Saturday, December 20, 2014

December 20 Wall Street Journal Articles on Car Deaths (down) and Walker Deaths (up)

Letter to the editor of the Wall Street Journal Today
"Safety gains in new cars cut traffic fatalities" (Journal December 20) ignores U.S. fatality rates per vehicle mile dropping like a stone from lowest in 1970 to fourteenth in the latest the Organization for EconoMic and Community Development6 (OECD) data.  

The U.S. rate, about double that of U.K., Denmark and Sweden equates to 15,000 additional U.S. traffic deaths per year now.   Your separate article on increasing walk mode fatalities trend over the last five years ignores AARP, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety and others that roundabouts (not a single walker fatality in North America since 1990 introduction here) cut serious and fatal injuries by about 90%.   AARP advocates converting signals to roundabouts because seniors drive fatality rates at intersections is twice that of the younger driver. 

Professor John Pucher, Rutgers, studied U.S. walk and bike fatalities per mile of travel versus Germany and the Netherlands--the U.S. fatality rates were about three times versus those two nations and bicycle injury rates 20 times.  For bicyclists the new treatment, cycle track, which separates cyclists from both walk and car modes, represents the rapidly emerging technology to both enable bicycling for all as well as providing safety--Chicago's Mayor Rahm Emanuel leads the nation in this regard. 

Ironically, the NY State Department of Transportation decade-old "roundabouts first policy" for intersections contrasts with New York City's completely crazy "0 roundabout policy."  

All the nations with better highway fatality rates (except Canada) have heavy investment in roundabouts as well as safe walk/bike facilities.  

Tuesday, December 9, 2014

Stop the Madness: Increase Vermont Taxes 2.5% of Gross State Product

Stop the Madness: Increase Vermont Taxes 2.5% of Gross State Product

Vermont and national numbers for median household and family income remain down now well into the Great Recession of 2008-2009 “recovery”—$52,600 in 2013, slightly above the U.S. average, but down $3,800 from its peak in 2008.  This drop gives absolute proof to the concerns about a declining middle class and middle class incomes.  But manufacturing wages, a key income indicator, remains little changed from 1980 suggesting a much longer historic tale of income woe for the nation and Vermonters.  A major study in Vermont in the 1990s revealed the eroding of incomes and increase in poverty associated with the decline in manufacturing jobs which fled to low wage countries.  U.S. and Vermont long term unemployed numbers today remain far above normal along with depressed incomes compared to previous recoveries.  Since “government” during the 2008 to date period has regularly declined in terms of employment and discretionary funding cuts, maybe the role of government needs another look.  The right wing mantra of “starving the beast” of government apparently working quite well, but a government starved does not meet ever growing demands on it services and support.  Should there be more government and taxes or less?  (The Department of Numbers website provides lots of information on U.S./Vermont income data  ,)

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) regularly chronicles the performance of its member nations comprised of developed nations, mostly European plus the U.S., Canada, Japan, South Korea, etc.  The first thing that strikes an observer is the U.S. ranking last among 14 developed nations in income equality (11 European nations, Canada and Japan).  Current U.S. governments spending at all levels overall actually contributes to the inequality because it tends to benefit the upper income groups.  Also, more importantly, low U.S. household tax burden stands out like a sore thumb.  Reform of existing government spending to benefit the low and middle income needs immediate attention, and so does the amount of taxes—taxes need to move up about five percent minimum in terms of gross state and federal government support.

Note the current news from Montpelier regarding how exciting it is with our economy growing, a low unemployment rate and no seeming obstacles in the path of a good life for Vermonters.  With Vermont continuing for years now boasting of its near lowest unemployment rate among states and our nation five years into recovery, why Governor Peter Shumlin announcing delay of his signature universal pre-kindergarten, a $100 million dollar budget deficit facing lawmakers, and demands by the Vermont middle class for some form of relief from a $3,800 drop in median income suffered from a 2008 peak through 2013 which seems to be moving toward a permanent state?

