The comments before City Council react to the lack of vision which recognizes the expanding role in urban America and Burlington of public transit (including light rail, commuter rail and Amtrak service) along with the necessary new walking and bicycling infrastructure--protected cycle lanes (cycle track) and roundabouts.
Simply, shoppers, visitors and local citizens going about their daily trips increasingly will travel in modes other than the car. Car trips already plateaued about 2000 in New England and already an increasing proportion of travel is non-car based. The comments below reflect this new reality and the need to revise transportation investments to meet this change, change fostered by a number of forces ranging from pressures on resource consumption, stagnant household incomes, economic competition, global warming and the like.
COMMENTS BEFORE THE BURLINGTON CITY COUNCIL JUNE 3,
2013
REGARDING BURLINGTON PlanBTV
Tony
Redington
Burlington, VT
Blog: TonyRVT.blospot.com
Thank you for the
opportunity to comment on the Final Draft of the PlanBTV aimed at guiding the
development of the Burlington downtown and waterfront areas. This more than year-long process
represents my first participation in policy development as a Burlington
citizen.
The comments here relate
primarily to the transportation sections of which contain serious shortcomings
and some clearly misleading. Most
important the transportation elements fail in the mission of any--providing a
rational guide to the downtown and waterfront development. Most of my comments relate to the
inadequate walking and bicycling content.
My suggestion is that
instead of adopting the Plan BTV as is, that at least the Transportation
section, particularly the walking and bicycling material, be re-worked with the
cooperation and participation of the Burlington Walk Bike Council (BWBC). I am sure you would be surprised as
councilors to learn that neither the Steering Committee nor the full BWBC
meetings (two total monthly included a minute of discussion regarding the
PlanBTV materials much less even receiving at any time the three or four pages
of draft and then revised PlanBTV material on walking and bicycling. As a Steering Committee member, perhaps
you can understand my submission of these comments following reviewing the
draft document in the last few days.
Let me emphasize the fact of
rapid change in the marketplace in all modal travel—bus, rail, auto, walking
and bicycling. For example, already
the statistic from a year ago of 62% of traveling to work by car in Burlington
drops to 54% in the latest Census information—car travel to work surely will
continue to move downward and drop below 50% in the near future. All major roadways accessing the
downtown and Marketplace in Burlington show substantial and continuing decreases
in numbers since peaking about 1990.
Traffic numbers decline on major streets—Main, Pearl, the Northern
Connector, Shelburne, Pine and Northern Avenue—range from 8 to 28 (Pine Street)
percent over the past two decades.
As representatives a ward,
one way to think of change is to consider home to work trips each year since
2000--about ten of your constituents switch from car travel to work to another
mode every year—bus, walk, bicycle or work at home. In Vermont car travel to work dropped 3% in the last decade
with an estimated 9,000 workers during the period choosing something other than
car travel—and the number of car travelers at the end of the decade unchanged
from 2000.
But the PlanBTV language
concludes: “Shoppers
and visitors coming to downtown from afar will likely continue to get here by
car.” Basically we need to
recognize that shoppers and visitors increasingly will come by modes other than
the car. Extension of Amtrak
service to Union Station is less than three years away, seasonally the
Champlain Ferry brings thousands to the waterfront, and commuter rail and even
light rail from the waterfront via the Marketplace to UVM and Fletcher Allen
Health Care are very likely within a few years. Finally, PlanBTV cites “convenience” as key to choice of
travel—I would suggest that those who quit their cars in droves for the CCTA
Link service to Montpelier recognize the up to $7,000 annual after tax saving
in their household budget—and that saving is after paying the daily $8
roundtrip daily fare.
Simply, just about any ground mode of transportation is less costly than
the private auto.
Note
extensive comments I made orally and in written form earlier in this process
were almost entirely excluded in any subsequent plan drafts.
Before
specific objections
Here
are some other specific comments:
1.
