A, B and C of Safe Modern Busy Street Design

Note: The U.S. dropped from first to 20th in highway safety since 1990 with today about 22,000 excess fatalities and hundreds of thousands of serious injuries each year compared to the numbers generated per mile of travel by the average of the top four nations--the UK (we were tied with them in 1990 for #1), Norway, Sweden and Switzerland.  AAA studies point to desperate need for U.S. to address its shoddy highway safety status.  AAA, AARP, Federal Highway Administration and Geico all support roundabouts for safety and converting signals to roundabouts for reducing serious and fatal injuries. 

The A, B and C of Modern Busy Urban Street Design:

the Burlington, VT Example

--yes, there are D, E, F, etc. to be covered in future analyses

Since 2000 a revolution occurred in United States modern busy urban streets design. Today there are three generic elements necessary when choosing to serve safely those who walk, bicycle, and, yes, those who travel by car on a busy urban street.

The three core busy urban street design elements are:

1. sidewalk
2. roundabout
3. cycle track (protected bike lane)

The basic design principle? Safety first!

If your busy urban street lacks one or more of these three central components—or their equivalent--by definition one or more ways of travel is unsafe, undeserviced and/or less than the desired, complete transportation street.

In many cases geographic (sharp grades like San Francisco hills), physical constraints (older narrow streets), etc., prevent fully achieving all three elements. The three elements remain the desired objective for safety! The 1000 Friends of Portland study found, essentially, the formula to walkable busy streets are a sidewalk network free of sharp grades plus ease of crossing intersections only the roundabout enables safely.

Almost by default by a neighborhood driven planning process, the Burlington, VT adopted its North Avenue Corridor Plan in 2014 where these three elements were enshrined to provide the highest level of safety for all modes: an existing sidewalk system, cycle track from end to end of the 2.6 mile corridor, and conversion of three of seven busy intersection traffic signals to roundabouts. Note the report two-page Chapter 1 vision and goals: https://studiesandreports.ccrpcvt.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/FINAL-NorthAve_CorridorReport.pdf

The roundabout, birthed in the U.K. in 1966, arrived in the U.S. in 1990. By 2005 NY State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) made the roundabout which cuts serious and fatal injuries about 90% its standard based on better safety for all modes. At U.S. and Canadian roundabouts, about 10,000 today, only one pedestrian and two cyclist fatalities occurred to date. NYSDOT's 2005 action instantly fossilized the traffic signal in America. (Consider the Assam, NL design preferred by many in the U.S. with a separate walk and bike lane: https://www.google.com/search?hs=ylX&q=assam+roundabout+design+netherlands&tbm=isch&source=univ&client=opera&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiYqdO8_s_iAhVkRN8KHbZODNIQsAR6BAgFEAE&biw=784&bih=462 )

Historically cycle track is the newest and most rapidly adopted generic street element—the first cycle track network in North America being installed in Montreal in 2007.

Cycle track adoption here includes its appearance statewide bike plans like the first Illinois state bicycle plan in 2014 and by 2017 in the form of a cycle track network in

Burlington, VT's planBTV Walk Bike: https://www.burlingtonvt.gov/planbtvwalkbike The “old” bicycle provisions of paint on street may have been help to the then prevalent young adult male cyclists. But paint on streets excluded most less skilled, old and young, and women concerned with personal safety. Simply, paint on asphalt is not a safety device and offers minimal safety benefit compared to cycle track while leaving most of the potential bicycle riding community unwilling to ride two wheelers.

Yes, there are some additional wrinkles. Led by Vermont bikepath pioneer, now Dr. Anne Lusk, Harvard School of Public Health, the cycle track alternative location on sidewalk level where there are business or other mixed use areas emerged. Dr. Lusk led the first safety studies showing the superior safety performance of cycle track in Montreal early this decade. Here is the 2010 Lusk study report: https://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/17/2/131

Japan cities feature widespread use of sidewalk level cycle track (though only now adopting roundabout technology). Bicycling is a natural part of Japanese urban neighborhood travel activity (and connecting to subways in major cities) with pedestrians and cyclists of all ages mixing in a low speed cycling context on sidewalk spaces and street crossings. (Up to 10% of Japanese bicycles are E-bikes.)