For the Greater Burlington Chamber of Commerce leader Tom Torti the recipe is simple: “Let’s stop raising taxes. Stop the madness”  (Seven Days, November 19).  Actually, the opposite is most likely true—Vermont can and should increase its taxes and at some point expect the federal government to do the same.  The reason is quite simple—the U.S. already has some of the lowest tax rates among developed nations measured in both the overall economy and household tax burden while attaining the highest level of income inequality, an inequality seeping swiftly into the middle class in a process dating back to the 1980s when U.S. manufacturing jobs began to flow to low wage destinations.  (See the New York Times piece by Steven Ratner November 15 

Yes, Vermont may well throw money down the drain in education administration and lack of performance while spending more than practically any other state to attain under achievement in primary and secondary education--but curing that does not solve the need for additional taxation.  As Vermonters decrease their driving or just throw away the keys, for example, they choose to move to downtowns and village centers.  Consider the needed infrastructure investments—intercity and commuter rail, higher education, and urban walk/bike facilities to further the demand from the movement of the “new workforce” and the doubling senior population who together increasingly choose to work, play, retire and shop without being car dependent.   

Right now U.S. taxes are split roughly 50 percent state/local and 50 percent federal.  If the overall tax burden were raised in the U.S. 5% of gross national product (GNP) to the average 32% of a group of 14 developed nations (11 European plus Canada and Japan) the State/local and federal coffers would each gain from Vermonters and Vermont businsesses roughly $750 million each yearly, $1.5 billion overall.  Since Vermont’s Gross State Product (GSP) in 2013 amounted to $29.5 billion, devoting 5% more of that GSP to government means about shifting $1.5 billion from non-government activity to government activity which means additional taxes to support that shift.

The Ratner analysis shows the current typical $100,000 U.S. earner paying an effective tax rate of 26% or $26,000 toward government—a rule of thumb of federal versus state/local taxes is 50/50, about $13,000 federal and $13,000 state/local.  Clearly the total is far more federal than state since federal Social Security taxes are included here—but this makes the argument a conservative one here since the majority of increased taxes suggested here would go to non-retirement areas even if the U.S. did establish a needed long term care insurance program under Social Security and expanded overall retirement and disability benefits modestly as well.  Assuming a 5% increase of hypothetical individual with a $100,000 income shifted to federal and State/local taxes means an increase of $5,000 to a total of $31,000.  Again, it is assumed that half the $5,000 increase--$2,500--goes into federal tax coffers and half to Vermont State and local taxes. 

Just raising our $750 million additional taxes a year for Vermont compares to the current general fund budget for this year passed by the Legislature of $2.5 billion—an additional $750 million in State revenues amounts to a 30% increase.  From another standpoint our State and local governments now try to provide a full range of services with one third less the funds of a typical developed OECD country.  Yes the “beast” of State and local government starves.  Meanwhile one would expect a similar 2.5% increase would occur allowing federal programs such as research, infrastructure, housing assistance, food support, and long term care would get attention instead of inflation and/or outright cuts experienced over the last several years and clear expectations this trend continues in the foreseeable future.  While the federal government sleepwalks, Vermont State government can begin to take judicious steps to bring needed relief using the taxing power to benefit the needy and the middle class without the loss of employment.

 Perhaps the proper response to Tom Torti is:  “Let’s start raising taxes. Stop this madness.”

