Running head: COMMUNITYS INFORMED CONSENT ON PROPOSED STRUCTURE 1

COMMUNITYS INFORMED CONSENT ON PROPOSED STRUCTURE 7

The Report on the Presentation Carried out as Part of Ensuring the Communitys Informed Consent for the Proposed Structure

Name:

Institution:

Letter of Introduction

Dear Sir,

Ref: Report on The Presentation Carried out as Part of Ensuring the Communitys Informed Consent For The Proposed Structure

As part of the process of ensuring the local community give an informed consent to the construction of a 27-story building on an unused section of land at 41 Wharf Street, a presentation was made to convince the affected community. A group of five engineers set out on this task. The group isolated the main issue as pedestrian safety and accessibility of the city during and after construction as the main problem. Kindly note that this issue had been raised in the scoping report.

The local administration government was approached to help in organizing the meeting, which had a fair representation. The group divided the main issues into various subtopics and applied the symposium strategy to inform the audience. The audience was allowed to ask questions and all clarifications made. Each speaker tackled the allocated issue effectively and assured the audience that the proposed solution would be implemented. The report has recommended four issues the project manager needs to implement for the project to be accepted by the community. Please see to it that the recommended issues are tackled. Thank you very much.Yours faithful

(Your name) Executive SummaryAfter the scoping report on the proposed site for construction of a 27-story building in an unused section of land at 41 Wharf Street was prepared and consent sought, the community needed to be convinced before making an informed consent. This report details a presentation on the issues arising from the project and how the project manager ought to deal with them for the project to be accepted. The study employed a group presentation method involving modified symposium technique. In the presentation, the group was convinced that the main problem focused on traffic caused by the project, parking during the building process, and dealing with tracks that are entering the construction site. Also, the pedestrian access was considered as the main issues during the project operation phase. The report recommends an appropriate action to the project engineer. In addition, the report has made an evaluation of the entire process of presentation so as to take note of future improvements. Introduction

This report follows a scoping report on the proposed site for construction of a 27-story building on an unused section of land at 41 Wharf Street. After an evaluation of the scoping report, a consent for building the hotel was sought, but it could only be issued after the community had been informed and agreed to the issue arising out of the project and how they will be solved. The purpose of this report is thus to document the presentations made to the local community as part of the process of ensuring the community is informed.

The group tasked with educating the community on these issues identified the issues falling under accessibility, and connectivity as the main issues affecting the community. The group was of the view that the problem be grouped in two phases; during the project construction phase, and during the operation. It was agreed that several items, including traffic, parking during the building process, and dealing with tracks that are entering the construction site be considered as the main issues during the project construction phase. It was further agreed that the pedestrian access be considered as the main issues during the project operation phase.

The main approach of the group was for each member of the group to make a presentation on an allocated issue tactfully to convince the audience. Arrangement for the meeting was effected through the help of the local administration.

Discussion of Group IssuesThe Perspective and Stance of the Group

The group was of the professional opinion that the project would affect the surrounding people in Dunedin city, and the main issues the community was concerned with was the safety, and accessibility during and after the project had been constructed. The group adopted that stance that all the issues likely to result from the project are technical in nature and could, thus be solved using various engineering techniques. In this case, they adopted the perspective that the community should allow the project to go on as planned and allow the project manager to see to it that solution to all issues has been found per the recommendation of the group. Each speaker was determined to convince the community how a given issue that was raised will be handled. The Issues the Group Considers to be the Most Important

During the process of submitting issues from the community, various issues were brought forward. However, the issues that the group considered important and needed to be addressed focused on accessibility and connectivity during the project construction phase, as well as after the project has been concluded. In this case, several items, including traffic, parking during the building process, and dealing with tracks entering the construction site were the main issues during the project construction phase. Also, the pedestrian access was considered as the main issues during the project operation phase. The Nature, Scale, Likelihood, and Importance of Issues

TrafficThe proposed structure will house hotel rooms and apartments. As a result, many people will come from various points as tenants, as well as customers for various businesses that will be housed in the structure. This means that the number of people leaving and coming into the building will increase. If most of them will be owning cars, they will add to the traffic on the Wharf street. Public service vehicles, as well as taxis will also increase on this street to cater for those without cars. By the time the building is completely occupied, there will be at least more than 1000 additional cars on the already busy street. The surge in traffic is certain and will commence as soon the building process starts. However, a surge in traffic is inevitable in any developing city and does not pose a serious threat (Hoek & Imrie, 1995).

