..... Sierra Club Eastern Missouri Group Home Page

Citizens' Transportation Policy for Metropolitan St. Louis
Written by Transportation & Smart Growth Committee of Sierra Club of Eastern Missouri et al


July 3, 2002
PURPOSE
This Citizens' Transportation Policy is intended to stimulate discussion of the principles currently guiding the allocation of transportation funds in the St. Louis metropolitan area. It is expected to be used to evaluate transportation projects being proposed for funding by the metropolitan planning agency (East-West Gateway Coordinating Council), by local governments, and by private entities.

GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Transportation policy is frequently viewed as solving the problem of moving people and goods from one place to another. Transportation policy needs to be viewed instead from two broad perspectives.

First, transportation is a means to an end, rather than an end in itself. The "end" is to provide access, i.e. to bring people, goods, services, ideas and materials into contact with one another to serve human purposes. Providing access is an important part of our economy.


Second, transportation has environmental and social consequences, and those consequences must be considered in evaluating the appropriate mix of access options.
CURRENT TRANSPORTATION POLICY AND PRACTICE
Current transportation policy and practice do not reflect the General Principles outlined above.
Users of motorized transportation generally do not pay the full cost of their transportation.
 

The costs of accidents caused by the speed and weight of motor vehicles are borne by the individual families involved and by all payers of health and life insurance policies.


Such subsidies disguise the real cost of motorized transportation in the USA, causing it to be under-priced and consequently over-used. This over-use has resulted in decentralized cities where people live farther away from the opportunities they need to access.

National policies since the 1950s regarding housing finance and highway construction have also encouraged the decentralization of cities and the consequent creation of greater distances between people and the opportunities they need to access.
With distance has come the need or desire for greater speed. With greater speed has come less efficient use of fuel, greater dependence on motorized travel, greater danger for those who travel by car, but especially for those who travel by foot or bicycle. Thus, a vicious cycle perpetuates itself.

Local government structure has encouraged the decentralization of the St. Louis metro area by putting municipalities in direct competition with each other for tax base. To secure the greatest possible tax base, municipalities have enacted exclusionary zoning and have subsidized regional retail and entertainment developments to attract customers from neighboring communities.
Local land-use policies such as large-lot zoning and separation among land-use types have created greater distances between residents' homes, jobs and stores. Land-use policies such as requiring large parking lots but not sidewalks have further encouraged dependence on motorized transportation.

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Transportation and land-use policies over the past half century have assumed that low-density, automobile-oriented development at the periphery of an urban area is the best way to achieve and assure "the good life." Citizens of all age groups and socio-economic situations are now rediscovering that higher-density, walkable urban neighborhoods can also provide the good life. In fact, there is a growing consensus that public policy (including transportation policy) should be revised so as not to defeat central city efforts to revitalize -- not only to preserve the utility of existing infrastructure, but also to preserve traditional urban neighborhoods, since these can provide an attractive and viable living environment.

The following Citizens' Transportation Policy responds to both the guiding principles and current policies and practices outlined above. These policies can be divided into three main categories: (1) health and environment, (2) economy, and (3) social well-being. Each of these categories has numerous, sometimes overlapping objectives.
_____________________________________________________________________
Health & Environment:
Improve Public Health
Improve Air Quality: Examples of ways this can be done:


Make walking and cycling safer so that people do not have to put their lives at greater risk in exchange for the benefits of exercise. Examples of ways to achieve this:
Conserve Resources (energy, land, metals, plastics, etc.)
Make walking, cycling and public transit more convenient and economical so that more people will use these energy- and resource-efficient modes for more of their trips. Examples of ways this can be done.
Encourage people to choose shorter trips so that more of their trips can be made by foot or bicycle. Examples of ways this can be done:


Economic Goals:
Improve Access to Jobs
Promote metropolitan job/housing balance to reduce commuting distances for all citizens. Examples of ways this can be done:


Improve public transit services so that citizens who cannot afford to own and operate a car or cannot drive one can still participate in the job market. Ways this can be done were discussed earlier, for example:


Stimulate economic competitiveness
Lower the cost of doing business and the cost of living for residents. For example, promote land use patterns that conserve land and require less energy for access.
Encourage prudent use of tax dollars
Encourage land use patterns that require minimal public capital and maintenance costs. Examples of ways this can be done:


Support transportation and land use investments that provide the most sustainable accessibility for the largest percent of the population and potential labor force per tax dollar spent. Besides other ways discussed earlier, examples of ways this can be done:


Social Well-being:
Improve Access to health care, recreation, education, cultural opportunities, markets & other necessary services. Examples of ways this can be done:


Promote community cohesiveness by enhancing opportunities for neighbors to talk with one another. Examples of ways this can be done:


Promote public participation in transportation and land-use decision-making.