Monday, November 24, 2014

Vermont, Burlington Transportation--Cycle Track, Roundabouts, Passenger Rail

                          Comments to the Vermont Transportation Board

  Tony Redington

20 North Winooski Avenue
Burlington, VT  05401
Email:  Blog:

                                                 November 24, 2014

Thank you for the opportunity to comment in response to the Vermont Transportation Board (Board) fall series of hearings emphasizing concerns regarding the needs for transportation of youth in Vermont.  The past twelve months reflect a continuing and seeming acceleration of transportation transformation in Burlington and Vermont, one characterized by private household resource re-allocation of transportation expenditures away from an auto oriented transport to other modes and as a direct result since the millennium substantially increased walking, bicycling, and transit of all kinds.  In parallel the public wants more walk and bike infrastructure and transit services, particularly ones serving medium to long distance worker commuting.   My comments here stress the policy changes needed to respond to the demand of younger workers and those of all ages to safe walking and bicycling infrastructure, needs of middle class workers for medium distance commuter rail, and the sudden announcement days ago of the Towne Center multi-use expansion promising $200 million direct investments in Burlington’s downtown Marketplace including among other elements significant numbers of housing units, a hotel and convention center capable of handling up to 6,000 attendees, and rejoining the north-south St. Paul Street sections cutoff by the Towne Center with the new connection a walk/bike corridor with separation of each mode. This commitment by the new owners of the Towne Center truly accelerates the known trend of younger workers moving to our State’s downtowns and village centers in order to live, work, and recreate without dependence on the automobile or at least with one less.  And absolutely critical, a $200 million dollar development assures a new source of property tax and sales tax revenue to Burlington likely in the range of $5-$7 million a year for the municipal budget which can help fuel decades long neglect of transportation infrastructure of all types (as well as additional sorely needed funds for the Burlington School District).

            Vermont Transportation Finance

Before proceeding, as contained in my comments to the Board last year, the finance of transportation inevitably must move—as was already the case in Virginia and Massachusetts—away from sole dependence on car oriented revenues to general fund revenues.  Simply as outlined, vehicle miles and gasoline remain in a practically permanent state of decline while alternative modes grow strongly.  Further, walking and bicycling modes particularly require substantial sums of infra investment as will be addressed below.   Vermont Agency of Transportation (VAOT) Secretary Brian Searles this summer clearly stated this same view that Vermont must now not only raise revenues outside the highway domain to maintain and expand not just non-auto modes but even for the needs of the highway system itself.

Burlington Landmark Corridor Study—a New Blueprint for Vermont Urban Streets

After a 15-month study (it ended up citizen driven) of the 2.8 mile North Avenue corridor, the Plan received the blessing of the Mayor and City Council last month.  This first Vermont definition of a quality “world class street,” safest for those who walk and bike or travel by car or transit, features an unprecedented combining of roundabouts at key intersections with cycle track end-to-end (protected bike lanes).  A leap well beyond the legislated “complete street,” the North Avenue Plan truly is a “safe” complete street design as “complete street” designs under law and accepted practice do not require the highest safety treatments along a multi-use urban street (most generally characterized by the liberal use of roundabouts and cycle track).

Safe walk and bike infrastructure must now be the first concern in our downtowns and village centers.  Except in a few roundabout nodes in downtowns, the Burlington Marketplace and Manchester Center roundabout corridor, there does not exist any significant walkable or bikable infrastructure in the State, typical of built up areas nationwide.  Here in Burlington walk and bike injuries remain a historic and continuing fact of life.   Counting the September death of young Julia Cora, 20, at the US 2 crossing between Staples Plaza and the Sheraton in So. Burlington, a few feet from the Burlington border—Burlington now averages a walk/bike fatality every four years, one walk/bike/car occupant fatality each three years—and all these deaths since 1998 all occurred at signalized intersections.  The State of Vermont must no longer ignore the 1993 statute calling for roundabouts at dangerous intersections—it must now admit signalization an inherent unsafe practice and take actions to no longer install signals at new intersections and--as AARP advocates--begin to convert the upwards of 400 signalized intersections to roundabouts (about half of signals now administered by AOT and half by municipalities).  The State and local road officials can no longer ignore the fact that after almost 25 years and construction of about 5,000 roundabouts nationwide (14 in Vermont) not a single walker fatality has occurred and only one documented cyclist (and that occurred on a partially converted traffic circle).  As AAA recently found, in metro U.S.—like the Burlington Metro—the costs of injuries and fatalities far outstrip the costs of congestion (they advocate a national policy of “0 fatality rates” on our highways and streets).

