 Alright welcome everybody and we're going to go ahead and get started. Welcome to zoom on this beautiful October morning. Thanks for coming. And most of you folks know me my name is Jonathan Weber I'm the complete streets program manager at local motion. I'm joined by Susan grass who's our complete streets program associate. And Susan and I work together as a team to support folks who are working to make their communities better for walking and biking that includes local advocates includes town staff. We also do a lot of advocacy at the local and state level. So we're really here to support folks like you. One of the ways that we do that is through education and webinars like this one and today we're going to be talking about some survey results that we gathered last year here in shaming County. Susan is going to be monitoring the chat for any questions. Feel free to post them or any comments that you have and then also feel free to raise your hand if you would rather use your voice to ask a question. So, without further ado, we'll go ahead and jump in. So, as I said, this is analysis of some survey data collected last year looking at actually transportation trends in shaming County project team on this was myself and our intern Carly. Carly did an awesome job taking all the data we had gathered and sort of making it all into this great presentation, which I think is a really nice process of shout out to Carly for all of her work on this. So the purpose behind this survey was purpose for the survey was to capture key insights on public opinion and informed decisions regarding walk by policies conditions and improvements. Local motion coordinate the survey. We have funding from the County Regional Planning Commission. Our staff drafted the survey questions with some help from our pollster. And we solicited input from a lot of stakeholders throughout the county. We also, the survey was administered by involved research, which is the non partisan unit of change research. And more on the methodology. In total is a sample of 588 changing County residents. And the survey itself was administered between August 31 and September 2. The margin of error is around 4.2%. And this was fielded on Facebook and Instagram is not a phone survey. And that allows change researcher and bold actually to adjust the demographics that they're serving the ads to for the survey as the results are coming in. So that they can reduce the need for waiting after all the results are are in. Political orientation was not accounted for in the sampling. Basically, the funding that we had from the Regional Planning Commission to allow us to do this can't be used for what's considered political research. So just be aware that, you know, political orientation and the differences in opinion on the questions in the survey and differences in behavior that come with that, just they're not sort of baked into the data here. Finally, the data was weighted after everything was done to depict the gender age, race, ethnicity and education of adults accurately in the county. So this presentation and the survey in general was sort of divvied up into three focus areas. We're going to start with the first, which is what are people's current transportation behavior so looking at how people get around barriers to life in particular. And then also very specifically to winter biking. So this presentation is going to be these three sections, we will stop after each one, and take some questions and have some discussion, because there, there's a lot of data and a lot of things to consider in each side. So we'll jump right into current transportation behaviors. So I think most of us probably intuitively notice that most people in shooting County, sadly, are car dependent. They report driving as their primary mode of transportation. And the remaining 14 or so percent get around, you know, 4% walk, and then between three and 1% you know, carpool, ride a bike or a bike, take the bus or ride a motorcycle. We do see that people of color, the lowest income group and the lowest age group are generally twice as likely to carpool, bus, bike or walk than the rest of the population. And that sort of data point and those demographics being more reliant and more interested in walking a bike is something that you're sort of going to see carried throughout this presentation. Looking at the same question in Burlington, so which transportation options do you use most often? We do see, you know, a much lower percentage of people driving. So if you compare Burlington to the rest of the towns in the county, 75% of people in Burlington drive as opposed to 90% of people in the towns outside of Burlington. And then the walk rate is much higher, 11% as opposed to 1% in other towns. The bike rate is also almost double, although it's still just 5%. So this of course, you know, it suggests a lot of different things. I think the primary thing is, you know, Burlington has the densest land use, the highest concentration of origins close to destinations, which, you know, just makes walking and biking much more convenient, much more doable for more people. I think it's likely that there is a similar effect within the other denser town centers throughout Union County, but we're only splitting the data out for Burlington. So when we look at secondary modes of transportation, we ask people which other transportation options have been used in the past month and they were able to select all that they had used. So 50% of people walked for transportation. 