Among other features, sidewalk level cycle track favors adjacent businesses with easier access and added flexible space between the business and vehicle travelways. Cycle track not on vehicle travelway may be at sidewalk level or at a separate level between the sidewalk level and vehicle travelway. Sidewalk cycle track examples:

https://www.google.com/search?hs=pNs&q=sidewalk+level+cycle+track&tbm=isch&source=univ&client=opera&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi_w9DW_c_iAhWGT98KHRe9Ah8Q7Al6BAgFEA0&biw=784&bih=462

There are a few other variations in street design of note, particularly “shared space” where all modes mix, coexist in a low speed and safe context https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_space One reason busy street urban Japan cycle track works so well is the presence of shared space neighborhood “local” side streets as described in the Wikipedia entry.

These major changes in safe busy urban street design took place since 1990 when the U.S. began its drop from 1^st to 20^th in highway fatality rates, now 22,000 yearly excess highway deaths compared to the average of the top four, the U.K. (co-leader with U.S. in 1990), Norway, Sweden and Switzerland. Safety first!

Tony Redington  June 7, 2019

TonyRVT99@gmail.com @TonyRVT60 TonyRVT.Blogspot.com

Yes We Can: Winooski Avenues--Making Burlington's Greatest Street

Yes We Can: Winooski Avenue--Burlington's Greatest Street 

The current North and South Winooski Ave corridor study seemed at first a challenging triage of a congested, narrow roadway--now it appears the Winooskis really can reach through flexible and unique design its deserving historic role as Burlington's "Greatest Street." 

The Winooski Corridor Study may very well achieve a "yes, we can" outstanding urban pathway:
Yes we can--cut carefully some parking which takes away from green space and safe walking-bicycling accommodation.  Yes, we can--serve the neighborhoods first and through traffic second in providing safe walking and bicycling for all ho can (see photo of sidewalk level cycle track applicable from Riverside to the north to at least Main Street).  Yes we can--employ the core safe best practices on our streets--the "intersection safety belt" roundabout and the safe for all ages and skills cycle track (protected bike lanes).  Yes we can--eliminate parking on at least one side of the street except for the central area (Archibald-North Streets) shifting the space to green and bike space use.  And, yes we can: provide a green strip throughout the corridor.  And, finally, yes we can:  strengthen and rejuvenate both the businesses and residential neighborhoods into a more sustainable and livable context.

Sidewalk level "cycle track" shifts the purpose of bike lanes to serving the needs of the neighborhood cyclists to access nearby businesses services and friends--this leaves the through cyclist to a secondary position, still retaining the skilled rider to the vehicle travelways.    Suddenly, all who can--young, old, and in between regardless of skill can bicycle--now only about 10% of the Burlington population bikes much at all.  This photo from Kyoto taken in October.


The intersections?  Again as in the North Avenue Corridor Plan (2014) the all-modes intersections safety belt, is the obvious choice.  (Recent public opinion surveys show about 75% of Americans favor replacing dangerous intersections with roundabouts--plus this is a priority change for GEICO, AAA, AARP and federal highway officials.)

Here is a 2011AARP Pine Street workshop photo from the report recommending roundabouts from stop to bottom of Pine Street in the South End, this engineering base design at Pine and Maple Streets.

Roundabouts  (all one way) are feasible at all the key intersections--they are not only safe (reduced pedestrian/vehicle injuries by about 90% and reduce bicyclists injuries) but the roundabout also cuts delay for all, cuts green house gas emissions by thousands of gallons of gas at busy intersections each year.  In the case of the Winooskis all intersections adjacent to the Marketplace (Pearl, Cherry, Bank, College and Main) are among the "Dirty 17"  City intersections averaging one injury a year--and add North Street/N. Winooski to that list. 

So, the "Greatest Burlington Street"?  Yes, the sacred Winooskis with the historic library and Fire Station, the main access to the City's shopping street (the Marketplace), location of the highest grossing co-op market in America, and the home to the lowest income Old North End neighborhood, the main avenue for the original trolley line from the waterfront to the Winooski manufacturing complexes--yes, the City's Greatest Street!  YES WE CAN!!

