NEPA oversight should prevent the Garden State Parkway from being widened using stimulus funds.

For advocates of green transportation, NEPA protection will help deter the construction of additional road capacity, but it does come with a potential downside.

The provision should assist the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, for example, in its fight against the widening of the Garden State Parkway, a project on New Jersey's stimulus wish list. The state has tried very hard to avoid federal oversight for this massive highway expansion project, going so far as to attempt funding it completely with toll revenue. Paying for the added lanes with stimulus cash should only be possible if the project can skirt NEPA.

While many are breathing a sigh of relief that the Senate fended off an end run around NEPA reviews, the application of 1970s-era environmental legislation could produce unintended consequences for deserving projects. Similar laws have been invoked to delay the implementation of San Francisco's bicycle network for three years and to impede car-free parks in New York.

The debate over NEPA provisions in the stimulus began when Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY), backed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and at least 20 other business groups, pushed an alternative amendment that would have allowed any project receiving stimulus funds to get a waiver from NEPA if the environmental review couldn't be completed within 270 days. The average NEPA review for a highway project lasts more than four years, according to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

The idea that environmental protections should be scrapped to stimulate the economy isn't new. Republicans have long argued that NEPA does more to stall the economy than protect the environment. Last month, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger revived this line of thinking when he wrote to the Obama administration about the stimulus package. Schwarzenegger argued then that streamlining NEPA and shortening the timeline for other environmental reviews was key to getting the economy moving again.

With so much emphasis placed on getting projects moving as quickly as possible, Barrasso's proposal looked like it might pass. But Boxer, with the aid of many groups fighting the highway-addled amendment she pieced together with James Inhofe, argued that there were more than enough "shovel-ready" projects on the table, clearing the way for the NEPA amendment.

Purpose: To ensure the expeditious completion of National Environmental Policy Act reviews under applicable law.

Insert at the appropriate place:

Findings

The National Environmental Policy Act protects public health, safety and environmental quality: by ensuring transparency, accountability and public involvement in federal actions and in the use of public funds;

When President Nixon signed the National Environmental Policy Act into law on January 1, 1970, he said that the Act provided the “direction” for the country to “regain a productive harmony between man and nature”;

The National Environmental Policy Act helps to provide an orderly process for considering federal actions and funding decisions and prevents ligation and delay that would otherwise be inevitable and existed prior to the establishment of the National Environmental Policy Act.

Section 1

Adequate resources within this bill must be devoted to ensuring that applicable environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act are completed on an expeditious basis and that the shortest existing applicable process under the National Environmental Policy Act shall be utilized.

The President shall report to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and the House Natural Resources Committee every 90 days following the date of enactment, until September 30, 2011, on the status and progress of projects and activities funded by this Act with respect to compliance with National Environmental Policy Act requirements and documentation.

A couple of weeks ago, as part of the "Bike Unfriendly Place of the Week" series at Streetsblog Los Angeles, I took a look at the bike planning at the Democratic National Convention. Local press reports were dire, noting that bike racks near the Pepsi Center in Denver would be closed down as part of the Secret Service's security perimeter. However, after thinking it over, I realized I may have had a "can't see the forest for the trees" moment; after all the advocacy group Bikes Belong has arranged for a free bike-share program for each host city during the convention. Instead of focusing on the negative, I could have looked at how the bike-share program will work around the Secret Service's security concerns.

Upon closer review, it appears that bikes will integrate with the convention pretty well. Thanks to the efforts of Bikes Belong and the openness of the DNC, the 1,000 free rental bikes will have plenty of places to safely park throughout Downtown Denver and near the convention center. The bike rack at the transit hub across the street referenced in press reports will be supplemented by a temporary bike shelter holding roughly 250 bikes. In total, there will be eight temporary racks around the city. Two of them will hold 250 bikes and another six will hold 100 bikes each. As for access to Obama's big speech at Invesco Field, details are still being worked out.

