11/24/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

and preservation of the central city neighborhoods. Any transportation policy should be consistent with this goal and should act to improve the quality of life of the central city neighborhoods. 7. We do not e support the razing of central city neighborhoods. 8. We support the suggestion by the Fairmount Neighborhood Organization that the funds now being used for planning alternative II be used instead for a study of a combination of 30% mass transit use and a program of balanced land use. We find, however, the concept of a balanced land use as described in alternative V to be unacceptable and dissimilar to our ideas on balanced land use. 9. No construction should be permitted unless it is demonstrated that it will significantly reduce traffic on present neighborhood streets and arterials. 10. Express buses from beyond Chambers Street should be instituted now as part of the mass transit system. II. We believe it is necessary that the public and neighborhood groups be directly involved in development of the long-range and detailed master transportation plan. 12. We find the policies, goals, and objectives stated herein to be necessary for our neighborhood to remain a safe, healthy, and viable communi ty in which to 1i ve." (I-B-2) Cliff Culp, Realtor, based his remarks on pollution and economics. In seeing the black smoke generated by bus exhaust, he feels they are more resonsible for pollution than the autos that would be needed to take the place of one bus. Why not plan for mini-buses - cleaner and better gas mileage - for the longer treks at least. Regarding the economic picture, he feels the auto industry has done a fine job in upping gas mileage and bringing pollution down, making it more economical for auto owners. Too, private industry is doing much to generate development of electric cars. e Mr. Culp feels strongly that it is time to tighten belts and ask "where the money is coming from" before spending it. Also, he favors bikes but feels that, if they want to use the streets, they also should be taxed and ticketed. Wanda Hensen, chairperson for the LCOG Citizens Advisory Committee for Transportation Planning, noted an error in Mr. Van Fossen's remarks. For purposes of transportation planning, she said, one body going three different places is considered as 3 person trips. She then went on to explain that the deadline for an adopted areawide transportation plan is August as dictated by the timetable negotiated with the u. S. Department of Transportation. The amount of time between the selection of an alternative in December-January and the August deadline leaves critically little time to complete the technical work necessary to develop the master plan. Because of the timetable, theCAC voted a 2-5 hybrid alternative so that data preparation could proceed. She said it was understood that some or all of the work would have to be set aside if the alternative chosen by local elected officials proved to differ substantially from that choice. The committee thought it the most logical alternative and felt that its early identification was the best opportunity to meet the August deadline for a master plan. It seemed too to be the most realistic and desirable alternative. She said 10% transit is a responsible goal, a trip reduction may come about by reduced resources, and it is only reasonable to begin to make land use decisions based partly on transportation conservation. 4t Don Yon, 2434 Columbia, representing the Pacific Northwest Sierra Club, stated that group supports the concepts of alternatives #3 and #5 in general but questions the process and resultant programs. They hope planners will plan for the future, not relying just upon present knowledge and processes, basing their plans on human needs and not the needs of the automobile. i:Jllp 11/24/75 - 5