Easy Converting Burlington's Most Unsafe and Dangerous VT Community Street to Safest!

Burlington High Crash Intersecitons "BTV Crash-20"

“BTV Crash-20”: Burlington's 20 Intersections in the Vermont High Crash Location Report 2012-2016 Note: This paper is a substantial expansion of a paper developed earlier. Twenty of Vermont's high crash intersections reside within Burlington—20 or 18% of the 111 tabulated high crash intersections statewide in the Vermont Agency of Transportation (VAOT) 2012-2016 report containing five years of data. They are the “BTV Crash-20” in Burlington averaging at least one injury a year. These 20 intersections on average generated $3.2 million cost per year in injury and property damage as well as assumed police, emergency and other related costs. The cost of a roundabout—the one proven safety countermeasure type intersection—to prevent or cure a high majority of serious and fatal injuries as well as overall crash reductions—can be as little as a few as $20-$50,000 in the case of mini-roundabouts. Roundabouts can be design and built in the case of mini roundabouts in a matter of weeks. Burlington's BTV Crash-20 averaged 1.5 injuries each per year—and received an overall rating taking into account injury severity and other factors. A roadway fatality occurs in Burlington about every three years. Four of seven recent Burlington fatalities were a pedestrian or bicyclist and all but one occurred at a signalized intersection (never the standard for safe intersection traffic management). Not only did Burlington hold six of the top 20 high crash slots (30%) on the statewide list, the BTV Crash-20 list did not include the Shelburne/St. Paul/Locust/S. Willard intersection, locally known as the “intersection of death” because it is scheduled to be a roundabout in 2022 under a 100% federal highway funding program for safety investments. In addition there are likely several more high crash intersections but only intersections on the State’s “federal aid system” are tabulated in the state report. Note the average cost per crash per year provided in the State report ranged in 2014 dollars from a low of $11,300 to a high of $110,720. The bulk of the 20 cost per crash were in the range of $20,000 to $30,000, a total of 12 of the 20. So, for example, where an inexpensive mini roundabout the payback in reduced crash costs would be about two years. The AARP Vermont Pine Street Corridor report (2014) recommended minis along Pine Street where ages old development precludes larger roundabouts, quite similar to the North Street corridor containing four high crash intersections. Based on four of recent intersection fatalities a pedestrian (3) or bicyclist (1), a pedestrian or bicyclist occurs about every five years here. Nationwide the growth of pedestrian fatalities, over 45% since 2010, led to the highest number of pedestrian deaths in 2018, over 6,000, since 1990. Note that six of the last seven Burlington fatalities were at signalized intersections—the two 2018 fatalities were a pedestrian at an unmarked crossing at North Avenue/Poirier Place and a car occupant at Shelburne Street/Home Avenue, site of a pedestrian fatal in 1998. Roundabouts according to an Insurance Institute for Highway Safety 2001 report reduce serious and fatal injury crashes by about 90%. While the “Burlington Transportation Plan” issued in 2011 states safety as a “critical” element for transportation improvement there remains not a single “safe” intersection, aka roundabout, built on a busy public street in the City or in the County. Note the $47 million Champlain Parkway project will introduce six new obsolete and unsafe traffic signal installations which promise a backward step in Burlington safety by increasing injuries and crashes in Burlington's South End. (It must be noted in view of the climate emergency a roundabout instead of a signal reduces global warming emissions 22- 29% amounting to from 3,000 to over 10,000 gallons of gasoline reduction along with associated global warming emissions compared to a signalized intersection—the higher the traffic volume the higher the