Gravel and Changing Leaves west of Boulder

Ambassador C.C.'s "It’s An Uptown Thang!" Ride

DC Brewery Tour- Four Breweries, 15 miles of fun!

The $1 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and $1.75 trillion Build Back Better Act offer big funding for bikes nationwide.

After months of debate and negotiations, the U.S. House of Representatives made progress on trillions of dollars in infrastructure and government spending, including billions in programming and incentives for bikes. Approved late on Friday, November 5, the $1 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) heads to President Biden to be signed into law. An initial, procedural vote was offered for the $1.75 trillion Build Back Better Act (BBB), setting billions more for climate and equity-focused infrastructure grants, a tax credit for electric bicycles and a bicycle commuter benefit for a full vote by November 15.

PeopleForBikes applauds this action from Congressional leaders and champions for bicycles in Congress. To meet the growing demand for bicycles and safe places to ride, the IIJA must be matched with the BBB, which holds billions of dollars more for equity, climate resiliency and tax incentives for electric bicycles and bike commuting. 

“We’re pleased to see Congress and the administration advance billions of new dollars for bike lanes, trails and safer streets with the IIJA,” said Jenn Dice, PeopleForBikes president and CEO. “Partnered with the Build Back Better Act, these packages are poised to reduce our nation’s reliance on carbon emissions, enhance equitable mobility and address the continued demand for safe, connected places to bike.”

The actual details of the IIJA remain unchanged from when the Senate voted to send it to the House on August 10. We outlined the specifics of what the bipartisan bill includes — and what it doesn’t — in a recent blog, but we’ll share the positives again here:  

$550 billion five-year transportation authorization bill after several short-term extensions.

An average of $1.44 billion/year for the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP), a nearly 70% increase. TAP is the largest source of federal funding for bike infrastructure!

Authorization of the Active Transportation Infrastructure Investment Program to build connected biking and walking networks.

A requirement for all states to develop standards for Complete Streets.

A vulnerable road user assessment (i.e., study how dangerous roads are for people outside of cars).

Inclusion of the model three-class electric bicycle definitions. 

The House intends to vote on the BBB after the Congressional Budget Office releases the score of the bill. It still requires approval from Senate Democrats, creating more opportunities for amendments and cuts.

Billions in Funding Advanced for Bikes in Federal Votes on Infrastructure and Reconciliation Bills

A new study shows that areas with less bike infrastructure experience disproportionate ticketing, compounding the effects of racially biased policing and transportation policies.

To borrow a term coined by researcher Charles T. Brown, there are many ways — societal and institutional — in which the mobility of Black, Indigenous and people of color (BIPOC) is arrested. From the disproportionate enforcement of jaywalking to the numerous highways that bisect majority-Black neighborhoods, it’s a fact that it’s easier to move around in this country if you’re white. A new study from Jesus M. Barajas, Ph.D., titled “Biking Where Black” and published last month in Transportation Research, lends credence to another unfortunate trend: Areas with less bike infrastructure correlate with higher populations of BIPOC and more bike-related tickets.

Barajas began his research while at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, inspired by a working relationship with Olatunji Oboi Reed, president and CEO at Equiticity, a Chicago-based nonprofit geared towards improving mobility outcomes for BIPOC. In 2017, Chicago adopted its Vision Zero plan, following a model that relied on the prescribed pillars of engineering, education and enforcement. As a racial justice advocacy organization, Equiticity saw the inclusion of “enforcement” as problematic for BIPOC communities. Inspired, Barajas decided to study Chicago’s enforcement of bicyclists, bike infrastructure investments, neighborhood demographics and safety statistics to see if any patterns emerged.

For three years now, Barajas has worked to analyze data related to the location of all Chicago Police Department bicycle citations, bicycle crashes and the city’s network of on-street bicycle facilities, geo-coding everything and compiling it all onto one layered grid. Although he used data from as far back as 2014, Barajas focused on 2017-2019 due to the quality of data available, controlling for crash incidences, police presence and neighborhood characteristics.