26% of people do really think they used any other mode of transportation. Of course, you know, probably all of those people are also walking or rolling some way to get from their car to where they're going. So 50% of people biked or re-biked at a secondary mode, which is awesome. And then you had dropped off and carpool and the ride sharing after that. I may note that transit is not in the top five for secondary modes of transportation. However, 22% of people of color use the bus as a secondary form of transportation as opposed to just 4% of white residents. So pretty big difference there. I also see that just an interesting data point, the lowest income group reported using the ride sharing apps actually the most frequently over twice the rate of the middle and highest income groups. I think there are a couple of different ways to explain that data point. You know, one possibility is that that really represents students and sort of the younger population. You know, using it to go out on weekends and get home safe. Another possible explanation is that lower income people who don't have a car, don't have access to someone who can give them a ride in a car and are not served by the transit network or by the bike network are really reliant on ride sharing when they need to get to a destination that's within, you know, walking or biking or bus distance, which of course a really expensive way to get around. So the next question we asked was, what prevents you from biking more often so trying to get these barriers that people experience that keep them from biking. And the number one that we saw was that their destinations are too far away. It just doesn't feel realistic to bike from my house to work or to where I go shopping. Number two, I don't own a bike. And then number three was the lack of state bike infrastructure. And then there are you know there's sort of a handful of reasons beyond that but those were the top three. And this is throughout the county. We did see that women and people of color express a higher level of concern for safe bike infrastructure compared to men and white residents so you can see that that difference in that bottom bottom left hand corner there. And then again sort of the comparison to Burlington, we see that destination being too far away really drops off quite a bit. It's still one of the top three barriers, but it's not the top barrier instead the top area of Burlington is actually a lack of bike ownership. The lack of safe bike infrastructure is still the third here in Burlington. So I think, you know, it really emphasized again the that importance of land use and, you know, helping our places develop with, you know, higher levels of density and warm mix use so that people can walk people can walk and bike to the place where they need to go and those places are close close enough for them to do that. I think it also highlights the importance of organizations like old folks home that focus on getting bikes to people, as well as you know having a good regional bike show program. Finally getting into winter biking. This was actually I think one of the one of the most surprising and encouraging results in the survey. We asked people how likely would you be to ride your bike for transportation in the winter. And we saw that people are about split on this about half of people said they were very likely or somewhat likely to bike in the winter, and about half people said they were very unlikely or somewhat unlikely. And personally, I would have expected the likely responses to be much, much lower than they were in this so I thought this was really encouraging and a great indication that if we can make the investments in our bike infrastructure and do the maintenance to make sure it's it's really nice to ride in the winter that people will use it. People are not afraid of being cold. This is Vermont and they'll get out and bike as long as we make it reasonably nice to do so. So some key points from this first section. And if you've got questions, feel free to raise your hand or post them in the chat and we'll answer them. Number one, as we said changing counties, we're mostly car dependent but there's that comparatively lower rate of driving and higher rates of walking and biking in Burlington. Marginalized communities. People of color lowering can people are more likely to rely on forms of transportation, other than driving. And finally, change to land use, you know, promoting more that makes use development destinations near origins initiatives that increase access to bikes and improving infrastructure and winter maintenance are really key to addressing barriers to biking. So, do we have questions, comments, thoughts, people want to share at this point. Susan let's go to the chat first I saw a couple things. So will will was asking will dodge was asking about the timing of the survey and the fact that it was done in late summer. So, with the questions, asking about behaviors over the previous month, we can assume that this data really represents more summer riding. He didn't he didn't ask specifically about what we might expect the survey to say, if it were conducted in the winter time but maybe you want to speculate on that a bit. Yeah, yeah, so the data, you can basically say that the data reflects some behavior from August 2022. That's that's when we feel that it was at the end of August so we asked about past month. And that's what it would have reflected in terms of the winter. If we had fielded this and asked the same question in the winter I'm sure rates of biking would have been much lower. During the winter, you know, I think we all see that anecdotally that there are fewer people riding there are still a lot of people out that I see. And also, I think that that's changing as our winter is sadly are becoming more mild. So I know that I'm riding more