The North Avenue Corridor Plan converts at least three of seven signalized intersections to roundabouts.  And, the Burlington Walk Bike Council (BWBC) in its discussion to date and the AARP workshop in September conduced by nationally known walk mode expert Dan Burden essentially recommend roundabouts at all Pine Street and new Champlain Parkway intersections in that overall $30 million project which will shortly undergo public discussion for re-design of street sections and intersections to high safety cycle track, separate walk/bike facilities and roundabouts—all lacking in the current City’s design.   The BWBC discussion to date also calls for separate bike and walk facilities throughout the Champlain Parkway with bicycle infrastructure to be in form of separated bikeway and/or cycle track.

Certainly Vermont towns and cities now have available the Burlington landmark blueprint of a “ safe” “complete street” design approach in the North Avenue Corridor Plan.  Note that for Chittenden County as a whole, since the 1981 completion of the Church Street Marketplace except for some street segments mostly in South Burlington there do not exist any safe bicycle facilities and not a single roundabout on a busy public street.  By definition, again with the exception of the Marketplace, the lack of a single roundabout on a busy public street in Chittenden County equates to no safe busy intersections for the walk mode in the entire County.  In sum, in just a few decades Vermont and U.S. fell from number one in the world in highway safety to now a national 14th with all modes fatality rates per mile of travel at least twice the level of the leading nations located mostly in Western Europe.  Meanwhile, the VAOT needs to be applauded for the new roundabouts in Morrisville, Cambridge, and Waterbury, which either are in construction or opened within the past year.

We in the walk/bike community all learned a great deal over the past year or so.  We learned that walking and bicycling crash rates are unacceptable and safe infrastructure—cycle track and roundabouts—must be the sine qua non of walkable bikable streets.  We learned thatit is absolutely critical for safe street section cycle track to be paired with bike-accommodating separate pathing at roundabouts to assure safety to all-age-all-skill bicyclists who surely will avail themselves the use of cycle track in their neighborhood.  (Burlington with the Dutch miles of cycle track per population would boast 45 miles of track, Vermont 670 miles.)  While cycle track arose as a new treatment in our thinking in the last year, it is the number one in the view of the cycling community as reported in the 2014 Illinois State Bicycle Transportation Plan, the ”Burlington Declaration” of the Burlington Walk Bike Council issued this summer, and the North Avenue Corridor Plan adopted by Mayor and Council last month.  Note that bicycling—even with lanes and, yes, we have tried lanes in my urban areas—do not meet the needs of the bulk of the Vermont urban population as bicycling still remains the province of mostly young, adult, white males.  Cycle track must be installed in order to enable those of all ages and skills the opportunity to bike on their neighborhood busy streets for the routine transportation each day to shop, go to school, and socialize.

          Light Rail, Commuter Rail and Intercity Rail

The shock of an announcement of $200 million investment in housing, shopping facilities, a convention center and hotel should be sufficient to at the very least initiate at once both commuter rail and light rail feasibility studies, investing in no-regrets improvements to Vermont rail infrastructure to accommodate passenger rail services, and complete both the extension of Amtrak service from Rutland to Burlington (a task that will have taken at least a decade and a half to upgrade 60 miles of trackage) and install Ambus service between Montreal and St. Albans to draw about 15,000 more Amtrak riders on Vermont trains as well as reduce the needed State tax dollar support allocated to Amtrak yearly.

Burlington itself must take the initiative in cooperation with the State to begin light rail feasibility building on the 1990s plan for a first phase from UVMMC/UVM/Chaplain College to the Marketplace and the waterfront.  As car travel wanes light rail becomes an increasingly needed service to assure the movement of people efficiently within the downtown area, to assure the economic viability and growth of both the waterfront and Towne Center developments.  Light rail will likely have a longer time line for development than commuter rail so planning needs to start at once.  There are several commuter rail studies already dating back to 1989, the short-lived Champlain Flyer service at the turn of the century between Charlotte and Burlington, and now 11 years of data showing, for example, a continuing double digit increase in workers each year giving forsaking car commuting for Link bus service between Burlington and Montpelier.  Burlington-Montpelier Link service now nears regular use by almost 300 commuters.  In the same travel time commuter rail service can serve seven downtowns and town centers plus Technology Park while Link service connects only the two downtowns of Burlington and Montpelier.  