“Similar to the Chicago Tribune in 2017, we found that there was a significant disparity in where bike tickets were issued and that tickets did not match with incidents of bike safety,” said Barajas. “We also found less bike infrastructure in majority-Black and Latino neighborhoods and that it made a difference in where tickets were issued.”

Based on his research, Barajas adds that if we blanketed Chicago’s most cited streets with infrastructure, there would be an 8% decrease in the number of tickets issued. Another way of looking at it: The rate of ticketing would be cut in half by installing bike infrastructure on all of the streets with citations. In Chicago, the majority of bike citations were for riding on the sidewalk, an illegal offense that's the direct result of inadequate on-street bike facilities. 

“There’s a behavioral response to a lack of infrastructure,” said Barajas, noting that anyone who feels unsafe biking on a street would naturally move to the sidewalk. “We need to figure out a way to make our streets safer and a big way to do that is through infrastructure.”

To be Black or brown in Chicago is to be denied a safe way to move around by bike and then later be fined for a natural act of self-preservation. What results is a no-win situation for BIPOC on bikes: In order to stay safe from cars, riders move to the sidewalk, where they expose themselves to the possibility of the financial risk of a ticket or, in the worst-case scenario, bodily harm at the hands of the police. What Barajas’ research illuminates is how the decisions of transportation planners can lead to racial disparities in the distribution of infrastructure, which then plays into the well-documented disparities in policing and enforcement. It paints a bleak picture of how the problem of policing and the historic lack of investment in BIPOC neighborhoods compounds to further inequity.

The recommendations for moving forward are as clear as the data: build more bike infrastructure in BIPOC neighborhoods. Between 2017 and 2019, 85% fewer tickets were given out and crash numbers declined on Chicago streets that had bike lanes. There’s also evidence that bike infrastructure encourages new riders and bike share users, not to mention the well-established environmental and health benefits of biking. Research has also highlighted how daily experiences with racism — such as suspect profiling and the stressors associated with even the possibility of police interaction — have a profound negative impact on the health of BIPOC. Thus, a lack of infrastructure in communities of color denies people a safe way to travel by bike, ultimately compounding trauma, limiting mobility, stymying our collective climate goals and depriving people of the joy and freedom riding offers.

Of course, in communities of color, there’s a strong perception that infrastructure such as bike lanes only arrive when a neighborhood is gentrifying. Even if data doesn’t support that fact, the perception still exists, making comprehensive community engagement a necessary component of any planning process. Planners not only need to prioritize historically marginalized neighborhoods but also need to work with residents there to ensure that any new infrastructure is meeting their needs. Likewise, it’s important to remain attentive to the intersections of identity and mobility, acknowledging that needs differ across groups.

Barajas’ research makes an equally compelling case for the removal of “enforcement” from Vision Zero policies, along with the abolition of bike laws that penalize people for riding on the sidewalk or failing to wear a helmet, use bike lights, obtain a bike license or register their bikes. Both aren’t novel concepts but rather part of a nationwide trend that’s been gaining momentum since the murder of George Floyd in 2020. 

“We don’t see that connection to safety and given the history — particularly in Chicago — of racially biased policing, the role of enforcement needs to be rethought,” said Barajas. 

In Chicago, after the Tribune analysis broke, the ACLU and the Chicago Police Department reached an agreement to reform the practice of investigatory street stops. As a result, by the end of 2019, ticketing for bike riders across the city declined by 64%. Still, as Barajas’ research shows, the racial disparities in ticketing only got worse, pointing to the need for more anti-bias training and general reform among the city’s police force.

“When police departments prioritize safety over pretextual stops, such as broken tail lights and expired registration, and really only focus on things like running red lights and stop signs and excessive speeding, there’s evidence that shows that the change in tactics reduces the disparities in traffic stops,” said Barajas. “But that needs to come from the top and instill its way into the entire force.”

Since the study concluded, Chicago has made some strides when it comes to building more bike lanes in the communities of color that saw more ticketing. But there remains a lack of infrastructure in other neighborhoods with higher rates of bike citations, especially on the South Side. Going forward, Chicago and cities across the U.S. need to continue to refine Vision Zero strategies and promote collaboration amongst various stakeholders, all with the goal of promoting equity.  