reduction in gasoline use and global warming emissions.) Federal Highway Administration safety website for “Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/ This one page summary in turn refers to “Proven Safety Countermeasures”: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/ The four paragraph “Proven Safety Countermeasures” lists 20 treatments in graphic form and states in part: “This list of Proven Safety Countermeasures has now reached a total of 20 treatments and strategies that practitioners can implement to successfully address roadway departure, intersection, and pedestrian and bicycle crashes. Among the 20 Proven Safety Countermeasures are several crosscutting strategies that address multiple safety focus areas.” 20 measures Only intersection “traffic management system” “proven safety countermeasure”: Roundabouts. Another proven safety countermeasure are “Medians and Pedestrian Crossing Islands” are an integral part of any roundabout design. Burlington High Crash Intersections—Mostly Signalized All but one of the BTV Crash-20 intersections are signalized—the one sign controlled high crash intersection is North Street/North Union with three-way stop sign control. The BTV Crash-20 are about a quarter of Burlington's total of about 75 signalized intersections. Burlington's share of high crash locations has been going up over the last three reports, from 14.5% in 2006-2010 to 18% of high crash locations 2012-2016. Burlington also features the number one highest crash rate in Vermont, the intersection of Main Street and South Winooski Avenue. Main/South Winooski in the five year period experienced 11 injuries—over two a year—98 crashes total with 90 crashes property damage only (PDO) (no injuries resulting). Based on frequency, just about every household has a member involved in a roadway crash every decade in Burlington or elsewhere. With about 150 injuries a year in the City and 1,400 property damage only crashes--about 16,000 crashes each decade mostly involving two vehicles or the equivalent of 30,000 affected households in a City of 16,000 households. Those fortunate not to be affected by a highway crash certainly observe a crash each decade or know those affected by a roadway crash. The BTV Crash-20 costs can be calculated from value of types of crashes provided in the State report—it comes to $2.5 million a year, $12.4 million for the five years of data tabulated. These costs go into the costs of auto insurance policies for vehicle owners. The BTV Crash-20 represent about 10% of all injuries each year and a similar proportion of property damage only crashes. Finally, note the Vermont report uses a fairly conservative estimate for the economic cost of a fatality and injury. The $1.5 million for a fatality Burlington High Crash Location Intersections Data 2012-2016 Base Data from Current Vermont High Crash Report Data from“High Crash Location Report: Sections and Intersections 2012-2016” Vermont Agency of Transportation --6,840 PDO 2013-2017. 1,368 per year Citywide. 696 PDO 2012-2016 at 20 high crash locations, each year 139—10% of all PDO citywide! --per decade approximately Citywide: 13,700 PDO crashes, 1,500 injury crashes; about 15,000 crashes overall Citywide per decade—equivalent to about one crash per decade per household in Burlington. About one third of all annual injuries or 50 injuries are a bicyclist or pedestrian, about equally divided. 2012-2016 High Crash Location Report --“The average economic costs in 2014 as used in the report are: Fatality (Death) $1,500,000; Injury (Disabling Injury) $88,500; No Injury Observed $ 11,300 [property damage only, PDO]. P 6 [Note the U.S. Department of Transportation uses a value of life method, right now a life is valued in excess of $10 million.] --20 BTV Intersections: 1 fatality, 147 injuries [1.47 injuries per intersection per year], 29.4 injuries/ 20 intersections per year--equals 19.6 of all roadway injuries recorded yearly (~150 based on recent survey) --All are signalized except North Street/North Union --111 Intersections reached threshold for high crash status, then are ranked --the 20 BTV intersections are 18.0% of the 111 high crash intersections tabulated; 21.8% of the highest 87 crash ranked intersections --696 property damage only (PDO), 139 PDO crashes per year, 7.0 PDO crashes per intersection per year —cost of Burlington High Crash intersections (2014 dollars) Fatality $1,500,000 (1) Injuries 3,000,010 (147) Property Damage Only (PDO) $7,864,800 (696) Total: 5 Years: $12,364,810 Cost per Year: $2,472,962 Source: “Vermont High Crash Location Report: Sections and Intersections 2012-2016.” 