Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Active Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Local Motion survey: 86% of Chittenden County respondents drive alone; strong support for sidewalks and protected bike lanes
Summary
A statistically representative survey of 588 Chittenden County residents presented Sept. 5 found 86% drive alone as their primary mode, broad support for sidewalks and protected bike lanes, and 6% e‑bike ownership; lower-income residents reported highest interest in e‑bikes but cited cost as a key barrier.
Jonathon Weber of Local Motion presented the results of a Chittenden County Active Transportation survey to the CCRPC Transportation Advisory Committee on Sept. 5. The survey, commissioned with CCRPC support and administered by Embold Research (a unit of Change Research), collected responses from 588 adults countywide to inform walking- and biking-related planning and investment decisions.
Weber summarized the survey’s headline finding that most respondents (86%) report driving alone as their primary mode of travel, with walking the most common secondary mode. Burlington differed from the countywide pattern: about 75% of Burlington respondents reported driving alone. Weber said the top barriers to biking countywide were that destinations are too far, people do not own bikes, and a lack of safe infrastructure. He noted that women and people of color reported higher concerns about bike safety.
Two-thirds of respondents supported increasing investment in walking and biking infrastructure. Support was strongest among people of color, Burlington residents, women, and people aged 18–34. When asked about street-design priorities for commercial corridors, respondents ranked safety and creating places where people want to spend time and money ahead of cost and car parking; reducing driving delay ranked lower. The committee was told that support for protected bike lanes falls when questions frame them as a trade-off with car parking or travel lanes.
On e-bikes, the survey found a 6% ownership rate across respondents. Lower-income respondents reported the highest interest in e-bikes but cited cost as the primary barrier and were least likely to know about utility incentives. Respondents were divided on whether e-bikes present a safety concern on shared-use paths.
The CCRPC staff and committee members were directed to the full data and slide deck for more detailed subgroup analysis. A TAC member asked about bike theft and the relationship to ownership; Weber said the survey included a question on secure bike parking but did not measure whether respondents lacked bikes explicitly because of theft fears.
Next steps noted by staff included using these results to inform walk-bike policy discussions and potential design guidance for local streets.
