Arleigh Greenwald is the owner of Bike Shop Girl Bikes in Aurora, CO. A mom and life long bike industry employee with over 18+ years as a professional mechanic, she has guided many in their purchase of a cargo bike and inspired countless others to “bike more and worry less,” (a philosophy we can all relate to these days). She has a deep desire to make our communities healthier, happier, and less congested as she watches her own children grow up. You can see several of her reviews of cargo bikes at the website bikeshopgirl.com. Arleigh is passionate in believing that ADHD, obesity, transportation gases, and much more can all be helped with a simple bike ride and choosing to #LeaveTheCarAtHome. Grab a beverage, come say hello to everyone, and bring your questions for Arleigh on Weds., November 4. We’ll start gathering at 5:30 pm ET, and Arleigh will join us at 6 pm.
How inclusive is Public Transit for those with disabilities?
How much support is given to non-car forms of transportation in our state?
Before NCDOT’s current financial woes, in 2018-2019, North Carolina’s Department of Transportation had a budget of $5 billion dollars.
From NCDOT’s $5 billion budget, public transit’s share was only $124.5 million for the entire state, which has 90 transit systems. (Note: many of the budget decisions for how NCDOT can spend money come not from NCDOT but from the General Assembly.) This lack of serious financial support makes it impossible to have the type of transit systems that communities ask for.
People often say they don’t take the bus because of the amount of time it takes over driving. Would it be different if buses had more funding, dedicated lanes, and more input from those who depend on them most? And what does the amount of money given to transit say about how our state values those who cannot drive or don’t have access to a car?
The Summit will have a panel discussion that will address several issues related to mobility as it impacts people who are blind or visually impaired or otherwise disabled. With advances in technology, changes in the ways people get around and aging Baby Boomers, increasing numbers of people with disabilities are out and about and engaging in society on all levels. The need for transit and transportation services and infrastructure which will allow for safe and effective travel for school, work, healthcare, social and cultural interactions and engagement has never been more important to the growing community of people with disabilities.
This session will spotlight the needs of those for whom transit is not just an alternative to driving, but a main part of their independence and mobility.
UPDATE: You can watch the discussion below:
Revised Budget Language Fixes Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning Grant Provision
The Conference Committee’s released budget (here) has replaced the original Senate budget provision with an annual progress reporting requirement. The original provision would have decimated the NCDOT’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning Grant program by requiring a pay-back of grant funds if projects weren’t implemented in a timeframe over which they had limited control. See here for a previous discussion of the potential impact of the provision, especially on small, rural towns.
We identified the concern – that funding plans that just sit on a shelf without project implement is a waste of tax payer money. We agree and want to see bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure built, not just planned. After speaking with NCDOT staff and with transportation planners across the state, the problem is not the planning grant program. The grant application process is very competitive and the winnowing process ensures that the most motivated and committed localities are accepted into the program. These communities very much want to get projects built and avail of the many benefits of active transportation.
However, the timeframes for all transportation projects is very long and not in the control of the local entity, therefore imposing a six-year implementation window for bicycle and pedestrian projects (and no other mode) is unrealistic and unfair. After developing the plan (typically 2 years for bicycle and pedestrian plans to be developed and adopted by the community), the state prioritization programming process alone can take in typical situations 8 to 15 years, or longer, from the time of project submittal. If the project scores well enough to be funded, the state provides the 20% local funds to match the 80% federal funds for all other transportation modes except bike and pedestrian projects – leaving the local government the added burden (time and financial) to obtain the local match funds.
Therefore, the original provision would have presented a deterrent to communities (a looming financial risk of repaying the grant), especially for small rural communities that most need these planning grant funds. Here is our response to the concern in more detail.
We would like to thank the legislative leadership for listening to us and others to fix this provision. By requiring NCDOT to report annually on project implementation in plans funded by their grant program, we hope to see more focus on bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. These projects are typically part of an economic development or safety improvement strategy. The benefit of requiring NCDOT and towns to reflect on their plans at least annually will likely be to better identify barriers to implementation that we can all work together with the legislature to remove.
One obvious barrier is funding for the required local match that is provided by the state pursuant to the state’s Strategic Transportation Investment law for all other modes except bicycle and pedestrian projects. This year’s budget contains an increase in funding for most modes of transportation, much from the General Fund, but does not include an increase for bicycle and pedestrian modes. We are hopeful that this reporting requirement means that the legislature is interested in seeing more bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure built and we want to work with them next session to make this happen.
