<?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: NJ Year in Review: A Loss of Focus</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.tstc.org/2008/01/08/nj-year-in-review-a-loss-of-focus/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.tstc.org/2008/01/08/nj-year-in-review-a-loss-of-focus/</link>
	<description>News and opinion from the Tri-State Transportation Campaign</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 02:28:51 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Nathanael Nerode</title>
		<link>http://blog.tstc.org/2008/01/08/nj-year-in-review-a-loss-of-focus/comment-page-1/#comment-141</link>
		<dc:creator>Nathanael Nerode</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2008 07:50:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.tstc.org/2008/01/08/nj-year-in-review-a-loss-of-focus/#comment-141</guid>
		<description>Shouldn&#039;t the Parkway and Turnpike widenings have FLUNKED the EIS requirement?  After all, according to their own documents, they not only don&#039;t achieve any improvement, they actually make the original traffic problem (which they were designed to solve) worse!

The law requires mitigation for induced problems, and I don&#039;t think there&#039;s any  mitigation possible for that other than cancelling the project.

How on earth did they manage to keep the projects going?  Are they just lying in the EIS or something?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shouldn&#8217;t the Parkway and Turnpike widenings have FLUNKED the EIS requirement?  After all, according to their own documents, they not only don&#8217;t achieve any improvement, they actually make the original traffic problem (which they were designed to solve) worse!</p>
<p>The law requires mitigation for induced problems, and I don&#8217;t think there&#8217;s any  mitigation possible for that other than cancelling the project.</p>
<p>How on earth did they manage to keep the projects going?  Are they just lying in the EIS or something?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
