Now is your last chance to influence how Caltrans spends $100 million on bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. The funding comes from an unprecedented set-aside that Caltrans director Toks Omishakin ordered, to add bicycle and pedestrian safety elements to projects in the 2020 State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP).
The SHOPP contains 920 projects. The projects will be constructed over the next four years. Many of them already include complete streets elements, but some projects don’t include critical safety improvements despite the multimillion dollar investment. Caltrans Headquarters has already identified 22 of those projects which will require less than $50 million of the $100 million set-aside.
Now, Caltrans district directors are identifying more projects to receive the funding that remains in the set-aside. They will submit those projects to Caltrans Headquarters for evaluation on September 25.
Caltrans staff has shared with CalBike and others on the California Walk Bike Technical Advisory Committee the criteria they will use to evaluate the projects proposed by the district directors. The criteria are excellent, with an emphasis on projects that will help marginalized communities. These are neighborhoods that have been historically divided by racist freeway construction and harmed by neglect to their infrastructure.
However, the criteria only apply to projects submitted for evaluation. Some projects that may need safety improvements could be overlooked and never submitted for evaluation. This is where you come in.
Help highlight Complete Streets priorities in your community
We want you to help us figure out which Caltrans projects need Complete Streets. We have provided a link to the project summary document below. Don’t be put off by the length of the document. Project summaries are broken out by county, so you can focus on the ones near you. If you’d like more information, CalBike has copies of the Project Initiation Documents (PIDs). If you’d like to see the PID for any of the projects, email Jared Sanchez.
Let us know as soon as possible if you see projects that need Complete Streets funding in your community. CalBike will communicate your requests to the Caltrans regional offices and will advocate for them when the proposals are reviewed at the California Transportation Commission meeting in November.
Sacramento, August 27, 2020: The California Bicycle Coalition (CalBike) announced a victory today in its campaign to protect bike share systems from a threat from the California State Senate. An amendment to Assembly Bill 1286 removed a provision that would have transferred all liability for any impact onto providers of shared bikes and scooters. The provision would have made it impossible for shared mobility systems to get insurance and likely forced the removal of such systems throughout the state.
In a letter to the legislature, CalBike’s Executive Director Dave Snyder thanked the author of the bill, Assembly Member Al Muratsuchi (D-South Bay), for “his support of this low-cost, low-impact form of transportation.” Snyder said that his organization wants to see expansion of shared micromobility through greater public support of the services and integration with public transit. AB 1286 threatened that expansion until the removal of the liability provision, a change that was made at the very last hour that amendments were allowed.
“Shared bikes and scooters are fun, affordable, and eco-friendly ways to get around, reducing car trips and air pollution,” said Assembly Member Muratsuchi. “AB 1286 will make these devices safer for both users and the general public, with basic consumer protections for users.”
“In a matter of days we put together a coalition of local bicycling advocacy organizations and environmental groups that helped to convince the Assembly Member to pull that provision,” said Snyder. “We’re strong when we act together,” added Eli Akira Kaufman, Executive Director of the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition.
CalBike had objected to other aspects of the bill, as well. One provision will increase the amount of insurance a provider must carry. Snyder said this will drive up the cost of providing shared mobility but isn’t a reason to oppose the bill because it has its benefits for users. Another mandates that a provider acquire a permit before operating. CalBike supports the intent of this provision but is concerned that some cities may use it disingenuously to effectively ban shared mobility. Snyder said that “we can deal with that if and when it happens.”
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/bike-share-narrow.jpg4811024Kevin Claxtonhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngKevin Claxton2020-08-27 11:40:022020-09-11 17:23:15CalBike Heralds a Victory for Bike Sharing in California
Add one more item to the (loooong) list of legislative priorities that have been derailed by the coronavirus pandemic: Assembly Member Robert Rivas’s bike parking incentive bill. It is the last of many bills that CalBike was working on in 2020 to improve the policy environment for biking.
CalBike now has more capacity to plan and campaign for bills in the next session which starts in December. We also have more capacity to invest in a handful of close races for Assembly and Senate. More bike-friendly legislators can make a huge difference.
CalBike started this year with a full docket of bills in the Legislature. Our priority bill would have given the same purchase incentives for e-bikes that California gives for electric cars. Another would add the Dutch Reach to California driver’s education manuals. We were working on changes in how speed limits were set. All those bills were pulled by their authors in March as the legislative session got upended by the pandemic.