Barajas has since left Illinois for the University of California, Davis, where he continues to research the connection between infrastructure and policing. In California, he’s scaling up the Chicago study to include Oakland, Sacramento and Los Angeles, where it’s not illegal to ride on the sidewalk. The underlying hope is that indisputable research might lead to widespread reform. 

“You can imagine that the ‘cycling on the sidewalk’ law was put in place with the good intention of protecting pedestrians from cyclists, just like the ‘helmet law’ or ‘light law’ come from a place of wanting to protect people’s safety and health,” said Barajas. “All of these laws were made with the intention of improving safety but end up having harmful effects on communities of color. So the question is, how do we best protect vulnerable road users while also protecting vulnerable populations?”

An interview with Austin Mayor Steve Adler on the city’s ambitious, 400+ mile bike network.

In Austin, Texas, a more than 400-mile bike network is being built in record time. As of September of this year, 215 miles of the all ages and abilities network are complete, connecting protected bike lanes, neighborhood bikeways and urban trails. Impressively, Austin’s investment of $460 million to complete the network by 2025 exceeds the commitment recently made—and widely celebrated—by Paris, France ($291 million, with a 2026 completion date).

We spoke with Austin Mayor Steve Adler to discuss the ways the city rallied around the network’s construction, the major challenges to achieving comprehensive mode shift and how transit and bike projects benefit drivers, too.

PeopleForBikes: Why is this all-ages and abilities bike network important to the city of Austin?

Mayor Steve Adler: We have to do a better job of giving everyone in our city more equitable, safer and convenient transportation choices. People of all ages — whether they’re a child or in their eighties — and of all backgrounds have to feel comfortable and secure moving freely in Austin. People are not going to survive if it takes an hour and a half to commute to their medical office, to care for their kids or to get back and forth from their job. We also set climate goals in this city which we won’t reach unless we’re able to get people to make a mode shift.

For people who aren't from Austin, can you explain the two transportation bonds that passed and why they were such a big deal?

Two really important bond initiatives went before Austin voters last November, which, due to the pandemic, was an exciting time to take a bond initiative to voters. Many cities backed off of taking bonds to voters in that period of time for fear that people wouldn't tax themselves. Of our two bond proposals, one passed by 58% and the other by about two-thirds. The first one was really to bring mass public transit to our city in a way that people would actually use. 

We went to voters and said, “Let’s not focus on one transit line, let’s focus on the city and adopt a whole regional plan.” It required people to vote to increase their city property taxes by about 20.4%. But we were able to do that because people recognized that we needed to get this done. That was a $7.2 billion project and at the same time it was going to the voters, it was suggested that surely we could free up half a billion dollars to actually improve active transportation projects in our city, which would only complement and support the other proposition on the ballot.

We had the infrastructure in place. The elections were in place. The campaign and the messaging were supportive of one another. Advocates were supportive. We figured we should do them both while the time was ripe and fortunately, we were successful.

So this support from the public helped accelerate the buildout? 

We set what we thought were pretty ambitious goals and frankly, I would've been really proud if we had just met those original goals. But then we had a community that indicated that it was ready to open up the pocketbook and really develop these multimodal choices faster. At the same time as we were getting our community together to approve a multi-billion dollar urban rail system and transit overhaul, it became apparent to us that we could also accelerate the goal we had of building up the bicycle network. It was popular and people wanted us to do it.

How have different players in the city come together to make this happen?

It took a lot of grassroots work — a lot of the bicycle advocacy organizations in our city really helped position our community to be able to do this. We have some very strong bicycle advocacy organizations in this community — smart folks, strategic folks — that have always been pushing this agenda. But I think Austin really did come together on this and part of it is it fits with the culture of who we are in this city. Things happen fast when cities and communities are being their best selves, and this is just who we are.

How has the city built support for the network from residents that do not bike or will never choose to bike?

There are some people in our community that say that they're never going to give up their cars. And to those people, I say, "Great, but wouldn't you like all the other people in their cars to get off the roads so that you have more space? Let's give more options for the people that you'd like to see leave our roads.” That one's hard to argue with. 

The other thing we hear a lot is that's not going to happen in Texas. That it’s possible in a Scandinavian country, but not here. So we show people that in the early seventies, those countries were as car-centric as we are today. 

