By Laurie Hurowitz and Pierre Swick
We are writing about the Waitsfield Select Board’s approval of a conceptual plan for the revised West Village Sidewalk in Waitsfield. We read the April 14, 2016, story in The Valley Reporter (http://valleyreporter.com/stories/news/11258-waitsfield-select-board-approves-sidewalk-plan) regarding the newly revised plan for a sidewalk, on-street parking and curb cut on the west side of state highway Route 100 in Waitsfield. We noticed no mention of the impact of the plan on the roads, shoulder and bicycle lane, so we went to the select board website, April 11 meeting agenda (www.waitsfieldvt.us/sb/agenda.cfm), and reviewed the Conceptual Plan street map which does not identify a bike lane and the Summary of Issues which speaks about pedestrians and cars but not bicyclists.
We assume that improvement to the sidewalk and adding on-street parking to Route 100, along with curb cuts, qualifies under the 1985 state statute, “any construction, or reconstruction, including upgrading and resurfacing projects on [major state] highways, shall maintain or improve existing access and road surface conditions for bicycles and pedestrians along the shoulders of these highways ... unless the agency deems it to be cost-prohibitive” (as quoted in http://vtdigger.org/2015/12/09/state-studies-bike-network-expansion/).
The Vermont Agency of Transportation’s On-Road Bicycle Plan (www.aot.state.vt.us/documents/bikeplan/VTrans_Bicycle_Corridor_Priority_LargeMap_Draft.pdf) recently identified the Waitsfield section of Route 100 as a “high status corridor” based on current and potential bicycle use. We assume this use includes not only locals, like ourselves, but also the many, many bicycle visitors to The Valley who support our tourist industry.
We believe that any plan affecting state Route 100 should be explicit and address its impact on the bike lane, its maintenance or, even better, its improvement. Conversations among the Waitsfield Select Board concerning Route 100 paving and the bicycle lane are certainly not new (http://valleyreporter.com/stories/11-news/2252-), which makes its absence in the current plan all the more surprising.
When documents do not even mention the impact of the project on the roads, other vulnerable population, bicyclists, we fear the worst, which is that the introduction of on-street parking and curb cuts will not only add to road hazards for bicyclists (preventing bicyclists from putting as much distance as possible between themselves and the road) but, even worse, that these new features will cut into the existing shoulder on Route 100.
We hope to see a new street map of the Conceptual Plan very soon, which shows the current shoulder and proposed changes, including maintenance or improvement to the bike lane. We’d also like to see a revised Summary of Issues addressing the impact of proposed changes on bicyclists, so we can have a full and informed discussion of the impact of the plan on all vulnerable populations using the beautiful Mad River Valley Scenic Byway.
Hurowitz and Swick live in Fayston.