2017 VTrans https://vtrans.vermont.gov/sites/aot/files/highway/documents/highway/Formal %202012-2016%20High%20Crash%20Location%20Report.pdf Since the 20 Burlington high crash intersections are about 10% of all crashes and injuries recorded a rough approximation of the cost per year of highway crashes and injuries is ten times the cost per year figure of the high crash intersection, $2,472,692 or $24,700,000 annually in 2014 dollars, $31,616,000 in 2021 dollars. The costs developed for individual crashes by type include public costs for emergency, medical, police, etc., costs but not intangibles like pain and suffering, effects on neighborhood quality of life, etc. 2010-2014 High Crash Location Report --19 of 132 intersections tabulated or 14.4% --169 injuries 33.8 injuries per year, 1.8 injuries per intersection per year 2012-2016 High Crash Location Report Tabulated Burlington Intersections—19 signalized, 1 3-way stop control (dollars per crash) #1 S. Winooski/Main (Alternate US 7) 0.990 5 years/98 crashes/11 injuries/90 PDO ($20,311/crash) Total Crashes (per year): 98 (19.6) #5 Colchester/Barrett 0.990 5 years/34 crashes/7 injuries/1fatality/26 PDO ($71,312/crash) Total Crashes (per year): 34 (6.8) #11 South Prospect/Main (US 2) 0.220 5 years/72 crashes/9 injuries/65PDO ($21,264) Total Crashes (per year): 72 (14.4) #14 South Willard-US 7/Main 2.110 5 years/65 crashes/9 injuries/58 PDO ($22,337/crash) Total Crashes (per year): 65 (5.4) #15 Colchester/East Ave 0.430 5 years/44 crashes/9 injuries/35 PDO ($27,091) Total Crashes (per year): 44 (8.8) #20 North Union/South Union/Pearl 0.000 5 years/19 crashes/5 injuries/15 PDO ($32,211) Total Crashes (per year): 19 (3.8) #23 North/North Champlain 0.220 5 years/43 crashes/12 injuries/17 PDO ($30,219) Total Crashes (per year): 45 (8.6) #24 Main/St. Paul 0.250 5 years/39 crashes/7 injuries/32 PDO ($25,156) Total Crashes (per year): 39 (7.8) #25 Pearl/South Prospect/Colchester 0.930 5 years/40 crashes/12 injuries/34 PDO ($33,633) Total Crashes (per year): 40 (8.0) #31 Battery/Main 0.220 5 years/45 crashes/8 injuries/38 PDO ($25,276) Total Crashes (per year): 45 (9.0) #32 VT 127 Beltline 1.340 5 years/5 crashes/6 injuries (Location ?)/2 PDO (110,720) Total Crashes (per year): 5 (1.0) #38 North Winooski (Alternative US 7)/Pearl 1.310 5 years/61 crashes/13 injuries/51 PDO 
($23,489) Total Crashes (per year): 61 (12.2) #40 Park/North 0.280 5 years/19 crashes/4 injuries/16 PDO ($28,147) Total Crashes (per year): 19 (3.8) #46 North Winooski (Alternate 7)/North 1.620 5 years/19 crashes/3 injuries/16 PDO ($23,489) Total Crashes (per year): 19 (3.8) #47 US 7 North Willard/Pearl 2.420 5 years/57 crashes/13 injuries/47 PDO ($29,502) Total Crashes (per year): 57 (11.4) #52 Main/South Union 0.520 5 years/37 crashes/9 injuries/30 PDO ($30,689) Total Crashes (per year): 37 (7.4) #64 US 7 North Willard/Riverside Alternative 7 3.050 5 years/27 crashes/5 injuries/23 PDO ($22,337) Total Crashes (per year): 27 (5.4) #76 Swift/Shelburne Rd. (S. Burlington/Burlington) 1.720 5 years/60 crashes/1 injuries/59 PDO ($12,587) Total Crashes (per year): 60 (12.0) #87 North Union/North 0.300 5 years/15 crashes/0 injuries/15 PDO (3-way stop) ($11,300) Total Crashes (per year): 15 (3.0) #110 North Avenue/North 0.180 5 years/20 crashes/4 injuries/17 PDO ($27,305) Total Crashes (per year): 20 (4.0) Tony Redington Safe Streets Burlington ( SafeStreetsBurlington.com ) TonyRVT99@gmai.com @TonyRVT60 TonyRVT.blogspot.com June 10, 2021

Pine Street/VT Racial Justice Call for Railyard First, then RIGHTWAY to cut King Maple up to 59%!!