In the section “crossing to the other side”: This section fails to mention the only proven method of
moving walkers through intersections quickly, safely and comfortably—the modern
roundabout. For some reason City
and Regional planners totally fail to recognize the pre-eminence that the
Federal Highway Administration places on the use of roundabouts for walker and
all other modes safety—or the fact that three states and two Canadian provinces
now make the roundabout the default choice for intersections. Note to date not a single walker fatal
has occurred in almost 15,000 roundabout years in the U.S. and Canada.
2.
In the section “1. Bikeways”: This section claims, falsely: “Recent studies
have shown the dedicated bike lane can reduce injury for bikers by 90%. “ I must say that this can only be described
as untrue based on research and even advisories of the organization sponsored
by U.S. DOT note this,
Bicyclinginfo.org (http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/faqs/answer.cfm?id=971 )
Key
here is that a bicycle lane and a protected bicycle lane or cycle track are two
totally different treatments—lanes are not particularly safe and cannot be used
by all ages or those of all skill levels. Cycle tracks when connected to proper intersection treatments
provide both mobility and safety for all bicyclists. (my blog posting over the weekend center on this very
subject ( see TonyRVT.blospot.com )
Basic
bike lanes do not necessarily result in increased safety and certainly do not
serve all users (I avoid them except during low traffic periods). Protected bike lanes, also called cycle
track—which I endorse—still have yet to be completely accepted by all elements
of the bicycle community. My blog addresses
this overall issue and how truly “complete streets” means cycle track along
segments and roundabouts with bicycle pathing at intersections presents the
best infrastructure affording mobility and safety for users of all ages and
skills.
3.
In the section “ 2 Intersection treatments”: This section does not mention roundabouts and the importance
of separate bicycle pathways at a roundabout or other types of bicycling
treatment where separate bicycle and walker pathways cannot be provided. With the new Shelburne Street
roundabout coming on line in a year or so, this is not an academic
concern. (Note with a few
exceptions most of Burlington arterial streets can be served by single lane
roundabouts which do [see Netherlands 1994 research by Schoon and van Minnen]
reduce walker injuries by about 90% and bicycle injuries by 60% or more).
4. In section “Bike Culture”: A general comment here. Bicycling and walking in the United
States experience crash rates are several times higher than in the Netherlands
and Germany per mile of travel (John Pucher and Lewis Dijkstra). We need in Burlington substantial—tens
of millions—in investments in walking and bicycling infrastructure (mostly
cycle track/separate bicycle pathways and roundabouts) as a pre-condition to
encouraging and achieveving high levels of walking and, particularly,
bicycling. We need to be careful
not to put the cart before the horse.
5. In the section “Cycle track”: Again, the claim cycle track reduces
bicycle injuries “90%” does not find confirmation in research. Indicator research—cycle track versus riding
on normal roadway—done in Montreal found significant decrease in injuries but
statistically complete research remains to be done. I strongly support cycle
track as the basic infrastructure to provide a safe level for bicycling for all
users—but am not ready to quantify in the absence of data the reduction attained
over lanes/no lanes. My
current position is that only protected bicycle lanes, cycle track, need be
installed and where possible matched with roundabout treatments at intersections.
6. In the section “Transit ties it
altogether”: This section needs to
be totally redone since, as a practical matter, car traffic entering
declines—and this includes vacation and visitor travel. Transit includes the Amtrak service set
for 2017. Transit includes high
capacity commuter rail service which can literally deliver thousands of
visitors and hour to the waterfront.
Transit includes high capacity light rail which along with commuter rail
was studied extensively in Burlington in the 1990s—those plans need to be
re-examined and referenced in PlanBTV.
The transit section (including Champlain Ferry as an integral part)
really keys the future success of both the waterfront and the Marketplace. Transit and the promise it provides for
low cost access carrying visitors in large numbers needs to key the entire
aspect of bringing folks to and
from the future development of the waterfront
One
last comment. PlanBTV fails to
acknowledge the Marketplace “plaza” as one of three in the nation and its
intersections a rare U.S. example of “shared space” where modes mix at the
highest level of safety at the Cherry, Bank and College intersections—shared
space which needs to be expanded outward where helpful to retail businesses and
replicated in other spots in the community—and probably at spots within the
waterfront development.
Thank
you for the opportunity to comment on PlanBTV.
No comments:
Post a Comment