BikeWalk NC hosts Our First Lobby Day
The 
General Assembly is back and ready for business! Since meeting for the long session on Jan. 11, the Assembly has been coming together for regular meetings and to work on the budget. Currently, one bill, H.B. 135, addresses the need for bike safety to be added to the public school curriculum. The General Assembly asserts that the public school community upholds the responsibility to ensure that each child is able “to learn, to achieve, and to fulfill his or her potential.” The bill, short-titled “Technical Changes to Courses of Study Statute,” will ensure that the state Board of Education enforces and reviews materials related to bicycle safety education, among a list of other topics. We thank bill sponsors Reps. Jeffrey Elmore, Linda P. Johnson and Debra Conrad for including bike safety. Implementing bike safety into the K-12 curriculum is sure to have a lasting impact on transportation safety for everyone.
General Assembly is back and ready for business! Since meeting for the long session on Jan. 11, the Assembly has been coming together for regular meetings and to work on the budget. Currently, one bill, H.B. 135, addresses the need for bike safety to be added to the public school curriculum. The General Assembly asserts that the public school community upholds the responsibility to ensure that each child is able “to learn, to achieve, and to fulfill his or her potential.” The bill, short-titled “Technical Changes to Courses of Study Statute,” will ensure that the state Board of Education enforces and reviews materials related to bicycle safety education, among a list of other topics. We thank bill sponsors Reps. Jeffrey Elmore, Linda P. Johnson and Debra Conrad for including bike safety. Implementing bike safety into the K-12 curriculum is sure to have a lasting impact on transportation safety for everyone.We are hoping that the N.C. DOT will get their requested expansion budget for bicycle and pedestrian planning grants and for “Watch for Me” safety programming. If the state does do a Transportation Bond, we want to make sure bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure is included!
Check to see if your senator or representative is on the House Transportation Committee or Senate Transportation Committee. Leadership in the House includes Reps. Hastings, Iler, Shepard, Torbett and from Appropriations, Rep. Presnell. On the Senate side, chairs include Sens. Davis and McInnis and from Appropriations, Sen. Meredith.
By supporting BikeWalk NC, you are supporting a team of advocates who work to make sure bills do not limit bicycling or make it less safe for the community.
LOBBY DAY
We hope everyone comes out to Lobby Day on April 5 to remind legislators that bicycling and walking are vital for health and for supporting community values. This opportunity is an excellent way to participate in government by reminding legislators that bicycling and walking are viable and legitimate transportation modes, and to thank them for the recent safety improvements in House Bills 959 (summer 2016) and 135 (current session). For more details and to register, please visit our Eventbrite invitation.
Bike Law Changes in House Bill 959 Improve Public Roadway Safety
In addition to the important provision that allows vehicles to cross the solid center line to pass slower moving vehicles (a big win for the BWNC and the NC bicycling community), House Bill 959: DOT Proposed Legislative Changes modifies other bicycle safety laws. These new laws will become effective October 1st, 2016:
- Allowing vehicles to pass slower-moving bicycles and mopeds in a no-passing zone when all safety requirements are met (and with a very good four foot distance specified- read more here)
- Legalizing the commonly-used right-hand turn signal for right turns (read here)
- Extending motorcyclists’ legal protection as vulnerable road users to bicyclists (read here)
- Updating requirements for a rear light or reflective gear on bicyclists at night (we recommend a rear light – read here for BWNC specific recommendations and here for new rear light requirement)
- Revising the definitions of autocycles and mopeds, and including a new definition for electric assisted bicycles (read here)
Viewers can read the full version of the bill here. BWNC supports the bike safety modifications in the bill and believes that implementation will add to the safety of bicyclists and motorists on public roadways. Thank you all for your comments last December 2015 on NCDOT’s report on the House Bill 232 Bike Safety Law Study report. We believe that the legislature included only the non-controversial parts of NCDOT’s recommendations because all of you spoke up and helped BWNC communicate our position and concerns. NCDOT received about 1,000 comments and the legislature received 1,000s of comments on the HB44 anti-Road Diet Bill last session, so together, we heard reference to a “bicycle movement.”
BWNC was disappointed that the final version removed the provision directing NCDOT to develop a safety education program for motorists and bicyclists. The removal likely happened because the timelines were too tight and there was no new funding. However NCDOT has committed to working with BWNC to develop a comprehensive motorist and bicyclist education program. The education program could help both motorists and bicyclists understand the rules of the road, thereby reducing conflicts.
BWNC is also thankful for NCDOT’s assistance in adding a definition of electric assisted bicycles to the bill so that e-bikes would not be classified under motorcycle laws. BWNC worked closely with NCDOT’s Division of Motor Vehicles and with House and Senate Transportation Leaders – Representatives Torbett, Iler and Shepard and with Senators Rabon and McKissick. Without the electric assisted bicycle definition and exemption from motorcycle laws, “e-bikes” would have been categorized as motorcycles and subject to all those rules and requirements. We believe that without this definition and exemption, “e-bikes” would not be able to be used on our roads, as they could not meet all the specifications of motorcycles. People for Bikes provided expertise from a national perspective and helped answer many questions about this still evolving technology.