You also hear from people that no one will ever do this in Texas because it's just too hot and that the climate doesn't lend itself to it. And I say, “I hear you on climate, it can get a little warm here. Go ahead and get yourself an electric bike.” Then I show them a picture I took in Oslo, Norway, where it was below zero and the snow was coming down pretty heavy and people were dressed warmly and still using their bikes. When people are used to doing something because it’s easy, convenient and safe, they keep doing it, no matter the weather.

Austin is rare in that it’s coordinated between city transit organizations, advocates and the community. The city is promoting bikes, but in concert with transit and even drivers — why is that a winning strategy?

When you address the issues of transportation and mobility — and if you really are putting a certain effort into driving equity and opportunity — then you have to take a holistic approach. There is no one mobility solution that's the answer for everyone or in and of itself. It has to be an integrated system. You can pick pieces of that system but that’s going to leave people out. 

Our challenge is to have a comprehensive mode shift. The good thing about moving forward holistically is that the transit people are supporting the bike programs and vice versa because we’re all supporting the same concept. Seventy percent of the people that are traveling to Austin downtown right now are doing it alone in their cars. We can't survive that way on lots of different levels. The way we get from 70% to 50% by 2039 isn’t just bikes and it isn’t just transit. It isn’t just one thing — it’s everything. 

How do safe and equitable mobility options benefit Austin's larger goals?

There are so many things that are going right in Austin right now — it's kind of a magical place. It's the fastest-growing large metropolitan area in the country and has been for the last five years. We are just hitting on so many cylinders, but we’re not hitting on every cylinder for everybody. If we're going to be able to preserve the magic that is Austin — the kind of the culture that keeps things weird and supports innovation — we have to maintain diversity in our community. And that is the hardest thing to do when you become the “it” city because so many people want to come and everything becomes so expensive so fast. 

A mass public transit system and an all-ages and abilities bicycle network are both great for people's lives. These are all things that enable everyone to participate in a community, which is really important to our economy because our economy is all about the people. It will also help us to meet our goals around climate change. For Austin to get to a zero-carbon footprint by 2040, it's going to require us to take another look at how we're doing transportation, getting more and more people in fewer and fewer vehicles. This work fits in with that. 

What are some of the biggest challenges you see in Austin when it comes to large-scale, equitable mode shift?

There are challenges in any community, Austin included, when it comes to achieving real equity. To a large measure that's because so many of the systems and institutions are built around systemic challenges like racism. Those things are built-in. So if you actually want to change things, you have to be pretty disruptive. 

We're trying to do that in this city with homelessness and policing — disruptive change — to rethink how we do those kinds of systems. The same thing is true for transportation. And that's hard because people like to live with incremental change. I would say that the biggest challenge is recognizing that there's a lot of inertia working against you and that sometimes the needed change is going to have to be disruptive, and that can be tough for any community.

What’s your 10-year vision for Austin? Paint a picture of life and the city’s streets for us.

Twenty years from now, I hope life on the street just looks active and involved, with lots of people doing many different things and the streets being used in a variety of ways. I want everyone in Austin to have the ability to be able to come together and to move with one another and talk to one another in an environment that is safe, friendly and accessible to everyone. We have a lot of that already in our communities, we're just not using our streets in all the different ways that they could be used. That’s changing in many ways right now.

PeopleForBikes staff are amplifying the many environmental and social solutions e-bikes offer at several events this fall.

As individuals, companies and cities alike search for solutions for the climate crisis, electric bicycles (e-bikes) are increasingly recognized as a valuable tool in the climate mitigation toolbox. PeopleforBikes is helping raise awareness of the powerful solutions that e-bikes offer by engaging in a variety of educational and informational events.

During National Drive Electric Week, Ash Lovell, Ph.D., PeopleForBikes’ electric bicycle policy and campaign director, moderated a conversation titled, “Cars are Overrated: e-Bikes, Buses, and Box Trucks, Oh My!” During the conversation, bike industry leaders and electric bicycle advocates shared the benefits of transitioning transportation habits away from vehicles and towards electric bicycles. During the conversation, participants discussed how replacing car trips with bike rides can serve as a tangible climate solution that individuals can practice every day. Research shows that if 10% of the population were to replace one car trip a day with a bike ride, overall carbon emissions from transportation would drop 10%. With the transportation sector accounting for the largest source of carbon emissions in the U.S., this shift in daily habits could help move the needle toward a more sustainable future.

