|
Chair John Finger called the meeting to order and asked each of the members to report on any work they had done since the last meeting.
Liz Farr has spoken to Mary Farmer, a long-time south Knoxville resident and had identified neighborhoods that might be impacted by the proposed extension of JWP to Chapman Highway. Without a known route for the other alternatives, only the neighborhoods in the immediate, proposed TDOT route are listed. Pat Harmon reported on looking at census information from the sector on the MPC website and noted that population has declined in sector 22 and 23, sector 8 has grown. (Note: Census tracks are mapped on the KGIS.org web site)
John Nolt reported that he plans to do some further research on some of the unknowns, issues he had been involved with on the previous task force – extent of the Meades Quarry cave, the rare salamander, habitat for gray bat, potential urban forest preserves, surface water impacts, hazardous waste sites in proximity to the road, and environments effects to neighborhoods - heat, noise, air quality; pedestrian and bike trails, connections to sprawl, what becomes of Marie Meyers park, proximity to the school, blasting damage, aesthetics and underground water channels. He expressed interest in die tracing to find more about how the water flows underground, and plans to look at the longer extensions discussed as alternatives. John noted that Meades Quarry is currently being mapped, but exploration is a slow process. Joe Hultquist mentioned that the City of Knoxville, TDOT and TDEC may be able to offer assistance, for example the city’s storm water division can do dye tracing. Joe will arrange a meeting to discuss what the group is interested in.
Vicki Andrews has spoken to Donna Young, City of Knoxville greenway coordinator, about greenway potential in the community and would like to have a map to identify existing green ways and potential connections, including all public lands near the proposed JWP route. Vicki shared information on a Context Sensitive Highway design seminar at UT on July 13.
Renee Davis briefly discussed visioning and evaluation criteria, noting that visioning is used during the early steps of planning to provide a ‘look ahead’ to the desired community values, qualities and opportunities – the ideal situation. It provides insights into local resources available or necessary to achieve the desired community vision. Visioning input is useful for identifying issues, defining project goals, formulating evaluation criteria, developing improvement options, and evaluating those options.
For example, what do you like most – what do you want to see preserved? What should South Knox be like in 20 years? 30 years? In the take forward, leave behind exercise this was discussed in general terms, and now the focus, while still broad, needs to be more specific. When a common vision is established, the group will need to discuss initial thoughts on what transportation related improvements will support their vision.
Renee also outlined the basic components or steps in the planning process, explaining that many of the alternatives had already been developed.
1) Visioning
2) Purpose and Needs, Project Goals
3) Developing Transportation Improvement Alternatives
4) Developing Evaluation Criteria (based on vision and overall goals)
5) Evaluating/narrowing the alternatives
6) Details and Preferred Alternative
John Finger noted that the ‘take forward, leave behind’ information was very useful and he recommends referring back to it often.
Jeff Welch talked about existing conditions on Chapman Highway, referring to a map showing the six segments of similar cross-sections. A hand out provided additional information. Jeff noted that the transportation subcommittee received a more detailed discussion of this on Monday night, as it is their group’s focus. He noted that the groups are being asked “How do you want Chapman Highway to function to meet your goals and vision?”
Jeff pointed out that capacity of the roadways is really controlled by the traffic signals, this is where the congestion is. City of Knoxville is trying to improve the signal timing in order to keep traffic flowing on Chapman highway, which results in longer delays on the side streets. After a discussion of the existing conditions along Chapman, the group discussed land use and types of development along Chapman, including concepts such as New Urbanism, and the market forces behind redevelopment.
Q - What is the potential for raising the capacity along Chapman highway? Depends on right-of-way in the various sections, traffic signal operations, etc. TRIMS data showing ROW will be available.
Q – What are the steps that can be taken to help make good use of the vacant commercial buildings? Economic Development Subcommittee is trying to address those type issues.
Q – Are there any concrete plans for improving the Gov. John Sevier Highway? Jeff noted that is listed on the TPO’s long range plan but as far as we know it is not scheduled to be improved by TDOT in the next 5-7 years. This and other roadway improvements such as Alcoa Highway may affect Chapman Highway.
Joe Hultquist noted that if there are any other things the subcommittee believes need to be looked at, to put it on the table and we’ll figure out which group needs to take a closer look at it. Rich Hopkins, who has been to all the subcommittee meetings this week, discussed the approach each of the groups had taken in the past few days when looking at south Knoxville. He reminded everyone to consider each of the common threads-Community Impact, Economic Development and Mobility. For example, ‘character areas’ along Chapman Highway were discussed by the economic development subcommittee as part of their visioning process – eventual decisions may include what land use is appropriate in those areas, and what type transportation network is needed to support the land use. Input from the entire task force and community in general will be needed as this moves forward.
Joe reminded everyone that we will evaluate all the alternatives, explaining that it doesn’t strengthen your argument if you throw something out too early, it weakens it. John Nolt asked at what point cost considerations come into play, he would like to have some idea of expense. Jeff Welch noted that cost estimates based on typical similar projects and rules of thumb can be obtained, but right now we are ‘brainstorming’ and we do not want to compile cost estimates for twelve or more alternatives – as alternatives are narrowed, more information on costs will be collected.
No matter what happens with JWP, the subcommittee agrees that Chapman Highway needs to be improved, but how exactly has not yet been determined. After asking for input on the next subcommittee agenda, John Finger concluded the meeting at 7 PM. The next subcommittee meeting will be held at 5:30 PM on Wednesday, June 16. The next large task force meeting is on Thursday June 4 at 6:00 PM (note change in time).
Meeting summary prepared by Renee Davis, 5-24-04
|
