Pocahontas Trail Corridor Public Workshops
Public Workshop #1
Nov. 16, 2017
Abram Frink Jr. Community Center
The Public Workshop was intended to inform residents about the study and gain valuable input from the community regarding their concerns and desired improvements along the Pocahontas Trail Corridor. A short presentation was conducted by the Study Team and summarized the study scope and schedule and then reviewed the corridor in terms of traffic operations/congestion, safety, connectivity and access, existing pedestrian, bicycle, and transit accommodations, and other information. The presentation was followed by two interactive activities. A “Word Wall” was created and attendees were asked to identify their key concerns and most desired improvements for the corridor. Next, attendees participated in a “Build a Street” activity; different parts of a roadway (through lanes, turn lanes, sidewalks, shared use paths, buffer spaces, etc) were provided and residents were asked to combine them to create their desired typical section for the corridor. Input received at the workshop is being used by the project team to develop preliminary improvement concepts to be shared with the public at the next workshop in January 2018. The presentation materials can be found via the link below.
Public Workshop #2
Jan. 26, 2018
Little Zion Baptist Church
The Public Workshop was intended to inform residents about progress on the study and present preliminary alternatives which were developed based on the valuable input provided by the community regarding their concerns and desired improvements along the Pocahontas Trail Corridor. Approximately 50 people attended the meeting. A short presentation was conducted by the Study Team to review the feedback received at the November Public Workshop, plus additional feedback received from the Technical and Steering Committees, and at smaller group meetings along the corridor. The Study Team then introduced 3 concepts to the attendees, describing the key elements such as the number of lanes and how pedestrians and bicyclists would be accommodated for each one. The presentation was followed by an opportunity for attendees to review large roll maps of the concepts. Three stations were available and attendees were able to provide feedback on specific areas of their concern. After reviewing the roll maps, the attendees regrouped and the Study Team led them a through a series of 11 questions related to the concepts. Feedback was provided by a show of hands and the results were recorded. Based on the feedback received from the community, the alternatives will be refined and more detailed information related to costs and potential phasing of the improvements will be presented at the next public workshop in April. The presentation materials can be found via the link below.
Public Workshop #3
The third public workshop was intended to provide additional details about the improvement concepts, including cost estimates and present recommendations for phasing the improvements. Approximately 45 people attended the meeting.
The study team reviewed the preliminary cost estimates for each of the 3 concepts, with the overall costs assuming completion of improvements along the entire corridor at one time. The team then reviewed the typical transportation project schedule for a project comparable in size, as well as the constraints and opportunities for funding the project. The study team then presented a proposed approach to separate the improvements into smaller projects which may better match the available funding sources and provided cost estimates and a summary of the key needs identified for each of the segments. Next, a video simulation of the proposed improvements was shown; the video included a fly through of the entire study corridor as well as a street-level comparison of existing and proposed conditions at several key locations. The public then had the opportunity to review the conceptual drawings and engage in further discussion with the study team.
After reviewing the drawings, the attendees were asked to provide feedback on their desired priority order for improvements if the project needed to be separated into segments. In addition, questionnaires were provided as an opportunity for the public to provide additional feedback.