its oversight role. On the other hand, the state breached its trust with the FHWA and others by intentionally withholding knowledge of the project's potential cost overrun.
As reported in the Federal Highway Administration Federal Task Force on the Central Artery/Tunnel in early 2000, the Chairman of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority (MTA) had reported to the FHWA a total cost of the CA/T project as $10.8 billion. Later in the same day the MTA informed the media of a potential $1.4 billion cost overrun, bringing the total CA/T Project cost to $12.2 billion. The MTA Chairman informed the Task Force that he acted in response to an anticipated inaccurate press account of cost exposures expected later that week. According to the FHWA Division Administrator, the state had not directly forewarned the FHWA of a potential cost overrun of such magnitude in any document provided to the Division Office, in the Plan, or in discussions prior to the conditional acceptance of the Plan.
The Central Artery was not realistic when the first $2.6 billion funding was approved. Now the budget for the Big Dig is approaching over $14.6 billion. Just accounting for inflation from 1982 could account for several billion dollars, according to Carl Gottschall, the Project Administrator. Also, cost overruns were not accounted for. For example, the environmental costs were not estimated correctly as the following examples indicate:
Even today, the moniker of "Big Dig" does little to convey a sense that this project is something to be proud of. To most, the term has replaced the "Central Artery/Tunnel." One report from the Boston Forum (2000) titled "Boston's Money Pit, the Big Dig" has less than favorable remarks that cites the enormous cost of the Big Dig could take as many as 50 years to pay back, with the responsibility resting squarely with the commuter and other taxpayers. The branding of the Central Artery is evident, as it has become synonymous with the Big Dig.
Having an adequate and proactive PR staff is essential, but is still not always forefront in the projects' goals. The FHWA takes the lead in oversight for PR staffing, but there is some cause for concern. The state DOTs mainly control the project and provide for the PR staffing. However, some DOT PR staffs can fall victim to the following:
In an April 8, 2004 interview with the UMUC Study Team, Rick Capca, the FHWA Deputy Administrator, considered the public relations staffing at the Central Artery adequate to the job. However, in a separate interview with the Central Artery Project Administrator Carl Gotschall in February 2004, it was brought out that the PR staffing is much less than for example the T-REX project, and that the press was handled very poorly. The public relations staff is not proactive as it should be. For example even now, in the midst of a public concern for a bulging $14.6 billion budget, when detours have to be made, there is no convention utilized to alert the public.
Some projects labeled as successful in handling the public, can actually be teetering towards problems. The Woodrow Wilson Bridge (WWB) project just has two full time PR staff members and two part time staff members to handle all the media and public relations. Even though some established DOT guidelines suggest that the DOT should take the lead in public relations, the WWB public relations staffing for DOT is not represented. Although not now seen as a daunting task, the potential to be overwhelmed can be seen, as demonstrated in a March, 2004 media blitz concerning falling ceilings for an apartment complex called Hunting Terrace, located adjacent to the bridge construction. In this case, the residents of this complex were told to move out within 2 days so that the contractor can survey the situation and make repairs. As it turns out, the PR staff was unaware of that decision. The residents were outraged and the incident made the 6 o'clock evening news. The residents were later well compensated and given 2 weeks notice so that repairs could be made. The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has now provided a liaison figurehead to help coordinate issues specific to that problem. Although things are going well now, in an interview with Ms. Noreen Walker, the Communities Relation - Construction Point of Contact person, it was pointed out that there is not really the staff to do comprehensive evaluations of consumer complaints and there was not an adequate fund to help with a better website for public information.
For mega projects, planning for public involvement does not start at the beginning of the project Notice to Proceed or at the writing of the Request for Proposal. Before those events take place, a considerable amount of research needs to be performed in community impact assessments, and how public needs and awareness are met throughout the life of the project. This information is not only relevant to assess actual public needs, but is relevant to plan how the project should fund, assign, organize, and coordinate their public relations staff. This is not limited to the staff of the DOT, but also to the other partners that can be involved. For example, the Colorado Department of Transportation involved with the Denver Transportation Regional Extension (T-REX) project coordinates with the PR staff of the Colorado Regional Transportation District (RTD), and with the project owner (Southeast Corridors Construction). In an interview with Ron Clark of the UMUC Study Team on March 5, 2004, Ms. Toni Gatzen, the Colorado Department of Transportation Public Information (PI) person for the T-REX, indicated that setting a goal early through careful market research is essential. For the TREX project, the number one goal was "minimizing inconvenience to the public." T-REX has been very successful so far due to the amount of planning that was performed to ascertain what public issues the project would face and how problems would be minimized.
