COMMENTS ON COMPREHENSIVE VT ENERGY PLAN

Notre:  State Energy Plan "draft" handles in its transportation section all text devoted to walk and bike modes and rail passenger/rail freight in less than five pages

Comments for the 2015 Vermont “Comprehensive Energy Plan”

by

Tony Redington

Burlington, VT 05401

TonyRVT99@gmail.com TonyRVT.blogspot.com @TonyRVT08

July 23, 2015

Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments regarding the 2015 draft Vermont “Comprehensive Energy Plan” (CEP). The period starting about 1990 marks a continuing

rapid and escalating change in all aspects of transportation, land use and demographics both here in Vermont and the nation. The 2011 current CEP largely failed to capture this ongoing process of change across the spectrum, but generation of data, new services, new infrastructure choices, and collapse of car-oriented finance for transportation investment and maintenance make it paramount that the 2015 plan not only recognize the changes, but also anticipates and aggressively supports all the key positive aspects of this new transportation/land use world whether that be in the area of commuter rail, an immediate adding of Ambus service from St. Albans and Montreal to connect with our Amtrak services to New York City and beyond, fostering building of urban roundabouts and cycle track in order to introduce for the first time walkable/bikable streets in Vermont cities and town centers for the first time, moving “free parking” to paid parking over time for those commuting and using public space, changing our transportation finance to recognize non-car auto taxation now is the new normal, and carefully re-tuning highway cost allocation to reflect new realities thereby reducing the subsidy we all pay for heavy trucks on our highway where a large portion never even stop in Vermont.

With the greatest area of petroleum use in Vermont found in the transportation sector—about half of State consumption—arguably addressing this sector provides both the greatest challenge and greatest opportunity for moving towards a fully sustainable human settlement in this unique State.

The following addresses some of these issues following the content of the CEP Volumes 1 and 2.

1. In the section outlining “strategies” and “measurable goals” for land use and transportation (Energy Plan, Volume 1 p. 15) actions include “tripling the number of spaces in the State park-and-ride program to 3,426 by 2030.”

This policy element is as effective as pouring water in a bottomless pail. Truly it is a measurable failure. The park-and-ride and ride program probably does little to encourage or even support auto-based rideshare, even if that were possible or desirable from benefit/cost standpoint. The decades long decline in rideshare likely continues, a trend since at least 1990 when 55,187 workers reported ridesharing to work, 24.9% of all commuters. All Census data since shows both a numerical and percentage decline to the ACS 2011 report of 31,421 ridesharing, down to 9.9%of all commuters. Since park-and-ride lots may well occupy prime land for high level value development, current lots should be reviewed for sale for that very purpose.

Providing convenient parking spaces—practically all surface parking—at key intersections of major arterials is both expensive and and the least valuable use of land. The Richmond park-and-ride lot expansion required by the success of commuter Link buses but not by rideshare demand, and the installation of a dangerous stoplight remains a certain source of a serious injury.

Solo journey-to-work grew until 2000 hitting 75% and since declined very slightly to a point between 74.0 and 75.0 percent in every ACS survey since. The slight decline remains very significant in view of the aforementioned decline in rideshare—this means the a shift of both rideshare and solo commutes both recently moved into negative territory. Because of the decline in rideshare, the total worker commute by car topped out at 87.1% in 2010 and since in three ACS samples has averaged 84.5. A one-percent shift is not insignificant since each percent point change represents a shift of about 32,000 Vermont workers. The current Burlngton Link commuter bus services began in 2003 serves about 500 daily commuters, and my recent study of commuter rail along three corridors out of Burlington estimates about 2,200 served while a lower number, perhaps 200 continue on reduced Link services. Overall, commuting by car declined since 2000 while walking, bicycle, work at home and public transit

increased at an average well into double digits.

The rapid change in demographics—such as, absolute population decline since 2010 in nine of Vermont's 14 counties and the doubling of the senior population to 24% total population between 2010 and 2030—require a full re-examination of not just how to improve “efficiency” of worker commuting but also how the entire population travels and how travel can be accommodated for all types of trips. Using the official Vermont population projections, we are experiencing an increase of about 4,500 new seniors each year and an reduction in under 65-aged population in excess of 2,000 a year. While the 4,500 “homegrown” senior population grew yearly or about 18,000 2010-2014, overall population in Vermont according to Census increased less than 1,000.