The Bike Parking Bill
One key bill was not pulled. Assembly Member Robert Rivas proposed a fantastic statewide incentive for bike parking and car-sharing: incentives to build bike parking in new housing. AB 3153 would have allowed housing builders to reduce the amount of car parking they would be required to build if they built a certain amount of bike parking or car-sharing spaces instead. Thanks to hundreds of CalBike supporters who called and emailed in support of this measure, it made it through the Assembly and into the Senate. Even with that outpouring of support, however, this pandemic year created too great a headwind in Sacramento.
The bill would not have made a huge impact on California’s housing stock, because it provided an optional incentive (instead of a mandate) and would only have impacted new housing in some counties. But where it applied, it would have overridden local zoning laws, making an incredibly bold statement on behalf of sustainable transportation. Housing builders could have used this law to build less car parking and more bike parking than local regulations require, and local officials could not have prevented it. It would have encouraged new local ordinances to reduce car parking requirements and increase bike parking requirements in the name of local control.
CalBike’s bike parking campaign continues
Minimum parking requirements are among the worst zoning laws. By forcing developers to add the cost of car parking to new homes, parking requirements add to the already high cost of housing construction. In addition, these laws increase inequality and impede sustainable transportation. Unfortunately, legislators are extremely unlikely to change minimum parking requirements at a statewide level.
However, legislators are happy to impose a new statewide building code. For example, as of January 1 2020, all new residential buildings must have solar panels.
Thanks to your tremendous show of support for the Bike Parking Bill, we are looking forward to positive developments in 2021. Senator Mike McGuire (SD 2) has committed to working with us to bring a bill about bike parking in next year’s session and has already reached out to CalBike to discuss it.
In the next legislative session, CalBike will launch a campaign to change the state’s mandatory residential building code to require bike parking in all new residential buildings. While such an initiative would not have the benefit of incentivizing a reduction in subsidized car parking, it would have a much more dramatic impact on the availability of secure bike parking in new residential buildings.
Are you interested in supporting a campaign for mandatory bike parking in new California residential construction? Add your name to the form below to join the movement for better bike parking.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/California_State_Capitol_in_Sacramento.jpg10001500Kevin Claxtonhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngKevin Claxton2020-08-14 16:42:242020-09-11 17:23:47Bike Parking Bill Killed by COVID-19
CalBike Launches Central Valley Community Bikeways Survey
Bakersfield, July 23, 2020: CalBike is excited to announce the release of a community survey to help guide our Central Valley Bikeways Project. This survey asks respondents to identify both barriers to biking and their most visited destinations in Fresno, Merced, and Bakersfield.
This survey will inform our work and add to existing community-led work to ensure that the Central Valley residents can get around safely by bicycle. We welcome feedback from all residents of Bakersfield, Fresno, or Merced.
The COVID-19 pandemic has forced the Central Valley Bikeways Project to retool our outreach plans and rely primarily on digital strategies. This electronic survey is one of our main community engagement and outreach tools. We will be conducting additional outreach, primarily through our local partners. Additional outreach will include community focus groups and other forms of on-the-ground engagement with paid incentives to participate.
For those with access to a smartphone or computer, the survey is available online in both English and Spanish. For those without online access, we will be partnering with local community organizations to distribute printed surveys.
The survey responses will guide our project analysis. Community input will be central to our final recommendations to city, county, and state decision-makers about Central Valley bikeways.
If you’re a resident of the Bakersfield, Fresno, or Merced area we want to hear from you. Please see our project website and take our electronic survey. If you have trouble viewing the survey, please use this link.
The Central Valley Bikeways Project is a partnership between CalBike and the Kern Council of Governments. The project is funded by a grant to develop plans for a complete, low-stress bike network in central Bakersfield, central Fresno, and Merced. The project will also focus on improving walkability in Downtown Bakersfield and along planned bus rapid transit corridors.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Central-Valley-Bikeways-Project-Bakersfield.png10021146Laura McCamyhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngLaura McCamy2020-07-27 15:36:542020-09-11 17:26:07CalBike Launches Central Valley Community Bikeways Survey
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/bellplaza_2-1.jpg14001400Laura McCamyhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngLaura McCamy2020-07-20 21:06:572020-07-21 12:39:00Shasta Bike Depot Will Help Redding Embrace Its Potential as a Bikeable City
On July 1, 2020, a quiet change happened on California streets. You won’t notice a difference right away, but the change will have huge ramifications for years to come. The change involves a win for VMT vs. LOS. For the past seven years, Caltrans has dragged its feet on a change to CEQA that would switch the way we evaluate traffic impacts for projects from level of service (LOS) to vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Builders associations also desperately opposed this change. BIA Southern California even recorded an anti-VMT rock song parody.