frequently and not having to, you know, wear a snow suit as frequently and post my bike off as much so I think that's changing but I do think it would be it would be lower if we had asked the same question. We have some hands up. Yeah, no other questions in the chat and I don't see any hands up. I think Phil, you can see that Phil has said I'm going to so I'm going to unmute you. So go ahead. So if you've got a question go ahead. Because of my magnification took a while to find. All the way over on the right part of the screen. Jonathan, how much of this do you feel is a reflection of the lack of infrastructure money put into Burlington Chittenden County and the rest of the state it seems that we put 90% into car centric transportation and whatever is left over I think it's 2% goes into transit walking and biking. Yeah, I mean, I think, I think, I think that's a kind of huge effect on on the data and on how people people get around. You know, we saw just for example, flip back to this barriers question. We did see, you know, lack of safe bike infrastructure is sort of the number three barrier so it's definitely up there and if we were investing more in that infrastructure I think there would also be stronger political support to maintain it there would be a stronger by culture would be more accepted. All kinds of things I think would would sort of grow from that so and yet that the lack of funding is really is a key barrier to building more of the good infrastructure that we need. So, yeah, I think that's definitely a huge component here. So how can we make this more of, well, local motion and other groups working with active mobility. So how can we better get this on the ballot, so that we can increase the funding. It is a priority for us it's probably our top priority coming into this legislative session, one of the key sources of funding for bike and pedestrian infrastructure in Vermont is the state bike grant. We actually got the past five years of data on that and over the past five years it has only funded about 30% of the requests. So that's a lot of infrastructure that towns wanted to build that they haven't been able to over the past five years. I did see I think our partners at the regional planning commission is also really want to see that increase. Yeah, it is a priority and, you know, for for local motion, spending more time on lobbying is something that we, we are always trying to do. And if folks want to see us doing that, I would encourage you to donate because we do need that kind of unrestricted grassroots donation in order for us to spend that time. Well put, thank you, Jim Johnson. I have a question from Will. Let's see what you should be able to try to know. Okay, can you hear me okay. Yes. Okay, great. First of all, thank you for this survey I think it's really great I think it's a it's a really good, you know solid building block to to start on and I guess what I would encourage is like looking at this chart in particular. Right. You know it sort of goes to well what what comes next and obviously. Sometimes I think, you know, some of these answers can be a little deceptive because for instance. I know that like I some people who live in Essex like I do and commute into Burlington think well it's too far away. But what I found over time with an e-bike is that you know my sort of average car commute takes about 25 minutes. So if I go in on an e-bike I can get here in 35 minutes, and I would not have known that until I actually like started to get better at just navigating and kind of using the bike so the so when I think about that the convenience factor would change for me. And with lack with the bike infrastructure. I think it would be great if you guys had a survey that maybe got out okay well what of the investments of the public investments that could be made in bike infrastructure. What is the most, I don't know requested what's the most effective, like is it obviously, you know, dedicated multi use paths like we have on route 15 now that made a huge difference for me. In Montreal, I look with envy at those posts that can separate, you know, cars, car paths from bike paths or roads from the bike paths. So it'd be interesting to get more data about sort of like what, you know, what would the commuter think if certain types of improvements were made. That's more just a comment I think it's a great, really great work that that was done on this survey. Yeah, thanks. Well, that is a great, a great comment on the on that you like point we will get to that a little later we have a section on you guys that's going to be our third section so we will get that question of the effect on you guys to these barriers and how they're different for a person on the bike. And yeah, the infrastructure point totally agree with you, you know, there's there's been a lot of great planning work done in the county the regional planning question has an active transportation plan that was updated this year that does look at sort of whatever the most effective or in segments to focus on. And then I really encourage folks to check out actually the last webinar we did on level of traffic stress which really gets at looking at like what is the appropriate kind of bike infrastructure given the context, you know, the volumes and the speeds on the street really make a person feel comfortable. There's actually pretty objective way to determine that using level of traffic stress so Susan can probably put the link to that in the chat. So thanks will. And we have. I will put that link in in just a minute. We don't have any other hands up. Stu Lindsay makes the point though related to this conversation about destination being too far indicates