The T-REX project recognized a reasonable budget was necessary and established funding in the budget early on in the planning stage for an independent contractor to handle public relations in cooperation with the Colorado State DOT (CDOT). In an interview with Ron Clark on February 11, 2004, Mr. Craig Actis, of the T-REX public information staff, related how the contractor went out to meet the neighborhood groups and local politicians to obtain information about the citizens' desires into the project. Instrumental to planning an appropriate public relations budget was the research performed by independent consultants that reviewed other projects that were successful in handling public concerns. One such project was the Salt Lake City project in Utah. This project effectively established a PR plan that was made part of the Request for Proposal in the contract. This made public relations a responsibility to uphold by the winning contractor.
Public involvement can serve as a source of information to identify community values and needs, to explore the importance of community facilities and resources, to identify those facilities not previously noted, and to validate information collected from other sources.
| Contact Points | |
|---|---|
| Source | Primary Uses |
| Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) | Economic base, land-use and zoning plans, and area planning history |
| State and local government planning and social service departments/agencies | Economic base, land-use and zoning plans, taxing districts, social and economic programs, and business and marketing information |
| State employment agencies or labor departments | Employment trends, unemployment rates, and economic base |
| State, local, and university libraries (for local newspaper clippings and other local sources) | General information, community historical background, economic base, and business and marketing information |
| Local historical societies and State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) | Community historical background, and location of historic structures, landmarks, and districts |
| Other relevant data collection organizations, such as Chambers of Commerce, religious institutions, American Automobile Association (AAA), Meals-on-Wheels, American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), social agencies, and other associations. | Special populations and needs, businesses, community issues, etc. |
| Data Collections and Activities | |
|---|---|
| Source | Primary Uses |
| Census Bureau publications and statistical abstracts | Population trends and demographics, economic indicators, and housing |
| Aerial maps and road maps | Community boundaries and physical characteristics; location of activity centers, infrastructure, houses and businesses |
| Field or windshield surveys and reviews | Locations and numbers of structures, and activity patterns |
| Yellow Pages or city directories | Businesses and community facility locations and type |
| Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) databases | Business location, type, and number of employees |
| Donnelley Directory (available on CD-ROM) | Business location, type, and number of employees |
| Tax records | Property values |
| Building-permit records | Approved or built development |
| Real estate market surveys, regional real estate journals, and interviews with realtors | Housing prices, trends in sales, age or characteristics of structures, and neighborhood compositions |
| Interviews and public involvement with businesses, community leaders, and residents | Community values and issues |
As part of the planning stage, it is also important to perform a community impact assessment. Not knowing the concerns of the public can have a detrimental affect that can be carried throughout the project. It is important to get community buy-in early to develop the necessary public trust. It then becomes just as important to stay in touch with the community to sustain a good level of trust and confidence.
One guide (Brock, et. al., 1996) prepared for transportation professionals to help determine the community impact for transportation projects is the "Community Impact Assessment: A Quick Reference for Transportation." This guide was writtenas a "[...] quick primer for transportation professionals and analysts who assess the impacts of proposed transportation actions on communities." It outlines the community impact assessment process, highlights critical areas that must be examined, identifies basic tools and information sources, and stimulates the thought-process related to individual projects. There are both practical and legal reasons for assessing community impact as indicated in the table below.
| Practical Reasons | Legal Reasons |
|---|---|
| Quality of Life: A high-quality standard of living for all American means we must protect the essential elements of existence, including neighborhoods and community values. The assessment of community impacts supports sustainable, livable communities; promotes community values and thriving neighborhoods; and contributes to general well being. |
Legal Backing -- What are the legal requirements and guidance?
