Category: [WEBINAR]

[WEBINAR] A Recipe for Award-Winning Online Community Engagement Featuring Elevating Erie

This highly visual 45-minute webinar presents research findings, proven best practices, practical tips and award-winning case studies to guide agencies towards the successful application of online community engagement for planning projects. Participants walk away with an understanding about how to leverage digital engagement to achieve unprecedented results using cost-effective tools.

The webinar showcases a wide range of outstanding planning projects from the Northeastern US. Our special guests from the City of Syracuse and the Town of Dewitt join us to talk about the Elevating Erie project, one of the most innovative and successful outreach efforts we’ve ever seen. They discuss the innovative ways they combined online and targeted face to face community engagement to involve thousands of community members to help inform the process. They also share advice for agencies seeking to improve the diversity and effectiveness of their community engagement efforts and talk about the positive difference that broad community support is making as they move forward.

Watch Recording

View Slides

This webinar featured three presenters: Dave Biggs from MetroQuest, Sam Gordon from the Town of DeWitt and Owen Kerney from the Syracuse – Onondaga County Planning Agency.

View Dave’s Slides

View Sam & Owen’s Slides

Participant Comments

Thanks so much for the great comments and kudos. Here’s some of our favorites:
“The presentation was well crafted and interesting.”
“Great webinar for public outreach. Very interesting. The tool looks very effective!”
“Exemplary project presentation and “How-To” regarding the Public Participation/Open Process.”
“One of the better webinars I’ve heard. Graphics were great.”
“Great webinar. Really good info, efficient, relevant to my work.”
“Interesting, upbeat, helpful as we will be writing a comp plan over the next two years.”
“I really enjoyed this webinar and found it very useful and timely. It was a very visual presentation and I plan to look back at it again.”
“Public engagement has always been a tough job. This webinar was great – highlights quickly what is working”
Average rating: 4.75/5 stars

[Wow, thanks!]

AICP CM Credits

Here is the direct link to claim your AICP credits from the APA. Note that the date trips people up. This webinar is part of a series so they instructed us to set it up as an “on-demand” session so you’ll notice that the start and end are a year apart.

Get ACIP CM Credit

During the webinar Sam and Owen shared a video that they produced to promote participation but it was a little choppy so feel free to check it out here.

Bonus Case Study: NashvilleNext

Mentioned briefly in the webinar, this case study of the NashvilleNext process shows why they were the 2016 winners of the APA 2016 National Daniel Burnham Award for a Comprehensive Plan.

Q&A

Here are the questions that were raised by participants or that came in after by email that we didn’t get a chance to respond to fully during the session.

Questions for MetroQuest

Q: MetroQuest looks useful. Who is the best person to speak to for more information about it?
A: [From Dave] I apologize for not being able to provide more in-depth information about MetroQuest due to the educational nature of this session. The best person is Derek Warburton at MetroQuest (by email to derek.warburton@metroquest.com, or toll free phone: 1 855-215-0186. Derek will be pleased to make sure you get the information you need. In the meantime, here is a quick video to give you a better sense of the software.

Questions for Elevating Erie

Q: How many staff people did you have working on the project?
A: [From Sam] Between the City and the Town we had 4 different staff people working on different aspects of the project. We also had 3 different consultants who provided assistance.

Q: What was the overall budget and funding sources for this project?
A: [From Sam] Between the City and Town we spent approximately $85,000 on the Elevating Erie project inclusive of the design of the ideas competition, running the competition, coordinating the jury, building the exhibition, purchasing and putting together the Metroquest engagement tool. Roughly $35,000 was from the Town of DeWitt Local Waterfront Revitalization Program funding through NYS Department of State, $30,000 was from the City of Syracuse of Syracuse Brownfield Opportunity Area Funding also through NYS Department of State, and we also received a $20,000 grant from a local community foundation.

Q: Have you done any analysis of the demographic difference of community members engaged via on-line methods vs. in-person? (older/younger? Resident/non-resident?)
A: [From Sam] According to our survey responses, approximately 28% of our respondents were between 20-35, 30% were between 36-50, and 28% were between 51-65. – also approximately 30% of participants were from the town, 31% were from the City of Syracuse, and 26% from elsewhere in Onondaga County. 10 percent of participants were from other parts of New York State, and just over 4% of participants identified as outside of New York State. It was important to us to hear from a variety of audiences, and to be able to demonstrate that there was interest in this project from outside of the region, we feel that we were successful to date in being able to demonstrate this.