There are a number of reasons why this change to CEQA reviews has inspired so much angst. At its core, however, the resistance comes down to this: the switch from LOS to VMT is a fundamental shift in the way we view the world. This is nothing less than changing from a through-the-windshield view of life to an outlook that gives weight to the impacts of climate change and quality of life.
CalBike is proud to be a member of the coalition of groups that pushed to get the VMT Bill, SB 743, passed and then continued the push to get it implemented. We know that big changes can come from quiet victories, like SB 743. Here’s what will change
LOS seemed like a good idea — in 1969
When the California Environmental Quality Act was signed into law by Governor Ronald Regan in 1969, it was intended to make sure that all steps were taken to protect the environment during construction projects. CEQA guidelines, as originally written, used LOS as a measure of traffic impacts of a project.
LOS is an accurate measure of congestion, specifically, the seconds of delay suffered by a motorist at an intersection compared to free-flowing traffic. LOS forced cities and developers to analyze how new developments or traffic changes would impact nearby intersections. That analysis was considered a measure of environmental impact, because cars produce emissions when they idle at a red light. By placing top importance on relieving car congestion at intersections, however, LOS made cities prioritize driving over all other modes of travel.
Why VMT vs. LOS matters
CEQA analysis (which produces a document called an EIR) will indicate measures that a project may take to mitigate its environmental impact. In order to mitigate worsening LOS, engineers could change signal timing to move traffic faster, widen the roadway, add turn lanes, reduce the time of the pedestrian crossing, or, as most bike riders are painfully aware, remove a bike lane at the approach to an intersection. Intersections are choke points because people have to stop and wait for cross traffic. You might need a turn lane at an intersection to satisfy the demands of LOS. Perversely, the rules of analysis would indicate that keeping the bike lane at the intersection to allow safe bicycle passage would cause a negative environmental impact.
Under CEQA law, a restriping of the roadway to add vehicle lanes was exempt from environmental analysis. In other words, you could change a wide 2-lane road to three lanes, which would be a huge increase in capacity, without considering the environmental impacts of this project. On the other hand, if you wanted to turn one of the lanes in a 3-lane road into a bike lane, that would impact LOS for car traffic and you’d have to do an environmental impact analysis.
“From the point of view everyone gets around by cars, LOS is an important way to reduce inconvenience to the public. That’s why getting rid of it was so hard. But that point of view was wrong then, it’s wrong today, and disastrous carried into the future.” – Dave Snyder, CalBike Executive Director
A lot has changed since 1969. First of all, cars don’t pollute as much when they idle as they used to. Secondly, planners have come to understand and accept the concept of induced demand. When you widen a roadway, rather than relieving congestion, you induce additional demand. Counterintuitively, adding more lanes to a street or highway often leads to more congestion, not less. Finally, we’ve come to understand the impact of carbon emissions on climate change. Carbon emissions are almost a direct function of vehicle miles traveled.
By changing the measure of impact in CEQA analysis to VMT from LOS, project proponents will have to assess the added vehicle miles associated with a new building or road construction. This shifts the focus from moving cars faster to moving people more safely, conveniently, and with less carbon emission. Mitigations could include investments in transit, widening sidewalks, or building bike lanes to help reduce the VMT of the building.
A victory seven years in the making
Although SB 743 passed in 2013, Caltrans clung stubbornly to LOS for assessing its projects. It took a great deal of pressure, but the agency finally switched to a VMT analysis as of July 1. Now, projects that impact state-controlled roadways will be subject to VMT analysis rather than LOS. Caltrans controls roads that double as local streets in many California communities. Often, these state routes are the most direct way to get across town. They are also often the most dangerous streets in a community.
VMT won’t change the condition of Caltrans-controlled roads overnight. But this CEQA change opens the door to more Complete Streets projects, more bike lanes, better intersections, and safer streets across California. And it represents one small but necessary step in mitigating the worst impacts of the climate crisis.
Before the change to a VMT standard, bike lanes almost always required an environmental review. The process is costly and it added delays to bike infrastructure projects.