In addition to the practical reasons for community impact assessment, it is legally required and supported by major federal regulations, statutes, policies, technical advisories and Executive Orders, including:
|
| Responsive Decision Making: The assessment of community impacts helps ensure that transportation policies and investments embrace the concerns of neighborhoods, communities, and society as a whole. Understanding the relationship between transportation actions and community life leads to conflict minimization and the resolution of potential problems. Active involvement of affected parties leads to better decisions and greater acceptance of projects, while creating a sense of community ownership and enhancing agency credibility. | |
| Coordination: Community impact assessment helps coordinate and integrate independent plans for land use, economics, and transportation to achieve common goals. This process helps communities meet state and local regulations and policies, such as zoning ordinances, environmental quality regulations, growth management and adequate facilities legislation, and comprehensive planning. | |
| Nondiscrimination: Community impact assessment ensures that we act on our obligation to achieve environmental justice through practices and procedures that do not discriminate. It alerts decision makers to the effects on all segments of society and the potential for disproportionately high adverse effects on specific populations. |
The following table includes examples of the types of impacts that might be identified and analyzed. The inquiries under the impact categories highlight some of the relevant questions to answer to understand how the proposed action affects the community. This is an iterative process. Analysts will need to return to the community profile to obtain detailed information about the proposed project and to collect additional data about the community in order to answer the questions posed. The questions in this table should lead to others based on the specific circumstances of the project.
| Impact Category | ||
|---|---|---|
| Social and Psychological Aspects | Physical Aspects | Visual Environment |
|
|
|
| Land Use | Economic Conditions | Mobility and Access |
|
|
|
| Provision of Public Services | Safety | Displacement |
|
|
|
Although the community impact is a recognized component that helps to form and develop public trust and confidence, the Community Impact Guide (Table 3) makes an interesting distinctive statement: "Throughout project decision making activities and until construction, the community impact analyst assures that consequences to the social fabric of an area are given consideration with other environmental impacts." It has been made clear by the FHWA for our study group there is concern that the public trust and confidence is sometimes lost at the design and construction phase of the project. This guide implies the issue faced by transportation projects is the lack of community involvement at the beginning of the planning stage, contending that the involvement doesn't begin for many projects till the end of the planning stage. That implication follows the concerns of the FHWA Major Projects group (UMUC, TMAN 671, 2004) that "Another key factor this is becoming increasingly more important to the success of these (mega) projects is the ability to maintain public trust and confidence in the project from start to finish."
There has to be a new awareness of transportation project endeavors that concern the public trust and confidence throughout the project. Involvement cannot stop at the planning stage. Although full of useful information, this guide stops short of creating a mindset that does not go far enough to accomplish the desired effect of maintaining public trust and confidence throughout the life of a mega project. It not only is important to note this but to emphasize that there has to be a new awareness for all projects including mega projects, and to make commitments to integrate this into their project planning.
Public involvement is not meant to be just an integral part of the community impact statement, but should be fully integrated within the planning of the project. Early in the planning stage, analysts need to identify how the public relations is to be handled throughout the project and how the different PR staffs will partner and work together to ensure good communications between the project, the PR staff, and the community.
Public involvement is integral to the assessment process. They can provide vital information to the community impact assessment process, and can help validate the following:
The planning and project development process must provide for an open exchange of information and ideas among the public, community impact analysts, and the entire project-development team. It should provide opportunities for early and continuing communication between the community and key project staff.
The US Department of Transportation website (April 22, 2004) recently posted an article on President Bush's issuance of Executive Order 13274 on September 18, 2002. This Executive Order was issued to enhance environmental stewardship and streamline the decision-making process in connection with major transportation projects and instructs DOT to select priority projects and establishes an interagency Task Force to coordinate expedited decision-making across the federal agencies. While this EO advances current DOT and interagency streamlining efforts, it also brings high-level officials to the table to address immediate issues and track the progress of particular projects. "Establishing an interagency task force will further foster interagency coordination and collaboration. By working together in partnerships, agencies of the Federal Government can improve upon the decision- making process while safeguarding the environment."
On January 1, 1970 the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) was signed into Law. NEPA established a national environmental policy intentionally focused on federal activities and the desire for a sustainable environment balanced with other essential needs of present and future generations of Americans.