Bikes Belong hopes that all participants in the convention take advantage of the free bike sharing program, be they delegates, elected officials or even nominees. Bikes will also be available to any local wishing to try a little two-wheeled travel while the convention is in town. Avery Stonich, Bikes Belong communications director, sums up the feelings of the bike community in Denver: "People will remember that bikes were a part of this year's conventions long after we forget where the security lines were drawn."

In short, it's a bummer the Secret Service is blocking off the Pepsi Center's bike racks, but overall this could be the most bike-friendly political convention ever. That is, if it's not topped by the Republican National Convention next month in Minneapolis, where, according to Stonich, similar efforts are underway to make bikes a part of the event.

Photo: Damien Newton

You can just see the planning meeting for what organizers are calling the "greenest" national political convention ever. Special perks for hybrids? Check. Biofuel powered buses? Check. Solar powered green area? Check. Bike racks? Nope. Sorry, the Secret Service says they're too dangerous.

The Colorado Independent reports that there will be no bikes allowed within the DNC perimeter of the Pepsi Center, nor at Invesco Field, where Barack Obama will deliver his acceptance speech. Convention organizers cite the Secret Service and the Denver Police Department as making all security-related mandates.

Meanwhile, national advocacy group Bikes Belong has arranged for 1,000 bicycles to be available during the convention week for free to anyone with I.D. and a credit card.

One can't help but wonder if the crackdown on Critical Mass at the 2004 Republican National Convention had anything to do with the Secret Service's view that bicycles represent a security threat. Before the last RNC, officials tried and failed to get Critical Mass banned during the convention. When the ride took place and attracted 5,000 riders, 250 of them ended up in jail.

Photo: blkmarket/Flickr

Thanks to the announcement that Baltimore will have a Ciclovia, some in the livable streets movement already know that Baltimore is changing, that there is more to Charm City than is seen in crime dramas such as "The Wire" and "Homicide."  A recent visit showed me that the Ciclovia is only one of several bike improvements underway.

Baltimore City Councilman Bill Henry gives most of the credit to the new mayoral administration, which began early last year: "Between Mayor [Sheila] Dixon's 'Cleaner Greener' Campaign and the other sustainability efforts that she's worked on with the council, Baltimore's main streets are quickly becoming far more comfortable places for people in the community to walk and bike, not just drive."

Baltimore completed its Bike Master Plan in 2006 -- when Dixon was, in title, City Council president, but was basically acting mayor while Martin O'Malley campaigned for governor -- with the goal "to enhance and promote bicycling." The plan was divided into two parts, an "introductory" plan to be completed by 2010 and a more long-term plan to guide the city for decades to come.

The good news is that it looks like the short-term plan is well on its way to completion.

Since I last visited in September of 2007, a series of bike signs and street markings have been added throughout the city. One of the highlights is a network of bike lanes connecting the colleges and universities. In gaps where there are no bike lanes, sharrows and new signage remind drivers that there will likely be cyclists along the route.

New lanes were also painted to many of the city's attractions and local gathering places. For example, bike lanes have been added to and through "The Avenue" in historic Hampden, the setting and inspiration for the writings of John Waters. As recently seen in Sacramento, parking meters along The Avenue have been converted to free parking for bikes.

To promote the lanes connecting the colleges, the city tapped the Baltimore Collegetown Network, which has all 16 area colleges as members, to help promote the trails. Collegetown Network director Kristen Campbell credits Baltimore DOT for the lanes and notes how they will help Baltimore's colleges have better access to each other.  Campbell tells Streetsblog, "We worked with the city to cross promote between campuses to students to help them get out and about without using cars."

The signage along the bike routes does more than remind drivers that cyclists are present, it also points the way to bike trails and other attractions, similar to street markings one might see along a bike boulevard.

And the best news of all: it seems to be working. I lived in and around Baltimore for almost a decade, and I saw more people riding bikes in three days last week than I would see in entire months while I lived in the city. Nobody's going to confuse Baltimore with Portland, at least not yet, but it provides a great example of the immediate impacts that a good bike plan with good follow-through can have on the way people think about local transportation.