Also, Burlington light rail planning also needs to complete a feasibility study of a north-south line along a route from Flynn School to the north to the South Burlington border area to the south via North Avenue, the Marketplace and Pine Street.  The joint study is necessary to determine from the start how to create one or more transfer points with the east-west route. Note that both commuter rail and light rail cars which feature low floor easy boarding can easily be configured to hold a large number of bicycles requiring very little effort by the cyclist.

In sum, Vermont faces an exciting opportunity to redesign its entire system of urban and intercity transportation with—for the first time—walkable and bikable busy street infra, and returning to historic forms of transport, commuter rail and the modern trolley.  

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Vermont transportation.


Tuesday, November 18, 2014

US and Burlington Walk/Bike Fatalities Discussion

         Burlington, VT is a small City of 42,000 population with 16,000 students mostly at the University of Vermont and Champlain College, 38 percent of the population.  The following discusses national, international and local walk and bike fatalities and lack of U.S./local action on walk/bike safety infrastructure:
Unfortunately  StreetsblogUSA's rosy scenario of bicycle safety improving over time as more bike trips occur depends more on misinterpretation of statistics than reality.  

StreetsblogUSA--pushing for walk/bike modes, sustainable communities, etc.--uses a timeline of 1977-to date of bike trips against bike fatalities.  Then criticizes the report author, Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA), for blaming the "victim," the cyclist for fatalities by reporting about a quarter of adult bicyclists killed were BUI (biking under the influence).  Welcome to highway statistics--half of all walkers killed in the young adult ages--20-40--also were WUI (walking under the influence).   The conclusion from the data is that one should no more bike home after a few drinks than drive--and if you must walk home after a few drinks, do so with a designated sober "walker buddy."

The use of the 1977 to recent fatalities and trips for U.S. cyclists happens to parallel roughly the drop of the U.S. from first to 14th in highway fatalities rates internationally (per vehicle mile).  Gains everywhere in reduction of highway fatalities during the period were particularly helped by better incident management and medical advancements, including better trained EMS personnel, improved emergency medical facilities, etc.  But the U.S. failed to invest in safety, does not have a high priority for safety and as a result relatively for those who walk and bike---and yes travel by car--our streets are far more dangerous up to twice as dangerous as the nations with lower fatalities rates, many in Western Europe. 

Meanwhile during the last four decades when the U.S. did practically nothing many nations--particularly European--actually made great progress in walk/bike safety through substantial investments in roundabouts, traffic calming, protected bike lanes, grade separations, etc.  While the U.S. urban street changed very little in a half century the streets in many nations changed radically.  For example, France which long lagged the U.S. in highway safety in one year 1993-2003 built more roundabouts when adjusted for population than the U.S. has from the first in 1991 to date, about 5,000 to 6,000 roundabouts now in the U.S. which includes residential traffic calming circles.

Note that while just about everyone in Europe urban total trips share--bicycle and walking--ranging around the 30% mark, the U.S. urban share is about 11% with home to work urban trips by bicycle recently reported by U.S. Census at 0.6 %.  Bicycling on U.S. urban streets--yes, Canada too--remains mostly the province of young, adult, white males while in Europe a cross section of the population by age and gender bikes regularly in addition to walk trips. 
And--most important--how about our walk/bike fatality rates (remember our riders are young adult males and their population includes kids, women and oldsters)?  Well not much of a surprise, our fatality rates for those who walk and bike per mile of travel is about three times the rate of the urban Germany and the Netherlands (John Pucher of Rutgers study).  And the most disturbing statistic are the U.S. bike injury rates per mile of travel 20 (twenty) times  that of the two European nations.  