that housing near services is a key barrier. So that's that's a whole nother really important conversation. Yeah, yeah, absolutely I think I think that land use question is is really important and I think a lot of municipalities have a lot of work to do on that and and some are starting to do that work and it's a great it's usually important for getting more people walking and biking. I also saw Jean Bergman asked about us sharing this with the Transportation Heritage and Utilities Committee of Burlington. I can't recall if I shared this with those folks specifically but she might absolutely will. And, and yeah we are going to be sharing this more with elected folks in general. Okay, I'm going to keep us moving because we're almost halfway through already. So the second section gets into perspectives. Basically, ask people how they feel about this stuff what their priorities are what kinds of policy they would support. What kinds of investments they want to see. So, first off we asked generally do you support or oppose your community increase investment in biking and walking infrastructure. And really strong overall support for this at 67% throughout the county. And you sort of see this pattern of people of color you know growing some residents women, younger people on the lowest household income group having levels of support above above the average of the county. So I think you know this is really encouraging that people want to see more of this stuff they encourage they support their community spending more more money and more capacity on it. This question is a little tricky. So, this is basically trying to get at how, you know, how people would position trade off between the types of transportation initiatives and investments we can make. This is based on a question that the regional planning commission asks its five year survey. And it changes to how the options were described. And we got a very significant difference in our results from what the regional planning commission had. Basically, in the regional planning commission involves they tend to see safety ranked as number one. And I think preservation and walk bike infrastructure is two and three. And you can see that we got was preservation is number one but then we had the efficiency and expansion, which essentially refer to building bigger rows or making traffic move more efficiently, or more faster, faster as two and three. And as you can see at the top we provided quite a bit more description for those options in the regional planning commission survey, it was not super clear what those were referring to. I think it was the right thing to do to provide more description for those options but we did not provide more description for the other option and I think that's part of why they didn't. Part of why they're the results were what they are for this question so it'll be interesting to see what the regional planning commission gets in terms of results to this in its next survey, which I think will go out this year. So, keep an eye on that. This, we asked basically your level of agreement agreement for a statement and the statement for this question was investments in walking and biking infrastructure such as sidewalks and bike lanes would make our communities healthier and more enjoyable places to live. And we found that 73% of people agree or somewhat agree. So again, really strong support. Pretty uncontrovertial. We do see high levels of support from various residents younger people and women. Again, you know we asked people their level of agreement the statement was that investments in walking and biking infrastructure are good for local business because they create more foot traffic, and 690% of people agree with this one. So, the highest levels agreement from the lowest income group, you know, these folks and women. So, you know, I think that this is really encouraging people, people get the connection between the need to have people out of their cars, walking around enjoying the built environment in order for them to have successful businesses in their community and that when you build a place just that's fast for cars to drive through, you're not creating an environment where local businesses are going to thrive. This was getting into basically how people would prioritize design elements when they're looking at a street that has businesses on it so thinking about it like a main street or commercial street. And we have to rank their priorities from one to seven. And basically what we saw was, of course, safety was number one that's not a huge surprise people want to see everyone safe when they're interacting, you know, commercial business street. Number two was creating place for people want to spend time and money I think that's sort of similar to that last result right people people think that it's important to get folks out of cars. I think the public realm feel enjoyable and welcoming in order for businesses to be successful. Cost was number three they don't want to spend, you know, a ton of their tax money on it. And then parking for cars, unfortunately still is number four so not a huge surprise to those of us who work on this kind of advocacy that parking is still important to a lot of people. And then we have reducing the life of people driving, reducing the life of people walking and biking and parking for bikes. So, you know, I think I think this kind of is about in line with with what I tend to experience as an advocate right like we see that people people want the idea of safety, but that it sort of becomes a political fight once removing people walking or increasing the cost of the project comes into the question. Also, I think you trust in