Photos: Damien Newton

Complete streets advocates received a double dose of good news this week from Washington, D.C. For the first time ever, complete streets legislation is now introduced in both chambers of Congress, after the Safe and Complete Streets Act was introduced in the House of Representatives. Meanwhile, the Senate version of the bill received its first Republican cosponsor.

Sacramento Democrat Doris Matsui introduced the Safe and Complete Streets Act of 2008. Unsurprisingly, Matsui's move was praised by transportation reform advocates, but her office notes that complete streets is popular with more than just bike riders, pedestrians and transit users. Her press release, the full text of which is available after the jump, quotes not just leaders of the complete streets movement but also clean air advocates and the AARP.

Meanwhile, Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman became the first Republican in either the House or the Senate to cosponsor complete streets legislation. Coleman joins Senators Tom Harkin (D-IA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Thomas Carper (D-DE) as cosponsor of S. 2686, the Senate version of the Safe and Complete Streets Act. Harkin introduced S. 2686 in early March.

Complete streets laws would insure that all federal transportation dollars spent on road projects are used to improve conditions for all potential users of the road: car drivers, cyclists, pedestrians and transit users. While complete streets has proven controversial nationally, it has been adopted by several states including California, Oregon, Illinois, Massachusetts and Virginia.

The League of American Bicyclists has set up an action alert to help people contact their senators in support of S. 2686.

Below, the full text of Matsui's release:

Rep. Doris Matsui Introduces Complete Streets Legislation

Bill Will Increase Options for Travel, Make Roads Accessible to Cyclists and Pedestrians

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, Rep. Doris Matsui (CA-05) introduced the Safe and Complete Streets Act of 2008 to make the nation's roadways accessible to alternate modes of transportation. Complete streets are designed and operated to enable safe access to motorists, pedestrians, cyclists, and riders of public transit.

"Once again, gas prices have hit record highs this week. As American families continue to feel the pain at the pump due to the skyrocketing costs of gasoline, they are driving less and less. By diversifying our roadways, we can provide real alternatives to travel by car," said Rep. Matsui.

The Safe and Complete Streets Act would require states that receive federal funding for their road improvement projects to implement complete streets policies. These policies ensure that any new road construction or rehabilitation efforts would accommodate the safety and convenience of all users of the transportation system.

The bill does not try to establish a one-size-fits-all policy. Instead, it accounts for variation from one locale to the next by requiring the projects to fit within the local community context. It also provides for clearly-established guidelines wherein a single project could be exempted from the complete streets guidelines, such as cases of the cost of implementing them would be prohibitive.

"We have very real challenges facing our country, and they are all interwoven. We now know that we must change our environmental and energy policy, and reduce our impact on the planet. By opening up our roadways to pedestrians and cyclists, we can help ease the congestion on our nation's roads," said Rep. Matsui.

The benefits of complete streets principles are well-documented and broad in scope. Complete streets:

• help increase the capacity of the transportation network by giving people more choices about how they travel
• are cost-effective infrastructure investments, and help avoid costly retrofits
• improve pedestrian safety for the nearly one-third of Americans who do not drive
• encourage healthy and active lifestyles
• fight climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by encouraging people to drive less
  

"We cannot continue our current course, placing undue burdens on our infrastructure and environment. We must take innovative steps to change how we live our daily lives, and ensure that we hand over a sustainable planet to the next generation," said Rep. Matsui.

The Safe and Complete Streets Act enjoys broad support:

"AARP greatly appreciates Representative Matsui's leadership in introducing Complete Streets legislation. Complete streets are safer and more user-friendly for everyone and help people of all ages and abilities stay safely connected to their communities."

- David Sloane, Senior Vice President of AARP

"The Safe Routes to School National Partnership is extremely grateful that Rep Matsui has introduced complete streets legislation. This bill will increase safety on our nation's roads for pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists, and will help children, who are among the most vulnerable roadway users."