Whether individuals own or lease an electric bicycle, every time they ride, they are reducing carbon emissions and decongesting urban streets. During a recent CycleBackNYC webinar, Lovell and Noa Banayan, PeopleForBikes’ director of federal affairs, helped organizers explore how bicycle leasing could benefit New York City residents and businesses. As cycling is increasingly embraced as an option for commuting, New York City is interested in building on this momentum by introducing electric bicycle leasing as an affordable alternative for New Yorkers to obtain e-bikes.

As electric bicycles gain popularity worldwide, industry leaders are keen to innovate and adapt e-bikes to future needs and trends. During the E-Bike Future Conference, industry leaders discussed trends and shared innovative ideas for how to adapt electric bicycles for the changing needs of consumers, businesses and municipalities across the globe. Lovell kicked off the virtual conference with a conversation about how electric bikes can help improve our health, connect communities and protect the planet. 

In the U.S., some communities are going big for electric bicycles and incorporating them into planning for the future. At the upcoming NWA Tech Summit, Banayan will outline movement on pro-e-bike policies PeopleForBikes is working towards, including updating electric bicycle definitions and laying the foundation for new incentives for e-bikes. With electric bicycle sales and ridership continuing to grow, the session will explore how individuals, businesses and policymakers can embrace the technology of a low-speed electric motor to increase accessibility to the outdoors, enhance efficiency in the workplace and bring more people into the world of biking. 

A common theme connecting all of these educational events is that electric bicycles offer a variety of solutions for the environmental and social challenges we face today. PeopleForBikes will continue to share how electric bicycles can help individuals, companies and communities tackle these challenges and explore how we can incentivize electric bicycles so they are more accessible for everyone.

Increasing Awareness and Education About the Benefits of Electric Bicycles

All cities should strive to serve everyone, people with disabilities included. Unfortunately, the latter is all too often left out of the planning process.

If you have ever been to Seattle, chances are you’ve likely visited one or more of its hallmarks: the Space Needle, the original Starbucks in Pike Place Market, the Museum of Flight. All of these attractions are worth seeing. If it’s bikes you’re into though, you’ve probably spent some time on the city’s Burke-Gilman Trail testing your endurance.

This trail stretches about 20 miles from Shilshole Bay, in Seattle, to the City of Bothell. One of the reasons why it’s so popular is because it is both paved and off-road, so bikes and cars don’t have to share space except for at trail crossings that intersect with major streets.

When I first moved to the city 20 years ago, the trail was a place I could enjoy walking. As a person with a disability, I liked it because I didn’t have to worry about the presence of curbs, the trail never felt too crowded and a canopy of trees coupled with a gentle breeze often kept me cool as I got in my steps.  

All of that has changed and I seldom use the Burke-Gilman Trail anymore. What makes this trail so challenging to enjoy now is that Seattle’s population has grown significantly. The trail was never meant to support the number of people who currently use it. For a trail that permits traffic in both directions, it is far too narrow in many places to navigate safely even if you aren’t disabled.

Before I decided to all but throw in the towel, I tried my best to be accommodating, acknowledging that this was a shared space and that I moved slower than most other people. I’d stay as far to the right as I possibly could without falling into the bushes or I’d strategically time my visits to avoid as many bicyclists as possible. Even with those concessions, it’s begun to feel like far more trouble than it’s worth. 

The trail is touted as a space for everyone to enjoy but bicyclists often prevent people who are not on bikes from feeling safe, frequently exceeding speeds that are appropriate for a space shared with pedestrians. There is nothing magical about saying, “On your left” as you whiz by as though you are competing in the Tour de France. Those three words don’t absolve anyone from their responsibility to use common sense. Each time a bicyclist says that to me, I just respond with a snarky, “On your right.” If bicyclists actually want their warning to be helpful, it needs to be said earlier so that people can safely react to it.