the reducing delay of people walking and biking. I think people don't tend to think about, you know, a signalized intersection where a person walking has to stop and wait as delay. I think that there's some work to do for us to emphasize that, you know, people walking experience delay to and that it would be, it's really important to reduce that to make walking much more convenient and easier. And here, relatively uncontroversial one we asked, do you support or both each of the following potential policies for your community. And this policy was adding more sidewalks and crosswalks, and 85% of people strongly or somewhat support this one so there's there's not a whole lot to say about this. I think we all see this also that sidewalks are pretty uncontroversial and the struggle really is just to find the money to keep up with with maintenance on. So this is where we get a little more controversial when we start talking about protected bike lanes. We asked, do you support or pose adding protected bike lanes to your community 66% of people overall support with 31% opposing. We see that women people of color, the youngest age group and the lowest income group have the highest levels of support. So I think that this was really encouraging. This question is just asking straight up, do you support out of protected bike lanes people do want to see more protected bike infrastructure. It's where we get into the trade offs that it gets more controversial and we see the support drop off. So, we asked, would you support or oppose adding protected bike lanes to key rows in your community, if doing so resulted in fewer parking spaces and or travel lanes for cars. So first off, we don't totally know if people are responding to the travel lanes, or the parking removal, but that is that is something I tend to think it's the parking. We see that only about 38% of people strongly or somewhat support this, and about 60% strongly or somewhat oppose adding protected bike lanes if it requires removing parking or travel. We see people of color, more strongly oppose this than white people, and we see that opposition actually increases the household income decline so basically the lowest income group has the highest level of opposition to this. So it's, you know, it conflicts with a lot of the other things that we see in the data in the survey where those groups tend to be the strongest supporters of walking and biking also had strongest levels of support for protected bike lanes in general. But when you frame it as a trade off that support drops off. So, you know, I think it's instructive that, you know, we do need to take care when we're looking at an impact like removing parking in particular. I think this also gets at the fact that we're in this sort of like halfway stage where we built some of our bike infrastructure. We're getting to a point where we're having to make some harder choices about whether we're going to park me on a street or a bike lane, but we haven't built out a cohesive network yet. And so when you remove parking on anyone's street, it doesn't necessarily feel like as much of a benefit as it would if the whole network outside of that street was already built up. It's a bit of a transitional phase. I think there's work to do on messaging in terms of how, you know, building out this network and getting more people biking, you know, will reduce pressure on parking. You know, talking about how when you build infrastructure for cars, more people drive, more people need to park. So, this is a really interesting result and it's only to keep in mind. So getting into some policies. We asked people if they, if they support or oppose allowing people riding bikes to use pedestrian signals to cross intersections after coming to a complete stop and yielding to pedestrians. So basically this is if you're on a bike coming up to a red light. You would stop and then if the pedestrian signal comes on in your direction of travel, you're able to proceed through the intersection on the red light after you've yielded to pedestrians. And there's really strong support for this. This policy had already in place in Burlington. I think this is something that other municipalities should look at as well. On the other hand, people generally oppose what we call a stop or stop is yield, which is giving people on bikes the right to treat stop signs as yield signs when there's no other traffic present. So 60% opposition to that. A few groups did have majority support, including people of color. Those who rode those who report modes of transportation other than driving and those report biking and b biking as a secondary mode. So, I think this is, you know, I don't know stop and stop is yield policies do have a pretty clear safety benefit. They've been implemented in quite a few states and a few municipalities at this point. So I think there's there's some education to be done on this one. So that's the end of our second section and please do post your your questions or raise your hand if you have a question just are going over our key points, improving walking biking infrastructure is broadly supported. But for a lot of folks, at least our data isn't the highest priority, and the support does drop off when it's framed as a trade off for car infrastructure. So the support for increased walk bike investment initiatives comes from brothers and residents, people of color and the lowest household income group, although there is that data point around protected bike infrastructure and parking removal that we need to consider. Third, residents understand the importance of walking by infrastructure, the local business and really rank safety and quality of place highly