However, by definition, a bike lane doesn’t increase VMT – it actually reduces the need for car travel. Bike plans are exempt from CEQA, thanks to a 2005 CalBike victory, However, the projects that implemented the plan used to require CEQA analysis. In some cases, an entire planned bike network might require a cumulative impact analysis under CEQA. Now that the primary measure to determine impact under CEQA is no longer automobile traffic, bike lane projects will be cheaper and quicker to build.
On the other hand, projects like adding a vehicle travel lane used to get a pass because they theoretically reduced car congestion. Under the VMT standard, those projects will now require analysis because they are likely to increase vehicle miles traveled.
Is the switch to VMT from LOS enough to mitigate the looming climate catastrophe? No. We need to do much, much more to build bikeable, livable communities where people don’t need to burn dinosaurs to get to work or to the store. However, the VMT win is a vital piece of a larger strategy to take the car-centric blinders off agencies like Caltrans. CalBike will keep fighting for those changes, large and small.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Intersection.jpeg625500Laura McCamyhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngLaura McCamy2020-07-08 17:19:312020-07-24 12:07:27VMT vs. LOS: VMT FTW!
CalBike is delighted to welcome Alexandra Weber, Rosy Doud, and Peter Garcia to our Central Valley Bikeways Project team. The project will design a low-stress bikeway network centered around the planned High Speed Rail (HSR) stations in Fresno, Merced, and Bakersfield.
“Each of them brings different skills and equity focus that will enhance our planning work,” said Forest Barnes, CalBike Central Valley Active Transportation Planner. “The best ideas and the best work gets done when you have a team to look over each other’s work and bounce ideas off of.”
Meet the new Central Valley Bikeways Project team members
In addition to project managers Forest Barnes and Jared Sanchez, our Central Valley Project team now includes these three talented planners.
Alexandra Weber
Alexandra is currently a master’s student at UCLA studying urban planning with a concentration in transportation policy. Her work has included studying ways to empower women bike riders. As a fierce advocate for equitable active transportation practices, she says working for CalBike is her dream job. Her role on the team is research and design of the long distance bike route portion of the Central Valley Active Transportation Planning Project. Before joining CalBike, Alexandra was a Peace Corps volunteer in West Africa and she is now a California transplant. In her free time, she enjoys biking the streets of Los Angeles, baking bread and woodworking.
Rosy Doud
As an urban planner, Rosy is interested in disrupting auto-centric design and promoting social equity through active transportation planning. While getting her Master’s in Urban and Regional Planning from UCLA, Rosy interned for LA City Planning. She wrote her capstone project on pedestrian-oriented design interventions to freeway underpasses. At CalBike, Rosy is excited to work on the Central Valley Bikeways Project and to promote pedestrian-friendly design around planned HSR Stations. Since freeways and on-ramps present access hurdles near the HSR stations, Rosy’s experience overcoming these types of challenges will be particularly helpful.
Peter Garcia
Peter is a recent urban planning graduate from UCLA’s Luskin School of Public Affairs, where he studied the interaction between race, class, and power in transportation finance policy and planning. This lens will bring an important focus to the CalBike’s Central Valley Bikeways Project. His interest in urban planning is rooted in a combination of growing up in auto-dependent Orange County and a study abroad trip to Russia, where he lived in St. Petersburg and traveled to Kyiv and Moscow. Peter lives in Los Angeles and bikes almost everywhere he needs to go, as well as recreationally.
The Central Valley Project will expand biking and walking access to the Central Valley’s planned HSR stations. In addition, the project will make recommendations about wider connections in and between Fresno, Merced, and Bakersfield. Learn more about the Central Valley Bikeways Project.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Merced-no-source-in-ATP-2.png966896Kevin Claxtonhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngKevin Claxton2020-07-08 16:50:382020-07-08 17:52:16CalBike Welcomes New Members to the Central Valley Bikeways Project Team
For decades, the laws that protect the environment by requiring traffic impact analysis had a serious flaw. The analysis considered car congestion as a negative impact that should be mitigated. This led to road widenings to relieve congestion (which only led to more traffic and, soon after, more congestion). Even worse, these level of service (LOS) analyses prevented safety improvements if those improvements would delay automobiles. The result of these rules was perverse. A huge office development in the sprawling suburbs with easy highway access and no safe way to get there by bike would be deemed to have no significant environmental impact. At the same time, a simple bike lane or retiming of traffic lights to make it safer to walk or bike might be declared to have a significant negative impact on the environment using the LOS traffic impact analysis.
