"new" US DOT bike policy

Recommended Actions

The DOT encourages States, local governments, professional associations, community organizations, public transportation agencies, and other government agencies, to adopt similar policy statements on bicycle and pedestrian accommodation as an indication of their commitment to accommodating bicyclists and pedestrians as an integral element of the transportation system. In support of this commitment, transportation agencies and local communities should go beyond minimum design standards and requirements to create safe, attractive, sustainable, accessible, and convenient bicycling and walking networks. Such actions should include:

* Considering walking and bicycling as equals with other transportation modes: The primary goal of a transportation system is to safely and efficiently move people and goods. Walking and bicycling are efficient transportation modes for most short trips and, where convenient intermodal systems exist, these nonmotorized trips can easily be linked with transit to significantly increase trip distance. Because of the benefits they provide, transportation agencies should give the same priority to walking and bicycling as is given to other transportation modes. Walking and bicycling should not be an afterthought in roadway design.
* Ensuring that there are transportation choices for people of all ages and abilities, especially children: Pedestrian and bicycle facilities should meet accessibility requirements and provide safe, convenient, and interconnected transportation networks. For example, children should have safe and convenient options for walking or bicycling to school and parks. People who cannot or prefer not to drive should have safe and efficient transportation choices.
* Going beyond minimum design standards: Transportation agencies are encouraged, when possible, to avoid designing walking and bicycling facilities to the minimum standards. For example, shared-use paths that have been designed to minimum width requirements will need retrofits as more people use them. It is more effective to plan for increased usage than to retrofit an older facility. Planning projects for the long-term should anticipate likely future demand for bicycling and walking facilities and not preclude the provision of future improvements.
* Integrating bicycle and pedestrian accommodation on new, rehabilitated, and limited-access bridges: DOT encourages bicycle and pedestrian accommodation on bridge projects including facilities on limited-access bridges with connections to streets or paths.
* Collecting data on walking and biking trips: The best way to improve transportation networks for any mode is to collect and analyze trip data to optimize investments. Walking and bicycling trip data for many communities are lacking. This data gap can be overcome by establishing routine collection of nonmotorized trip information. Communities that routinely collect walking and bicycling data are able to track trends and prioritize investments to ensure the success of new facilities. These data are also valuable in linking walking and bicycling with transit.
* Setting mode share targets for walking and bicycling and tracking them over time: A byproduct of improved data collection is that communities can establish targets for increasing the percentage of trips made by walking and bicycling.
* Removing snow from sidewalks and shared-use paths: Current maintenance provisions require pedestrian facilities built with Federal funds to be maintained in the same manner as other roadway assets. State Agencies have generally established levels of service on various routes especially as related to snow and ice events.
* Improving nonmotorized facilities during maintenance projects: Many transportation agencies spend most of their transportation funding on maintenance rather than on constructing new facilities. Transportation agencies should find ways to make facility improvements for pedestrians and bicyclists during resurfacing and other maintenance projects.

http://fastlane.dot.gov/2010/03/my-v...ke-summit.html

Sorry to ask a tiny question..for how many years will the funding last from Obama administration for cycling infrastructure/programs?

Would be interesting to see how this vision gets executed at the state and municipal level over the next few years.

Star:

The Surface Transportation Authorization Act typically covers a 5-year window, and has to be replaced ("reauthorized") at that time. The new bill was passed out of the House committee last June, but it currently only covers policy issues, there's no funding or budget attached to it yet. And that's the rub -- the federal Highway Trust Fund is quickly going broke, and there's no kind of agreement yet on how to replenish and sustain it. For now, the old act, SAFETEA-LU, is being extended pretty much on a month-by-month basis.

We were at the National Bike Summit in DC last week, and the frustration in the current Congress is so thick you can see it hanging in the hallways like fog...

Tom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PscyclePath

Star:

The Surface Transportation Authorization Act typically covers a 5-year window, and has to be replaced ("reauthorized") at that time. The new bill was passed out of the House committee last June, but it currently only covers policy issues, there's no funding or budget attached to it yet. And that's the rub -- the federal Highway Trust Fund is quickly going broke, and there's no kind of agreement yet on how to replenish and sustain it. For now, the old act, SAFETEA-LU, is being extended pretty much on a month-by-month basis.

We were at the National Bike Summit in DC last week, and the frustration in the current Congress is so thick you can see it hanging in the hallways like fog...

