<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Can State DOTs Be Trained to Kick the Sprawl Habit?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/09/25/can-state-dots-be-trained-to-kick-the-sprawl-habit/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/09/25/can-state-dots-be-trained-to-kick-the-sprawl-habit/</link>
	<description>Covering the New York City Streets Renaissance</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:07:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: MichelleM</title>
		<link>http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/09/25/can-state-dots-be-trained-to-kick-the-sprawl-habit/comment-page-1/#comment-124981</link>
		<dc:creator>MichelleM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 17:35:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=55001#comment-124981</guid>
		<description>I participated in this webcast, and I was genuinely disappointed. I mean, yes, they said all the right things about walkability and transit and context sensitive design and the environment and quality of life...but most of the participants were people who have been preaching this stuff for the past 10 years or longer. When the discussion turned to programs and next steps, the presenters really didn&#039;t have anything new to talk about. The idea of the planning grants is good, but there weren&#039;t many specifics. We&#039;ve known about TIGER for, what, a year now? I&#039;m glad that we have people in charge who &#039;get it&#039;, but I really hope they&#039;ll get more assertive about developing programs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I participated in this webcast, and I was genuinely disappointed. I mean, yes, they said all the right things about walkability and transit and context sensitive design and the environment and quality of life&#8230;but most of the participants were people who have been preaching this stuff for the past 10 years or longer. When the discussion turned to programs and next steps, the presenters really didn&#8217;t have anything new to talk about. The idea of the planning grants is good, but there weren&#8217;t many specifics. We&#8217;ve known about TIGER for, what, a year now? I&#8217;m glad that we have people in charge who &#8216;get it&#8217;, but I really hope they&#8217;ll get more assertive about developing programs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Moser</title>
		<link>http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/09/25/can-state-dots-be-trained-to-kick-the-sprawl-habit/comment-page-1/#comment-124731</link>
		<dc:creator>Moser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Sep 2009 18:07:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=55001#comment-124731</guid>
		<description>I think you are wrong about the infrastructure bank, which may not end up within USDOT altogether, and whose resources are likely to be oriented toward mega-projects. I think a more likely interpretation is that if the feds have to go through the pain of raising new revenue for transportation, there is going to be a greater degree of accountability attached, and the Tiger grants will show which direction things are headed.  I also think the topic here is a bit miscast.  State DOT&#039;s don&#039;t directly create sprawl.  They facilitate it by seeing their job as chasing around after the traffic congestion that sprawl generates.  Disowning the congestion caused by bad municipal development decisions is the first step toward state transportation reform.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you are wrong about the infrastructure bank, which may not end up within USDOT altogether, and whose resources are likely to be oriented toward mega-projects. I think a more likely interpretation is that if the feds have to go through the pain of raising new revenue for transportation, there is going to be a greater degree of accountability attached, and the Tiger grants will show which direction things are headed.  I also think the topic here is a bit miscast.  State DOT&#8217;s don&#8217;t directly create sprawl.  They facilitate it by seeing their job as chasing around after the traffic congestion that sprawl generates.  Disowning the congestion caused by bad municipal development decisions is the first step toward state transportation reform.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