These factors of demographics and modal shift alone imply both relatively major land use and transportation considerations, the re-emergence with a vengeance of every mode other than carcentric forms, and providing proper incentives for re-vitalizing town center and city transportation systems with, for the first time, quality/safe walk/bike infrastructure allowing those two mode to take an equal place in the transportation marketplace, as well as intercity-commuter passenger rail and in more than one case light rail services.

2. In the section outlining “strategies” and “measurable goals” for land use and transportation (Energy Plan, Volume 1 p. 15) actions include fostering more compact land uses though efforts at the State, regional, and local level.

This entire discussion misses the basic transportation equation—if you cannot improve, capacity and service to particular modes while retaining a modicum of safety, no changes occur in land use or travel modes other than those dictated primarily by household incomes and demographics. That is the nature of the transportation/land use equation. The reason for sprawl—other than huge public expenditures to foster it through car subsidies—remained in great part streets and intersections unable to handle vehicle traffic. This forced the well known devolution of alternative modes so dependent on high densities—walking, bicycling and transit—still dominating much of Vermont urban landscapes, particularly in Chittenden County. Two infrastructure inventions, the roundabout in 1966 and cycle track in the 1990s, increase intersection capacities by about half, reduce delay for all modes, and overall can reduce serious and fatal injuries for all modes up to 90%. Because of the safety gains these innovations provide thereby fostering alternative modes, and because the roundabout improves safety, service and capacity for ALL modes, densities can increase and growth of walking and bicycling in downtowns and village centers can now begin. To see these dynamics in reality one can visit any of the Vermont downtown examples, first and foremost the State's first roundabout corridor in Manchester Center and the downtown roundabouts in Middlebury, Montpelier and Waterbury.

For the first time, transportation designers and policy makers have a all-modes opportunity to make urban areas and town centers walkable and bikable—and yes drivable.

So, the primary State planning goal of compact urban and town centers separated by rural countryside can be in fact achieved, not the impossible dream really was when first entered into legislation more than a half century ago when the landscape remained under siege by seemingly limitless resources being plowed into car ownership and operation. That siege suddenly has lifted.

Note the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) calls for converting existing stoplights to roundabouts (and not to build new ones) as half of all senior driver deaths occur at signalized intersections compared to less than a quarter for those younger. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (2000) found U.S. roundabout cut serious and fatal injuries about 90%--from about 1990 the U.S. has dropped relatively like a stone compared to leading nations, from first to 19^th in fatalities per mile of vehicle travel, twice the rate of the top nations including the U.K. at number one.

Sensible housing policy (placing housing near services with walkable/bikable/transit), provision of mixed use development, and slow weening of Vermonters off car and truck public subsidies (about 43% of all highway construction and maintenance comes from general not vehicle levies according to a just released study by USPIRG) promises both a major reduction of vehicle miles of travel and associated motor fuel consumption, but also major economic gains in incomes, health, and resources badly needed in human services areas by government.

3. In the section outlining “strategies” and “measurable goals” for land use and transportation (Energy Plan, Volume 1 p. 15) rail passenger service gets an insignificant and total comment “...the State must continue to support...rail passenger initiatives that dovetail with northeast and Canadian rail initiatives (sic)”.

The 2011 plan process did not catch the rapid shift of commuters to and from Burlngton along “Link” corridors, now more than 50 buses daily between Burlington and Middlebury/Montpelier/Milton/Jefferfsonvile/St. Albans. With daily commuters approaching 600 and 330 commuters served between Burlington-Montpelier, the Link services represent the key mode change in Vermont commuting patterns. All modes other than car commuting are up and solo/rideshare car commuting trends downward. Note the huge benefit to the Burlington-Montpelier commuter who saves $8,000 in after tax income for taking the Link service over the solo commute by car.

Because of the 130 or so commuters from Montpelier have one destination—Burlington--the Link service tells us that the Montpelier and four surrounding towns has about a quarter of its total workers traveling to Burlington taking the Link each workday. This “market” data using journey-to-work Census information constitutes the major yardstick for estimating commuter rail potential when reasonably applied to the three rail corridors potentially served out of Burlington. Compared to the three towns served by Link between Montpelier-Burlington, for example, commuter rail can serve seven plus Technology Park in Essex Jct. In the same travel time as the Burlington-Montpelier Link.

