Hi Roger,
I left the meeting when Joe Goldstein, former Dean of Engineering at UMass Amherst, rolled over in his grave upon hearing Professor Dan inform the gathering that he does not ride on bike paths; he rides in the streets. Huh? 

Professor Dan is a typical seasoned rider and I suggest thinking should go into implementing roadway strategies that give walkers and bicyclists preference and causes cars, SUVs, pick-ups and dump trucks to loose it. 

Some years ago I suggested deploying established Road Sharing design principles, engineering parameters and design criteria developed by the brilliant traffic engineer, Hans Monderman (RIP), from the Netherlands. Google him. Read about his traffic management theories and take a test ride with him on you tube (CUT AND PASTE INTO YOUR BROWSER). 
(i) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Monderman 

(ii) http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.12/traffic.html 

(iii) http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/22/international/europe/22monderman.html?_r=1&ex=1264136400&en=df658c80f6f9ed20&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland 

(iv) http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=search_videos&search_query=monderman%20tequio&search_sort=video_date_uploaded&search_category=0&search=Search 

Road Sharing causes a more respectful acknowledgement of the rights of all to use the roadway. Our one road is perfect to put these practices into play. 

Building a separate, bi-directional, off-the-road bike path does not get to the core of the issue which I believe to be vehicles not bicycles. Isn't it vehicles v. walkers, vehicles v. bicycles, vehicles v. mopeds, vehicles v. horses, vehicles v. deer and vehicles v. vehicles (some on dangerously deflated tires)?

Road Sharing principles are legitimate tools that deliver effective solutions that can address nearly all of the areas where vehicles contest with other users as well as address the safety and cost concerns voiced at the meeting. 

Trucks, cars, motorcycles, rickshaws, scooters, mopeds, ox carts, bicycles, walkers and even an occasional flock of sheep can all share the roadway safely and without conflict. Road Sharing causes 'psychological traffic calming', meaning: things settle down to non-aggressive behaviors and tolerance prevails. Chappy can accomplish a safe, efficient and very democratic transportation plan, respectful of all users, with very little new infrastructure. 

Road Sharing engineering is counterintuitive, no doubt. But it works. 

Finally, a "planning process" is one of assessment, goal setting, and attainment. It’s also supposed to be fun. This isn’t. An engineering homework assignment has hijacked our community ... and along with it some of our neighborliness, civility and common sense. Seems to me the engineering exercise gun-jumped the planning process and, in doing so, drove the solution toward the “100 year flood model" that Dan presented. 

The student engineers, to their credit, tried to solve for bicycles but couldn't solve for all bicycles, certainly not Dan’s. They didn’t solve for pedestrians, nor mopeds, or vehicles of any type. I think we can and we should rethink this and solve for all modes by using Road Sharing engineering alternatives so everyone gets safe passage on our "Island Apart". Then, hopefully, we can bring ourselves together as a community with renewed resolve to settle differences respectfully and to act as worthy stewards of this very special place we share. 

Victor Colantonio 
55 Lighthouse Road