among commercial street design. And finally, allowing people on bikes to cross intersections on pedestrian signals is broadly supported. All right, thank you got some some questions to get through here. Yeah, so I'm Jean asks about. I believe it was the slide that discussed the relationship between investment and impact to investment into walk bike infrastructure and impact to local businesses. He asks what's what's the breakdown on the agreement group. I'm not sure if I fully understand that. Let's see. So you know if it was this one we do have sort of the break this is the breakdown the agreement group on the right side here. Send the slide before trade offs, which was Jean has his hand raised so maybe we can unmute him. Thanks, Jonathan. I'm just the difference between the somewhat and like fully agree I think it's on a previous slide that breaks down this 67% and maybe go back one. Maybe let's go forward to this one here. So there's a big difference between a somewhat agree and a strongly agree so I'm just curious about that that breakdown. Thank you. Okay, yeah, let's I'll try and pull that up really quick and see let's grab another question while I'm getting to that. Let's see here's do I'm suggesting. Well, let me jump to your second ones do. How do cyclists know that it's legal to use the pedestrian signal in Burlington. Yeah, they don't. There's definitely need for education on that. So yeah, we've, we've talked with the city about doing some of that. But, but yeah, frankly, there, there is quite a bit of need for personal education now. And you also asked if we collected demographic or city slash village where the respondent lives or works. We don't is just on where you live, not where you work. So that's what we talk about Burlington residents versus residents in the rest of the county is just based on where you live. Do you ask also about number seven, I'm not sure what you're referring to there, but about bike parking, a suggest a suggestion that it might be helpful to ask a separate question about the impact or how people feel about having bike parking that's watched and very secure as an option especially in Burlington. But the, I guess as a barrier to biking, what the impact of that might be to provide that kind of bike parking opportunity. Yeah, so let's see, I can, if we're talking about barriers, let's go back. We did not see lack of safe bike parking come up as a, as a strong reason on barriers to biking we do talk a little bit about that in the bike section, it did come up there. Steve, if you're asking about, oops, you're asking about this question, you know, we, I think it's sort of just lumped into parking for bikes and the level of importance there, right? We asked people about their, about their priorities when they're saying the design of the street and parking for bikes was, you know, a priority for, for attention of people. Yeah, it looks like it was that one and he was clarifying that maybe it'd be interesting to ask specifically about a particular type of bike parking opportunity. Yeah, definitely definitely would be interesting. I'd love to get more data just on bike parking specifically. We were limited in the number of questions we, we had to work with here so we tried to keep it kind of high level ish. So just just on Jean's question, which was in regard to this slide. For this one, 26% strongly agree and 42% somewhat agreed. So that was the breakdown of the agreed demographic for this one. So moving on in commented about the Idaho stop. I see that he has his hand raised so maybe he would like to to share his thoughts about that. Okay, go ahead. I see. Actually, I pressed the wrong button I pressed the hand raised when I really meant to make the comment in the chat so if the comment in the chat is clear that's what I intended. Sorry about that. That's okay. So your comment was that a reason to oppose Idaho stop is that all road users should be treated equally. That's definitely something that that I've, you know, heard and I think that there's a strong perception among the population in general that sort of like same road same rules. And on the one hand, that's really clear and maybe useful in that regard. On the other hand, the roads and the rules that we've made are really for cars, right, like people walking people biking, you know, don't need stop lights, except for the fact that there are cars on our roads. You know, when you ask a person on a bike or a person walking to abide by rules that are really made for infrastructure that's at the scale of a car, you generally make it harder for them to get around. So, you know, it's a very different vehicle. Another thing you consider is when a person on a bike rolls up to a stop sign, they have a much wider field of peripheral vision than a person in a car they have use of their hearing. They're generally moving at a slower pace in general and so more time to take in their surroundings. They also are the vulnerable user right so person on a bike generally is not going to cause harm to a person in a car if they crash into them generally the person on the bike is the vulnerable user or the person walking is the vulnerable user. And so there are a lot of reasons why, you know, it's, it's pretty safe, and the data backs this up for a person on a bike to, to roll through a stop sign when there is no other traffic present. At the moment, the law is to stop at a stop sign and people should be doing that, but I do think it's something worth thinking about. And then Charlie Jones, he's noticing that a takeaway from the presentation so far is that there's a real need for greater awareness raising and education of biking and walking and rolling. And he's