Pine Street Fights for Environmental Justice, Safe Walk and Bike Accommodation, and Economic Growth in a Champlain “RIGHTway Street and Street Design Pine Street Wins Key Change in Parkway: Still Miles to Go! …first build Railyard connection to Battery Street slicing current traffic in King Maple by 59%, then build a redesigned the Parkway to a complete “RIGHTway” by safe accommodation of pedestrians and bicyclists, employing “best practices” for minimizing injuries for all, preserving Englesby Brook and slashing 1.5 lane- miles of excess roadway. “Stop it! Stop it Now!…We’ll be back!” Mark Hughes, Vermont Racial Justice Alliance Parkway Hearing, July 29, 2020 Two years ago—June 6, 2019—the grassroots Pine Street Coalition stopped the 1950s South End still gargantuan highway proposal in its tracks by filing a lawsuit in federal court. That lawsuit caused the feds to apply new Environmental Justice regulations to the 2009 Parkway route which today cuts in half the King Maple community of color and 26% residents with poverty incomes! Lower upscale Pine Street traffic drops 76% while stressed King Maple gets flooded with 37% more cars and trucks! Suddenly after lawsuit federal officials who in 2006 dismissed the City fight against the King Maple routing retreated saying OK, you can bypass King Maple as originally advocated by our Mayor and Council with a connection between Battery Street and Pine Street adjacent to Curtis Lumber. The “Railyard” project now in planning cuts King Maple traffic by upwards of 59% while still cutting the majority of traffic along Pine below Flynn Avenue. Still, federal and Vermont officials want to build the current design first with its full bore devastation on King Maple only to come back at some as yet unknown future year “cure” the Parkway harms. Bypass King Maple now! Kill the Parkway through King Maple! A “RIGHTway” design saves millions in cost in a project now topping $100 million! Our all volunteer Pine Street Coalition, now about six years old, is composed of about 200 citizens.  Pine Street is an outgrowth of Burlington Walk Bike Council analysis and concerns 2014-2016 over lack of safe, separate walk and bike accommodations  anywhere along the Parkway base route, and a larger community opposition which caused a complete rewrite of the planBTV South End to include a future vision of the South End with and without the Parkway as then designed.  Add the numerous laws, policies and plans now in place since the 2009 now rescinded environmental document--plus the one the ground changes like the South End City Market Coop Store, Blodgett Oven moving out being replaced by a generator space type development, etc.  Those laws, policies and plans include, among others: Vermont Complete Streets Law (2011), new Environmental Justice regulations, federal requirements that highway funds decrease serious and fatal injuries, and our own City plans and policies which include our the Climate Change Emergency (2019), Transportation Plan (2011), Racism as a Public Health Emergency (2020), and our landmark and regularly revised Climate Action Plan which dates back to the 1990s. Vermont Racial Justice Alliance and Fortieth Burlington (Innovation Center) Pine Street expanded last fall by joining with the Vermont Racial Justice Alliance (VRJA) which together with a long standing association with Fortieth Burlington, LLC (Fortieth) creates a larger group in a common cause. Fortieth owns the former 1800s manufacturing complex now reborn as a modern office complex, Innovation Center on Lakeside Avenue. Without the appeal of the Act 250 permit to the Vermont Supreme Court by Fortieth, the current atrocious and harmful Parkway design would be in place today with devastating impacts on the King Maple community of color and a harmful bubble covering the entire South End! So, our Pine Street Coalition formed a joint effort with VRJA and Fortieth last fall and individually and jointly continue initiatives along a common set of accepted re-design guidelines originally developed in a community process years ago which continues today with little change--see the new "one-pager" which describes our common design elements we seek in a re-designed, Railyard first built modern transportation facility.  It is this "Railyard first" which means an immediate and permanent reduction in traffic, stress and pollution in King Maple which has come to the fore in our thinking and advocacy over the past three months!  Our common cause separate, parallel and joint actions. Both VRJA and ourselves are proud of the Vermont Sierra Club inaugural Transit Equity day award early this year, a joint award which recognizes our common cause efforts to address racial equity in the King Maple neighborhood as well as a quality, safe, “equality” streets Parkway design.    We here at Pine Street mark with sadness the recent passing of a founding member of our "presentation team", Charles Simpson, also a long time member of Neighborhood Planning Assembly 6 Steering Committee, and retired SUNNY Plattsburgh professor, expert in community land use and urban development!  

Pine Street and Vermont Racial Justice Call for Champlain RIGHTway cutting King Maple Traffic 59%!