            Burlington Fatalaties

Our four Burlington walk/bike fatalities since 1998--one cyclist and three walkers--amounts to a rate of one walk/bike fatality every four years.  (Included in the Burlington four is Julia Gorda, 20, killed adjacent to the City limit on U.S. in September at the crossing between Staples Plaza and the Sheraton.)  All our fatalities occurred at signalized intersections as did two car occupant fatalities.  Note that practically all the fatalities outlined here could have been avoided if those intersections were roundabouts--and all the intersections involved are obviously good candidates for roundabout conversion. 

Meanwhile, Burlington also experiences a high rate of walk/bike injuries including the critical injury which occurred at the new "flasher" signal on Pine Street in September.  

The lessons here are at least twofold.  First and foremost, each of us needs to be very careful in walking and bicycling in Burlington as the streets are relatively dangerous compared to communities--predominately found in European nations--where quality walk/bke infra predominate.  Second, we need to accelerate the investment and installation of safe walk bike infra, like that contained in the North Avenue Corridor Plan adopted by the City Council in October.  

There are other glimmers of change in Vermont urban walk/bike safety with roundabouts now in downtown Middlebury, Manchester Center (first Vermont roundabout "corridor" of three), Montpelier and now Waterbury.  In addition to the North Avenue Corridor Plan with its end-to-end cycle track an three roundabouts replacing signals, Brattleboro's long awaited commercial roundabout corridor on Putney Road my move ahead.

And, finally, Burlington will get the first busy street roundabout on a public street in Chittenden County in 2017--perhaps the Burlington Walk Bike Council requested roundabout demo along with funding of $12,000 will beat that 2017 date. 

Wednesday, November 5, 2014

Initial Amtrak 2014 Passenger Numbers for Vermont Supported Trains

Vermont Supported Amtrak Trains Increase During 2014

Amtrak reported for the operating year ending September 30, the two Vermont supported trains, the Vermonter and Ethan Allen, recorded a passengers gain of 3.7 percent.   The Vermonter growth of 6.6 percent year over year ranked second among the 29 state-supported Amtrak routes while the Ethan Allen -1 percent performance ranked 22nd.  The 142,395 passengers on the two Vermont trains included some to and from stations in New York, Massachusetts and New Hampshire.  Data on those boarding and disembarking at each Vermont station will be available in the near future. 

The revenues reported for the two trains increased 10 percent on the Vermonter and 3 percent on the Ethan Allen.  The total 2014 revenues of $8.5 million for the two trains represented an increase of 7.7% over 2013.

Friday, October 10, 2014

Roundabouts a Panacea for Intersections?

On the U.S. roundabout listserv a commenter lamented about the roundabout not being a panacea for intersections, saying “…roundabouts are not the universal panaceas I once imagined - but can be excellent if designed correctly in an appropriate situation.”

My response was as follows:

Yes the roundabout does represent a panacea for intersections--well designed or not in most cases--compared to the alternative.  Note the overall issues here--walk/bike/car occupant injuries and fatalities, use of gasoline, delay for all users, scenic quality, pollution/global warming gas generation, walkable/bikable nodes and corridors, land use density, enabling cycle track, transit oriented development (TOD), livable communities, addressing half of all senior driver fatalities at non-roundabout intersections (compared to less than a quarter for younger drivers), the United States soaring relative highway fatality rates, the U.S. abysmal fatality rates for walk-bike modes, etc.  Pick your subject and show how traffic signals or sign control perform so much better in all these categories.  Blaming all roundabouts for the design flaws of a few is illogical.  Any case studies of signals replacing roundabouts and performing better in all of the above areas of concern?

Unfortunately the dead bodies are on our urban streets in all these categories for all to see each and every day while in a small but agonizingly slow way there are nodes and now over 60 roundabout corridors showing an alternative way to the U.S. mean streets, the kind of urban environment you and I are forced to submit to each day.