Draft MTP/SCS Comments Received - sacog

More documents

Recommendations

Info

We acknowledge that the ULI report is just one market study out of many and that all such projections are by nature uncertain. Still, a report that projects a future surplus of nearly 200,000 housing units of a product type that SACOG continues to build should be given some serious consideration. Prior to its next RTP, we would encourage SACOG to conduct or continue to refine its own market study to ensure SACOG’s next 20 years of growth are appropriate to the market demand and help to strengthen the regional economy. Invest Transportation Dollars Strategically to Deliver Real Results SACOG puts its money in the right places, and critically, operates within its means. The new plan spends 12.5% less than the existing one, but the decrease is spread intelligently: a 20% decrease in capital projects versus only a 9% decrease in O&M, consistent with a “fix-it-first” investment strategy. It proposes to spend 8% of total revenues for bike and walk projects, plus include bike lane and sidewalk features on most arterial projects, dwarfing other region’s efforts to promote active transportation. The plan spends only 3% of revenues on state highway improvements, which no other region has done in 50 years of RTPs. SACOG’s fiscal constraint should be a model for other California regions, some of which simply assume new revenues to meet an ever growing appetite for new projects. And yet, in spite of this sound investment strategy, unfortunately 85% of all trips in the SACOG region by 2035 are still made by car. Below we make recommendations for strategies SACOG might consider to improve the return on its transit investments. • Prioritize transit investments in high-density arterial corridors. High density arterial corridors with no or limited transit service present strategic investment opportunities and should be prioritized to receive funding. SACOG should flag any sufficiently dense arterial corridors that currently lack this transit service and work with local jurisdictions and transit operators to accelerate service there. In arterial corridors where transit service doesn’t currently exist, service introduction should be timed with a sufficient density of homes or jobs along these arterial corridors. • Ensure sufficient densities and strong ridership potential prior to initiation of costly capital transit projects. As suggested by strategy 28.9, bus transit may be a less expensive and more practical investment in key new transit corridors prior to capital intensive rail projects. It may make sense to defer some of these rail projects until bus service has proven that strong ridership demand exists in these corridors. • Schedule road construction to occur later in the plan to avoid triggering growth outside existing urban areas. Any capacity increases at the urban edge should be phased to occur during the plan’s later years to ensure they are not growth-inducing, but rather demand management strategies. Construction of these costly capital facilities should be initiated only once demand is strong enough to warrant their development. • Improve parking policies to support walkable communities and transit use. Chapter 3 specifically notes that parking policies may be a barrier to realization of SACOG’s desired land use pattern. Strategies 3.7 and 16.1 can help to address what is surely one of the most powerful drivers of the decision to drive in the SACOG region--the abundance of free and available parking--and we strongly support prioritizing these research efforts, and moving towards implementation of their findings. Modifying current parking 4
egulations can help to ensure that developers are able to deliver the walkable, transitoriented housing the market is demanding. Well designed, parking pricing policies can help pay for business improvement districts and shuttles, boost returns for local merchant, and support increased transit use. Additional Policies and Recommendations In addition to detailing its proposed investments and land use pattern, this plan includes an excellent chapter on additional policies and strategies to ensure effective implementation. This chapter could be strengthened by providing more detail on the state policies which will be necessary to realize the promise of this plan. The recent Supreme Court decision on the elimination of redevelopment agencies, for example, provides a significant complication for implementation of this plan. This plan can take a step towards achieving its goals by articulating clearly for state policy makers which additional tools will be necessary for