NEPA established a supplemental mandate for federal agencies to consider the potential environmental consequences of their proposals, document the analysis, and make this information available to the public for comment prior to implementation. The environmental protection policy established in NEPA, Section 101, is supported by a set of "action forcing" provisions in Section 102 that form the basic framework for federal decision making and the NEPA process.
While NEPA established the basic framework for integrating environmental considerations into federal decision-making, it did not provide the details of the process for which it would be accomplished. Federal implementation of NEPA was the charge of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), which interpreted the law and addressed NEPA's action forcing provisions in the form of regulations and guidance. The CEQ requires the FHWA to report significant human environmental issues with an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
The types of actions that would normally require an EIS are:
The purpose of an EIS is to provide a full discussion of significant environmental impacts resulting from a proposed action. It provides the public and decision makers with reasonable alternatives that meet the project's purpose and need and that could avoid or minimize adverse impacts or enhance the human environment. The EIS must be clear and concise. The focus of the discussion is on significant environmental impacts. Other impact categories are discussed only in enough detail to document why they are not considered significant. All discussions of potentially significant impact categories must be to the point and supported by technical information.
Following is a broad overview of the steps in the Environmental Impact Statement process:
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and NEPA requires, to the fullest extent possible, that the policies, regulations, and laws of the Federal Government be interpreted and administered in accordance with its environmental protection goals. NEPA also requires federal agencies to use an interdisciplinary approach in planning and decision making for any action that adversely impacts the environment.
NEPA requires and FHWA is committed to the examination and avoidance of potential impacts to the social and natural environment when considering approval of proposed transportation projects. In addition to evaluating the potential environmental effects, we must also take into account the transportation needs of the public in reaching a decision that is in the best overall public interest. The FHWA NEPA project development process is an approach to balanced transportation decision-making that takes into account the potential impacts on the human and natural environment and the public's need for safe and efficient transportation.
It is FHWA's policy that (23 CFR § 105):
According to the T-REX 2003 Fact Book, there was an aggressive public involvement program, which included a series of public open houses, provided information to the public while giving them the opportunity to participate in the project's environmental planning process. Four rounds of public open houses, in addition to numerous presentations to public and civic groups, took place during the environmental planning process, as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The T-REX team and the Southeast Corridor Constructors (SECC) team used every means available to minimize the project's impact on the environment, including wildlife. Measures included working with local municipalities and state and federal agencies to comply with all established local ordinances and state and federal laws.
SECC, recognizing the need to minimize the impact of noise on residents during the demolition of bridges in the City and County of Denver, devised an innovative temporary noise wall using freight trailers modified with special noise-dampening skirts. The trailers proved to be an effective means of mitigating noise during the demolition of bridges. The contractor also implemented a hotel voucher program that provided residents living closest to the demolition projects the opportunity to stay in hotels. To ensure the success of the noise mitigation program, SECC representatives and the City and County of Denver continuously monitored noise levels on the project. Residents also have access to a telephone hotline to report excessive noise levels.
The T-REX Project team and the contractor worked closely with local, state and national agencies to ensure environmental impacts are minimized during construction. Measures include:
Air quality
Water Quality
Noise / Vibration
Transportation planning and project development must reflect the desires of communities, and take into account the impacts on both the natural and human environments. Transportation projects are closely looked at to see how they might impact the community, the natural environment, and our health and welfare. Before any project can move forward to construction, the FHWA must address and comply with laws related to the environment. These laws cover social, economic, and environmental concerns ranging from community cohesion to threatened and endangered species.
The FHWA Major Projects Group identified the design and construction stage of the mega project as the stage where the publics' trust and confidence begins to wane. As demonstrated by earlier snafus with the Big Dig, it is imperative that mega projects take note of public concerns early in the planning stage to avoid issues later. T-REX used a design-build philosophy of construction that allowed for a better use of resource planning and public involvement. Could this have worked for the Big Dig at the time? That may be hard to answer since there are so many distinguishing differences.