Q: What’s considered a good length of time to run a campaign of this scope? I noticed on the Erie billboard the project was on display at the museum May through August. How long did you collect input?
A: [From Sam] We collected input over a three month timeframe, which seemed to be a good window for sustaining both interest from the community and our own effort of scheduling and appearing at the various venues, speaking engagements, and media opportunities during that timeframe. [from Dave] 3 months seems to be a good standard for most of our clients. It’s important to keep the promotional effort going throughout to spur on new spikes in participation. It’s also useful as let people know that there is a limited amount of time and count down as the end get near to increase the sense of urgency.

Many thanks for joining us!

October 24, 2016
[WEBINAR] A Recipe for Award-Winning Online Community Engagement Featuring ARC

This highly visual webinar presents research findings, proven best practices, practical tips and award-winning case studies to guide agencies towards the successful application of online community engagement for planning projects. Participants walk away with an understanding about how to leverage digital engagement to achieve unprecedented results using cost-effective tools.

The webinar showcases a wide range of outstanding planning projects throughout Georgia as well as North and South Carolina. Our special guests from the Atlanta Regional Commission join us to talk about The Atlanta Region’s Plan, one of the most innovative and successful outreach efforts we’ve ever seen. They discuss the innovative ways they combined online and targeted face to face community engagement to involve over 25,000 community members to help plan the region. They also share advice for agencies seeking to improve the diversity and effectiveness of their community engagement efforts and talk about the positive difference that broad community support is making as they move forward.

Watch Recording

View Slides

This webinar featured two presenters: Dave Biggs from MetroQuest followed by Melissa Roberts from the Atlanta Regional Commission.

View Dave’s Slides

View Melissa’s Slides

Participant Comments

Thanks so much for the great comments and kudos. Here’s some of our favorites:
“Very informative!”
“Great webinar for public outreach. Very interesting. The tool looks very effective!”
“It was good to learn tips for engagement like how a registration page upfront eliminates 90% of potential responses.”
“One of the better webinars I’ve heard. Graphics were great.”
“Great webinar. Really good info, efficient, relevant to my work.”
“Interesting, upbeat, helpful as we will be writing a comp plan over the next two years.”
“Great presentation that had a lot of good visual examples and tips and tricks on engaging the public with current and groundbreaking tools.”
“Public engagement has always been a tough job. This webinar was great – highlights quickly what is working”
Average rating: 4.75/5 stars

[Wow, thanks!]

AICP CM Credits

Here is the direct link to claim your AICP credits from the APA. Note that the date trips people up. This webinar is part of a series so they instructed us to set it up as an “on-demand” session so you’ll notice that the start and end are a year apart.

Get AICP CM Credit

Bonus Case Study: NashvilleNext

Mentioned briefly in the webinar, this case study of the NashvilleNext process shows why they were the 2016 winners of the APA 2016 National Daniel Burnham Award for a Comprehensive Plan.

Q&A

Here are the questions that were raised by participants that we didn’t get a chance to respond to during the session.

Questions for Dave from MetroQuest

Q: MetroQuest looks like useful software. What is the best way to get more information about it?
A: [From Dave] I apologize for not being able to provide more in-depth information about MetroQuest due to the educational nature of this session. The best place to start would be to connect with us by filling out the Contact Us form. We will be pleased to make sure you get the information you need. In the meantime, here is a quick video to give you a better sense of the software.

Q: I was curious as to whether by using the MetroQuest software, if you do reach out to a larger demographic, do communities see things coming through that the staff may not have thought of.
A: [From Dave] This certainly seems to be the case since we hear this comment frequently. The reality is that the types of people who agencies are used to hearing from represent a very narrow cross section of the community. MetroQuest clients report that the feedback that is received online is more positive and constructive than what generally comes out at public meetings. I think this is due to the fact that many who attend public meetings are fired up about the project, often not in a good way.

Secondly, new information tends to emerge about community preferences since MetroQuest is specifically well-suited to reach a broader demographic that, in the past, has not been represented at all.

A good example that comes to mind is a recent project about cycling. The voice that was missing in previous bike planning efforts in this community was the large group of people who do not currently bike but would be willing to start if certain changes were made. In the past they were missing because they did not identify as cyclists and were not passionate about the topic. It turned out that this missing demographic was uniquely suited to identify what changes would encourage the largest mode shift towards biking. By making is very easy to participate and getting the benefit of social media sharing this project was able to hear from over 7,000 people and they received over 50,000 inputs from the community including some valuable new insights for the bike plan. [Editorial comment: It’s case studies like these that make it all worthwhile.]