- Deb Hubsmith, Director of Safe Routes to School National Partnership

"Complete streets will help people shift short auto trips to walking and bicycling, and that's essential for reducing pollution and carbon emissions. We're very pleased to be working with Congresswoman Matsui on this legislation, and we appreciate her leadership on this important public health issue."

- Larry Greene, Executive Director of the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District

"We commend Rep. Matsui for recognizing the importance of making the best investment possible with our federal transportation dollars. States and cities across the country have discovered that completing their streets for all users means safer communities that invite walking, bicycling, and taking transit - and that can help people cope with the rising price of gasoline."

- Barbara McCann, Coordinator of the National Complete Streets Coalition

The Safe and Complete Streets Act is supported by:

AARP, America Bikes, America Walks, American Planning Association, American Public Transportation Association, American Society of Landscape Architects, Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals, Breathe California, California Park and Recreation Society, California WIC Association, Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, Easter Seals, Friends of the Earth, League of American Bicyclists, Local Government Commission, National Center for Bicycling and Walking, National Recreation and Parks Association, Prevention Institute, Reconnecting America, Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates, Safe Kids Greater Sacramento, Safe Routes to School National Partnership, Smart Growth America, Strategic Alliance for Healthy Food and Activity Environments, Surface Transportation Policy Partnership, Thunderhead Alliance, Transportation Alliance, Transportation Equity Network, Transport Worker's Union, Transportation and Land Use Coalition, Trust for America's Health, WALKSacramento, YMCA of the USA

Photo of a complete street in High Springs, Florida: Dan Burden

Never let it be said that transportation reform advocates don't have a sense of humor. How else can you explain the decision to take one of Los Angeles' best known pedestrian advocates and interview her while driving around the Hollywoods at rush hour on a Friday night?

Streetfilms' Nicholas Whitaker took a backseat, rush hour ride with City Planner Deborah Murphy through the streets of Los Angeles in the second part of our series of Streetfilms set in Los Angeles. Murphy pointed out some of the difficulties one encounters in L.A. as a pedestrian advocate, commuter, and champion for change.

Via WestSideBikeSide, last week 10 Los Angeles cyclists (illegally) took to the 405 and the 10 on the premise that riding on those infamously congested freeways at rush hour is no less safe than taking the Pacific Coast Highway.

Other LA blogs have picked up the video. Metblog called it "equal parts stupid and awesome," and Joke Is Up calls it a "great little bit of anarchy here in Los Angeles." Viewers at YouTube seem similarly at odds. One poster says he "fell asleep b4 I got to the part where the idiots got crushed by a Hummer," but another commenter asks what I think is the million dollar question: "LA is made for cars. Why are bicycles getting places faster?"

Video: richtothele/YouTube via Streetsblog LA 

Democratic front runner Barack Obama just released a campaign "Fact Sheet" entitled, "Strengthening America's Transportation Infrastructure" (download it). While Hillary Clinton has put forward some outstanding and heavily transit-oriented plans of her own, Obama appears to be the first major party presidential candidate to outline a national transportation platform that explicitly seeks to "create policies that incentivize greater bicycle and pedestrian usage of sidewalks and roads" (if anyone knows differently, let us know in the comments section). Whatever the case, it's a significant step up from the 2004 campaign featuring George W. Bush's mountain bike fitness regimen and John Kerry, spandex-clad on an $8,000 Serotta.

Before you get too excited, it's worth noting that Obama's paper looks like it was a bit rushed. Is Amtrak really "the only form of reliable transportation" in "many parts of the country?" What parts of the country would that be? The plan is also missing language from Obama's energy plan concerning the equalization of subsidies for motorized and non-motorized commuting.

Nitpicking aside, we do get a good view of what a President Obama would aim to do for more Livable Streets. In addition to encouraging biking and walking, he wants to:

• "Provide states and local governments with the resources they need to address sprawl and create more livable communities."
  
