Watch here without subtitles.

After sponsoring Streetfilms of the first two CicLAvias, the open streets festival in Los Angeles based on Bogota’s Ciclovia, Streetsblog LA faced a dilemma: How can we continue to cover this event that draws over a hundred thousand Angelenos to the streets?  The answer: Make a Streetfilm that was accessible to Southern California’s large Spanish-speaking population.

¡Viva CicLAvia! consists of two parts. First, narrator Mara Corina Arellano Colin explains the history and concept of Los Angeles’s amazing open streets party, including footage and photos from similar festivals in Bogota, Guadalajara, Mexico City, Brussels and Miami. While the narration is a great explanation of the benefits and culture of CicLAvia, the soul of Social Impact Consulting’s efforts are the interviews with participants.

The next five minutes is a parade of Spanish speakers professing their love of CicLAvia.  Whether it’s the team from South Central’s Mendez Bike Shop, the traffic officer spreading his arms while explaining Viva CicLAvia, or Hollywood’s City Councilman Eric Garcetti; the broad smiles in the Southern California sun give a message in any language.  Giving people more chances to play in the sun is good for Los Angeles.

This Streetfilm marked another first for Streetfilms, a directly reader supported video.  L.A. Streetsblog asked its readers if they wanted a Spanish language film on CicLAvia, and when they said yes, the readers were challenged through a Kick Starter campaign to fund the film.  Needless to say, the readers came through.

The song and video vent anger at conditions on Los Angeles’ freeways and depict the benefits of finding other ways to travel. Lead singer Eddie Solis screams his rage while shots of congested traffic and a physically divided city assault the senses. Finally, Solis shouts “THE RED LINE” over and over again while rocking out in a subway car.

The best part is that Solis is legitimately car free, or “unlicensed” as the band’s myspace page says. In addition to a “hard plastic seat,” Solis also travels around on his trusty skateboard.

Damien Newton: Los Angeles is changing the way it does parking in its downtown. They’re calling it the ExpressPark system. Let’s start with the basics — what is the program and what are your thoughts?

Donald Shoup: For the first time they’re stating how they’re going to set parking prices. Instead of basing it on council decisions or emotions or people’s feelings, they stated a principal. Parking at a meter will be at the lowest price they can charge and still have one or two open spaces on every block.

If they get that price right, then those spaces will be well used because almost all the spaces will be full. Yet there will be spaces readily available because one or two spaces will be open.

Can it get any better than that as a goal for the parking system?

The key is, can you set the right price without looking at the results even though the results are what’s going to count when setting the price.

DN: This marks a shift in policy for the city that seemed to base parking decisions based on what brings in the most revenue.

DS: It hadn’t been about that even, until quite recently.

You may remember a few years ago they doubled the price of parking everywhere in the city with a minimum price of a dollar an hour. Since most meters were at a quarter an hour, that meant quadrupling the price at most meters. That was the first time meter prices had been changed in eighteen years.

There’s been a lot of neglect of parking meters. Inertia seemed to be the main factor in determining parking prices.

They’re changing that by saying, “Here’s the rule. If half the spaces on a block are empty, we’re going to lower prices. If all the spaces are full we’re going to raise prices.” Since the price change two years ago, I’ve seen entire blocks where there isn’t one car parked. The price is too high.

I think a lot of prices would go down if they extend express park to the whole city. They’re starting in downtown, but I suspect that some prices will go down.

DN: One of the tenets of “The High Cost of Free Parking” is that money collected from meters should be returned to the communities where it was collected. L.A.’s plan returns all metered funds to the general fund. Is that a mistake by the city? Does it give you any misgivings about the plan altogether?

DS: That’s what they’re planning in L.A., they’re not planning on funneling any of the money back to the neighborhood?

That’s a mistake. When you funnel back to the neighborhood you get local buy-in and you get wonderful results.

Pasadena returns all of the metered money back into the neighborhood for decades and they turned the local neighborhood that used to be a commercial skid row into one of the most popular shopping destinations in Southern California. The meters brought in an extra million dollars a year in public services in just that little shopping district. They replaced all the sidewalks, streetlights and street furniture. They cleaned up the allays. They put electric wires underground. This was all paid for by meters.

But that’s a political issue. I think that getting the price right is also very important.

]]> http://la.streetsblog.org/2011/08/24/interview-with-donald-shoup-los-angeles-making-strides-with-expresspark/feed/ 0 http://la.streetsblog.org/2011/02/28/one-crazed-driver-plows-through-critical-mass-in-brazil/ http://la.streetsblog.org/2011/02/28/one-crazed-driver-plows-through-critical-mass-in-brazil/#comments Mon, 28 Feb 2011 21:12:36 +0000 Damien Newton http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=252123 [...]]]>

(There’s a graphic video of the actual attack available here.)