wondering if there are funds available for generating video and social media posts that would help create better awareness and understanding. I don't know about there being funds available. I, I totally agree that there, there is a need for more, you know, awareness raising. And I think, you know, especially when there's a specific thing that we're trying to raise awareness of like, you know, people in Burlington being able to, when they're on a bike use a pedestrian signal to cross an intersection I think that's really productive. You know, I think, like, general education and awareness raising and like a user seatbelt follow the rules kind of thing. I don't see that as being super effective, to be honest. And, you know, we, we do some of that at local motion, and I think it's work we're going to keep doing. You know, the data pretty strongly says and experience in other places really pretty strongly says that if you want more people walking and biking if you want safer roads. You have to build them to encourage walking biking and to be safer and that really means doing the engineering work, building places with destinations close to origins and making it safe to get around outside of a car and convenient. Great. Thanks. Will Dodge has an interesting question about the protected bike lane responses that we received. He's wondering if respondents if they were asked about their perspectives related to rebuilding widening sidewalks to create multi use off road paths. If they might be more receptive to that as it reduces that sort of trade off with cars issue. So I think, you know, will you specifically mention the route 15 multi use past, which I think is a great piece of infrastructure and it didn't require any parking removal or the removal of traveling for cars. I think yeah, when you can when you can eliminate the trade off, then the support for for building the infrastructure certainly increases. I think there are a lot of context where you can't eliminate the trade off where there just isn't room in the right of way to have, you know, the travel lanes you have right now or the parking lanes you have right now. And the, the safe walk bike infrastructure that you want. So, you know, especially in our denser areas that, you know, the trade off is usually baked in and it's going to be a political fight to decide whether or not it's made. Great. And then, Deb sacks is asking in general about the breakdown and responses, I guess responses from Burlington versus the entire total number of responses that were received for the survey. I would have to pull up the cross tabs but I don't have in front of you right now. Let me see if I can get really quick. Is there another question Susan or is that the last one. We have to. Well, let's see. Stu, do you have a question. Your hand is raised. Just real quick we had 146 responses from Burlington and 442 from the rest of the county. So that was a breakdown there overall. And we will put a link. I'll put the link right now in the chat. And if you go to that like you can see the cross tab results which is sort of all the numbers. There's a narrative report the open ended responses all the everything from the surveys in that folder. Let's let's keep it moving through all that. Okay, section three we're going to talk about the bikes. So, first off, we asked folks, do you own the bike. And just. So do you own the bike and how interest are you in using the bike for transportation purposes. And so we saw is about, you know, a 6% ownership rate overall in the county for the bikes. And around 39% overall are interested in using the bike for transportation. So if you look at the youngest age group people of color, the lowest household income group, those ownership rates go down a bit and the interest rates go up. So, looking at the lowest household income group, they have a 3% ownership rate, and 56% of them are interested in using me bike for transportation. So a lot of interest out there and even especially among folks that we think of as marginalized groups. So you might use an ownership. This is the full selection. You do see a lack of secure bike parking pop up here. You also see, you know, cost really as a primary barrier far away. And then distance to definition, as you may know, is still number two, but it's much lower percentage compared to when we asked about biking in general. And that will point about an e bike really helping to address those commute distances. So this slide sort of emphasize in those findings cost being a number one barrier, and it's disproportionately affecting the lowest household income group they reported it at the highest rate fall by bromance and residents and the younger members, of course, price overlap in those populations. And then lack of secure bike parking we saw was particularly reported by Burlington residents. And then, again, a distance destination difference. It being less barrier that comes to the likes. We asked about utility incentives. So, are you aware of the bike purchase rebate incentives available through Vermont power utilities. And what we saw is that around 29% of people know about them, which is pretty good. Unfortunately, only 19% of the lowest household income group know about them. So there's this really interesting pattern here where the lowest household income group has the lowest rate of the like ownership but is the most interested in using them for transportation. Cost is the primary barrier to them getting a new bike. And they are least aware of the utility incentive that would help them reduce the cost so certainly a big opportunity there to better promote the incentives that are available. And we didn't ask about the state