Champlain Parkway and Pine Street Corridor Redesign Guidelines

These Guidelines were just released by Safe Streets Burlington and the Pine Street Coalition, a basic approach to changes sought to the current Champlain Parkway design...

CHAMPLAIN PARKWAY AND PINE STREET CORRIDOR RE-DESIGN GUIDELINES 

 “Shape a safe and complete streets project for a livable community as well as enabling a thriving business and arts center” 

 Cities evolve and so must their transportation systems. The South End highway project—once part of a long abandoned freeway encircling Burlington and subsequently up-dated--still fails to serve the City’s residents. First called the “Southern Connector” and more recently the “Champlain Parkway,” the project requires a reconceptualization to incorporate safety, street connectivity, a reduction in intersection delay, and to support pleasant walk and bike-ability. With these improvements, the corridor can enhance our burgeoning South End Arts District and associated businesses. Over the last year, City residents in the Save Streets Burlington Coalition (SSB) have met among themselves and with City officials, eventually formulating the following “Champlain Parkway and Pine Street Corridor Redesign Guidelines” (Guidelines). 

While specific details will require the work of experts, these principles reflect our collective vision of streets supporting livable communities. When the initial thoroughfare was planned in the 1960s, it incorporated a “speed-the-car” logic. The current Parkway design remains committed to that outdated concept. Worse, the $43 million current Parkway design moves away from both safe street and complete street principles. These better principles are reflected in recent public discussions, Plan BTV Downtown and Plan BTV South End, the North Avenue Corridor Plan, the recent preliminary Railyard studies. the 2014 recommendations of the city's Walk Bike Council, and the City Walk Bike Master Plan now nearing conclusion. The current Parkway plan contravenes each of these studies. In January 2016, SSB issued a White Paper which identified South End road needs as beginning with separate walk and bike facilities, environmental sensitivity along this sensitive lake-front area, and overall livability. It prioritized safety—minimizing highway injuries and fatalities—and called for roundabouts rather than signaled intersections. These briefer “Champlain Parkway and Pine Street Corridor Redesign Guidelines” do not attempt a detailed prescription but set a starting point and identify essential planning principles to guide any final design. Robust public discussion must be a component as the design phase continues to address integration of mass transit along the Pine Street corridor, traffic facilitation on the Pine/King and Pine/Maple intersections, and preservation of existing businesses and rail activity. 

Design Guideline: Bottom of Pine Street to Flynn Avenue The present Parkway design reduces the roadway to one lane in each direction with a median on the section west of Shelburne Road. While this works, there’s a flaw. What’s needed at Pine Street is an intersection that avoids barricading off this important north/south corridor from points south so access to Queen City Park Road and the Kmart lot and other area businesses is

Safe Streets Burlington -- "Champlain Parkway White Paper One: Evaluation"

Champlain Parkway White Paper One: Evaluation

       

                      “Champlain Parkway: Get it Right the First Time”

                       Panel and Discussion Wednesday 

                       February 3, 6:30 p.m. at Arts Riot, 400 Pine St.

Champlain Parkway White Paper One: Evaluation

Let's shape it to become a street the public can love!

January 16, 2016

Our Parkway View—Do it right the first time by shaping a highest all-modes safety and quality transportation street to:

1. Play a central part in achieving a livable South End community
2. Remove trucks off residential streets
3. Assure safety, especially for those who walk and bike, while reducing global warming gases and other pollutants, cutting gasoline use, and intersection delay.
4. Ignite and sustain a vibrant South End industrial-commercial-arts economy

The current Parkway now promoted by the City, Vermont Agency of Transportation (VAOT) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) gets very little right. Most importantly the current Parkway completely fails the following critical tests. The City’s Parkway design results in a net drop in safety for each mode. Added to poor safety: the current Parkway design would increase global warming gases and other pollutants, waste gasoline, strangle economic vitality, cut off connectivity to key adjacent areas, and damage neighborhood livability. Therefore, Safe Streets Burlington (SSB) calls for stopping the project design followed by developing revisions centering on major upgrades to safety, reducing environment impacts, and increasing economic benefits.