Pine Street Fights for Environmental Justice, Safe Walk and Bike Accommodation, and Economic Growth in a Champlain “RIGHTway Street and Street Design Pine Street Wins Key Change in Parkway: Still Miles to Go! …first build Railyard connection to Battery Street slicing current traffic in King Maple by 59%, then build a redesigned the Parkway to a complete “RIGHTway” by safe accommodation of pedestrians and bicyclists, employing “best practices” for minimizing injuries for all, preserving Englesby Brook and slashing 1.5 lane- miles of excess roadway. “Stop it! Stop it Now!…We’ll be back!” Mark Hughes, Vermont Racial Justice Alliance Parkway Hearing, July 29, 2020 Two years ago—June 6, 2019—the grassroots Pine Street Coalition stopped the 1950s South End still gargantuan highway proposal in its tracks by filing a lawsuit in federal court. That lawsuit caused the feds to apply new Environmental Justice regulations to the 2009 Parkway route which today cuts in half the King Maple community of color and 26% residents with poverty incomes! Lower upscale Pine Street traffic drops 76% while stressed King Maple gets flooded with 37% more cars and trucks! Suddenly after lawsuit federal officials who in 2006 dismissed the City fight against the King Maple routing retreated saying OK, you can bypass King Maple as originally advocated by our Mayor and Council with a connection between Battery Street and Pine Street adjacent to Curtis Lumber. The “Railyard” project now in planning cuts King Maple traffic by upwards of 59% while still cutting the majority of traffic along Pine below Flynn Avenue. Still, federal and Vermont officials want to build the current design first with its full bore devastation on King Maple only to come back at some as yet unknown future year “cure” the Parkway harms. Bypass King Maple now! Kill the Parkway through King Maple! A “RIGHTway” design saves millions in cost in a project now topping $100 million! Our all volunteer Pine Street Coalition, now about six years old, is composed of about 200 citizens.  Pine Street is an outgrowth of Burlington Walk Bike Council analysis and concerns 2014-2016 over lack of safe, separate walk and bike accommodations  anywhere along the Parkway base route, and a larger community opposition which caused a complete rewrite of the planBTV South End to include a future vision of the South End with and without the Parkway as then designed.  Add the numerous laws, policies and plans now in place since the 2009 now rescinded environmental document--plus the one the ground changes like the South End City Market Coop Store, Blodgett Oven moving out being replaced by a generator space type development, etc.  Those laws, policies and plans include, among others: Vermont Complete Streets Law (2011), new Environmental Justice regulations, federal requirements that highway funds decrease serious and fatal injuries, and our own City plans and policies which include our the Climate Change Emergency (2019), Transportation Plan (2011), Racism as a Public Health Emergency (2020), and our landmark and regularly revised Climate Action Plan which dates back to the 1990s. Vermont Racial Justice Alliance and Fortieth Burlington (Innovation Center) Pine Street expanded last fall by joining with the Vermont Racial Justice Alliance (VRJA) which together with a long standing association with Fortieth Burlington, LLC (Fortieth) creates a larger group in a common cause. Fortieth owns the former 1800s manufacturing complex now reborn as a modern office complex, Innovation Center on Lakeside Avenue. Without the appeal of the Act 250 permit to the Vermont Supreme Court by Fortieth, the current atrocious and harmful Parkway design would be in place today with devastating impacts on the King Maple community of color and a harmful bubble covering the entire South End! So, our Pine Street Coalition formed a joint effort with VRJA and Fortieth last fall and individually and jointly continue initiatives along a common set of accepted re-design guidelines originally developed in a community process years ago which continues today with little change--see the new "one-pager" which describes our common design elements we seek in a re-designed, Railyard first built modern transportation facility.  It is this "Railyard first" which means an immediate and permanent reduction in traffic, stress and pollution in King Maple which has come to the fore in our thinking and advocacy over the past three months!  Our common cause separate, parallel and joint actions. Both VRJA and ourselves are proud of the Vermont Sierra Club inaugural Transit Equity day award early this year, a joint award which recognizes our common cause efforts to address racial equity in the King Maple neighborhood as well as a quality, safe, “equality” streets Parkway design.    We here at Pine Street mark with sadness the recent passing of a founding member of our "presentation team", Charles Simpson, also a long time member of Neighborhood Planning Assembly 6 Steering Committee, and retired SUNNY Plattsburgh professor, expert in community land use and urban development!  