The CA/T is seen by the many in the public sector as "a poorly managed project." However, the final product is far from a failure and in fact has viewed as an engineering marvel as measured by the unique ways construction was conducted. To do highway improvements in a city like Boston has amounted to one of the largest, most technically difficult and environmentally challenging infrastructure projects ever undertaken in the United States. The project spans 7.8 miles of highway, 161 lanes miles in all, about half in tunnels. All told, the CA/T is placing 3.8 million cubic yards of concrete - the equivalent of 2,350 acres, one foot thick - and excavate more than 16 million cubic yards of soil.
The Central Artery/Tunnel Project is public works on a scale comparable to some of the great projects of the last century -- the Panama Canal, the English Channel Tunnel (the "Chunnel"), the Trans-Alaska Pipeline. Each of these projects presented unique challenges: The Panama Canal confronted earth slides, malaria, yellow fever, and Central American jungles. The Channel was dug from either end, 31 miles apart, meeting at a precise point under the channel floor. The Alaska Pipeline contended with vast distances, freezing temperatures, and major environmental concerns.
The Central Artery project's unique challenge has been the fact that it is being built in the middle of a city. Work of the CA/T project's magnitude and duration has never been attempted in the heart of an urban area, but unlike any other major highway project, the CA/T has been designed to maintain traffic capacity and access to residents and businesses - to keep the city open for business - throughout construction. Highway projects of the 1950s and 1960s, when the interstates were first built, gave very little consideration to the communities in the path of the new roads, with disruption and dislocation the rule of the day.
Recognizing that failing to maintain Boston's economic viability during construction would damage the city's competitive position for years to come, project planners worked with environmental and other oversight and permitting agencies, community groups, businesses, and political leaders to create consensus on how the project would be built.
With the enormous task of the mega projects comes the responsibility to maintain the public trust and confidence as well. It cannot end once the planning, and the community and environmental impacts have been decided and mitigated. There is the responsibility to respond to construction delays, residential noise and vibration concerns, right of ways that included businesses and communities, emergency response entities and others. The state DOTs and the project team need to come to the table and plan early how to incorporate public input into the project and have it effective at the design and construction stage as well. If already underway, then there should be a research effort to determine if all public concerns are being heard and acknowledged. This could mean increasing and improving the public information staff to properly respond to public concerns with the appropriate key figureheads of the project represented to show good faith. With community "buy in," there can be effective mitigation and improved public trust and confidence.
According to the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, in a September 2001 report on highway funding, there is a tendency for major construction projects to concentrate on the planning, environmental and construction stages of the project, with less concentration on the operations stage of the project. Some highway officials have realized that providing transportation infrastructure is not enough, if the infrastructure doesn't provide a reasonable level of service. Transit agencies and the Federal Aviation Administration have recognized this for decades, as evidence in their investment in maintenance and operations systems such as control towers and switching systems to control traffic. However, it is an approach not yet supported by federal transportation policy, which is still, despite some evolution, rooted primarily in the 20th century pattern of providing federal-aid money for highway construction, not highway operations. For highway agencies to realize and carry out a more operations-oriented mission, a corresponding change in federal highway funding policy and accompanying changes to supporting institutions and organizations will be necessary.
Operations on all roads and highways are affected by several entities that include public-safety agencies, as one example, who perform services related to accidents and safety that are vital to the smooth operation of transportation systems. Emergency response teams also are critical when an incident occurs, stopping traffic in all directions. These separate players each report to different entities and each has its own federal, state, and/or local funding source that is usually different than any made through transportation legislative and funding decisions. They are consequently difficult to coordinate, even if one group decided that it was important to do so. For instance, state highway patrols are not typically included in the transportation planning, funding, and administrative decisions usually spearheaded by state DOTs. And local police and emergency-response communities are usually not included in decisions about public-works operations. Better management of road and highway congestion is needed to ensure commuter confidence.
In recent years, the state DOTs have been placing new emphasis on operations and maintenance planning. Incorporating environmental stewardship goals into operations and maintenance activities helps DOTs achieve continuous improvement in environmental performance. Maintenance and operations activities encompass all areas of a highway system. So improvements in these areas, even seemingly minor ones, can have far-reaching impacts.