• "Double the federal Jobs Access and Reverse Commute (JARC) program to ensure that additional federal public transportation dollars flow to the highest-need communities and that urban planning initiatives take this aspect of transportation policy into account." Presumably this includes better transit for inner-cities.
• Provide long-term federal support for Amtrak and "increase the availability of rail transportation options for residents of rural communities."
  
• Support the development of high-speed freight and passenger rail.

Now that we have transportation plans from both Obama and Clinton; John McCain, where you at?

Photo: alison.jane/Flickr

 
This is part two of a two-part series on where candidates for president stand on transportation issues, authored by Streetsblog Los Angeles correspondent Damien Newton. Damien currently runs the blog Street Heat, which is soon to become Streetsblog L.A., our first foray into foreign territory. Damien was New Jersey coordinator for the Tri-State Transportation Campaign before relocating to California last year. Yesterday he examined the platforms and records of the Republican presidential candidates; today, the Democrats.

For the Democrats, the race for the nomination has been about one thing: change. Each of the Democratic candidates offer some vision of change for how our government views and funds transportation. Streetsblog noted in one if its first posts of the new year that Senator Barack Obama is the only Democrat that promotes cycling as part of his platform. Back in November, I noted on my blog that Obama has also pledged to force states and municipalities to include energy conservation in any transportation plan that involves federal funds, and says he would equalize tax benefits received by car and bike commuters. While Obama is strong on stopping sprawl and promoting walking and biking, he doesn’t mention transit anywhere on his web site that I could find. However, a look into Obama’s record shows a strong history of transit activism. As a U.S. senator, Obama worked with fellow Illinois Senator Dick Durbin to get financial help for Chicago’s L-Trains. As a state senator, he worked with community groups to increase access to transit for the disabled and underprivileged. As first lady, Michelle Obama could emerge as a vocal supporter of urban transportation projects; Mrs. Obama served as chair of Chicago Transit Authority’s Citizen Advisory Board.

New York Senator Hillary Clinton is the only candidate to offer a specific proposal to improve transit: an annual increase of $1.5 billion in urban rail funding. The plan also offers specific information on fighting sprawl and increasing development density. As a candidate for the Senate, Clinton preached the value of "leaving cars in their garage," and has since acted to support transit measures. Recently, her Senate office released a statement on the potential Amtrak strike. Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, an outspoken supporter of her campaign, often notes that more funds were available for urban transit projects when her husband was president.

Senator John Edwards’ energy plan pledges to promote policies that will slow sprawl and reduce vehicle miles traveled. However, Edwards only mentions transit as a tool for "restoring economic fairness." The former senator and Democratic VP nom has received support from a New York based transit union, but that seems to have more to do with his odds of being elected than his transit advocacy. At least when Nevada’s UTU endorsed Clinton, it managed to mention transportation related issues. Edwards’ one term in the Senate didn’t produce a strong record either for or against any major transportation plans. He even skipped a vote on the Highway Transportation Funding Bill.

So it appears that each of the leading Democratic candidates does embrace the notion of some sort of transportation reform, but wholesale "change" doesn’t seem to be in the cards.

Tomorrow, January 31, NYU's Wagner Rudin Center will host a transportation and infrastructure forum, moderated by "Gridlock Sam" Schwartz, to which all Republican and Democratic candidates have been invited.  

Video: YouTube via Street Heat, which offers analysis from an L.A. perspective

This is part one of a two-part series on where candidates for president stand on transportation issues, authored by Streetsblog Los Angeles correspondent Damien Newton. Damien currently runs the blog Street Heat, which is soon to become Streetsblog L.A., our first foray into foreign territory. Damien was New Jersey coordinator for the Tri-State Transportation Campaign before relocating to California last year. Here, he examines the platforms and records of the Republican presidential candidates.

For Republicans vying for the White House, transportation reform isn’t couched in terms of fixing the environment or cutting carbon emissions, but in reducing dependency on foreign oil. Promoting alternatives to car culture is not something any of these candidates want to take up.