A lot of critics of group bicycle rides, especially Critical Mass, like to claim that they’d like nothing more than to drive through it in their SUVs. Apparently one maniac in Brazil decided to give that a try.

At last Friday’s Porto Alegre Critical Mass, the driver of a Black Volkswagen Golf plowed through a group of 130 cyclists. Fifty of them were hit. Two were in critical condition as of Saturday night. Following the assault, the driver of the Golf ditched the weapon and fled on foot from the unmarked car. The police identified Ricardo José Neis as the lead suspect.

The above video shows the aftermath of the attack. The narration has been translated as:

“I am? here at the Critical Mass ride. A car just ran over with the entire critical mass ride. At full speed! A black VW Golf. He hit everybody!! Are you seeing this?!

What a horrible thing… oh my GOD. Someone call the police, call the ambulance

Police! Call the? Police!! The Ambulance!?

Everyone is scared, son.

A car hit the whole, entire Critical Mass ride!! At full speed.

Voice: What’s going on?

This is the most horrible thing I’ve ever seen! I cannot believe”

Congress members and and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa take questions from the media. John Mica is at the podium flanked by Villaraigosa and Barbara Boxer. Photo: Darrell Clarke

Goodbye “30/10″ and hello “Fast Forward America.”

Congressman John Mica (R-FL) and Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) brought their road show to Los Angeles earlier this week to get feedback and elicit testimony on how to improve the federal transportation bill. While Boxer was on her “home turf,” it was Mica who sounded like a local, finding time to complain about traffic, needle Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa about transit connections to LAX, and repeatedly honor Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA), who was attending her last public event as a member of Congress.

While there was some talk of the need to better move freight through the Southland, much of the conversation was dominated by ways to expedite project delivery of all sorts. There was no talk of America’s obesity epidemic, rebuilding our cities and communities or even a mention of the words “bicycle” or “pedestrian.” The focus was almost completely on transit and goods movement.

Back in 2008, as soon as Los Angeles County passed a half-cent sales tax dedicated toward expanding its transportation network, the question was asked, “when are we going to start seeing projects on the ground?” Thanks to some innovations from the Move L.A. Coalition and the support of the Los Angeles Mayor’s office, the 30/10 Initiative was born. The plan was to leverage the funds that would be collected over the thirty-year sales tax to build the transit projects within the next ten years. By borrowing the money from the federal government up front, projects would be delivered sooner, taking advantage of today’s low construction costs and creating 160,000 construction jobs when the industry needs it most.

Because the plan would require some changes to federal law, there had always been some discussion of how these changes would help communities outside of Southern California. Today, Mayor Villaraigosa re-branded the 30/10 Initiative as a national initiative focused on putting more construction workers to work on more projects through what he’s calling “America Fast Forward.”

Mica and Boxer share a moment. Jane Harman prays.

America Fast Forward is a program that would leverage the funds created through local sales and gas taxes dedicated for transportation with low interest federal loans to jump start projects that already have “49%” of the project paid for at the local level. The program has received the support of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the AFL-CIO, and over 60 Mayors from around the country. In his testimony, Villaraigosa described the changes in federal transportation financing that would make America Fast Forward possible. In particular, he called for the expanson of the Transportation and Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA).

Villraigosa called for nearly tripling the TIFIA Budget to at least $350 million annually. Later in the hearing, Boxer commented that even the $350 million number was low prompting Villaraigosa to say that he would support as high a number as he could get. As well, American Fast Forward calls for:

• Increasing the maximum percentage of the project allotment that TIFIA can fund. Currently, TIFIA will fund up to 80% of a project with no “added points” going towards proposal with a higher local match. Villaraigosa called for at least a 49% local match;
• Permitting the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) to approve multiple related projects at the same time. In Los Angeles County, for example, this could mean loans for the entire suite of Measure R transit projects at once, as opposed to a line-by-line piecemeal approach;
• Allowing USDOT to grant up-front credits to projects and;
• Authorizing USDOT to lock-in interest rates for approved projects.

“This is not an earmark, it is a template,” finished Villaraigosa, who noted throughout his presentation that this model would help the communities that have voted to help themselves.

Don Knabe, the Board Chair for The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority (Metro), made the case that federal investment in communities that invest in themselves is a long-overdue idea. “Every time we go to Washington, the feds tell us to come back with a funding source. The voters of this county have voted to tax themselves three times in the last three decades. Yet, we are not awarded for the leadership that this agency has shown nor the leadership our voters have shown.”