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) represents the next step in the evolution of transportation. As information technologies and advances in electronics continue to revolutionize all aspects of our modern-day world, they are also being applied to our transportation network. These technologies include the latest in computers, electronics, communications, and safety systems. T-REX has incorporated ITS technologies into its project. During construction, ITS technologies monitor traffic on the interstates and roads most likely used as alternate routes by drivers. ITS technologies also provide a crucial connection in helping appropriate agencies respond to emergencies on and off the highways, both during and after construction.
During T-REX construction, a number of ITS elements are being used to minimize inconvenience to the public. Elements include:
The completed T-REX project includes ITS components to:
In delivering funding assistance to the national transportation system, the U.S. Department of Transportation forms partnerships with non-federal agencies to administer aid and to ensure that transportation projects and programs are carried out. For highway programs, the federal partners are the fifty state DOTs. The state DOTs generally do not view their primary role as "highway operations," although they have major mission responsibility for Maintenance and Operations (M&O). In sharp contrast, for transit programs the federal partner is typically a regional or local transit agency, whose principal job is the operation of transit systems as well as providing the rolling stock.
This difference highlights one of the institutional issues that must be addressed if there is a shift to more federal assistance for highway operations. Only rarely does the FHWA form a local partnership with the fifty state counterparts. Even when they do exist, partnerships between local and federal highway agencies are likely to be with an FHWA division office, not FHWA headquarters.
Defining "operations" is critical to deciding where, how, and in what form to fund its component activities. Moreover, some consensus must be achieved on what constitutes a level of congestion that warrants federal attention. According to a paper prepared for FHWA's Operations Core Business Unit, (Lomax and Turner) concern about congestion is relative to expectations and perceptions of what is normal. These expectations and perceptions naturally differ from place to place. An intolerable level of congestion in Fargo, North Dakota, where traffic customarily flows relatively freely, would be completely different than an intolerable level in Los Angeles, Seattle, or Washington, DC, which are among the most congested in the country. Reaching national agreement on a definition of the level of performance required to meet criteria for eligibility for funding for operations will require extensive outreach, information and idea sharing, and consensus building. As a follow-up, informational and professional capacity-building initiatives will be required.
In terms of public trust and confidence, a compelling case can be made that it is time to address the issue of congestion, that it is recognized that the present piecemeal approach to congestion is not the answer. A policy shift to direct funding targeted at operations to reduce congestion is required - even overdue. Operational strategies and tactics, if implemented, can be effective, efficient ways of managing congestion and making maximum use of the transportation system's capacity. According to Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, the number-one transportation problem for the U.S. today is congestion. The national press agrees:
"If all the plans, programs and problems of the Department of Transportation could be boiled down to one word, it would be: CONGESTION. [...] [T]here is general consensus that it simply will not be possible to keep building new highways, particularly in the near-gridlocked areas of the East and West Coasts."
(Washington Post, May 15, 2001)
There is a concern that ignoring public influence and concerns, in line with the statement from the stated goal of the T-REX mega project in Colorado. "[...] to minimize inconvenience to the public," can ultimately fuel politicians and impact groups to pledge support to other modal areas of transport. It would be practical to consider funding for public involvement at this stage of the mega project construction that is encompassed within the framework of the total project in the beginning stages of the project funding effort.
A marketing strategic plan is developed to incorporate all concepts that are important throughout the decision-making process and until construction is completed. The plan is designed to help define the business goals and develop activities to achieve them. In positioning a mega project to effectively promote public trust and confidence throughout the life cycle of a project, a marketing strategy that focuses on public information and awareness initiatives should be implemented. Marketing the mega project will depend on the specifications of the project and the welfare of the community within its parameters. The strategic plan must take into consideration how the construction process will affect the public. Today, the public is extremely knowledgeable, know their rights, and know how to fight for them. If the concerns of the public are not reflected in the project planning stages, then projects can be delayed due to negative media attention and lengthy litigation. There is a need for more and better communication within the industry and with the public. Above all, quality and the components to implement it should be reflected as a hallmark in the marketing strategy.
The implementation of the mega project should recognize the importance of disseminating public information in all phases of the project. Also important is the need to identify and resolve issues and concerns impacted by the citizens, which is explored in the beginning stage of market research -market segmentation and positional analysis. The reason for the emphasis on the importance of public information throughout the marketing plan is that the public information effort concentrates on minimizing inconvenience to the public, which creates a sign of trust and confidence in the system. The primary public information goal is to develop and maintain a high level of communication that creates and informs public, of the project relevant issues. Consensus building techniques and process improvements must also be promoted so that communities can gain a sense of confidence that the standard procedures of the nation's highway builders will meet their needs and concerns.