While Amtrak on/off passengers in 2014 totaled 106,000, commuter rail Burlington-Montpelier service estimate would be five times that number, 550,000 and with the additional two corridors, total annual on/off passengers 953,000. Overall over 2,000 Vermont journey-to-work trips would be represented with the three rail corridor commuter service, a number equivalent to about 5% of the total workers crossing the Burlington border to and from work each day, 1% of solo drivers statewide, 7% of rideshare statewide, and 80% of cyclists statewide.

An immediate increase in Amtrak passengers—about a 15% increase or 17,000—can occur by just contracting an Ambus to connect the Vermonter at St. Albans to Montreal. This service likely cuts the current State support for Amtrak from $8 million to $7 million overnight. This really constitutes a no-regrets action—if the bus fails to earn its keep, the service can be ended.

4. The modern roundabout installed in 200 Vermont busy intersections promise about a 3% reduction in current levels of motor fuels use in the State: the reductions come in three parts: (1) direct motor fuel reductions short term (2) medium term reductions from from increased development densities and modal shifts altogether; and (3) long term reductions from the same combination of change, modal shift and higher density land development.
   The reductions in motor fuel consumption and associated emissions, about 30% compared to signals not only has been determined empirically and in models but is also calculated routinely in roundabout analysis in U.K. and Australian developed software which dominate U.S. traffic analysis.
   One Greek case study using an empirical “car following”method to determine annual fuel consumption and related emissions employed a before-and-after set of data on a signalized intersection converted to a roundabout. That study of an intersection with 23,500 vehicles a day entering compares reasonably with Vermont busy intersection conversions such as, Montpelier US 2/302 roundabout conversion with 21,000 vehicles per day and Brattleboro's Keene Turn Roundabout with 28,000 vehicles per day including an usually high 900 tractor trailers daily.
   The reduction in fuel totaled almost 19,000 gallons annualized. With about 400 signalized Vermont intersections it is fair to estimate about 200 busy intersections is a reasonable objective for roundabout conversion at least one criteria being impact on fuel consumption. Certainly about 90% of signalized intersections are roundabout-conversion feasible.

Conversion of 200 busy intersections to roundabouts with a resulting average 19,000 gallon annual reduction in fuel consumption represents a 1.2% decrease in the 2012 Vermont consumption of 307 million gallons of motor fuel. Another 1.2% in the medium term”, 10 years, can be estimated and a third 1.2% for the “long term”, 10-20 years, comprised of a combination of modal shifts to non-motor vehicle travel combined by the impacts of increased development densities. Overall, the 200 signal-to-roundabout conversions represent a 3.6% decline in motor fuel consumption. This does not address the ancillary benefits of hundreds of thousands of hours of reduced travel time for all modes, injuries and fatalities avoided, and improved scenic quality.

5. The 2010 plan miscalculates both post-2000 Annual Vehicle Miles of Travel (AVMT) but also presents a slow growth AVMT scenario already proven not to be the case.

First, the 2000-2010 growth to 7 billion-plus AVMT clearly is in error. Vermont AVMT growth for the period likely was less than the 3.1% average growth rate for all New England AVMT for the period leaving Vermont AVMT below 7 billion AVMT as of 2010. The Vermont AVMT actually declined 1.8% 2010-2013, a figure which is reasonable when compared to other Ne England States (all but Massachusetts declined). The problem with Vermont 2000-2010 change of AMVT occurred in two changes in how the State calculated AVMT during the period—the lack of a consistent method skewed the 2000-2010 upward.

Second, as Vermont population growth slowed more than expected (dipping into negative territory in a recent year) and the 2014 Census data showing population decline in nine of fourteen counties clearly indicate a slow growth in AVMT regardless of other factors. But, the growth of the senior population factor—about a half percent of Vermont population each year or about 3,000, shifts into the senior age category while the under-65 population slowly declines. This trend reflected in the official State population estimates means—all other factors equal—a slow and steady decline in AVMT as that over-65 driver mile-per-year over the decades has remained 40% below the under-65 aged driver. So, Vermont absent any other factors can anticipate a flat to slow downtrend in AVMT at least through 2030 based on demographics alone.

Of course other factors are not equal—the under 30 age group driver license proportions have dropped, employers and public policy pushes for reduced solo driving, and there are clear indications of decreased public financed of motor vehicle use.

One of the major areas for action is abandoning “free” parking for solo driving Vermont workers who burden the public and private sector with $120 million year parking costs.