The current Parkway now promoted by the City, Vermont Agency of Transportation (VAOT) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) gets very little right. Most importantly the current Parkway completely fails the following critical tests. The City’s Parkway design results in a net drop in safety for each mode. Added to poor safety: the current Parkway design would increase global warming gases and other pollutants, waste gasoline, strangle economic vitality, cut off connectivity to key adjacent areas, and damage neighborhood livability. Therefore, Safe Streets Burlington (SSB) calls for stopping the project design followed by developing revisions centering on major upgrades to safety, reducing environment impacts, and increasing economic benefits.

Remember about 15 years ago the City itself fought against the route of Pine Street from the old Public Works facility to Main Street and lost out to FHWA and VAOT opposition. Since the last public hearing was held a decade ago 2006, a large portion of today's Burlington population never participated in formulating the current design.

Safe Streets Burlington (SSB) challenges the current Champlain Parkway's (Parkway) decades old purpose of speeding cars from I 189 to downtown. The current 2006 Parkway plan correctly moves trucks off residential streets, but new priorities of this decade demand safe streets and intersections for our families and visitors. These priorities include reducing gasoline use and all pollutants tied to climate change, and maintaining economic vitality and growth centering on the arts and business sectors. SSB condemns cutting off the connectivity of the South End to Queen City Park Road, Kmart Plaza and points beyond.

SSB calls for a Parkway to become a street the public can love, a street leading the parade to thriving, livable neighborhoods. Therefore SSB abandons the Parkway purpose of the past half century--moving cars at high speeds to downtown totally blind to what lies outside the curbs. A Parkway design with separate walk and bike facilities along with roundabout intersections cures most of the fundamental defects in the current design. This separation of walk and bike facilities along with safe intersections assures an immeasurable gain for the South End and the City. Progress in other Vermont towns on safe streets and our own North End corridor plan show the way. A project price tag of $43 million requires the City to “do it right the first time.”

Can safety be ignored with a massive 47% predicted growth in Lakeside Avenue traffic facing the Lakeside neighborhood just to get to Pine Street? Can the safety and needs of those on foot and bicycle be ignored in the face of a 39% increase of traffic along Pine Street above Lakeside Avenue through the heart of the commercial, retail, and arts section? The current design dismisses these questions. SSB calls for a Parkway revised using designs which actually improve safety for all modes along Pine Street and Lakeside Avenue.

City leaders apologize for obsolete project design for every mode, and promise later improvements to make up for admitted Parkway design defects. SSB says correct the project defects now, don't kick the can down the road! With $43 million to work with composed of 95% federal funds, a “fits and starts” Parkway approach simply makes no sense.

Burlington residents who comprise Safe Streets Burlington call for quality and safe transportation investing within our City. Like the late urbanologist Jane Jacobs, SSB places people and neighborhood livability first and catering to cars and trucks second. Both SSB and the City start from common values, but the current Parkway design does not meet today's safety and quality street features, namely, sidewalks throughout, separate safe bike pathways and vehicle travelways—all of which would be served at busy intersections by the unrivaled safety and service of the modern roundabout. By contrast all of these very features sparkle in the North Avenue 2.8 mile corridor plan embraced by the City in 2014. The North Avenue design features separate cycle track end-to-end and sidewalks end-to-end and at least three of seven signals converted to roundabouts. The American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) support conversions of signals to roundabouts for seniors safety. Three states including New York the transportation departments of two Canadian provinces follow an intersection policy of “roundabouts first.”

Why safety first? When the Parkway project began in 1965 the U.S. ranked first in highway safety and then sunk to 19^th in the world. With a fatality rate twice that of leading nations, attaining the lowest rates translates to saving 13,000 U.S. lives a year. Both walk and bike fatalities remain a pressing concern as we encourage more people to undertake these healthy modes of travel. Burlington recorded five fatalities since 1998—two pedestrians, one bicyclist, and two drivers—all of which occurred at signalized intersections. Consider that there has not been one single fatality to date at any of the 4,000 roundabouts in the U.S. built since 1990. Compare the roundabout record against two Burlington pedestrian fatalities occurring since 1998 at its 75 traffic signals.