What if Burlington City Council Does What NYC City Council did with Veto Proof Vote to Suddenly Spend 6% of Budget for Fed Housing Vouchers

The VT Housing Finance Agency vhfa.com seeks comments on $1.5 million to be spent on covid relief without addressing the underlying income gap. Below are my comments submitted today, May 29, and the address for anyone to submit comments, etc. https://www.vhfa.org/news/blog/dhcd-seeks-public-comment-recovery-housing-plan COMMENTS: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Plan for use of federal recovery funds received by Vermont. This opportunity to comment was provided by a VHFA tweet in the last day. First and foremost as anyone knows who even takes a cursory look at Vermont governmental activity in the area of housing, there is no comprehensive housing plan and the pandemic has held up a Agency of Human Services doing even a plan for older Vermonters. The housing "problem" is summed by the Center for Budget Priorities as a need for an additional 16,000 fed type "affordable housing assistance" (shelter security at 30% income max rent) for Vermont (not including homeowners and mobile homes on rental sites) with 14,000 units in place serving on in five renters. Vermont so-called "affordable housing" (tax credit non-profit and Burlington "inclusionary zoning') is best described in the annual HUD report of tax credit housing where 24% of households pay in excess of 30% of income and 6% pay over half their income for rent. So, no plan for Vermont and a need which is clearly not addressed. The use of any public for funds for homeownership makes no sense while the 1,000 households, for example, sit on the Burlington Housing Authority waitlist, for example. New York City's City Council remarkably this week passed a veto proof budget with 6%--for the first time--set for affordable fed type Section 8 assistance vouchers (30% income max rent). There really are no such City budgeted units like this today! Vermont and BTV also do zilch here while doing "pretend" short term treatments, sort of like having an emergency room of housing with no wards for longer term treatment. If Burlington employed 6% of their general fund for fed type vouchers it would create about 600 vouchers, end homelessness overnight and address a good chunk of our Housing Authority waitlist. It is also time for Vermont state government to stand up and act like an adult in the room. The 30% requirement for a household income needs to be dropped to 25% as it was until the Reagan administration--30% if frankly confiscatory and exploitive of the lower income classes. The entire are of providing transitional assistance where there is no promise of longer term assistance is in itself cruel and unusual aid--depressing to those who administer the funds and those who received them. We must--as then Sen. Harris' Rent Relief Act called for--make Section 8 type aid as universal and not dependent on the drugs you do or do not consume. Drug addiction is a health issue not a housing issue. Finally I would refer you to Mathew Desmond's book "Eviction" and particularly the 60 or so pages of notes which comprise a graduate course in housing policy--and note that he like myself subscribe to universal vouchers--when we reach that point the behavior issues can be handed off where they belong--in the human services and health fields! Thank you for the opportunity to comment and this program design--it is not a plan. There is no housing plan for Vermont or the City of Burlington. That must also be addressed! Yours truly, Tony Redington

Some Comments on Transportation, etc. to the VT Climate Council--Motor Fuels, Walk, Transit, Rail

VERMONT CLIMATE COUNCIL PUBLIC INPUT FORM https://anrweb.vt.gov/ANR/ClimateCouncil/PublicInputForm.aspx?PKID=2633 Below are comments submitted today, May 20, 2021 Good Day All: My comments--as former transportation policy development chief for VAOT writing its first two policy plans incuding Act 200--centers on transportation but also from my experience as a statewide housing and rail planner in NH as well as a director of the NH Housing Commission there. VT in transportation is really in an enviable position compared to our northern NE neighbors even considering we had an unexpected growth of population 2010-2020 according to first Census reporting. Immediately below note that going into 2020 when we know there was a sharp drop in vehicle miles (13% nationwide while road deaths increased 8%) we only needed to drop motor fuel consumption 16% to each a goal of 1990 motor fuel consumption. We likely came within a percent above or below motor fuel consumption of 1990 this past year--though this creates a lot of pressure to maintain that in 2021! https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2019/mf202.cfm (FHWA, Highway Statistics, Series) Net Motor Fuel Taxed (000 gallons) State Vermont Maine New Hampshire Year 1990 329,543 709,799 550,014 1995 391,512 732,829 626,638 2000 411,065 856,796 770,059 2005 415,386 895,578 812,635 2010 388,988 850,450 803,334 2015 379,108 974,479 808,211 2019 381,931 914,922 835,032 NH: 2019 versus 1990 +51.8% Maine : + 28.9% VT: +15.9% No reason to jump for joy, but an clear indication that CAFE standards and beginning efforts at demand management and other actions to reduce driving have had a substantial impact creating a downtrend in motor fuel usage for a decade in Vermont! The major cause of Vermont and national sprawl has been federal and state subsidies of car use and homeownership--yes, we have such subsidies, Canada does not have federal housing and transport programs