6. Transportation finance must move away from vehicle taxes to support needed non-vehicle services.

USPIRG in a report this year found 42% of the investment and maintenance of highways came from non-user funding. The federal government ended motor vehicle taxes to support the so-called Highway Trust Fund about three years ago and currently is considering a number of non-motor vehicle taxes of about $8 billion to keep federal transportation programs continuing for a short time. At the state level Virginia abolished the gas tax last year and funds all highways through an across the board dedicated sales tax. Nothing complicated here—car travel decline combined with rapid growth of all other modes (walk, bike, rail, bus, etc.) means other sources must be tapped. Vermont must address these new reality—commuter rail, for example, might be funded by a northwest/central Vermont dedicated sales tax. And, subsidies of high-petroleum use/polluting heavy trucks by everyone else needs to

stop.

Most important our urban areas and town centers needs a $100-$200 million immediate investment in modern, quality, safe walk and bike infrastructure to respond to making a reality safe, multi-modal transportation increasingly found in our town and regional plans.

7. Annual Vehicle Miles of Travel (AVMT) Exhibit 9-7 appears seriously flawed; Exhibit 9-8 similarly historically misleading.

The picture presented of Vermont change in Exhibit 9-7 appears seriously in error, representing a false trend line. The growth 1980-1990 appears about 25% versus actual growth of 57%. From 1990 to 2000 growth collapsed to 16%, then about 3% (using New England average) 2000—2010, turning negative about 2008 and never reaching that number since. The sharply reduced growth in AVMT was known to the VAOT in a study and an analysis in the 1989-1991 period when a 20% growth (overstated by about 20% as it turned out) was projected 1990-2000. This graph needs to be revised to reflect the real trends it fails to reflect.

Exhibit 9-8, of course, must be replaced by now historic data showing a downtrend/flatlining in AVMT from 2008 forward (note earlier comments that the Vermont peak never hit 7 billion AVMT because of changes in Vermont calculations of AVMT made a one time unjustifiable increase in the figure subsequently used as a base for annual calculations thereafter). As AVMT represents a key metric, Vermont's numbers for the 2000 forward need to be revised to better reflect actual levels. Because HPMS and motor fuels—along with comparisons with other New England States—serve as a guide, such a revision in numbers for 2000 and after do not pose a major obstacle.

Without accurate trends and inventory, policy discussions and setting objectives become exceedingly difficult and lead to a mis-allocation of scarce resources.

8. Public transportation, walking and bicycling—the three rabbits along with one horse, the car, in the transportation horse and rabbit stew
   While Vermont households spend about $2 billion in their household budget for car-based transportation, they spend perhaps $10 million for public transit including Amtrak, walking and bicycling. Now it is well understood that a network of intercity and commuter rail as well as modern high quality and safe walk/bike infrastructure is not only possible but a market driven demand, sizable investments are needed outside of highway taxation stream to fund these burgeoning transportation modes while decreasing subsidies to all forms of motor vehicle transport except the public transport vehicles.
   It is noteworthy that less than five pages is devoted to walk, bike and rail passenger modes even though these three can represent more than half the urban trips in some urban planning. In Copenhagen, bike trips topping half of all urban trips in about two years has been a goal since 2000. Commuter, intercity and light rail along with walk/bike modes shares of 20% or more represent the very minimum that CEP needs to recommend along with estimates of modal shifts from vehicle miles, car registrations, etc. (Note that in a recent month there was a 1,000 vehicle decline in registered cars and light trucks in Vermont.)

Thank for the opportunity to submit these comments.

Vermont Roundabout Celebrates 19th Birthday

Montpelier's Keck Circle celebrated its 19th birthday and my letter to Mayor Hollar and City Councilor takes note of the 20th anniversary coming up in 2015 and the kinds of changes in transportation since that first northeastern U.S. roundabout was built--there are now fourteen roundabouts in Vermont, about 4,000 in the nation and several states and provinces in Canada with "roundabouts first" policies in place. 

Dear Mayor Hollar and Councilors:

On this day, the 19^th birthday of Keck Circle, am writing to look forward to Sunday, August 16, 2015 when the first modern roundabout in the northeast (east of Las Vegas and north of Maryland) ends the teenage years. 

Keck Circle, the 19^th roundabout built in the United States, represents a modern technology dating from its inception in 1966 in the U.K. and composed of stone-age materials.  It is my hope to perhaps lunch with some of the City committee members and councilors from the 1993-1995 period of study, design and construction. 