Questions for Melissa from Atlanta Regional Commission

Q: Address measure of effectiveness beyond on-line usage and zip code mapping such as reaching under-represented populations.
A: [From Melissa] Currently, we measure our effectiveness in reaching under-represented populations through accounting for the number of people who attend various meetings, as well as an inventory of the community organizations ARC works with on a regular basis. Specifically we maintain a current listing of community-based organizations and coalitions focused on organizing, serving and meeting the needs of under-represented populations. We then determine our current level of interaction and support of these organizations, and develop strategies for strengthening our relationships with them, such as regular face to face meeting times, attendance at their special events, and on-going communication. It is our intent to continue to develop robust outcomes for reaching lower-income and under-represented populations. I would welcome any advice or best practices related to measuring the effectiveness of engaging with harder to reach populations.

Q: What strategy has worked best so far engaging the low income, minority, and Hispanic communities?
A: [From Melissa] I believe that our best work in engaging low income, minority, and Hispanic communities has been face to face meetings, both in smaller and larger groups. These meetings are most effective at reaching these under-served populations when we host them in venues where a greater percentage of low income, minority and Hispanic communities live. In particular, our most successful engagement activities (measured through the number of attendees and/or the depth of community input generated) has been when we partner with trusted community partners in co-designing and hosting face to face events within the community (and not at our own offices). The outreach booths at various festivals and events within communities are effective at generating awareness of ARC and our work, as well as, identifying new contacts to follow up with for future, more in-depth relationship building and dialogues.

[from Dave] Participants might be interested in this webinar recording on the topic, “Engaging Vulnerable & Disadvantaged People in Planning.” It was so popular we had to hold a second one which also filled to capacity so we posted it as an on-demand resource.

Thanks again for your interest and participation in this webinar.

October 6, 2016
[WEBINAR] A Recipe for Award-Winning Online Community Engagement with COTA

This highly visual webinar presents research findings, proven best practices, practical tips and award-winning case studies to guide agencies towards the successful application of online community engagement for planning projects. Viewers will walk away with an understanding about how to leverage digital engagement to achieve unprecedented results using cost-effective tools.

The webinar showcases a wide range of outstanding planning projects throughout Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia and the Northeastern US. Our special guests from the Central Ohio Transit Authority join us to talk about NextGen, one of the most innovative and successful outreach efforts we’ve ever seen. They discuss the innovative ways they combined online and targeted face to face community engagement to involve an unprecedented number and diversity of community members to help define the transit needs for the region. They also share advice for agencies seeking to improve the breadth and effectiveness of their community engagement efforts and talk about the positive difference that broad community support is making as they move forward.

Watch Recording

AICP CM Credits

Here is the direct link to claim your AICP credits from the APA. Note that the date trips people up. This webinar is part of a series so they instructed us to set it up as an “on-demand” session so you’ll notice that the start and end are a year apart.

Get AICP CM Credit

COTA’s video from the presentation (the one that didn’t play well)

Bonus Case Study: NashvilleNext

Q&A

Here are the questions that were raised by participants following the presentations with answers provided by the presenters.

Questions for Dave

Q: MetroQuest looks like useful software. What is the best way to get more information about it?
A: [From Dave] I apologize for not being able to provide more in-depth information about MetroQuest due to the nature of this session. The best place to start would be to connect with Derek Warburton at MetroQuest (by email to derek.warburton@metroquest.com, or toll free phone:1 855-215-0186. Derek will be pleased to make sure you get the information you need. In the meantime, here is a quick video to give you a better sense of the software.

Q: Do you have any bike/ped examples where MetroQuest was used for public involvement?
A: [From Dave] MetroQuest is frequently used for bike/ped projects. Here are a few examples to play around with:

Northern Virginia Regional Bikeway and Trail Network Study, VA – https://novabikedemo1.metroquest.com/

HEPMPO, MD – https://bikehepmpodemo1.metroquest.com/

Eastside Greenway, OH – https://esgdemo1.metroquest.com/

Midway Cycle Track, OH – https://midway-demo.metroquest.com/

Rim of the World, CA Rim Rec & Parks District – https://rimrecatp-demo.metroquest.com/

Q: Is MetroQuest affordable for smaller communities?
A: [From Dave] MetroQuest has recently launched an annual subscription which allows for use of MetroQuest on as many projects as you wish. The cost of the subscription scales based on the size of the organization to ensure that it remains affordable for smaller agencies. Here’s how to learn more. https://metroquest.com/contact/

Q: I was curious as to whether by using the Metroquest software, if you do reach out to a larger demographic, do communities see things coming through that the staff may not have thought of.
A: [From Dave] This certainly seems to be the case since we hear this comment frequently. The reality is that the types of people who agencies are used to hearing from represent a very narrow cross section of the community. MetroQuest clients report that the feedback that is received online is more positive and constructive than what generally comes out at public meetings. I think this is due to the fact that many who attend public meetings are fired up about the project, often not in a good way.