In 2013, the legislature and governor approved SB 743. The new law changed the rules for traffic analysis in California. It forbid analysis of congestion for environmental review purposes. Instead, SB 743 required an analysis of vehicle trips generated by a project. This new vehicle miles traveled (VMT) traffic impact analysis will change the way new projects are assessed. In keeping with California’s goals to reduce car traffic to mitigate climate change, a project that would generate lots of car traffic would require mitigation. After SB 734, a project that would reduce car traffic and provide access for alternative transit options would be considered a good thing for the environment.
The California Department of Transportation resisted this law for years. Only now, in 2020, have they produced guidelines for agencies to implement the new rules. These guidelines were about to go into effect when the COVID-19 crisis hit. Now, a coalition including real estate developers and automobile interests has asked the governor to delay implementation of the new rules, claiming that any change to the rules regarding development will delay crucial economic recovery activity.
CalBike is opposing the delay in a letter sent to the governor on May 26, 2020. The letter, written by the Planning and Conservation League and joined by our partners in the Climate Plan Coalition, contradicts the developers’ claim that implementing SB 743 will harm the economy.
“Not only have developers and agencies had 7 years to prepare for the implementation of this statute, the VMT-based methodology is in most cases less complex to conduct than LOS. Upon implementation of SB 743, many land use and infrastructure projects that California needs to meet its climate, public health and equity goals will not be required to analyse transportation impacts at all. Projects presumed to reduce VMT—including transit and active transportation projects, commercial and housing development within proximity to transit or within low-VMT zones, and all affordable housing—are all exempt from conducting the new analysis.”
In 2013, California’s legislators enacted a commonsense law to ensure that new building projects support active transportation and transit rather than recklessly expanding car travel. Now, in the midst of a pandemic that has provided a stark example of the importance of clean air and green transportation, Governor Newsom must not delay the implementation of SB 743 any longer.
Update: On July 1, 202o, the INVEST Act passed the House! Now it will face a much harder journey through the Senate.
The federal government will improve its support of bicycling if lawmakers approve the INVEST in America Act, pending in Congress right now. This federal transportation bill programs $494 billion in transportation funding over the next five years. It dedicates approximately $7 billion to alternative transportation, including biking and walking.
In addition, the Bicycle Commuter Act is pending in Congress. This bill would extend the tax-exempt employer subsidy for parking or transit to bicycling. This would reinstate an improved version of the bicycle commuter benefit that was removed by Congress in the 2017 tax overhaul.
The INVEST in America Act increases funding in the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) by 60%. That is the main program that provides federal funds for biking and walking. The program gets approximately 1.4% of total federal transportation funding.
More important than the amount of funding for TAP are the rules that govern how the entire $494 billion is spent. Congress doesn’t explicitly direct how each state can spend its share. That means we can press California to allocate additional funds to Complete Streets and other biking and walking programs.
National partners lobby hard for more funding for bikes
The League of American Bicyclists is lobbying for bicycle funding at the national level. They have won increased transparency and more local control of the Transportation Alternatives Program. They have ensured that funds in other programs, including the $49 billion set aside for local roads, remain eligible to support bicycle infrastructure and programs. Local and state advocacy will be important to ensure that states spend federal transportation dollars on alternative transportation projects.
Another highlight of the bill is a new Active Transportation Connectivity Grant Program. This is a $250 million, one-year grant program for states and local governments to build active transportation networks, spines (connections between communities) and Complete Streets plans. The League is working to get this expanded into an annual program instead of one-time funding.
Next steps for the INVEST Act
Right now, the INVEST Act is a partisan-drafted bill of the Democratic-led House of Representatives. It may look drastically different after amendments from Republican representatives in the coming days and weeks.
Congressional leaders may decide they have a good compromise and pass the bill this year. Or Democratic leaders in the House may choose to wait until next year, in hopes of a more Democratic government. In that case, they would simply extend the existing federal transportation authorization, Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, passed by a Republican Congress and signed by Democratic President Obama in 2015.
If you want to learn more about this new federal transportation bill, please read the League’s summary. At CalBike, we will continue to track what’s happening at the national level. We will ensure that California commits to safe and equitable biking using new national funding sources. In the coming days, we may need your support to keep the biking provisions strong and get the bill signed into law. Given the short timeline of Congress, amendments will move quickly. Please stay tuned!
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/thumbnail_bike_subsidies.jpg246329Jared Sanchezhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngJared Sanchez2020-06-23 16:17:432020-07-08 19:41:53New Federal Transportation Bill Includes Major Investments for Biking