The closest thing to an exception is John McCain. The senator is the only Republican candidate who recognizes climate change as an issue worthy of space on his web site. Recently, McCain resisted the knee-jerk reaction of promising to subsidize or prop up the auto industry, and he has been an advocate for higher fuel economy standards for automobiles -- two positions that may have cost him the Michigan primary. However, McCain’s recognition of the environmental and economic effects of auto dependency has not translated into a platform of transportation reform. Senator McCain made a name for himself as an outspoken critic of Amtrak. While the agency could doubtless be more efficient, McCain’s fear of government waste led to setbacks of high speed rail expansion and his supporting of the Bush Administration’s plan to segment Amtrak into several local rail agencies. The senator did stop short of calling for the agency to be shut-down completely.

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt "cars in my blood" Romney, meanwhile, has a mixed record on transportation spending, all "Big Dig" jokes aside. He changed spending patterns from expansion to "Fix-It-First," purchased more fuel-efficient and clean transit buses, and used smart growth funds to increase bike-ped access to transit. At the same time, he pushed an MBTA fare hike and slashed funding for parks, even as he used conservation funds to hail the New England Patriots. Romney’s administration also earned the scorn of cyclists for vetoing legislation that "called for training police to uniformly enforce laws covering both bicyclists and motorists." (At least his kids are avid cyclists.) Candidate Romney can be somewhat baffling on transportation related issues. Take global warming, where he frames his plans to reduce emissions in terms of foreign oil, refers to the debate about man’s role in climate change, and promises to maybe reduce greenhouse gas emissions all in the same article. Romney is also an outspoken advocate of drilling for oil in Alaska’s ANWR region.

A couple of months ago, I couldn’t even find a mention of transportation on Rudy Giuliani’s web site, despite his most recent position as mayor of the transit capital of America. Giuliani’s web team now has a section on energy independence, which amazingly manages to avoid mentioning transportation except to note that "Every gallon of gas and electricity we do not use is energy we do not import and pollution we reduce." While candidate Rudy may be trying to avoid transportation talk, he has a notable history on the issue. Though his administration dabbled with alternative transportation initiatives, occasionally embracing traffic calming or opening new bike lanes, the overall record was not a progressive one. Ideas such as his temporary ban on pedestrian crossings or his appointment of no-show political cronies to the MTA board led to continually failing marks from transportation reformers. But he did earn praise from one transportation advocate on his way out of office when, in the aftermath of 9-11, Mayor Giuliani banned single passenger vehicles from the streets of New York to temporarily ease congestion.

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee proposed using the $150 billion that will be spent on the most recent tax rebate plan to build "two new lanes of highway on I-95 between Maine and Florida." Huckabee has a long record of pushing road expansion. He claims that his highway expansion projects earned the praise of "Trucking Magazine," who labeled Arkansas’ roads the "worst in the country" at the start of his term and then labeled the same roads "most improved" by the end of his term. This claim was examined by the St. Petersburg Times, which found the statement to be partially true. The most obvious problem is that there is no such magazine as "Trucking Magazine," but Huckabee was probably referring to Overdrive, a magazine that reports on truckers’ surveys. While the vast majority of Huckabee’s transportation record was centered around adding road capacity, he does earn some points by making drivers pay for their own improvements by increasing the state’s gas tax. Maybe because he wasn’t an early front-runner, Huckabee’s web site has even less on transportation than that of other Republican candidates. He does promise that "the first thing I will do as President is send Congress my comprehensive plan for energy independence." Unfortunately, I couldn’t find details on what that plan actually is.

All in all, it’s not a very encouraging picture from the Republican side of the field. Each candidate has something in his past that could offer reason to hope that he wouldn’t be a disaster for transportation reforms, but overall the records aren’t exactly a promise of "Morning in America" for alternative transportation.

This Thursday, January 31, NYU's Wagner Rudin Center will host a transportation and infrastructure forum, moderated by "Gridlock Sam" Schwartz, to which all Republican and Democratic candidates have been invited. 

Photo: GM Blogs/Flickr