Secondly, new information tends to emerge about community preferences since MetroQuest is specifically well-suited to reach a broader demographic that, in the past, has not been represented at all.

A good example that comes to mind is a recent project about cycling. The voice that was missing in previous bike planning efforts in this community was the large group of people who do not currently bike but would be willing to start if certain changes were made. In the past they were missing because they did not identify as cyclists and were not passionate about the topic. It turned out that this missing demographic was uniquely suited to identify what changes would encourage the largest mode shift towards biking. By making is very easy to participate and getting the benefit of social media sharing this project was able to hear from over 7,000 people and they received over 50,000 inputs from the community including some valuable new insights for the bike plan. [Editorial comment: It’s case studies like these that make it all worthwhile.]

Questions for Doug and Elliot from COTA

Q: Did COTA’s public involvement process ask people about using Uber/Lyft type organizations for first mile/last mile services?
A: [From COTA] COTA did not specifically ask about ridesharing companies in this phase. However, we did receive comments regarding these services. We asked the public what type of non-high capacity service improvements and investments the region should make using fairly broad categories without identifying the actual mode/vehicle. Modes and vehicles will be discussed in the spring of 2017 as part of finishing Phase 2 (out of 3) of the project.

Q: Did COTA’s public involvement process/planning process ask/consider about the impact of driverless vehicles on their service?
A: [From COTA] NextGen will consider driveless vehicles as part of the Vision 2050 plan; however, we did not specifically ask about these services during our Phase 2 outreach last year. Of note, the City of Columbus was recently awarded the FTA Smart City Challenge grant, of which driverless vehicles is a significant aspect. We anticipate our Phase 3 outreach will attract a robust conversation about this technology.

As of now, our consultant team does not believe the impact will be too great as driverless cars will offer the most benefits in less dense areas, due to traditionally longer trip times to work locations and more time spent in congestion.

This is under the assumption that work trips take place to/from the major employment centers in Columbus, that is Downtown and Ohio State University, and suburban locations.

Dense, urban areas, will benefit from driverless vehicles, but there will be a question of physical geometry and street capacity, particularly with the desire to narrow thoroughfares and implementation of complete streets policy in the region. Driverless vehicles will improve street capacity, which, I suspect at least, the public will claim the excess capacity for amenities such as more parking, bike lanes and expanded sidewalks. That is increasingly becoming the practice of the City of Columbus and its neighborhoods.

These assumptions are not set in stone as of yet and will be further fleshed out.

Q: How long did it take for COTA to get the data in place?
A: [From COTA] Our demographic and traffic projections came from our MPO, the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission (MORPC). MORPC was updating their long-range Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) at the same time we were launching NextGen, which required employment, population and travel demand data be projected out to 2040. Being an MPO partner, MORPC adjusted their projections for us to include 2025 and 2050.

Another initiative that MORPC was leading along with ULI, was insight2050, which looked at various growth scenarios for the entire central Ohio region through 2050. MORPC also prepared data for this initiative.

All in all, we were fortunate that MORPC was able to respond to our requests quite easily, providing us with data within weeks of asking, tied to TAZ’s and ¼ mi. grids.

Q: How long did the public participation outreach take?
A: [From COTA] The public meetings occurred over the course of three days (September 28-30). The survey was available for 35 days (September 28 – November 2).

Thanks again for your interest and participation in this webinar.

October 3, 2016
[WEBINAR] A Recipe for Award-Winning Online Community Engagement with Plan Hillsborough

This highly visual 45-minute webinar presents research findings and proven best practices, practical tips and award-winning case studies to guide Florida agencies towards the successful application of online community engagement for planning projects. Viewers will gain an understanding about how to leverage digital engagement to achieve unprecedented results using cost-effective tools. This session showcases a wide range of outstanding planning projects throughout Florida including Lee County, Venice, Satellite Beach, Broward, Jacksonville and the award-winning Seven50 project. Our special guests from the Hillsborough Planning Commission in Tampa, FL will be online talking about Imagine 2040, one of the most innovative and successful planning projects we’ve ever seen. They will discuss the innovative ways they combined online and targeted face to face community engagement to involve over 5,000 community members in the creation of a plan for the region. They will also share advice for agencies seeking to improve the breadth and effectiveness of their community engagement efforts and talk about the positive difference that broad community support is making in their implementation process.

Watch Recording

View Slides

View Dave’s Slides

View Lynn’s Slides

Participant Comments

Thanks so much for the great comments and kudos. Here’s some of our favorites:
“What a great session. Thank you so much Dave and Lynn.”
“One of the best presentations on Public engagement I have seen. Well done and congratulations Hillsborough for a great job and setting a great example for us to follow!”
“Great graphics and concepts. The presentation was insightful and delightful!”
“Great suggestions for thinking outside the box when it comes to public engagement.”
“Wonderful online presentation. Got a lot of out the speakers.”