incentive as part of this question because it was brand new when we administered this survey. And so awareness probably would have been really low. I think it's pretty safe to assume that awareness of that incentive is still lower than that is for the utility incentives. So last getting into the getting into the controversial issues again, new e-bikes pose a safety concern on shared use paths. And the question was, do you feel that e-bikes to the safety concern to people walking biking or using devices like wheelchairs and shared spaces such as bike paths. You know a real split on this one around 30% saying yes, you know about a quarter saying no and about half saying or sorry about half saying no about a quarter saying not sure. So you know I think this is one to keep an eye on I think you know the number of people that don't have an opinion really reflects that a lot of people aren't maybe not not spending time on bike paths or just don't have a lot of experience around e-bikes. So you know with 30% of people saying yes I think it was something for us to pay attention to. You know municipalities have some municipalities like Burlington have been working to address this with etiquette and education campaigns. You know people on regular bikes can go just as fast as a person on an e-bike they can make you know close passes just like a person on an e-bike. So I think that's likely an approach that makes sense but longer term I think it's definitely worth thinking about you know if we really should be mixing you know in particular people walking and people on e-bikes and electric cargo bikes and those sorts of things on paths and you know you may just need to build more good bike infrastructure, more good walking infrastructure. So the key points to the e-bike section is a quick one the countywide ownership rate is around 6%. Younger people, people of color, those with lower household incomes are really most interested in using e-bikes for transportation. Costs are identified as the top barrier to e-bike ownership and low income residents are least aware of those utility incentives and e-bikes appear to reduce the significance of distance to destination as a barrier to biking. And that is the end of the presentation. I put the link in the chat where you can find all the survey data set and the report and these slides. And let's go back to the questions and comments we've got about five minutes left here. Yeah I was going to say, John Riley is asking what utilities offer incentives I'm going to share a link to that I know Green Mountain Power is one Burlington Electric. Here's a link to Drive Electric Vermont that should have the full list. Yeah, great thanks Susan. Deb is suggesting that slide 30 might be shared with legislators to reduce the complexity on distribution of rebates. Yeah, we, I think we remember if we shared this with legislators last year but we certainly will share it again. I think overall this data on e-bikes is really important to share not just about the awareness of incentives but the interest level and the groups that are interested. I think it's pretty instructive and really positive. So we will definitely be sharing this with legislators. We did, you know, the trans and legislators did make an effort in this last session to make the rebates more focused on lower income residents they did increase the rebate amounts and lower the income threshold. So you know we would like to see there be more money overall available for e-bikes for all populations and for in particular the incentives for the lower income folks to be much higher than they are now. So that's definitely something we're going to be advocating for in this coming session. Great. And will, you know, was also kind of raising the awareness question around the e-bike incentives that the utility could maybe do a better job by putting that information some postcards or otherwise outreach to the community. I'm not sure if that's something that they're doing now or not. Yeah, I don't know if that's being done. It is something that we're going to be talking with the utilities about. And then, Stu, one last comment from Stu, he's just suggesting that adding a slide on the demographics of respondents might help folks kind of better interpret the data. But otherwise, great presentation. Yeah, thanks Stu. And yeah, we certainly can add that. And if you look at the, the cross tabs spreadsheet that has all the demographic breakdown. To be clear, though, the demographics of the survey are basically as close as possible to the demographics of the county. That's what makes it statistically representative. So that's it unless there are other questions out there. We will close it out. Susan's going to put some links in the chat to some resources that we've got going. I want to emphasize we do have a whole series of webinars planned for this fall, winter and early spring. That's really intended to help local advocates understand how they can make change in their communities. What are some things to focus on. To understand the resources and programs that are out there. So I encourage you to sign up for those webinars. This was recorded so you'll also go link to the recording. And there are a few other links this is going to put in the chat I think to our statewide walk by advocates forum. We also have a technical assistance page, which, you know, Susan and I are really available to local advocates and local groups to help you make change in your communities. That's that's what we're here for. So don't hesitate to reach out. And yeah, go get an email with some follow up info and links. So thanks so much everyone for coming. And look forward to talking with you soon.