Parking During Building ProcessDuring the process of building, some vehicles ferrying people and materials will frequent the site. Since these vehicles will not access the site easily because of the trenches that would have been dug in the place, drivers might be forced to pack by the roadside, thereby making it difficult for the traffic to flow. Such an occurrence is likely to disrupt the pace of the traffic in this place, and the life in general. Such an issue is of importance, and if it occurs, it must be dealt with because it will cause a serious disruption to the flow of the traffic. However, the project engineer in this project will ensure that industrial code of safety practices are adhered to whereby safety parking will be considered. In this case, a parking will be constructed before commencing the actual work. At the same time, only a small number of vehicles will be allowed at a time, and no vehicle will be allowed to idle at the site as part of the mitigating mechanism. Dealing With Moving Tracks Entering the Construction Site

Heavy tracks ferrying construction materials will be frequenting the site during the entire process of construction. Such tracks occupies a lot of space on the roads and move at a snail speed. This imply that they will cause serious traffic problems. Since the Wharf street is ever busy, it might not be possible for drivers to overtake any track ferrying materials to the site. This means that the problem resulting from trucks will certainly occur and will inconvenience many people on the roads. However, these trucks are essential for the success of the project, and thus, must be dealt with accordingly. One way is to ferry materials during midmorning hours when traffic is not busy or at night. Discussion of Personal Role and SubmissionI played two essential role during the group presentation. First, I acted as an expert witness, and second, I acted as a presenter whereby I made a submission on the role of bridges for pedestrians during a major project.

My Role As An Expert WitnessAn expert witness is an individual who is well versed with a given technical ability, and thus his or her opinion on a given issue is highly respected because of his qualification (Hoek & Imrie, 1995). As a road engineer, I was an expert witness during the group presentation. My main role was to agree with the speaker on essential points by rubberstamping them as true, as well as offering additional information. Also, I asked questions on behalf of the audience to make them understand an important issue that may have been overlooked by the speaker. Furthermore, I was called to assist the speaker in demonstrating some concepts for the audience to understand and I generally validated the information from the presenter.An Analysis of My SubmissionI was tasked with the responsibility of handling pedestrian access.

Nature Of The Issue

To understand pedestrian access issue resulting from the project, the diagram in fig 1 below will assist in the analysis.

Figure 1: Dunedin city showing the proposed building (Mccorkindale & Houlahan, 2013, p. 1)In the diagram, it can be seen that a road passes between the proposed site for project and the harbor. The entire map of the site is shown below:

Figure 2:The Dunedin City map showing the names of various streets and roads (The Dunedin City Council, 2013)

Figure 3:the site map for the proposed project (Mccorkindale & Houlahan, 2013). The exact spot is colored redFrom the maps in figure 2 and 3, the arrangement of roads implies that once the project is completed, it will be difficult to connect the city and the harbor through the Wharf Street from the proposed hotel. This is because the proposed structure lies between the city and the harbor. Many pedestrians will be inconvenienced, and they may interfere with normal traffic on Wharf Street. In addition, it will be difficult for pedestrians to cross the railway to Cumberland street. If no proper connection is made to cater for pedestrians, especially those crossing to and from the harbors, accidents are likely to be common on the Wharf street. In addition, the wharf street will experience notorious traffic surge that may persist as long as the building is occupied. Although pedestrian access seems a major problem, this problem can be solved by constructing an overpass bridge over Wharf street, as well as an overpass pedestrian bridge over the railway line to Cumberland street. Overpass pedestrian bridges, also called flyovers, are common engineering structures that can help solve connectivity problem, such as the one in this case (Construction Management Engineers, 2012). The diagram below indicates an example of a flyover:

Figure 4: An overhead footbridge crossing the road

Figure 5:Figure 5: An overhead footbridge crossing the railway (Construction Management Engineers, 2012, p. 1)

The flyover bridge, once completed, will ensure that pedestrians cross the Wharf street and the railway line at their own pace without causing accidents or traffic jam. Constructing a flyover bridge is a simple process as there are standards and directions one has to follow (Evans, 1990). A flyover bridge acts as a safety detour, as well an ease of congestion. Pedestrians are advised to use the bridge at all times. Critical Review of the Groups Approach to the Presentation