Tom

---

Interesting..so the speech by US DOT leader, was abit of hot air? Delegation of vision for others to carry forward.. Hmmmm yea.

There is no National Bike Summit equivalent in Canada.
We just tend to have municipal based cycling advocates that do their own thing in their various jurisdictions. At least in the last decade, I have never heard of national/federal funding specifically for cycling infrastructure. It is subsumed/buried in competition with other types of project funding either for road transportation, public transit or for community sustainability.

Just to organize municipal advocates at a provincial level takes serious effort and time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PscyclePath

Star:

The Surface Transportation Authorization Act typically covers a 5-year window, and has to be replaced ("reauthorized") at that time. The new bill was passed out of the House committee last June, but it currently only covers policy issues, there's no funding or budget attached to it yet. And that's the rub -- the federal Highway Trust Fund is quickly going broke, and there's no kind of agreement yet on how to replenish and sustain it. For now, the old act, SAFETEA-LU, is being extended pretty much on a month-by-month basis.

We were at the National Bike Summit in DC last week, and the frustration in the current Congress is so thick you can see it hanging in the hallways like fog...

Tom

---

Technically, nothing ever has funding unless Congress appropriates the money (there's a difference b/t "authorizations" and "appropriations"). Appropriations bills must be signed annually. An act's authorization can expire, and it's provisions still receive funding through an annual appropriation.

You were at the Summit?? I was there for the Thursday federal session and workshop. Interesting. I saw the video on Streetfilms and had no idea it was as big as it was (I had trouble finding signs for it at the Reagan building).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PscyclePath

Star:

The Surface Transportation Authorization Act typically covers a 5-year window, and has to be replaced ("reauthorized") at that time. The new bill was passed out of the House committee last June, but it currently only covers policy issues, there's no funding or budget attached to it yet. And that's the rub -- the federal Highway Trust Fund is quickly going broke, and there's no kind of agreement yet on how to replenish and sustain it. For now, the old act, SAFETEA-LU, is being extended pretty much on a month-by-month basis.

We were at the National Bike Summit in DC last week, and the frustration in the current Congress is so thick you can see it hanging in the hallways like fog...

Tom

---

Ahem...putting on my transportation planner hat :)

Just so you know, the current Transportation Bill (SAFETEA-LU) was almost 2 years late once it was finally passed - so almost half of the life of the Bill was gone before it was approved. Not saying that will happen this time, just that is what happened last time. It has been known for years when the Highway Trust Fund would go broke without either a raise in gas taxes or some other funding source decided upon. Something will be worked out, but it won't be a quick process.

.....removing my transportation planner hat...

Catrin--wear that transportation planner hat proudly! Gone are the days of ISTEA and TEA-21, when all sorts of projects got funded. Nothing wrong with being a transportation planner!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tulip

Catrin--wear that transportation planner hat proudly! Gone are the days of ISTEA and TEA-21, when all sorts of projects got funded. Nothing wrong with being a transportation planner!

---

Certainly not - my specific job deals with travel demand modeling and air quality conformity - which most find more arcane than "transportation planning" :) I do love my job, transportation of all kinds is a basic need of all. SAFETEA-LU has certainly done some good things, what follows it will be very interesting.

:) I like all forms of planners :) I now have a planning mentor & will be discussing more about moulding my way into the transportation planning side of things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catrin

It has been known for years when the Highway Trust Fund would go broke without either a raise in gas taxes or some other funding source decided upon.

---

I thought that was just MoDOT (Missouri's DOT). Glad to hear that federal highways are in the same mess.

Our car culture is not sustainable. Even if we come up with a cheap energy alternative to cheap oil, which is actually unlikely (there are alternatives, but nothing as cheap as oil was), the infrastructure isn't sustainable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shootingstar

Interesting..so the speech by US DOT leader, was abit of hot air? Delegation of vision for others to carry forward.. Hmmmm yea.

---

I was about 20 feet away in the crowd when he made his speech, and heard the same level of commitment from him at last year's summit, so I believe the fellow is earnest.

But where Secretaries change with the administrations, the permanent staff doesn't, and can be fairly fixed in their world view. Based on timing, tone, and content, I'm of a thought that the memo is as much for internal consumption within DoT and the state agencies as it is for the general public, reminding folks that we've already got these sorts of policies in place... so pay more attention to them.

The Reagan Center is a pretty big place, and signage is not one of their better attributes ;-)