The Chittenden County MPO is working on its long range (2025) transportation
plan.  In steering committee meetings, I have be beating the drum for
creating communities that enable everyone to safely and conveniently reach
their destination (access), rather than continuing to focus on vehicle
mobility as occurs typically.

FYI, below is response I make to a suggestion to change the language of one
of our goal statements.

Marc Companion

Sent: Monday, November 13, 2000 8:12 PM
Subject: MPO 2025 revised goals

> Hi friends
> I think the wording of Goal #3 is fine, especially the portion that says
> "including the elderly, disabled, and youth."
> The goal now says:  "Create a transportation system that offers constantly
> improving safety, accessibility, flexibility, and comfort for all users,
> including the elderly, the disabled, and youth."
> For too many years, the needs of these groups of people have been left out
> of the day-to-day transportation planning process.  For example, as we
> review the plethora of proposed subdivisions and new
> projects statewide in local planning commissions and Act 250, the dialogue
> is almost always exclusively on traffic studies and roadway levels of
> service.  The result, unwittingly, has been a planned and permitted
> of the ability of the elderly, the disabled, and youth to reach their
> desitnation.   This is one of the outstanding, yet least discussed
> associated with sprawl...if you do not have a car, you cannot reach your
> destination!!!   The land use and transportation implications of sprawl
> a civil rights issue.
> The 2025 Metropolitan Plan has the opportunity to redirect the dialogue on
> how we think about transportation planning in Chittenden County, and
> Vermont.  By specifically recognizing the needs of the elderly, the
> disabled, and youth, we can hopefully transition away from the traffic
> mentality and begin a meaningful integration of holistic, multi-modal
> planning tools at all levels of planning.
> Retaining the language in Goal #3 is beneficial for the simple reason
> A transportation system that is safe and convenient for the elderly, the
> disabled, and youth can be used by EVERYONE.  All users are accommodated.
> This kind of thinking needs to become part of our land use /
> culture in Vermont if we are to succeed in our transition into the
> multi-modal era.
> So may I suggest that if we make any changes to Goal #3, we ought to
> consider strengthening the message by proclaiming   "ESPECIALLY the
>  the disabled, and youth".
> Marc
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: sam <[log in to unmask]>
> To: bruce.bender <[log in to unmask]>; christopher.p.jolly
> <[log in to unmask]>; clay.poitras
<[log in to unmask]>;
> Dean L. Pierce <[log in to unmask]>; gina.campoli
> <[log in to unmask]>; meldridge.bpz
> <[log in to unmask]>; boydenn <[log in to unmask]>; deb
> <[log in to unmask]>; faith <[log in to unmask]>; jkmarvin
> <[log in to unmask]>; jsegale <[log in to unmask]>; knolan
> <[log in to unmask]>; marcc <[log in to unmask]>; mlintermann
> <[log in to unmask]>; morgante <[log in to unmask]>; pkeating
> <[log in to unmask]>; sprawlvt <[log in to unmask]>; tbuckley
> <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, November 10, 2000 10:07 AM
> Subject: RE: revised goals
> >
> > Dean -
> >    Thank you for the latest version of the goals.  Although I much
> a
> > 'real-time' dialogue, I understand that the e-mails will hopefully
> expedite
> > the process so that the Vision Statement and the Goals can be released
> > the full Board before the end of the year.
> >     I do have a few comments:
> > 1. Goal #3: by retaining the part.."including the elderly, the
> > disabled...etc." I worry that we run the risk of inadvertently excluding
> > some group. The rule of thumb being ,specific mention can actually
> > the group rather than maintain it as all inclusive. Should we not just
> stop
> > the statement at the end of ..."for all users."
> > 2. Goal #5:   I would suggest consideration of a change to..." Provide a
> > transportation system that respects and protects the region's....." The
> > burden of proof to show an enhancement may not apply to all
> > projects...whereas "protects" can more readily be accomplished
> consistently.
> > I look forward to our next meeting. Sam
> >
> > ===== Original Message from "Dean L. Pierce" <[log in to unmask]>
> > 11/09/00 8:58 am
> > >Greetings--
> > >
> > >Attached please find the latest version of the goals for the
> > >Transportation Plan.
> > >
> > >This version reflects the latest comments received.
> > >
> > >Please review and, assuming you are using MSWord, suggest changes using
> the
> > >"Change Tracking" feature (Call me or Joe if you have questions).
> > >
> > >We would like to come to agreement before the next mailing goes out
> > >Tuesday or Wednesday).
> > >
> > >
> > >Thanks in advance.
> > >
> > >Dean Pierce
> >
> >
> >

VTBIKEPEDPOLICY-L: The Vermont Bicycle and Pedestrian Policy Discussion List
Subscription control:
For help: email [log in to unmask] with the word "help" in the message body.