The Outline of the Methodology UsedThe group approached this presentation in form of a symposium. In this approach, the topic was divided into more or less equal sections and each member given his or her part to present. Each group member was given a topic he or she understands very well and was supposed to stick in his or her allocated area. It was agreed that group members participate as active audience by asking specific questions meant to help the audience understand the topic well. The person doing a presentation provided the type of questions that was supposed to be asked by the group.Effectiveness of The Group At Representing The Delegated Position

By delegating a section to every group member, it was easy for each member to specialize in his or her area so as to deal with every question that would come. Also, it was easy to control the relevancy and content of every subtopic because the group members had a prearranged questions for each subtopic. The prearranged questions for the group members enabled the audience to grasp the issue. However, sometimes the audience asked questions beyond the topic and this caused some panicking tendencies among the group. Nevertheless, the collaboration among the group made the presentation successful and convincing.How the Group Methodology Approach Impacted the overall Hearing

The group methodology approach impacted the entire hearing process positively. In the first place, a group approach indicated the weight with which the group had approached the issues, and thus, the audience were keen to listen to what the group had to say. Each speaker of the group had his or her style of speaking and this contributed to the alertness of the audience whereby the monotony of one speaker was broken by another speaker. The process of shifting from one speaker to another provided a good break and a time of reflection to the audience and this improved the general hearing. However, slow learners in the audience may have been lost in the process of changing from one speaker to another.

How the Experience Has Informed My Knowledge of Consent Hearing Process Any project proposal must first be rubberstamped by the community, and thus, the project manager must ensure that he or she convinces the community to accept the project. Consent hearing process requires the speaker to be knowledgeable of the problem affecting the audience and various ways of solving it. The speaker must be genuine and concerned about this problem for the audience to accept the information. As a result, a group approach is an effective way of enhancing credibility and keenness from the audience. Each presentation must be backed by scientific or engineering explanation for the idea to be accepted.

What Should be Done Differently In FutureThe group symposium method used in this study has various drawbacks. In the first place, some members are likely to go beyond their allocated topic thereby inconveniencing the next speaker. The presentation can turn out to be a series of events that are not related to each other if there is no effective transition. As a result, there will be a mock presentation before an actual presentation in future presentation. Mock presentation will be done in secret, but before a panel of critics to weed out some mistakes. Conclusions and Recommendations

This paper focused on convincing the community to give a consent for the construction of a 27-story building. The study discovered that the community was concerned about accessibility and safety during and after the project, and thus, needed professional information on how these issues would be handled before consenting to the idea. The study developed a stance that a group symposium to discuss the issues and their solutions would convince the audience to consent to the idea. The presentations during the symposium convinced the community to consent to the idea. The speakers majorly focused on traffic caused by the project, parking during building process, and dealing with tracks that are entering the construction site. Also, the pedestrian access was considered as the main issues during the project operation phase. The group could not find a solution to the increased traffic after the project rolls in operations, but recommends the following: A flyover footbridge to be constructed across the wharf street to link the building and the harbor. Another flyover footbridge to be constructed across the railway line to link the building to the Cumberland street.

The project manager to construct a parking for all trucks carrying materials to the site so as not to interfere with the traffic on the Wharf Street.

Heavy trucks carrying materials to come to the site during the time when the traffic is low, especially at night so as not to interfere with the smooth flow of traffic in the city.References

Mccorkindale, W., & Houlahan, M. (2013). Dunedin waterfront hotel consent denied . Retrieved Nov 9, 2013, from Business Day: http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/8758022/Dunedin-waterfront-hotel-consent-denied

Construction Management Engineers . (2012). McKeesport Fly-Over Bridge. Retrieved Nov 9, 2013, from Construction Management Engineers : http://www.al-cm.com/projects/mckeesport-fly-over-bridge

Evans, H. (1990). Engineering handbook. New Haven, Connecticut: Institute of Traffic Engineers.

Hoek, E., & Imrie, S. (1995). Consulting Boards for large civil engineering projects. Water Power and Dam Construction , 47 (8), 33-34.

The University of Mary Washington . (2012). Formats for Group Presentations. Retrieved Nov 09, 2013, from University of Mary Washington : http://academics.umw.edu/speaking/resources/handouts/formats-for-group-presentations/

The Dunedin City Council. (2013). Street map. Retrieved Nov 9, 2013, from The Dunedin City Council: https://www.dunedin.govt.nz/council-online/webmaps/street-map