I fare slightly better on sidewalks (if they exist at all), but it’s hard to feel safe there too. After all, in Seattle, bicyclists are allowed to ride on the sidewalks. Seattle doesn’t have enough bike lane infrastructure so rather than compete with cars, bicyclists sometimes feel safer riding on the sidewalk. I get it! The part that I don’t get is the expectation that I’m the one who is supposed to move even though it's far easier for a bicyclist to adjust than it is for a disabled or elderly person. Much of this comes down to etiquette and education — I know bicyclists can do better. 

Miami Valley Trails has a guide to trail safety and etiquette that is helpful for trail users of all types. Guides like this one are important educational tools that need greater publicity. They can help create a safer experience for everyone, especially when space is limited and must be shared with many different transportation modes.

Despite my personal frustrations, I strongly believe in two things: 

Bikes and people with disabilities can equitably and safely coexist, and 

If we are going to have any chance of meaningfully reducing our carbon footprint, bikes must be part of the solution in creating a more sustainable transportation future.

However, these goals cannot be achieved if people with disabilities are not active and equal players in the planning process. That applies not only to how bikes and bike sharing programs are integrated into our transportation network but also to thoughtful street design and investment. This means that individuals with disabilities cannot be relegated to community advisory groups or modal boards. They must also be hired as transportation planners as well as policymakers and work in collaboration with those responsible for implementation. 

It seems like wanting people with disabilities in these roles is a no-brainer, but in reality, the barriers to holding these kinds of positions within most transportation agencies are high and made more difficult by the expectation that you possess a driver's license. I recently applied for a position with the City of Seattle and was surprised that it included a question that solicited my driver’s license number. 

Thankfully, I have a driver’s license but it’s important to recognize that many people with disabilities do not. Regardless of whether the question is required or optional, it doesn’t send an inclusive message to prospective applicants with varying abilities. Inflexible work schedules, requiring in-person work and work cultures that frown upon the concept of rest in the workplace likewise contribute to the idea that people with disabilities need not apply.

Hiring and retaining individuals with disabilities not only leads to more spaces that center universal design principles but results in equity wins that extend far beyond transportation outcomes. Employment is more than just a means to a paycheck. For those with disabilities, working within local, state and federal transportation agencies often means higher wages and more affordable, higher quality health care; it means access to a retirement plan and to expanded mental health services.

Transportation is in a moment of unprecedented challenges only made worse by the pandemic. Financial constraints, the urgency of climate action and a need for greater equity and inclusion contribute to a puzzle that already has so many moving parts. I choose to remain engaged because the stakes feel higher than ever. I believe that change is driven by a commitment to inclusion that doesn’t just apply to external community engagement efforts. Lasting change is fostered from within a workforce. 

I currently work as a consultant partnering with various transit agencies in the Puget Sound region to find solutions to some of its most complex issues. These include the integration of different modes in shared spaces that pedestrians, bicyclists, scooters and cars can use safely, or the best way to provide more timely options for how older adults and individuals with disabilities connect to transit. I am also utilizing my time in the Transportation Justice Fellowship to create a framework for how The City of Seattle will center racial equity in planning for areas with high-capacity transit.

The City of Seattle is right to strive for and cultivate a staff that reflects the diversity of the people it serves. All cities should. This must include individuals with disabilities. When individuals with disabilities are left out of decision making, this critical perspective is missed, resulting in mistakes that are repeated and inaccessible experiences that continue to feel dangerous. For far too long, we have been largely absent from transportation workforces — equity means addressing that disparity.

See How Your City Rates

Keep Riding

Battery Recycling

One Ride at a Time

A Climate Solution

Visit Advocacy Academy

COVID Resources

Better Bike Share Partnership

Bike Webinars

Fight Racial Injustice

use the Ridespot app to access great rides

PeopleForBikes News

Billions in Funding Advanced for Bikes in Federal Votes on Infrastructure and Reconciliation Bills

Biking Where Black

In Texas, A Bike Network Gets Bigger

Increasing Awareness and Education About the Benefits of Electric Bicycles

Planning’s Disability Blindspot