Phase II Meeting #2
Brooke-Hancock-Jefferson
Bridge Study Advisory Committee
March 13, 2002

Below are the minutes taken by BHJ Transportation Study Director Michael Paprocki for the Bridge Study Advisory Committee on March 13, 2002 at the Brooke County Library in Wellsburg, WV.  This is a full list of attendance and highlights of the meeting’s discussion.

The meeting was called to order at 1:35 p.m.

Introduction:  Commissioner Schwertfeger welcomed the BAC.  Mr. Schwertfeger asked all attendees to introduce themselves.

Summary of Past Meeting and Expectations:  BHJ Executive Director John Brown explained the baseline scenario as the “worst case”.  He commented that if no action is taken over the next twenty-five years that the Veterans Memorial Bridge (US022) will be the only functional river crossing in the BHJ Region.  The purpose of the study is to create a fundamental understanding of the existing bridge system and to avoid the “worst case” scenario.  The study must be based on established quantifiable evidence that the baseline scenario is not in the best interest for the metropolitan area.  Dr. Brown also explained that construction of a new bridge from Wellsville, OH and Hancock County, WV would take longer than the three years as stated in a recent newspaper article.  This is a separate project and should not be confused with BHJ’s ongoing Ohio River Bridge Study.  Media reports such as this raises false expectations and it is important that the news media fully understand the ongoing planning process.

Review and Discussion of Evaluation Criteria:  Mr. Jack Pflum of PKG Consultants emphasized that the Evaluation Criteria will steer and maintain the course of the study.  He further stated that the criteria might be reasonably amended but not so to skew the study’s results.  Mr. Pflum added that all planning assumptions incorporated into the study must be base on sound judgment with reasonable expectations.  The most recent version of the Evaluation Criteria dated March 1, 2002 replacing the February 19, 2002 version, was passed out to the BAC for discussion and adoption.  After some discussion two revisions were added:

1. “Environmental Justice” was added to the first Measure.
2. “and airports” was added to the seventh BAC Objective.

Further discussion centered upon how the Travel Demand Model is accepted by ODOT, WVDOT, and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) as the “best tool” available to conduct the study.  It was also discussed that the BAC Goal Number list in the Evaluation Criteria is arbitrary and reflects no ranking of importance.

The Evaluation Criteria was adopted by the BAC with one objection by Mr. Patrick Comiskey representing the City of Wellsburg.

Baseline Scenario Traffic Assignments:  Mr. Perry Keller of PKG Consultants handed out draft copies of the “Preliminary Comparison of Daily Estimated Volumes and Counts” for the baseline scenario.  Mr. Pflum led the discussion.  It was suggested by members of the BAC that in further analysis that east-west corridors (i.e. US022) be also presented for comparison.

Proposed Method for the Comparative Ranking of the Alternative Bridge Scenarios:  Mr. Pflum presented a handout “For Discussion Only” dated March 13, 2002, “Comparative Analysis and Ranking of Alternatives Ohio River Bridge Location Systems”.  It was explained that the comparative ranking will be a “consumer report” approach with ü marks ranging from:

üüüü Significantly Exceeds the Goal

üüü  Meets or Slightly Exceeds Goal

üü   Does Not Meet Goal

ü      Seriously Deficient in Meeting Goal

The meeting adjourned at 3:10 p.m.  The next meeting will be held on April 10, 2002 at 1:30 p.m. in the Rose Room located in the Millsop Community Center in Weirton, WV