AICP CM Credits

Get AICP CM Credit

Bonus Case Study: NashvilleNext

Q&A

Here are the questions that were raised by participants following the presentations with answers provided by the presenters.

Q: What was the budget?
A: [from Lynn] $260,000 including all consultant work and public engagement costs. Many public engagement costs were provided or achieved at drastically reduced costs due to strong public-private partnerships.

Q: Did Tampa have dedicated staff for the effort? How many?
A: [from Lynn] The Plan Hillsborough staff of about 40 at the time serves various roles as staff and planners for the Hillsborough County City-County Planning Commission, the Hillsborough Metropolitan Planning Organization, and the Hillsborough River Interlocal Planning Board and Technical Advisory Council. Planners on staff participated as planners in preparation of the Imagine 2040 Comprehensive Plans for Tampa, Temple Terrace, Plant City, and Hillsborough County, and the Imagine 2040 Transportation Plan. The planners were joined by various staff to conduct the public engagement for things like community groups and big events.

Q: Is the consolidated output of these meetings available to your market?
A: [from Lynn] The Imagine Hillsborough 2040 public outreach process guided the update of the 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan and the jurisdictional Comprehensive Plans. Two phases of public engagement included: an online interactive survey, taken either via computer or using kiosks placed in various public locations; and were available at community meetings where audiences could take a paper version of the survey. Part 1, took place between August and November of 2013, with more than 3,500 people responding to the survey, choosing between three growth strategies: Suburban Dream showing what would happen if growth continued outward; Bustling Metro, focusing growth in our cities and towns and investing in transit; and New Corporate Centers, focusing growth along major highways. For Part 1 results, visit this site. Also view the Executive Summary of Part 1 (used at public meetings for Part 2) as well as the full Survey Results Report.

Part 2 of the Imagine 2040 outreach started after the 4th of July weekend and ended on Labor Day weekend, resulting in over 2,400 responses. It consisted of an exercise/survey gauging how to fund proposed transit improvements over the approximate 26-year timeframe. For Part 2 results, visit our project site. The majority of the respondents resided in Tampa representing 38% of all responses. Northwest Hillsborough County had the second highest response rate with 24%, followed by South County with 17% and Central County with 13%. Here are the Part 2 Results.

Q: How much did the engagement feedback shape the plan?
A: [from Lynn] A lot – see documentation in the reports on the web page.

Q: Did it lead to different results than if it had it not be undertaken?
A: [from Lynn] The results of Imagine 2040 parts 1 and 2 and how they helped create a Vision to guide the Imagine 2040 Transportation Plan and the Comprehensive Plans for the Cities of Tampa, Temple Terrace, Plant City and Hillsborough County can be viewed at here and here.

Q: Has this been used for any FDOT projects?
A: [from Dave] I don’t recall contracting directly with FDOT in the past but MetroQuest has been used either directly or indirectly (through consultants) by most DOT’s in the US. Given the wide range of planning projects where MetroQuest was used in Florida I’m sure that some of them were FDOT projects. Feel free to contact us so we can help you find appropriate references or case studies.

Q: What is the AICP CM event number?
A: [from Dave] The AICP CM number is 9102565. Here is the direct link:
https://planning.org/events/course/9102565/

Q: One of the general MetroQuest projects slides included one project in Lee County Florida. What project was that?
A: [from Dave] That could have been from one of two projects in Lee County. This first one was one involving growth priorities and scenarios and then another for the 2040 Transportation Plan. Please note that the first one is based on a previous version of MetroQuest so some features have been added or changed and since then.

Q: Federal funding requires engagement in many efforts. Does it need to be for the “big” picture projects only?
A: [from Dave] While the “big” picture projects seem to get the most attention, online engagement is useful for a wide variety of scales and types of projects beyond these big picture ones. I briefly showed the Parks Plan that Hillsborough is currently working on which is very different from the grand Imagine 2040 effort. In addition, one of the MetroQuest projects that I did not have time to discuss was the University Drive Corridor plan in Miami which focuses on alternative alignments of a small section of the corridor. This morning I reviewed this site that is using MetroQuest to collect input on an Aquatic Center so there are certainly a wide range of planning projects beyond the “big” picture ones where online engagement tools can be helpful.

Thanks again for your interest and participation in this webinar.

