How do I get involved?

What's the project about?

What's going on now?

What area does this affect?

Where are we in the process?

Who's already involved?

What materials are available?

What's your connecton?

Where are we in the process?

Overall Process

Team Approach

Overall Process

Any successful planning process should include both objective and subjective analyses. A broad array of technical information is being collected for the NWCS; related to transportation, land use, and environmental impacts. The subjective analysis relates to the opinions and insights of residents and workers in the Northwest Corridor, as well as other key stakeholders in the metro Atlanta region. The combination of these two elements is what provides a quality foundation for the planning process that is the Northwest Connectivity Study. This study represents the first step in the planning and project development process established by the Federal Transit Administration for new transit investments. It builds on previous regional and private studies that have endorsed transit improvements as a way to improve mobility in the Corridor.

Under the FTA planning process, all projects seeking Federal funding for new transit capital investments (‘New Starts’) must complete an Alternatives Analysis. The purpose of an Alternatives Analysis for the NWCS is to identify a wide range of potential alternatives and determine which are the most effective in improving transportation connectivity in the Northwest Corridor.

The first step in the alternatives analysis process for the Northwest Corridor is to develop a “universe of alternatives.” This universe includes virtually every technology, service type, activity center and alignment possible in this Corridor. This “universe” is shared with the citizens of the Corridor in public meetings in order to receive feedback on these options as well as on the project goals. Project goals are then refined, as well as the objectives and evaluation criteria within those goals, which will help to measure the performance of alternatives. The first narrowing of the “universe” is to a set of conceptual alternatives that will be tested for their ability to address the project goals. An analysis of both the feasible modes in the Corridor and the feasible segments and alignments in the Corridor is undertaken. The results developed in these two streams of analyses, together with the locations of conceptual stations, are synthesized and combined into a set of conceptual alternatives. Our approach in identifying these conceptual alternatives is to develop a set of “mix and match” alternatives (approximately 9 – 11). The intent of this process is to assure that, as alternatives are analyzed and discussed, the results will provide a wealth of information on the feasible technologies, segments and stations to be tested.

The conceptual alternatives will be evaluated utilizing the evaluation criteria. These evaluations will be discussed at more public outreach meetings and the information gained at the meetings will be added to the matrices. The best aspects of each conceptual alternative can then be combined into a set of “best performing alternatives” (approximately 3 – 5) that will be subjected to more detailed evaluation and public discussion. These alternatives will be discussed in public forums to assure that information is shared and that buy-in from affected communities is pursued. These best performing alternatives will be the subject of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement. More detailed analysis of a greater number of the evaluation criteria and required environmental factors will be undertaken. At a point later in the project, the “best performing alternatives” will be narrowed further to a “locally preferred alternative” (LPA). This LPA will be evaluated in even more detail and will be the subject of the Final Environmental Impact Statement. In the case of this study, which is pursuing funding from the federal government, the environmental evaluation must be completed following the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. Based on the anticipated scope of a project needed to satisfy the transportation deficiencies in the study corridor, it is possible that significant environmental impacts could occur. As a result, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), the most intense level of environmental evaluation under the NEPA standards is being prepared.

Team Approach The Northwest Connectivity Study is a comprehensive project that is also being fast-tracked. Based on these characteristics, the project team is actually divided into task teams. These task teams are responsible for the major elements of the study. Coordination and communication among and between task members is highly valued and helps to ensure success of the entire project. The NWCS task teams are: Alternatives Analysis Team, Environmental Team, Land Use Team, and Public Outreach Team. back to top