Engaging Communities in the Functional Planning and Geometric Design Process
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The planning stage of a roadway project is the forerunner to the design and construction stages. In various jurisdictions the planning stage can be broken down into several components including General Location Planning, Preliminary Engineering Review, Detailed Functional Planning and Detailed Location Reporting. Each component is vital to establishing the parameters that will be used to design and eventually construct the project. As such, there has been a trend with jurisdictions to involve stakeholders earlier and earlier in the life of a project to manage impacts, risks and expectations. Many jurisdictions now require a comprehensive communications strategy to be implemented to guide the input of stakeholders that have an interest in the development and outcome of project requirements. The intent of early engagement is to minimize the amount of potential rework and inherent delays and budget overruns that can sometimes occur within the project lifecycle when the project objectives have not been properly communicated. Many of the decisions related to a project occur during the planning stage of its life cycle. For example, the route alignment, design criteria, initial right-of-way requirements, avoidance or mitigation of environmentally sensitive lands, utility impact mitigation can be addressed at the onset of the project to raise awareness and make adjustments where possible. Tetra Tech EBA Inc. (Tetra Tech), has been involved in the planning of several important key infrastructure projects for Western Canadian jurisdictions. The intent of these projects is to improve key routes to economic growth areas through enhancedmobility and access. With most infrastructure projects, the owning jurisdiction seeks to make improvements for the benefit of the majority; however, there is always an inherent disadvantage to some, mostly in the minority, when it comes to land loss and localized transportation impacts. Through collaborative engagement of local stakeholders, Tetra Tech and their project partners have developed and implemented effective communication strategies to involve key stakeholders from the onset of a project. Traditional planning exercises usually imposed the decisions made by technical parties, without much consideration for the local stakeholder impacts. By taking advantage of the local stakeholder knowledge of project areas and surrounding constraints, Tetra Tech has been able to develop infrastructure options that seek to balance project impacts and objectives. This early engagement has led to municipalities working alongside one another to meet project objectives, rather than apart as had been the previous relationship. It has also led to municipal advocacy towards stakeholders sharing their feedback and being heard, when previous opinions suggested that all feedback would fall on deaf ears. The intent of this paper is to discuss project case studies that involved local stakeholders in the decisionmaking process and the project advocacy that has been observed subsequently.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,048 | 0,045 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,018 | 0,010 |
| Communication savante | 0,013 | 0,011 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,029 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,016 | 0,004 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».