and has half again urban densities as a result. Electric cars will not overcome Vermont sprawl, only a stop to federal and state subsidies for auto ownership and operation, and misguided tax homeownership policies. This must be part of any climate solution policy set!! We live in a period of a highway fatality and serious injury pandemic---now 21,000 excess deaths in America (30 in Vermont) yearly versus the top four nations average (Norway, Ireland, Switzerland and UK now on top, US now number 18, we being with UK number 1 in road safety in 1990!). Vermont needs to adopt a program of replacing hundred of the approximately 400 traffic signal systems with modern roundabouts. Each roundabout will aid in reducing sprawl, reduce engird consumption the equivalent of 3,000 to 20,000 gallons of motor fuel use, and enable safety walking and bicycling in our downtowns and urban centers, the exception not the rule (think Middlebury and Manchester Center) today. AARP, Geico, AAA, and Insurance institute for Highway Safety--all advocate converting signals to roundabouts for safety. There is an equal reason, cutting climate change emissions! Vermont has no transport policy in the area of safety or climate change. This vacuum must end. Evidence of change toward walkability and bikeability can only be measured by the number of roundabouts found in downtown, mixed urban areas, etc.--and miles of cycle track installed. Note that our Vermont downtown roundabouts in 52 years of data did not record a single bike injury, just one non-serious pedestrian injury and average one injury a decade versus, for example, 20 Burlington high crash intersections which avenge 1.5 injuries per year! There is an equity issue at play which has been ignored as walkability remained in the vineyard of apartheid transportation. Those living in poverty including much of the population of Vermonters with black and brown skin are disproportionately dependent on walking and transit as 30% of residents of Burlington's Old North End and King Maple neighborhoods lack access to a car. Nationally pedestrians with Black skin die at almost twice the rate of white, Hispanic persons about 50% higher and Native Americans at two-three times of white pedestrian fatality rates. When spending to help well-to-do to own e-vehicles, we must also invest heavily in walkable urban and near town centers, particularly along transit routes (safe routes to the bus stop!) and locations with multi-use land development. National and Vermont transportation investments can be characterized as malign neglect and if we make safety the first consideration--as USDOT Peter Buttigieg espouses--the walking and bicycling investments will be made so incentives to use transit, walk and bike, will have a fertile context rather the lumps of coal now mostly in place. You will find my commentary on the role of light rail and commuter rail at my blog, TonyRVT.blogpost.com In short, we need to install a light rail network in Chittenden County (about 3 years to do as the $6.3 billion Cdn. begins operation next spring to be supplemented already another $10 billion Cdn. being pumped in on Montreal island. We could do a light rail system here in three years too. Intercity and commuter rail should also be on the table which when connected to Greyhound and VT Translines and our regional transit operators brings an entirely new system, lower levels at low fare and fare free, for moving around Vermont in our daily car-free! Yours truly, Tony Redington Walk Safety Advocate 125 Saint Paul St Apt 3-03 Burlington Also cited SafeStreetsBurlington.com website

Fritz Mondale, Some New Hampshire Politics, and Start with Dwight Eisenhower

4/20/2021 Some Personal History of Fritz Mondale, Presidential Politics, and New Hampshire Walter “Fritz” Mondale and his family represented the kind of caring and community committed politics we see (for many including myself surprisingly) embodied in Joe Biden this year. First saw Mondale at a Democratic state convention about 1968 in Maine a the “Democratic” noontime reception in the downtown hotel, the Sheraton Eastland, owned by the Dunfey family which would also would own the Sheraton in Bedford, NH which for many years also was the home of all would be presidential contenders from the 1970s through the end of the century—you would even see at lunch the likes of Pat Robertson who ran in the Republican primaries once. At the Sheraton in Bedford, NH experienced locals would shun the presidential parade which always seems a sideshow except, of course, for the candidate you and your family supported! Fritz was a young looking 40ish at that point with a crewcut and relaxed manner (did Mondale every have a different look?) as moved around with fellow and far more senior Senator Ed Muskie of Maine who was moving towards a presidential candidacy of his own. This immediate post-Great Society period had shifted to the Vietnam War as an increasingly dominant issue—and Muskie’s campaign lost the anti-Vietnam college fuel ultimately causing his campaign to hit the rocks. Muskie’s plan for the 1972 presidential nomination was derailed, a victim of the anti-Vietnam insurgency and Democratic Party structure upheaval which hit the simultaneous ceiling and rock bottom with Nixon landsliding into re-election followed by a first ever resignation of the presidency from massive personal and White House staffers lawbreaking. Senator George McGovern, the 1972 Democratic candidate, was as honest and forthright as Nixon was the opposite. Mondale went on to be vice-president under Carter who lost to Reagan in 1980. During