Unadopted Phase II Meeting #1
Brooke-Hancock-Jefferson
Bridge Study Advisory Committee
February 6, 2002

Below are the minutes taken by Dr. John Brown for the Bridge Study Committee conducted on February 6, 2002 at the Holiday Inn. Steubenville, Ohio. This is a full list of attendees and description of happenings.

On February 6thh at 1:30, the Bridge Advisory Committee was called to order by BHJ Commission Chair Domenick Mucci. The meeting proceeded in the following manner.

• Mayor Mucci welcomed the Bridge Advisory Committee (BAC) to this kick-off meeting for Phase 2. He noted the Bridge Advisory Committee was charged with the oversight of the Region's #1 transportation need, a new river crossing. Mayor Mucci requested all attending 38 attendees individually introduce themselves and the business/government they represent. Upon completion of the introduction, Mayor Mucci turned the podium over to John Brown, BHJ Executive Director.
  

Dr. Brown introduced the following points.

• He acknowledged the state support of the Ohio Department of Transportation and the West Virginia Department of Transportation for their joint funding of Phase 2.
   
• He noted the 16 mile Ohio River area, defined from the Ft. Steuben Bridge to the Ohio County line, was the Study area.
   
• He noted the preliminary analysis of a Ohio River bridge crossing in Northern Hancock County was not a part of this study at this time.
   
• Prior to this meeting, the last time the BAC had held a formal meeting was August 2002. The reason for separation of time between Phase 1 and Phase 2 was the expansion of the Phase 2 scope of work to include a stronger technical, more targeted analysis. This analysis is a requirement for subsequent review through NEPA (National Environmental Protection Act). In addition, an expenditure of $75 to $100 million of federal-state-local dollars and the solicitation for these funds requires a strong technical argument.
   
• He noted, since the last formal BAC meeting, BHJ, the consultant, subconsultant, Ohio Department of Transportation, and West Virginia Department of Transportation have met on numerous occasions to assure agreement on the Phase 2. scope of services.
   
• He stated the role of the BAC was advisory. Throughout Phase 2, the BAC will advise and evaluate the work of the consultant. The BAC will make a recommendation to be considered by the BHJ Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). The TAC will make a recommendation to the BHJ Full Policy Committee, the federally recognized decision-making body for transportation matters in the three-county BHJ area. BHJ is allocated this role through the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century.
   
• He stated the Phase 2 end product, as stated in the revised scope of work, "will be a recommendation for a preferred bridge system, to include the optimal number and bridge corridor locations, for the defined study area. If appropriate, because of the recommendation of a new structure, Phase 2 will include a recommended corridor for a new river crossing. Such a recommendation will not include a specific alignment." BHJ Ohio River Bridge System Study Scope of Services. Final. August 2001. Page 12.
   
• He stated persons wishing to follow project progress and review past minutes/tasks should refer to the BHJ website www.bhjmpc.org
   
• He reiterated the need for a consensus and sense of priority at the end of Phase 2.
   
• He stated Phase 2 is not a financial plan rather it is a technical statement, necessary for a logical transition into the NEPA process.
   
• Based upon the progress of the consultant and the BAC, further meetings wills be scheduled beyond March.
  

Jack Pflum, Study Manager, introduced his study team and their approach to the completion of Phase 2. As outlined in the revised Scope of Work, the following tasks are mandated. 

• Task 1. Establishment of Evaluation Criteria and Baseline Scenario
  Task 2. Travel Demand Modeling
  Task 3. Alternative Studies & Environmental Overview
  Task 4. Alternatives Ranking & Identification of Preferred Alternative
  Task 5. Public Involvement & Concurrence
   
• Mr. Pflum noted the importance of BAC evaluation and comment prior to the next upcoming meeting, March 13th @ Wellsburg, WV.
   

Mr. Pflum walked through the starting point, Task 1. Establishment of Evaluation Criteria and Baseline Scenario. He emphasized the beginning, worst case scenario for the target year of 2025 was one remaining bridge structure, the Veterans Bridge. He stated the term "new" includes the term "replacement."

Brian Martin, Study Modeler, distributed a two-page "Criteria for Evaluation of the Ohio River Bridge System Alternatives" sheet. Mr. Martin indicated these criteria, upon amendment at the March 13th meeting, will drive and state the impact of river crossings. As such, the BAC must respond/amend these criteria. He noted, these criteria are not subject to continued change as we proceed through the study. Such delayed amendments will increase project cost and revert to a "product driving analysis" scenario.

It was agreed, BHJ staff will prepare a BAC response sheet to clarify the purpose and response of the BAC.

PKG indicated they will have a preparatory conference call on March 1st with BHJ staff and would appreciate comment prior to this date.

The meeting adjourned at 2:30. March 13th (1:30-3:00. Brooke County Library. Wellsburg, WV) was announced as the next meeting date.