implementation. In particular, Strategy 1.2 calls for regulatory reform at the state, national and local levels to encourage Blueprint-style growth. More detail on the nature of such reforms would help guide policymakers. Strategy 18.4 mentions working with the state Strategic Growth Council. We would strongly recommend that SACOG work closely with the Council, the Governor, and the Legislature to advocate the necessary reforms to ensure this plan delivers on its promise. This collaboration should begin with a presentation to the Council with recommendations for administrative and legislative solutions to remove barriers. We thank you for your continued excellence in leadership and look forward to working with you in the weeks and months to come. Sincerely, Amanda Eaken, Deputy Director for Sustainable Communities Natural Resources Defense Council Meea Kang, President California Infill Builders Association i http://www.uli.org/ResearchAndPublications/~/media/ResearchAndPublications/Report/ULI%20Voices%20Nelson%20The%20New%20Califor nia%20Dream.ashx 5
Page 1 and 2:
Page 1 of 1 What are you commenting
Page 3 and 4:
Page 1 of 1 eircomments sacog - Dav
Page 5 and 6:
file://C:\Documents and Settings\CH
Page 7 and 8:
Roseville Public Hearing Comments f
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Coalition on Regional Equity MTP/SC
Page 17 and 18:
Coalition on Regional Equity MTP/SC
Page 19 and 20:
Page 19 of 165
Page 21 and 22:
Page 21 of 165
Page 23 and 24:
Page 23 of 165
Page 25 and 26:
Page 25 of 165
Page 27 and 28:
Page 27 of 165
Page 29 and 30:
Sacramento Public Hearing Comments
Page 31 and 32:
909 12 th Street Sacramento, CA 958
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 35 of 165
Page 37 and 38:
Sacramento Area Council of Governme
Page 39 and 40:
SCS Health & Equity Metrics August
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
The effort was funded by the Resour
Page 69 and 70:
Wier M, Weintraub J, Humphreys EH,
Page 71 and 72:
health by 6 percentage points; and
Page 73 and 74:
http://www.cityofrichmondgeneralpla
Page 75 and 76:
subway service, and over 50 percent
Page 77 and 78:
Large city downtown: Urban center A
Page 79 and 80:
Another population suffering from h
Page 81 and 82:
Activity-based model development is
Page 83 and 84:
METRIC: GENERAL TRANSPORTATION 7. W
Page 85 and 86:
FUTURE GROWTH METRIC: FUTURE GROWTH
Page 87 and 88:
ECONOMIC METRIC: ECONOMIC 9. a) Per
Page 89 and 90:
ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION METRIC: ENV
Page 91 and 92:
STANDARDS Walking & biking The Surg
Page 93 and 94:
emissions to impairments of lung fu
Page 95 and 96:
RD 3.2 Reduce asthma hospitalizatio
Page 97 and 98:
CARB 2005 Guidance on Preventing Ai
Page 99 and 100:
Institute, Public Health Law and Po
Page 101 and 102:
EQUITY METRIC: EQUITY f. Measure an
Page 103 and 104:
HOW TO USE THE HEALTH AND EQUITY ME
Page 105 and 106:
Appendix: Metrics recommended for f
Page 107 and 108:
xxii Schoeni RF, House JS, Kaplan G
Page 109 and 110:
lxi Campbell FA & Pungello E. (2000
Page 111 and 112:
ci Sallis JF, McKenzie TL. (1991).
Page 113 and 114:
cxliv Pisarski A. (2006). Commuting
Page 115 and 116:
cxci U.S. EPA. 2008. Inventory of U
Page 117 and 118:
ccxxxiv Beelen R, Hoek G, van den B
Page 119 and 120:
cclxxii Office of the Actuary, Cent
Page 121 and 122:
Signed by: Argelia Leon, Policy Man
Page 123 and 124:
I. Ensure Transportation Projects S
Page 125 and 126:
gentrification/displacement, air qu
Page 127 and 128: Liz O’Donoghue Director of Infras
Page 129 and 130: infrastructure in those communities
Page 131 and 132: high speed/high volume arterials or
Page 133 and 134: Attachment: Specific Comments about
Page 135 and 136: January 9, 2011 Sacramento Area Cou
Page 137 and 138: next four years so that the next MT
Page 139 and 140: We appreciate working with SACOG, i
Page 141 and 142: We note that the work to develop th
Page 143 and 144: Policy 9: Greenhouse Gas emission r
Page 145 and 146: • Modify Strategy 30.4 as follows
Page 147 and 148: PO Box 1526 • Sacramento, CA •
Page 149 and 150: This study by the Urban Land Instit
Page 151 and 152: Further, while SACOG has used the b
Page 153 and 154: from SHA to SACOG re MTP/SCS 2035 L
Page 165: file://C:\Documents and Settings\CH
Page 175 and 176: NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL J
Page 177: Consideration of this information
Page 187 and 188: Yuba County Elected Official Inform
Page 201 and 202: Lincoln Community Meeting Comments
Page 213 and 214: Colfax City Council Meeting Comment
show all

Draft MTP/SCS Comments Received - sacog

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?