Also backing Villaraigosa and Knabe were key representatives of business and labor, respectively, Mr. Joseph A. Czyzyk, Chair of the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce, and Mr. Robbie Hunter, Council Representative, Los Angeles/Orange Counties Building & Construction Trades Council.

Across the “Orange Curtain” they have a different program to speed up project delivery. Will Kempton, now the Director of the Orange County Transit Authority outlined their program for project expedition, the “Breaking Down Barriers Initiative.” While Kempton promised a written testimony that would cover two dozen suggestions, for today’s hearing he outlined four needs to bring projects to fruition more quickly.

• Extend and expand National Environmental Protection Act delegation to states, allowing those with strong environmental regulation to do their own environmental reviews only once, instead of an additional parallel federal review.
• Streamline the federal funding process.
• Overlap activities that can be overlapped.
• Work with environmental community to streamline permitting.

Of these, expanding the “NEPA Delegation Pilot Program” seems the most promising. Because California’s environmental review law, CEQA, is more stringent than NEPA, California can grant both CEQA and NEPA permits at the same time. Kempton estimated this cuts between 10 and 14 months off the life of a project.

Much of the discussion on freight was about how to move freight more efficiently. Both Knabe and Congress Woman Laura Richardson represent the areas surrounding the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach and both were looking for answers on ways to move freight better. Catherine Philips, from the Environmental Defense Fund, congratulated the Ports on their clean air initiatives. However, no panelists offered specific proposals for how to move freight through Los Angeles better. That said, Rep. Bill Shuster (R-Penn.) noted that 40% of goods that arrive through L.A.’s ports end up east of the Mississippi River, so goods movement in Los Angeles should be a national priority.

As touched on earlier, the complete lack of any discussion about urban mobility in the form of creating better communities, creating walkable and bikeable streets and just encouraging options to the automobile was jarring. Los Angeles is in the early stages of a Livable Streets renaissance, with a progressive bike plan and news of the My Figueroa project dominating the local Streetsblog in 2011. The only thing that L.A. needs is a true funding commitment to create sustainable urban communities, but today talk of that commitment was nowhere to be found.

GOOD Magazine recently examined the role that the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition’s City of Lights program has taken in giving voice to the overlooked and under-represented bicyclists. A program that started by handing out lights to immigrant cyclists and has become a national model for bicycle advocacy by focusing its efforts on safety to those underserved by government.

The above film, by Spot.us reporter and producer Alex Schmidt, is intended as a companion piece to the article in GOOD. The video does a great job explaining what City of Lights is really fighting for. They’re not dedicating their lives to improving conditions and resources for immigrant cyclists because they think cycling is great and fun. They’re doing it because making it attractive and safe to bicycle gives a new freedom to a population that is by and large car-free by necessity.

Taken in concert, the story and article do a great job outlining the twin challenges faced by City of Lights. How does one get the city to address the needs of “invisible cyclists,” and how do you reach out to a long-ignored community?

In the video, Daniel Rivera says he finds cycling in L.A. too dangerous, so instead he borrows a car or bus fare to get around town. Asked if there were conditions that would make him consider biking, Rivera answers:

Of course. If there were bike lanes like there are in Santa Monica, then I would. Otherwise it’s too dangerous.

For the article, LABC organizer Allison Mannos was asked why so many bikes near the City of Lights Day Labor Center are chained to fences instead of the new bike racks. Her answer illustrates the second problem perfectly. Just putting in new amenities is not enough, when a community isn’t looking for them.

Immigrants, she says, are not accustomed to amenities that cater to them as cyclists. “They’re not used to someone giving them a light and saying, ‘What you’re doing is awesome, keep riding,” she says. “So it just takes a lot more education.”

Clearly, there’s a lot of work left to be done. You can read more about City of Lights on the blog Ciudad de Luces.

For Angelenos, Sunday was a day that we’ll never forget. Our first Open Streets party was an unparalleled success.  So much so that even the critics of the concept grudgingly came on board when it was obvious that they missed the boat on supporting and experiencing a groundbreaking day.

The Los Angeles Times estimates that 100,000 people took to the streets to celebrate CicLAvia.  Of course, that number doesn’t count all of the residents that sat on their porches or balconies and enjoyed the car-free festival environment that permeated the air.

But perhaps the image that will remain after these festivals become the norm will be L.A.’s suddenly bike-friendly mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa, hopping on a bike and pedaling away from Hollenbeck Park at the start of the festival with a smile on his face and a shout of joy coming from his heart.

“Let’s Go!”  he shouted as he took off to celebrate the day. Hopefully Sunday was the turning point for Los Angeles as we all go into our clean transportation future.

(This film was shot by Robin Adams and was funded entirely through Streetsblog LA reader donations.)

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