June 29, 2016
[WEBINAR] A Recipe for Award-Winning Online Community Engagement with the City of Abbotsford

This highly visual 45-minute webinar presents research findings and proven best practices, practical tips and award-winning case studies to guide agencies towards the successful application of online community engagement for planning projects. Viewers will walk away with an understanding about how to leverage digital engagement to achieve unprecedented results using cost-effective tools. This session also features our special guests from the City of Abbotsford, BC talking about Abbotsforward, one of the most innovative and successful Official Community Planning projects we’ve ever seen. They join us online to talk about the innovative ways they combined online and targeted face to face community engagement to involve over 8,000 community members in the creation of a plan for Abbotsford, BC. They share advice for agencies seeking to improve the breadth and effectiveness of their community engagement efforts and talk about the positive difference that broad community support is making in their implementation process.

Watch Recording

View Slides

View Dave’s Slides

View Reuben’s Slides

Participant Comments

Thanks so much for the great comments and kudos. Here’s some of our favorites:
“Really well organized and digestible.”
“Excellent presentation. Concise discussion of lessons learned with real, transferable information.”
“The best presentation on outreach I’ve ever attended (and I’ve done outreach since 1993)”
“Wow! The webinar itself was a great example of effective engagement.”
“Great webinar. Really good info, efficient, relevant to my work.”
“The presentation was really well put together. I really enjoy when a presenter is able to get to the key takeaway first then dive into the specifics of that takeaway. Well done.”
“Great suggestions for thinking outside the box when it comes to public engagement.”
“Very good online presentation. Got a lot of out the speakers.”
“This was a very helpful and insightful presentation. It provided good evidence on the effectiveness of online community engagement.”

AICP CM Credits

Get ACIP CM Credit

Funny Video Promoting Abbotsfwd

Bonus Case Study: NashvilleNext

Q&A

Here are the questions that were raised by participants following the presentations with answers provided by the presenters.

Q: Each community seems to create their own design, so does each community buy MetroQuest software and do their own product? How does it work?
A: [From Dave] I apologize that I was not able to provide more detailed information about MetroQuest due to the nature of the session. We would be happy to provide additional information to those interested in a separate call. The short answer is that MetroQuest is available by annual subscription and clients simply choose from a variety of screen types to suit the needs of each project and then add their own content (words and images). The product is designed with a wide range of standard functionality and has a number of configuration options to meet the needs of a variety of projects at different stages. The community/agency is free to add unique content to create an engagement experience that matches the needs and branding of each initiative.

Q: How can this information be translated into sustainable RURAL growth?
A: [From Dave] Online engagement tools such as the ones demonstrated are used on all sorts of projects at all scales including many rural projects. The content is different when applied in a rural area but the functionality is similar. In fact, online community engagement is often a primary engagement channel for rural projects since, due to longer travel distances, getting people to come to meetings can be even more difficult than in urban areas. While internet access has become widespread even in rural areas, one must always be mindful of those without access. In many cases kiosks in general stores or community centres are a useful addition.

Q: Are the infographics and MetroQuest tool accessible for persons with disabilities?
A: [From Dave] Accessibility requirements can be met in a variety of ways without going to a 100% text based tool. This blog post outlines how MetroQuest and it’s clients are meeting accessibility standards and working to expand the definition of accessibility. With infographics such as the ones shown for the Atlanta case study, companion text description and image tags can be used to allow the information to be read by screen readers.

Q: Who was in charge of the graphic design of the campaign?
A: [From Reuben] The City hired a consultant early in the process to develop a brand package that included logos, colours, and other graphic elements. Once this was completed, City staff were generally responsible for adapting the graphics to fit a wide range of media uses, except in a few specialized cases.

Q: What was the role of the City compared to the consultant when it came to engagement?
A: [From Reuben] Early in the process, we recognized our effort would have the most impact if directed to expanding the engagement component, using consultant resources more for technical analysis and new perspectives. Although they attended some key events and workshops, and provided graphic material, City staff were responsible for approximately 75% of the engagement events.

Q: How many weeks was the engagement?
A: [From Reuben] Although the project was about 2 years long, engagement periods were focused and intense during that stretch. We started with 5 weeks in the summer of 2014 (Stage 1), followed by 6 weeks in early 2015 (Stage 2) and another 6 weeks in late 2015 (Stage 3), and finally 5 weeks in early 2016 (Stage 4). These periods of intense advertising and presence in the community resulted in high amounts of focused input, rather than minimal input that is drawn out.

Q: How long did you plan before you launched the engagement portion?
A: [From Reuben] See the above answer. With each of the 4 periods of engagement, advanced planning and preparation typically took about 2 to 4 weeks, depending on the diversity and complexity of the engagement activities.