An effective partnership with the various stakeholders and general public will be critical in developing a successful transportation system responsive to the needs of affected entities and potential users. In fact, stakeholders are the key in the relationship marketing, which is important in managing communication throughout the project system. Stakeholders must be identified in the pre-planning stage of the mega project analysis, which may consist of the following:
The central components of the marketing-strategic plan, which is dedicated to communicating the goals and objectives of maintaining and promoting public trust and awareness, should include elements that can be implemented throughout the life cycle of the plan. Each category placed in the plan has to be a proponent of what the project represents. The plan itself will be a blueprint to the public that it can and will accomplish the tasks outlined. The plan will represent the research that has been achieved through market research and statistics, the plan will represent goals that will be accomplish, the plan will represent good faith in achieving milestones to accomplish the project, and the plan will represent the unity and accomplishment of the work generated by all the stakeholders. An overview of a mega project marketing strategic plan should include the following elements in its outline:
The vision statement represents the organization's beliefs. It encompasses the organization's goals as well as the community's goals. It's a state of values and it declares to the public the expectations that it has and strives to accomplish. The statement should be precise and practical, and it is written to guide the actions of all involved. It is a major component in the process of strategic planning. The following is an example of a good vision statement presented by the T-Rex Transportation Expansion Project, and created for the projects Public Information Strategy Plan.
"The vision for the Southeast Corridor Public Information Team is to minimize the inconvenience to commuters, residents and businesses by building trust between the Transportation Expansion Project Team, the Community and all Stakeholder groups during the course of construction."
This statement is responsive and accessible. It provides accuracy and sustainable goals and does not portray objectives that cannot be accomplished.
Once the vision statement has been defined, it is time to create a mission statement that builds on the vision providing a statement of purpose and function. A mega project's mission statement must be future oriented and focus on one common purpose. The statement should be specific to the organization's goals and not generic. Here is an example of a mission statement that shows a specific purpose.
"By providing quality education, we empower individuals to become caring responsible citizens who value education as a lifelong process."
Setting goals and objectives will build on the previous steps of visioning and taking stock, goals are simply a clearer statement of the visions, specifying the accomplishments to be achieved if the vision is to become real. The target objectives are clearer statements of the specific activities required to achieve the goals, starting from the current status. Another example of creating effective goals based on the project initiative is seen in the Strategic Plan developed Southeast Corridor Public Information Team.
Goals
A situational analysis helps determine real development needs in a market plan. It helps to bond program participants together by identifying a variety of issues that may need to be dealt with, such as the roles of different partners in resolving those issues, or the milestones and resources needed to achieve a given solution. Sometimes, an analysis for a proposed activity may reveal issues that need to be tackled before the apparent development activity can take place. Some of the core concepts for creating a situational analysis involve:
There are several types of decision analysis tools and methods that are effective when trying to focus on the main aspect of problems related to the subject. These can include brainstorming, various decision tree analysis tools, SWOT analysis, focus groups, utilizing cause and effect relationships, and problems trees as shown below.
Figure 3. Structure of the problem tree showing causes and effects
The communications and promotion strategy will emphasize that an effective level of communications will be maintained throughout the life of the project. This includes immediate attention of the stakeholders and gaining feedback by building one-on-one relationships with group representatives, also known as relationship marketing, which is essentially how the project will develop. Other elements that are also part of the campaign are further outlined in the Strategies Section.
The SWOT Analysis is a very effective way of identifying the strengths and weaknesses, and of examining the opportunities and threats that organizations can possibly face. Carrying out an analysis using the SWOT framework helps focus activities into areas, which are considered weak and discover areas that have the greatest opportunities. To carry out a SWOT analysis, it is best to draft questions that focus on the primary issues relating to the project.
Responses to the proposed questions can identify what is relevant and what situations need to be improved. The T-REX Strategic Plan was good in determining factors in the area of strength