It is noteworthy the $64,000 all-City funded project design costs were $2,300.  Pinkham Engineering of Burlington, later merged into Summit Engineering, handled the design with the involvement of Michael J. Wallwork of Florida, then with the Florida Department of Transportation and since the late 1990s a leader in roundabout design nationally.

At some point the City certainly will update this historic intersection.  The original plan featured a slightly narrower entry on the Main Street northbound and the large vehicle override of the eastbound entry on Spring merits attention.  Certainly as we renew our core urban streets with cycle track Keck Circle bicycle accommodation needs at least a minimum upgrade to on/off ramping where approach lanes narrow thereby allowing cyclist the choice of shifting onto shared space with the walk mode along with shared crosswalks—you will find more than one Middle School student traveling on the sidewalk north of Keck Circle and Main Street below while on their trip to and from school.   Wallwork led the national evolution of bicycle accommodation design to—at a minimum--on/off ramps on both single and multi-lane roundabouts in recent years. 

As you are well aware a roundabout at Barre Street and Main Street remains as the chosen treatment to connect Winooski East and West Bikepaths—easily possible as part of the re-use of the beverage outlet re-development.

Mayor Hollar and City Council          August 16, 2015                                       Page 2

Montpelier’s two roundabouts played a key role in my neighborhood’s North Avenue corridor study just now ending with two field trips including one where our resident group was given the positive emergency vehicle experience at your roundabouts by Fire Chief Robert Gowans.  The outcome of our study includes an unprecedented long term recommendation for cycle track from end to end of the 2.8 mile corridor and conversion of three of the current seven signalized intersections to roundabouts.

You may find the various video material of our November 1, 2013 field visit (particularly the 5:43 second segment) taken on that last summer-like Friday taken when school let out at the Middle School, then later at the peak 4-5 p.m. traffic, about 2,100 vehicles an hour, at the US 2/302 roundabout.  Note the Keck Circle “walking school bus” from Union, the ambulance run, the rookie driver operation of a chartered Greyhound bus, and the two people in the splitter island refuge viewing the wind-driven wheel atop the bicycle sculpture.  http://goo.gl/DdajOC 

As you all recognize a revolution in transportation begun in the 1990s with Montpelier roundabouts and transportation paths a reflection of the early period when the City and the State attained regional leadership.  Now on the immediate horizon for Montpelier are cycle track to bring bicycling to all regardless of age or skill.  Further we are near both intercity and commuter rail with more than a thousand workers accessing your worksites via 12-20 trains daily stopping at the new transit center (already 50 Link bus runs each workday service handling about 500 individual commuters from Burlington to Montpelier, Middlebury and St. Albans with the first Link bus dating from 2003).

Yours truly,  Tony Redington

A New World of Transportation for Vermont?

A New World of Transportation for Vermont? 

During a February Burlington (VT) North Avenue corridor study meeting the question of funding for carrying out a “vision” of a livable street led to government types lamenting the scarcity of funding.  Then came President Obama’s March proposed budget starting October calling for a 25% increase in federal transportation program funding meaning a likely increase of $50 million or more for Vermont yearly over the $196 million currently budgeted.

Pretty much ignored by the press—no expects the expansion to pass Congress—the President’s proposal marks a historic but inevitable shift of funding from gasoline taxes to general funds.  As important, the budget calls for additional highway and transit funding plus two entirely new program categories, rail and multimodal.   

After car travel growth slowing for more than a decade, it flatlined beginning in 2007 and that peak year remains the national record to this day.  As car travel plateaued (it only grew 3% 2000-2010 in all of New England) so did gas and diesel tax revenues.  By 2010 the ramshackle federal Highway Trust Fund used for roadway and transit projects went bust (it raises about $37 billion a year) and Congress for a temporary fix dumped $14.7 billion into it from general funds. The President’s budget addresses the problem and more.  The budget calls for a $18 billion a year spending increase with corporate income tax reform raising about $36 billion yearly covering the spending increase and closing the current accumulated deficits.

While highway travel growth came to a halt, public transportation growth continued and accelerated.  In 2012 public transportation trips reached the highest level in a half century.  Rail and public transportation needs increase meaning more funding to meet demand as well as fostering transportation modes known for higher levels of safety and per passenger mile reductions pollution, emissions, and global warming gases.  In addition this means increased emphasis and investments in long neglected urban and town center walking and bicycling modes infrastructure—particularly the new technologies of cycle track (protected bike lanes) and roundabouts (one laners are truly “intersection safety belts” for all users).

