Over the course of the 18-month study period, February 2002 through August 2003, numerous agency working group meetings and two public meetings were held to inform the public of the progress of the route alternatives development and evaluation. In addition, newsletters with current project information and upcoming milestones were regularly sent to concerned citizens and agencies. This web page will be periodically updated to inform the public of the progress of the project.

Public Meetings
Two public meetings kept the public up-to-date on study progress and major project decisions, and gathered concerns and comments from the public. This web page was updated as meetings were held, information exchanged and conclusions reached throughout the study process. A summary of each meeting was provided.

The first public meeting was held on October 29, 2002 at the El Paso Police Department’s Northeast Regional Command Center, 9600 Dyer Street. TxDOT planners and engineers along with representatives of the consulting firm were on hand from 5 – 8 PM to discuss the alternatives developed to date, answer questions and obtain input on the significant project issues to be considered in the corridor and design development process. Approximately 75 persons attended, and in general, the project was favorably received. There was consensus among those present that the project was needed to reduce congestion along IH 10. There was also strong and consistent opposition expressed to Alternatives A and B, Loop 375/Martin Luther King, Jr. and Greenbelt, respectively. These Alternatives were subsequently dropped from further study.

A second public meeting was held on June 11, 2003, also at the Police Department’s Northeast Regional Command Center, to present the results of additional cost, environmental and technical studies that supported selecting Alternative C – Railroad/Pipeline as the preferred alignment alternative. Again, the consensus of the approximately 75 persons in attendance was that Alternative C was acceptable, as was Alternative E. Some concern was expressed about Alternative C’s impacts to sensitive natural environments found in the foothills of the Franklin Mountains.

Working Group Meetings
Key to the development of route alternatives and their evaluation is the early identification of corridor issues that will affect the location and design of the proposed limited access highway. Federal, state and local agencies and major private entities and groups are integral to this process, and to that end, an agency working group was set up to provide oversight and feedback to the study team at major milestones during the course of the work. The working group consisted of representatives from the following agencies and groups:

New Mexico Department of Transportation
City of El Paso
El Paso County
El Paso Metropolitan Planning Organization
Federal Highway Administration
Fort Bliss
US Dept. of the Interior- Bureau of Land Management
Doña Ana County
El Paso Water Utilities
El Paso Natural Gas
El Paso Electric
US Army Corps of Engineers
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

1^st Working Group Meeting- April 11, 2002
The first Working Group Meeting convened on April 11, 2002 in the offices of the El Paso District of the Texas Department of Transportation to provide federal, state and local agencies an overview of the project’s scope and to obtain their input on the major alignment location issues. Representatives from ten public entities, as well as some private individuals, attended. Among the agencies consulted and present at the meeting included the city and county of El Paso, Fort Bliss, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the New Mexico Department of Transportation, El Paso Natural Gas (EPNG) and El Paso Water Utilities (EPWU). Doña Ana County, NM was not represented, but a subsequent meeting with its planning director obtained that county’s input. Other meetings, both before and after the scoping meeting, with the BLM, Fort Bliss, EPWU, EPNG and the City of El Paso provided additional focus on the issues important to each.

In general, consultations with these agencies produced agreement on the purpose and need for the project. A number of agency-specific issues were raised that had to be addressed in the alignment development phase, but none of the issues was of a magnitude that would preclude continued project development of concept alignments. These issues were summarized in the Issues Summary Report, dated May 2002.

2^nd Working Group Meeting- August 28, 2002
A second working group meeting presented the results of the traffic analyses justifying the need for action and the inadequacies of TSM improvements in addressing the project need, the evaluation criteria used to rate each of the alignment alternatives and the five route alternatives that addressed the location opportunities and constraints identified at the first working group meeting and in subsequent agency meetings and discussions.

3^rd Working Group Meeting- April 24, 2003
A third working group meeting presented the results of additional cost, traffic and environmental studies that supported a recommendation for selecting Alternative C – Railroad/Pipeline as the preferred alternative. There was also a presentation of alternative financing mechanisms given the State’s current limited financial resources.

Project Newsletters
As part of its public involvement and information program, TxDOT prepared newsletters at key points in the study process. Information on schedule, upcoming meetings, alternatives under consideration and other important project information was presented. The first newsletter provided information on the preliminary alignment alternatives under consideration and was mailed to interested citizens, public officials and agencies in mid-October, 2002. A second newsletter, mailed to area residents in mid April, 2003, identified the reasons for recommending Alternative C as the preferred route location alternative. If you would like to receive project newsletters, contact the TxDOT individual listed below.

Feedback
Public input is essential to project success. Therefore, comments or questions on the study process or the route alternatives under study are welcome and should be directed to Ms. Marty Boyd, E.I.T., Project Manager, (915) 790-4326, mboyd@dot.state.tx.us, or Mr. Jack Lord, AICP, Deputy Project Manager, (915) 790-4329, jlord@dot.state.tx.us, at the El Paso District Office of TxDOT, 13301 Gateway Blvd. West, El Paso, TX 79928.