1. CSS Emerging Trends in
Planning, NEPA, Design,
Construction &
Maintenance
2006 Paving Conference

2. Presented by
• Joe J. Sanchez, PE. CSS Bureau Chief
• Kathryn Kretz, PG. Environmental Design
Bureau Chief
• Bruce Bender, AICP, Planning Bureau Chief
• Kevin Swaving, Twin Mountain Construction

3. Presented by
• Bruce Bender, AICP
• NMDOT Planning Bureau Chief

4. Transportation Planning
and
Context Sensitive Solutions
 What is good planning?
 What is good transportation planning?
 How does good transportation
planning fit in with context sensitive
approaches?

5. Good Planning
Involves Stakeholders
 Local residents
 Interest groups
 Resource agencies
 Others as appropriate

6. Good Planning
Includes Land Use and Community Values
 Existing and future land use
 Community vision

7. Good Planning
Works With the Site Conditions
 Architect – fits building to site
 Planner – fits project to community,
natural environment, built environment

8. Good Planning
Is Needs-Based
 Consistent with available facts
 Carefully identifies the problem before
proceeding to evaluate solutions
 Vision is one thing, pipe-dreams are
another

9. Good Planning
Evaluates Alternatives
 Clear problem definition
 Consensus on desired outcomes
 Considers a number of alternatives
 Arrives at a carefully tailored solution

10. How is Good Planning
Different From
Good Transportation Planning?
 It isn’t!
 Considers all users (not just vehicle
drivers)
 Considers all modes of transportation

11. How is Good Transportation Planning
Different From
Context Sensitive Approaches?
 It isn’t!
 Bold Prediction: fairly soon,
mainstream transportation planning
will evolve to what is now called
“context sensitive” planning

12. Presented by
• Kathryn Kretz, PG.
• NMDOT Environmental Design
Bureau Chief

13. Context Sensitive Solutions
And The
Environmental Process
The Context Sensitive Solution
approach incorporates established
planning and design concepts with
new strategies that enhance the
environment and preserve community
values.

14. How does NEPA
relate to CSS?
CSS and NEPA Processes are very
similar
 The “best” alternative
 Effective decision making
 Consider positive and negative impacts

15. Stakeholder and Public
Involvement
CSS and NEPA Processes
 Collaborative, interdisciplinary team
approach.
 Early and continual involvement through
planning, design, and construction.
 Involvement methods vary with project size,
complexity, local political situation.

16. Challenges for Effective
Involvement
 Identifying All & Appropriate Stakeholders
 Balancing Among Competing Objectives
 Defining roles and responsibilities
 Maintaining involvement

17. Context Sensitive Solutions
And The
Environmental Process
The Context Sensitive Solution
approach incorporates established
planning and design concepts with
new strategies that enhance the
environment and preserve community
values.

18. How does NEPA
relate to CSS?
CSS and NEPA Processes are very
similar
 The “best” alternative
 Effective decision making
 Consider positive and negative impacts

19. Stakeholder and Public
Involvement
CSS and NEPA Processes
 Collaborative, interdisciplinary team
approach.
 Early and continual involvement through
planning, design, and construction.
 Involvement methods vary with project size,
complexity, local political situation.

20. Challenges for Effective
Involvement
 Identifying All & Appropriate Stakeholders
 Balancing Among Competing Objectives
 Defining roles and responsibilities
 Maintaining involvement

21. Goals for Improved Practice
 Look at potential environmental issues on a
broader scale.
 Transition from Plan Level to Corridor Level to
Project Level.
 Establish Purpose and Need earlier in process.
 Consider long-term effects, secondary impacts, and
self-induced hardships.

22. Environmental Concerns Are Not
Something New
 National Historic Preservation Act - 1966
 NEPA - 1969
 Clean Air Act Amendments – 1970
 USEPA created - 1970
 NPDES and Section 404 - 1972

23. Need for “Culture Change”
 Values still not integrated into
development process as well as they
should be.
 Environmental concerns still
sometimes viewed as “external”.

24. CSS-DEVELOPMENT & DESIGN
• Joe J. Sanchez, PE.
• NMDOT CSS Bureau Chief

25. Energy Versus Synergy
• Energy-force, power, viewpoints,
concerns - - - - - - -disharmony?
• Synergy- Energy moving, growing,
multiplying in the same direction
……harmony?

26. CSS Project Development/Design
• Key Activities
• Performance Measures
• Project Outcomes

27. CSS Project Key Activities
• Project level Public/Stakeholder
Involvement
• Engineering Operations & Safety
• Structured Decision Making
• NEPA Review ( Commonly called
Environmental Review)

28. Project Process Performance
Measures
• Project Team – Collaborative,
multidisciplinary, open
• Public Engagement – Quality of PI Strategy
• Adequacy of resources
• Project Vision & Goals
• Evaluation Criteria & Design Considerations

29. CSS Project Goals - Design &
Construction
• Matching of Vision or goals to problems,
opportunities & needs of the final project
• Did we meet commitments
• Where resources preserved/enhanced
• Stakeholder Satisfaction
• Construction & Maintenance Impacts
• Quality Assurance

30. CSS Project Outcomes
• Address Mobility & Safety
• Environmental Stewardship
• Project Delivery
• Economic values
• Realistic Visioning-Matching Existing Plans
• Rowing in the Same Direction with Planning,
NEPA, Development/Design,
Construction/Maintenance

31. NM 14: A Contractor’s
Perspective
Kevin Swaving, PE
Twin Mountain Construction

32. NM 14 Context Sensitive Design
• Expectations
• Constructability
• Maintenance

33. End of
Project
Beginning of
Project
Intersection
CR 44 / 45
Intersection
CR 42
BNSF Railroad
Bridge
Intersection
CR 57 & Gallisteo
Creek Bridge
170+00
CN 1285
CN 2516

34. Community Advisory Committee

38. Proposed
Borrow Pit

40. Ongoing CAC Changes to Plans

41. Typical Section

44. Pre-Construction

45. Post Construction

46. Meeting Participation

47. Painted Asphalt Shoulders

48. Cortain Barrier Rail; maintaining existing vegetation and rock cuts

49. Decorative bridge rail

50. Stucco/Brick Barrier

51. Colored Concrete & Inset Pier

52. • Need to manage public interaction process
– Contractor CAC interaction = significant labor
investment
• Constructability impacts are costly
– Establish realistic (worst-case) expectations
• Bobcats, borrow site
• Community changes have financial impact
– Establish guidelines for input post-design
• Construction vs. benefit
Conclusion

53. Thanks for attending & here is
your chance to ask questions!