While no immediate federal program expansion is expected, the new transportation finance direction is clear, and states also began last year moving away from highway vehicle-only sources for transportation finance.  Virginia last year abolished its gas tax and moved all transportation funding from a dedicated general sales tax.  Massachusetts seriously considered sourcing additional transportation funding at a rate of  $1.9 billion in income taxation to deal with the evaporating car-based revenues twinned with higher public transportation and highway funding demands.  Further, the near term solution to transportation funding for states can only be resolved with federal assistance since over half the states contain constitutional provisions and laws, mostly dating from the 1930s, prohibiting gasoline and motor vehicle taxes being used for anything but highways.   

An injection of $50 million federal funding into transportation in Vermont posed by President’s budget along with shifting federal programming strongly toward multi-modal and rail would signify substantial opportunities for the State.  Here are some Vermont examples of estimated capital costs for rail passenger services and basic walking/bicycling infrastructure composed of cycle track (protected bike lanes) and roundabouts:

(1)  Commuter rail: between Burlington and Montpelier-Barre/St. Albans/Middlebury--$60 million (includes track upgrades and rail passenger equipment).

(2)  Intercity rail: extension of rail passenger services to Bennington, St. Johnsbury and between Bellows Falls-Rutland--$60 million (includes rail passenger equipment).

(3)  Light rail: extending outward north and south from Rutland downtown-$60 million (includes light rail vehicles).

(4)  Light rail: Burlington north/south line North Avenue’s Flynn School to south end of Pine $60 million; and Burlington’s waterfront to Fletcher Allen Health Center/University of Vermont/Champlain College via Church Street Marketplace--$80 million estimates (includes light rail vehicles).

(5)  Cycle track for urban and town centers: $2 million a mile

(6)  Urban roundabouts (single lane): $2 million per intersection average (roundabouts are designed with separate/shared paths for cyclists).

Of course Vermont and other states must also address their overall transportation funding and in most cases reflect the same kind of movement toward general fund revenue sources found in Virginia, Massachusetts and the federal proposed budget.

The new and revised revenue streams for transportation present challenges and opportunities but these cannot be avoided as the age of car travel as the primary funder of all transportation modes recedes into history.  Currently in urban U.S. about four percent of commuters go by bike and on foot with another six percent using public transit.   When all is said and done, Vermont urban and town centers—like those of the rest of the nation—will come to more closely resemble those in Western Europe where about half of all urban trips each day occur on transit, by bicycle and on foot.

DEMAND MANAGEMENT MUCH IN DEMAND

DEMAND MANAGEMENT MUCH IN DEMAND BY VERMONT CUSTOMERS

Apparently lots of the greater Burlington region commuters take to the Link buses which for a typical commuter between Montpelier and Burlington can increase the household dollars available—after taxes—by upwards of $7,000 yearly.

With just a month to go in the operational year of the Link buses between Burlington and the outlying connections—Middlebury Milton, Montpelier and St. Albans—ridership sets a new record, about 200,000 for the year and a growth of over 11% after a 14% increase last year.  From another standpoint about 440 workers now make their way back and forth to work on one of the 50 Link buses.  At the current growth rate that number will increase to about 500 this time next year, a number approaching 2% of all workers who cross the Burlington border to their jobs each weekday.

Pretty good growth numbers considering little change in the employment numbers statewide, a decline in car travel 2010-2011, and a state population increase Census estimates at 11 persons a month since the 2010 official counts.

Some of the growth of the decade-old Link services operated mostly by the Chittenden County Transportation Authority (CCTA) occurred as the result of active programs to reduce solo driving, particularly by three of the largest employers in Burlington, the “troika” of Champlain College, Fletcher Allen Health Care (FAHC) and the University of Vermont  (UVM).  The “troika” works through their joint small entity, the Campus Area Transportation Management Association (CATMA) which undertakes a number of initiatives aimed at encouraging and rewarding their 10,000 employees and 16,000 students to switch from solo driving to car share, walking, bicycling and taking public transit.  Discount or free transit, for example, is offered students and workers by CATMA, including Link bus services.  And, the numbers taking Link and other transit services reflects the CATMA efforts to reduce solo driving which is called in transportation language the realm of “demand management.”  The goals of demand management may vary, but the central mission in demand management is to reduce the use of certain transportation facilities so as to avoid expensive capital expenditures to increase capacity—assuming increasing capacity is even possible in a given situation (consider the cost, for example, of widening Main Street in downtown Brattleboro or Bennington).

