Draft MTP/SCS Comments Received - sacog

More documents

Recommendations

Info

SCS Health & Equity Metrics August 2011 Table of Contents Introduction 3 The Metrics Safety 5 Access to Goods, Jobs, and Services 7 General Transportation 16 Future Growth 21 Economic 23 Environmental Pollution 25 Equity 36 How to use the Health and Equity Metrics 38 Appendix: Metrics recommended for future study 40 References 41 ‐28‐ Page 64 of 165
SCS Health & Equity Metrics August 2011 SCS Health & Equity Performance Metrics INTRODUCTION In 2008, the California legislature passed SB375, the intent of which is to decrease emissions of greenhouse gases to target levels in each region of the state. Given the connection between how our environment is built and health behaviors, outcomes, and inequities, this is a unique opportunity to elevate health and equity into transportation and land use planning. The bodies responsible for implementation are the Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) in each of the 18 regions of the state, and they are planning for this change through their Regional Transportation Plans (RTPs), an update of transportation policies and guidelines, as well as guidance on the types of projects (and in some cases the actual projects) that will be constructed over the next 25 years. Within the RTPs, all MPOs will be developing a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), which is the document and vision for decreasing greenhouse gas emissions through transportation and land use planning. Given the high levels of chronic disease, including obesity, diabetes, and asthma, that we are facing as a country, it is imperative that we address the root causes. We spend a higher percent of our GDP on healthcare than any other country and while access to healthcare and genetics are important factors that determine our health status, there is growing recognition that the land use and transportation systems that influence our personal behaviors affect our health status even more. As described below, transportation systems impact health in many ways, through injuries and fatalities, environmental quality (e.g., air quality and noise), physical activity, and income. These impacts are typically not distributed evenly across all populations, with lower income populations and communities of color often facing worse outcomes for a variety of reasons. Understanding the causes of these differences is an important piece of addressing them. For this reason, we believe that equity (defined here to mean the absence of systematic disparities in health or in the major social determinants of health, between groups with different levels of underlying social advantage/disadvantage 1 ) must be assessed in addition to health. A statewide group of public health advocates convened by Human Impact Partners has developed the following set of 13 performance metrics for use in the RTP/SCS processes across the state. In the past, public health and equity have not been fully considered in land use and transportation planning and many health and equity outcomes related to those plans have been poor. We hope to inform the discussion of performance metrics with a health perspective and thereby improve future health outcomes related to these planning efforts. MPOs across the state are including different voices in the Sustainable Communities Strategy discussions as part of their RTPs. Our hope is that MPOs will consider including the following metrics in their SCSs and including public health and equity professionals and advocates in the process of developing their RTP/SCS. This document lists the 13 health and equity performance metrics prioritized by statewide health experts, agencies, advocates, and transportation planners. This list of 13 was chosen from an original 129 indicators. ‐29‐ Page 65 of 165
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: file://C:\Documents and Settings\CH
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 29 and 30: Sacramento Public Hearing Comments
Page 31 and 32: 909 12 th Street Sacramento, CA 958
Page 33 and 34: file://C:\Documents and Settings\CH
Page 37 and 38: Sacramento Area Council of Governme
Page 39 and 40: SCS Health & Equity Metrics August
Page 63: SCS Health & Equity Metrics August
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 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165:
Page 175 and 176:
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL J
Page 177 and 178:
Consideration of this information
Page 179:
egulations can help to ensure that
Page 187 and 188:
Yuba County Elected Official Inform
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Lincoln Community Meeting Comments
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Colfax City Council Meeting Comment
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
show all

Draft MTP/SCS Comments Received - sacog

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?