Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Bicycle Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers pitch Route 5 bicycle corridor from Massachusetts border to Quebec to boost tourism and low‑carbon travel
Summary
Representative John Bartholomew described a short-form bill to designate Route 5 as a formal bicycle corridor, coordinate existing trails, and convene a steering committee to study phased improvements. Supporters highlighted tourism and greenhouse gas benefits but noted costs and next steps were unspecified.
State Representative John Bartholomew proposed designating the entire length of Route 5 — from the Massachusetts border to Quebec — as a bicycle corridor during a House Transportation Committee hearing on March 19.
Bartholomew said the Connecticut River valley along Route 5 is “almost flat” by Vermont standards and parallels Interstate 91, which already carries much through traffic. He told the committee that towns along the route sit roughly “8 to 10 miles apart,” making the corridor suitable for multi-day bicycle tourism and for commuting by electric bicycle. The sponsor said the measure would create a steering committee to coordinate stakeholders, identify funding sources, and recommend whether improvements should be off-road trails, on-road lanes, or a phased mix of both.
The bill is presented as a short form to limit drafting burden; Bartholomew acknowledged no price tag was attached. He described prior outreach — a survey of towns along the river that drew mixed responses but generally favorable interest among respondents — and recommended working with existing programs such as the Connecticut River Byways and with regional planning commissions (RPCs). Bartholomew said several trails already exist on both sides of the river and that the committee’s work would aim to link those trails and close gaps.
Committee members voiced support and asked process questions. Representative Martin and others said tourism and economic development offices should be involved; members suggested a phased approach and better mapping of existing conditions with regional planning commissions and groups such as Local Motion. Representative Bartholomew and others said a feasibility process should focus on identifying the route and prioritizing problem intersections or short segments for incremental fixes rather than presupposing a multimillion-dollar construction plan.
There was no vote recorded. Bartholomew said the designation would set a long-term priority, with most work expected to proceed incrementally via RPCs, state agencies, and partnerships with neighboring states where crossing the river might be advantageous.
Ending: The committee expressed general enthusiasm for the concept and recommended further coordination with tourism and regional planning partners to scope costs and a phased implementation plan.