Now for the first time we have Vermont downtown roundabout data covering over 50 years with only one recorded pedestrian injury at the five busy downtown roundabouts in Montpelier, Middlebury and Manchester Center! Compare one pedestrian over a half century to five injuries (one critical) at two Parkway intersections in just four years (Pine at Locust and Lakeside)! Compare the Vermont downtown roundabouts to Burlington's overall “dirty 17” intersections (13 signalized) recording an average of one pedestrian injury yearly (one fatal) 2011-2014! SSB insists that the City must not make $43 million in street investments and fail to complete any modern safe facilities for those who walk, bike and travel by car! The Parkway design must turn to safety first!

The current Parkway design pales in comparison to the 2.8 mile North Avenue “model of excellence” plan adopted by the City Council in October 2014. In spite of massive expected traffic growth up to 47%, the Parkway design lacks North Avenue's basic features: end-to-end cycle track, end-to-end sidewalks, conversion of injury generating signals to roundabouts. Instead, the Parkway actually adds five new injury generating signalized intersections! Even the “new” Home Ave. to Lakeside Ave. section lacks either sidewalks or cycle track. Even FHWA, while opposing Parkway roundabouts, boasts of their benefits: “Compared to other types of intersections...Roundabouts improve safety: more than 90% reduction in fatalities, 76% reduction in injuries, 35% reduction in all crashes, slower speeds are generally safer for pedestrians.” Compared to the single lane roundabout the typical traffic signal doubles vehicle crashes, increases pollutants by about 30%, and raises rates of serious and fatal injury rates by upwards of nine times (900%). Roundabouts uniquely also lower vehicle speeds outwards one to two blocks.

SSB disagrees with the City and VAOT. The City says that VAOT blocks further safety and service changes to the Parkway. The City says in effect that the South End must accept unsafe streets and transportation infrastructure because these are forced on the City by VAOT and the Montpelier FHWA office. SSB rejects a situation wherein the City is forced to spend $43 million in transportation infrastructure, to accept the crashes and injuries (and, yes, perhaps a fatality or two over the 20 year lifetime of a transportation investment) or is faced with losing $40 million federal dollars. SSB points to the last significant busy street investment—the opening of the Church Street Marketplace 35 years ago—when SSB insists we can no longer ignore decades of no meaningful change for safety on Burlington busy streets!

Last but not least the Parkway clearly impacts surface and stormwater runoff increasingly of concern and directly affects the Barge Canal superfund site. This site continues being active today and an ongoing threat to Lake Champlain, the source of our City water supply and centerpiece of the of our waterfront tourist economy. Contaminated and toxic soils throughout the Parkway route and westward through the enterprise zone remain a continuing challenge. Re-Imagining includes adopting recent innovative practices and treatments to improve runoff performance, reducing pressure on the Barge Canal superfund site, and addressing in a straight forward fashion contaminated soils.

SSB calls for an immediate stop to project design. SSB calls for starting a discussion of new designs centering on safety and environmental and economically beneficial upgrades--upgrades without unreasonable associated costs, time delay, and permitting. The residents of the City and the South End, the City, the State and FHWA officials certainly share our SSB values—relocating truck traffic outside of neighborhoods, attaining true safety for all users, pursuing sustained economic vitality, acting on climate change by reducing pollutants and gasoline use, and achieving livable neighborhoods. Now the sole task remains of applying our common concerns to a project which is so critical to our South End neighborhoods and the City.

To join SSB and help to bring a world class street to the South End, a street our residents can love, please visit our website www.SafeStreetsBurlington.com or email SafeStreetsBurlington@gmail.com

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.

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.  

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

                          Comments to the Vermont Transportation Board

  Tony Redington

20 North Winooski Avenue

Burlington, VT  05401

Email:  TonyRVT99@gmail.com  Blog:  TonyRVT.blogspot.com

                                                 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 14^th 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.