the 1980-1984 period my encounter with Mondale shifted to my home state of New Hampshire. I saw Mondale, by then a former vice-president, in a noontime speech to a social service event in Washington, DC while on a conference. Living in Concord, NH then 7 miles away in Allenstown from 1976-1988, was active in Democratic politics. Allenstown located mid-way between Manchester and Concord was a mix of the two communities, half with roots from Concord’s English population heritage and the half Franco-Canadian which dominates Manchester. Not only was Allenstown the poorest in the state in terms of property valuation per student in the schools, it was considered a bellwether in politics, as Allenstown went in elections so would the State of New Hampshire as it contained a cross section of the State’s population—particularly that of the Democratic Party! My one elective office, a ten-year term representing Allenstown in the mandated NH Constitutional Convention was of note for my initiative on behalf of Allenstown to have the Constitution require the State to fund half of all local public education and half of the cost of state colleges. It lost, of course, but garnered a significant vote of about 40%. It would be years after that the NH Supreme Court required equal funding for each public school student—still a difficult task to carry out by the legislature. In the 1984 primary campaign I was involved in what was then a questionable role in unions from several states providing funds aiding the election of Mondale delegates—it is chronicled in the Germond and Witcover book “Wake Us When It’s Over.” Even as a life-long union person, it is my least proud actions in politics before or since. At the Democratic State Convention in 1982 to the best of my recollection Mondale was in full steam ahead mode for the 1984 nomination. I distinctly recall approaching him on behalf of a petition group seeking support for a state issue. To my surprise, Mondale took the petition placed on the adjacent table and carefully read it in its entirety leaving me quite nervous thinking it meant I would fail my appointed task. At that time I certainly was naive to think a former vice-president would simply sign any ordinary petition! Suffice to say the petition language satisfied the vice-president and he added his John Hancock. To say in those days seeing dozens of candidates for the Democratic nomination in the proverbial living room chats at the home of Mary Louise Hancock in Concord, former state planning director and state senator from Merrimack County, candidates for president were considered ordinary acquaintances and approachable and wanting to be approached like a super friendly young dog. New Hampshire voters were the candy they sought—everyone had their presidential candidate run in and story to tell. My Mom would often relate the time when she was a teacher in Colebrook, NH—she was as lifelong Republican—meeting as she was walking along Main Street Ronald Reagan and saying that she was not very much impressed by him. In fact my first in-person presidential contact came when during Boys State in 1955 we were bused to Concord from UNH to see President Eisenhower. We know now that was a campaign visit in preparation for the primary election election in early 1956. Eisenhower won the New Hampshire Republican Primary—the first ever— beating the party leader Robert Taft, himself the son of President William Howard Taft. That Eisenhower victory was crucial in his getting the Republican nomination in a process still strongly controlled by party leaders in most states. Of course I was only 17 at the time and would not be voting in the 1956 elections—21 was the voting age at that time. As an aside, I did receive an autograph on a Norwich University commencement luncheon program about 1950—my Grandfather George Lovell got it, perhaps I was there I do not recall—the General wrote, “Good Luck Tony, Dwight Eisenhower.” Must admit his autograph may have been clairvoyant. But, of course, Mondale did not win the New Hampshire primary—but he did carry Allenstown by about seven votes including two from my household. Supporting Mondale also meant phone banking in Allenstown and that brought both Mondale’s wonderful wife Joan and her daughter Eleanor to a long time community leader for a weekend of calling. I met them and their commitment to him helped energize us all. And on election day it was driving snow and sleet which by late afternoon was 2-3 inches deep as our volunteer crew went door to door in the February dark to pull voters who had not been tallied out to vote by our “poll watchers.” And, of course, some of us had gone to the speech by Gary Hart on the Friday night before the election in Concord, outside across from the State House on an unusually warm evening. We saw first hand the charisma and strength of Hart and could feel the momentum sufficient to carry over the finish line—he would likely and did upset Mondale. Even in those days the last weekend of a presidential primary were well known to result in shifts of 20-30 points and more from poll predictions. So, while I was on the Mondale slate of delegates to the national convention I would have gone only if he won by a large margin. Then came 1988 with work for Michael Dukakis in Allenstown and Jerry Brown in Montpelier, VT—but that is a story for another time, and Ted Kennedy, and Jimmy Carter and being key in winning a Maine governorship. All in all, Walter Mondale contributed a sense that one could be for all that is good, all that can benefit all of society and also do so with integrity and honesty.