Q: How much time did it take to develop the overall engagement strategy? Did MetroQuest take the lead or was this a shared iterative process?
A: [From Reuben] During the RFP process for engaging a consultant to help with the project, the City created a general outline of how we wanted to conduct the engagement, and requested this to be a key component of consultant proposals. Once a consultant was selected (DIALOG Design) we worked collaboratively to draft a final community engagement strategy (DIALOG included MetroQuest as their online engagement software) that focused on engagement activities. In addition, we had an internal corporate City engagement document to coordinate social media and advertising, with baseline targets for each activity. The engagement strategy was also iterative, and we adapted it as we learned what worked and online engagement was only one piece of the puzzle. Our involvement in the online survey was preparing the content by working with DIALOG.

Q: What was the participation with the community conversations (% of total)?
A: [From Reuben] We had nearly 8,000 interactions across multiple engagement platforms. This is not a measure of individual people, which would be extremely difficult to track since the engagement methods crossed so many different methods, but rather of how many times people interacted with a booth, survey, workshop, etc. Our city population is 140,000, so 8,000 interactions represent almost 6% of the population.

Q: How did you complete the process once the plan was finished?
A: [From Reuben] For engagement, we created a popup park where the draft plan was on display for 3 days and staff attended to answer questions. We also presented the draft plan to Council Committees and other groups. The comments received were used to refine the final plan as a bylaw, and then a final open house and public hearing. Going forward, our plan is to have some format of online or annual report on targets and achievements based on the new plan.

Q: How will you close the loop with participants to report out how their input was used?
A: [From Reuben] See the previous answer. Throughout the project, each Stage of work included a summary of the engagement input that was included in the Stage report. All of this material was presented to Council, posted on our project website, and taken to future events as background information.

Q: What was the engagement budget?
A: [From Reuben] Approximately $70,000 in direct costs, which included about $10,000 for the branding and promotion strategy, about $40,000 for the engagement activities (includes printing, space rental, honorariums, food, advertising, direct mailing, internet for iPads, Facebook, etc.), and about $20,000 for MetroQuest under subcontract. This does not include staff time.

Q: What was the budget for the tools and logistics in particular?
A: [From Reuben] Without providing a spreadsheet, this is difficult to answer but here are some general comments. It ranged from a few hundred dollars to advertise a series of events for a couple weeks in the newspaper, to a few thousand to bring in guest speakers for an evening mix and mingle talk, or create a popup park. However, our dollars were stretched through significant in-kind support from companies wanting to be a part of the project.

Thanks again for your interest and participation in this webinar.

June 14, 2016
[WEBINAR] A Recipe for Award-Winning Online Community Engagement with Metro Nashville Planning Commission

This highly visual webinar video presents research finding and proven best practices, practical tips and award-winning case studies to guide agencies towards the successful application of online community engagement for planning projects. Viewers will walk away with an understanding about how to leverage digital engagement to achieve unprecedented results using cost effective tools (see participant comments below). This session showcases some of the most effective case studies that have found innovative ways to combine online and targeted face to face community engagement to involve thousands of community members in the planning process. Participants will learn strategies to improve the breadth and effectiveness of community engagement efforts increase the level of community support to facilitate smoother plan implementation.

Watch Recording

View Slides

View Dave’s Slides

View Greg’s Slides

Participant Comments

Thanks so much for the great comments and kudos. Here’s some of our favorites:
“The best presentation on outreach I’ve ever attended (and I’ve done outreach since 1993)”
“Wow! The webinar itself was a great example of effective engagement.”
“Great webinar. Really good info, efficient, relevant to my work.”
“Really well organized and digestible.”
“The presentation was really well put together. I really enjoy when a presenter is able to get to the key takeaway first then dive into the specifics of that takeaway. Well done.”
“Great suggestions for thinking outside the box when it comes to public engagement.”
“Excellent presentation. Concise discussion of lessons learned with real, transferable information.”
“Very good online presentation. Got a lot of out the speakers.”
“This was a very helpful and insightful presentation. It provided good evidence on the effectiveness of online community engagement.”

AICP CM Credits

Get ACIP CM Credit

Q&A

Q: These campaigns were designed for larger metro areas. How could a small MPO in a smaller community get some success with a lower budget?
A: [From Dave] From our perspective, MetroQuest is used by agencies of all sizes including many smaller MPO’s with very limited budgets so we have seen a wide range of scales of engagement efforts. While Nashville had hundreds of meetings and used a variety of online tools, smaller agencies would decrease both of these factors significantly. Typically, smaller agencies reduce costs by only hosting a couple of community meetings thereby reducing staff and consultant time dramatically. As far a digital engagement goes these projects often only use one online engagement tool as opposed to many as Nashville did. Typically, if one tool is used it is an online survey tool that has an attractive cost per participant ratio in the hopes of broadening the participation cost effectively. [From Greg] Trying the same tools, but scaling them back. Knowing your regular participants and regular gaps is key, to then select tools (speakers bureau, street teams, or whatever) that match.

