×

Warning message

The installed version of the browser you are using is outdated and no longer supported by Konveio. Please upgrade your browser to the latest release.

DRAFT Chittenden County 2026 ECOS Regional Plan

Please review and comment on the first public hearing draft of the 2026 ECOS Plan by January 21, 2026.

The ECOS Regional Plan combines four plans into one: the Chittenden County Regional Plan, Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP), Enhanced Energy Plan (EEP), and Comprehensive Economic Develop Strategy (CEDS).
File name:

-

File size:

-

Title:

-

Author:

-

Subject:

-

Keywords:

-

Creation Date:

-

Modification Date:

-

Creator:

-

PDF Producer:

-

PDF Version:

-

Page Count:

-

Page Size:

-

Fast Web View:

-
Choose an option Alt text (alternative text) helps when people can’t see the image or when it doesn’t load.
Aim for 1-2 sentences that describe the subject, setting, or actions.
This is used for ornamental images, like borders or watermarks.
Preparing document for printing…
0%

Click anywhere in the document to add a comment. Select a bubble to view comments.
Document is loading Loading Glossary…
Powered by Konveio

Comments

View all Cancel

Add comment

Leo Jan 14 2026 at 5:16PM on page 133

Suggestion
What about waste-to-energy? Contemporary plants like Amager Bakke in Copenhagen are actually quite clean, would have a smaller footprint than a landfill, and would also provide electricity to the county.

Leo Jan 14 2026 at 5:12PM on page 89

Suggestion
I'll reiterate that park and rides don't seem to be the best use of funds, but investing in an actual bike share system, backed by municipalities or another segment of government, is essential.

Leo Jan 14 2026 at 5:10PM on page 89

Suggestion
This is excellent, and a solid commitment to TSP by all involved parties is essential. Maybe consider other priority strategies like bus lanes, but this is a huge step in the right direction.

Leo Jan 14 2026 at 5:09PM on page 89

Suggestion
When you think about it, park and ride for buses doesn't make a lot of sense, since a bus will be slower and less convenient than driving. Would they make sense in a context involving rail? Maybe, but in general, the funding could be better utilized to improve actual transit service, and the land could be better utilized for dense, transit-oriented development.

Leo Jan 14 2026 at 5:02PM on page 81

Suggestion
I'm well aware that this is a political 3rd rail- but nuclear should at least be mentioned as a potential, long-term option.

Leo Jan 14 2026 at 5:00PM on page 80

Suggestion
I'd argue that we shouldn't be encouraging any parking of any kind- greenwashed parking is still parking, and we should be trying to reduce the amount of parking in our communities in favor of active and public transportation.

Leo Jan 14 2026 at 4:57PM on page 71

Suggestion
Part of our housing crisis is municipalities' slow walking or refusing to enact policies that result in more housing being built. This would require a significant change in policy, but shifting away from "targets" and towards mandates could do a lot of good.
in reply to Nolan Rogers's comment

Nolan Rogers Jan 11 2026 at 7:40PM on page 80

Suggestion
Especially in downtown areas with high value/sqft, maybe we shouldn't be incentivizing people who own vehicles (let alone often the wealthiest in that category) at all

Nolan Rogers Jan 11 2026 at 7:37PM on page 80

Question
From a land use perspective, is incentivizing parking for many of the wealthiest vehicle owners a priority? Is this the best use of that space?

Nolan Rogers Jan 11 2026 at 7:36PM on page 80

Question
Is this equitable on a cost basis? Understanding that to own/use an EV requires significant money, can we make sure that at least as much money is going into mode shifting as is going into electric vehicle incentives?

Nolan Rogers Jan 11 2026 at 7:25PM on page 74

Question
What happens to decision makers when any of these goals in the plan are not met? Anything? Looking forward to discussion in the meetings.

Nolan Rogers Jan 11 2026 at 7:09PM on page 72

Suggestion
Potential formatting/text justification change

Nolan Rogers Jan 11 2026 at 6:50PM on page 71

Question
Does complete streets need to be defined? Probably not since this is a tool to be used by the planning agencies, but friendly comment in case it needs to be defined here or previously or in an appendix.

Nolan Rogers Jan 11 2026 at 3:20PM on page 64

Formatting/justification edit required for final draft

Nolan Rogers Jan 11 2026 at 3:18PM on page 62

Is this map poor quality? It could just be my computer but it may need to be higher definition in a future draft

Nolan Rogers Jan 11 2026 at 3:06PM on page 56

This does directly oppose climate goals outline in this same ECOS plan.

Nolan Rogers Jan 11 2026 at 2:48PM on page 23

Question
So the population in 2025 is 10,000 greater than 10 years ago (Figure 2), but we don't think the population will add another 10,000 for the next 25 years? How does that make sense? This would suggest that we should NOT use the 2018 forecasts.

Joe Segale Jan 7 2026 at 5:21PM on page 88

Suggestion
Consider adding an action related to improving the resilience of the transportation system to floods and other climate change impacts.

Sylvia Dec 24 2025 at 12:16PM on page 40

Suggestion
pesticide use to control invasives or manage landscapes,

Emma Vaughn Dec 10 2025 at 10:40PM on page 141

Suggestion
This links to the old ECOS Map Viewer; the correct link should be: link -- this will be updated in the next iteration.

Emma Vaughn Dec 10 2025 at 10:40PM on page 141

Suggestion
This links to the old ECOS Map Viewer; the correct link should be: link -- this will be updated in the next iteration.

Emma Vaughn Dec 10 2025 at 10:39PM on page 133

Suggestion
This links to the old ECOS Map Viewer; the correct link should be: link -- this will be updated in the next iteration.

Darren Schibler 2 Dec 1 2025 at 1:44PM on page 70

Suggestion
Planning Practices is Ch. 1, not Ch. 3

Darren Schibler 1 Nov 18 2025 at 3:48PM on page 2

Suggestion
Watershed Health chapter actually starts on p. 45, not p. 46.

Darren Schibler Oct 7 2025 at 2:14PM on page 65

Suggestion
This text is still highlighted

Jacki Murphy Oct 6 2025 at 1:04PM on page 22

Suggestion
add "than"

Jacki Murphy Oct 6 2025 at 12:54PM on page 19

Suggestion
replace of with or?

Jacki Murphy Oct 6 2025 at 12:52PM on page 19

Suggestion
healthy?

Jacki Murphy Oct 6 2025 at 12:50PM on page 18

Suggestion
remove extra comma?

Jacki Murphy Oct 6 2025 at 12:44PM on page 18

Suggestion
delete "in"

Jacki Murphy Oct 6 2025 at 12:43PM on page 18

Suggestion
needs a "but" or some other word here

Jacki Murphy Oct 6 2025 at 12:09PM on page 8

Suggestion
weird formatting issue due to r/l justification...can spacing be manually adjusted?
View all