The future looks bright for “demand management” as increasingly young driving age population aged 15-30 no longer even have a driver license and efforts in the demand management remain in the early stages of development.  CATMA is beginning to work with the State’s largest public employer, IBM in Essex, for example.  Further, the largest State employer, the State of Vermont itself, until now stayed on the sidelines in providing support or alternatives to solo commuting.  But a sudden scarcity of parking in Montpelier caused by relocation of workers after loss of State facilities from the storm Irene in the fall of 2011 resulted just recently in starting demand management on the part of the State.  A few dollars a month cost to the State to convince an employee to drop solo commuting pales by comparison to the $600 for a ground level parking space per year and up to $30,000 to $40,000 per space capital cost in a parking garage. 

Meanwhile, CCTA this year added larger buses to handle the highest ridership Link between Burlington and Montpelier—also growing at the highest rate of 13% since last year.  Finally, the growth of Link services and demand management programs confirm the findings in a recent study touting the potential for commuter rail services along the corridors from Burlington to Middlebury, Montpelier and St. Albans. 

VERMONT TRANSPORTATION NEW DEAL

THE “VERMONT TRANSPORTATION NEW DEAL"

Why not a "Vermont New Deal" to match the "Massachusetts New Deal" now on the plate there?  James Roosevelt, Jr. (FDR’s grandson) compares the Bay State’s Governor Deval Patrick proposal funding needed and ongoing transportation, pre-school and innovation as the state level equivalent of the New Deal his grandfather accomplished nationally in the 1930s.

The January “Massachusetts New Deal” $1.9 revenue annual increase divorces transportation funding from the ever declining car tax revenue stream and boosts transportation by about $1 billion and human service needs by another $900 million.  Virginia this year abolished the gas tax and switched transportation funding to a broad base sales tax.  Instead of the regressive sales tax, Governor Deval Patrick’s Massachusetts legislation calls for progressive income tax increases. 

The Boston Sunday Globe outlines in great detail in two articles and a half-page editorial the Patrick proposals—and today a major Globe editorial goes over the investment needs of Massachusetts transportation and Governor Patrick’s budgeted investments. 

Using the rule of 10—Massachusetts being ten times the population of Vermont—a Vermont New Deal amounts to $190 million a year, $100 million for transportation and $90 million for human service needs ranging from Gov. Shumlin’s proposal for university pre-K education to funds for health care reform and environmental/energy conservation measures so critical for the Vermont economy and quality of life.

Just take half the Massachusetts equivalent, $50 million a year , for the Vermont Transportation New Deal and see what one gets for this annual investment.  In just 24-months the Vermont Transportation New Deal completes the investments necessary for Amtrak extension from Rutland to Burlington’s Union Station plus commuter rail services along all three corridors from Burlington to Washington County (the State House), Franklin County (St. Albans) and Addison County (Middlebury).  Still another $15 million remains to fund the first efforts to provide bicycle “cycle track” in Vermont town and city centers to begin to make them truly bikable—and also a roundabout or two to continue moving to the kind of walkability now in place in Manchester Center where the first corridor of roundabouts came into being last November.

Start year three of the Vermont Transportation New Deal with the rail passenger commuter services in operation plus Amtrak to Burlington, both with operating support.  Then expand to those major towns without passenger service--intercity rail service to Bennington and Newport/Derby Line, Bellows Falls connected to Rutland, and a circuit train service—Burlingon-White River Junction-Bellows Falls-Rutland-Burlington—initiated.  Meanwhile, investments increase in city and town centers for bikability and walkability.

Remarkably not a single dime of federal transportation funds is assumed in the forgoing description of the Vermont Transportation New Deal.  Clearly considerable federal funding can be obtained for various elements of the Vermont Transportation New Deal thereby increasing the speed and reach of the program outlined above.

When one considers that going from $3.00 gas to $4.00 gas costs Vermont consumers over $300 million a year or that $50 million equals about a 15-cent gas tax—the Vermont Transportation New Deal seems like a no regrets investment with tremendous benefits to consumers, commuters and business.