Q: In both presentations, it looks like the engagement was geared around scenario planning, and sometimes very specific scenarios. Is that the most effective way to gain public engagement? What if your plan doesn’t use scenario planning?
A: [From Dave] The Atlanta case study did not involve scenarios. We find with MetroQuest, that less than one quarter of the projects involve scenarios. The rest use a variety of other screen types depending on the phase and public input needs of the project. With that said, scenarios are compelling as they provide a rich picture of a possible future and can be a tangible way to gain the attention of residents. [From Greg] I don’t think it’s the most productive, but for Nashville it matched our needs. The critical thing is finding engaging ways to structure the decisions your community needs to weigh in on.

Q: In both Atlanta and Nashville – besides shaping the vision and end product…how impactful were these efforts in bringing elected officials & leaders on board?
A: [From Dave] If you are successful in drawing in input from a large and diverse population, you can be confident that elected officials will get on board. That certainly happened in both these cases where over 18,000 people were involved. [From Greg] I don’t think it’s the most productive, but for Nashville it matched our needs. The critical thing is finding engaging ways to structure the decisions your community needs to weigh in on.

Q: Speaker mentioned that “meeting to go?” did not work as well as it hoped. Any thoughts how it could be better?
A: [From Greg] I’m not totally sure. It may have been that we had too much going on in that phase, and so we couldn’t focus the public’s attention on it.

Q: For Nashville, how did you best get people to participate at markets, transit stations, etc. Was there a reward like a raffle, candy, or mugs?
A: [From Greg] In one round, we had some raffle prizes (coordinated with prizes we recruited to give away to active participants on MindMixer). We also had shirts and tote bags in a different round. And we had stickers throughout – another good way to draw families over.

Q: Did you find that more people would attend after online outreach or were those done simultaneously?
A: [From Greg] Generally simultaneously. I think each fed the other.

Q: What was the total budget for Nashville Next?
A: [From Greg] About $300,000 in outreach consultant costs, plus 10-12 staff working 60-100% FTE. Several other departments and divisions participated in Resource Team meetings, but did not design, develop, or implement public participation.

Q: What would the cost for Hispanic input have been had the Spanish language site not been used?
A: [From Greg] I’m not sure. If you want to follow up with me directly, I can try to run the numbers without that.

Q: What meaningful public input was gained for Nashville Next that Metro Planning wouldn’t have done otherwise?
A: [From Greg] The prominence of affordability, largely due to traditionally under-represented groups. Affordability hasn’t ever been far from our understanding of community concerns, but it really came to the forefront in NN.

Q: How long was the public participation process?
A: [From Greg] All told, three years. Individual phases lasted two to four months.

Q: How is the comprehensive plan provided online? Interactive? Static pdf document?
A: Sadly, several static PDF documents right now. We’re working to get the action plan into the open data portal.

Q: How is implementation affecting your existing zoning and subdivision regulations?
A: [From Greg] Primarily through a current effort to add inclusionary zoning. Some minor updates. No comprehensive revision is planned right now.

Q: Is book a planner like a road show or speakers bureau?
A: [From Greg] Primarily a speakers bureau.

Q: What is your take on Twitter Live Chats as a method of consultation?
A: [From Greg] They’re okay. They weren’t a focus; we participated in one handled through the daily newspaper.

Q: Albuquerque asks: What were the background reports and studies, and how did you pick the topics?
A: [From Greg] They’re available here: http://www.nashville.gov/Government/NashvilleNext/Background-Reports.aspx. They were developed partly through our own sense of the community and partly in consultant with our Steering Committee. We went wide with the background reports and then narrowed and consolidated them into seven plan elements.

Q: Was NextDoor utilized for sourcing participation?
A: [From Greg] We didn’t have very much of a NextDoor presence when NashvilleNext was underway.

Q: Did you use existing staff to do the staff level (non-consultant) work, or did you deliberately staff up to accomplish the task? What disciplines were the focus?
A: [From Greg] Existing staff of planners, landscape architects, and architects.

Q: What is cost for MetroQuest? Is it a subscription?
A: [From Dave] I apologize that I was not able to provide more detailed information about MetroQuest due to the nature of the session. This session was not meant to be an introduction to MetroQuest and only included examples to highlight the lessons learned via the case studies. We would be happy to provide additional information to those interested in a separate call. I can let you know that MetroQuest is available by annual subscription and the cost varies based on the size of the organization. The Nashville case study compares the cost per participant of various online and face to face approaches at 38:30 in the video.

Thanks again for your interest and participation in this webinar.

May 16, 2016