The opening of LAX/Metro Transit Center Station on the Los Angeles Metro is a major milestone in the city’s history and is vital for the 2028 Summer Olympics, but there are far more reasons to invest in alternative transportation options beyond major sporting events.
A Los Angeles Metro Rail C Line Train at LAX/Metro Transit Center during the testing phase (Source: LACMTA)
The grand opening of a long awaited station
(Source: LACMTA)
This year, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA) plans to open the LAX/Metro Transit Center Station on the Los Angeles Metro Rail C and K Lines to serve Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). Despite having the second highest population of any city in the United States behind New York, Los Angeles did not provide rail transit service to LAX (the 8th busiest airport in the world) until 2025. While there is still work to be done on the LAX Automated People Mover (expected to open in 2026) to connect the transit center to the terminals at LAX without the need for a shuttle bus, the opening of LAX/Metro Transit Center is still a major milestone. LA has proven that it is committed to investing in the rest of its transportation system by heavily expanding the LA Metro Rail system and improving frequency and reliability on the LA Metro Bus network.
The LAX/Metro Transit Center Station is part of a larger set of projects known as the Twenty Eight by ‘28 plan in order to ensure Los Angeles and its transportation network are ready for the upcoming Olympic Games in the summer of 2028. Other upcoming notable projects part of the plan include the three phases of the D Line Extension along Wilshire Boulevard to the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), an extension of the A Line to Pomona, bike lane and pedestrian path improvements along the Los Angeles River, and more. Many of these projects are important initiatives to incentivize other methods of transportation beyond driving and will greatly benefit the local residents beyond the Olympics and the influx of people it will bring.
Competing Priorities for “Car-Free Games”
Los Angeles is a city well known for its car culture and particularly for its traffic. However, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass has stated that the 2028 Olympics will be a “no-car games. This is a tall order for LA, and such an investment will require cooperation from the federal, state, and local levels. However, this mission statement by Mayor Bass aims to avoid congestion by making transit and active transportation the primary focus of the city for the Olympics.
These Olympic Games are a prime time to build transit better in LA, and show the world that a car-free Olympics is possible, even in a city famous for its traffic. In addition, these policy decisions to prioritize alternative transportation for the Olympics will have broad implications beyond the games themselves, as the transit improvements such as the A and D Line Extensions will permeate far beyond the Olympics in 2028, and greatly enhance how Angelenos move throughout the region.
However, it is important that Mayor Bass and the LA Metro follow through with their vision for a car-free games. The need to focus on traffic alleviation and unsafe freeway interchange has prompted LA Metro to shift their focus to freeway expansions, including Express Lanes in I-105, increasing capacity at the interchange of State Routes 57 and 60, and expanding capacity for I-5. These projects run counter to the notion of a car-free games and should be re-examined in favor of other, smaller multimodal improvements which emit less carbon and cause less congestion.
Beyond the Olympics
By focusing on other methods of transportation such as cycling, walking, and many modes of public transit from buses to light rail and heavy rail, LA is creating options for moving around the city beyond driving that will last far beyond the 2028 Olympics. Oftentimes, after the Olympics, many of the facilities built and used for the events end up being underutilized and expensive to maintain (also known as a white elephant facility). By primarily investing in mobility options and reusing existing facilities, LA is creating a lasting mobility legacy beyond the Olympic Games.
A local coalition started by Move LA (the only countywide organization dedicated to public transportation funding that passed transformative initiatives like Measures R and M), FASTLinkDTLA, Agency Artifact, LA Commons, LA Neighborhood Initiative, and the California Community Foundation have come together to create the “Festival Trail” as a legacy project. This 28-mile-long zero-emissions, non-vehicular corridor connects the major venues currently proposed for the 2028 Games in the greater LA region. The Festival Trail is a linkage to current and planned Caltrans, LA Metro, and LA city projects with new public spaces celebrating each community and unlocking up to 20,000 units of new affordable housing in the most under-resourced communities of south LA and downtown.
Ideally, it should not take a major sporting event such as the Olympics to see the benefits of public transit, cycling, and other alternative transportation improvements. Building more public transit, both bus and rail, and investing in cycling and pedestrian pathways should be principles that cities across the United States implement regardless. But these mega-events do provide a deadline to move these projects along at a much faster pace. If a city so famous for its car culture such as Los Angeles can understand the value of alternative transportation, any city can.
While we might have the most extensive highway infrastructure in the world, the U.S. is delivering pitifully poor results compared to our peers when it comes to cost, efficiency, emissions, and safety. What can Congress and USDOT do to invest in the rest?
Under federal transportation policy, funding for highways greatly outpaces transit. Worse, it is hard to overstate how little of total funding has been allocated to building sidewalks and bike routes. For Americans who are unable to drive or lack regular access to a car, the lack of alternative options has very real consequences. In addition, when we fail to invest in opportunities to walk, bike, and take public transit, communities lose out on the wide-scale benefits these options provide. Multimodal transportation investments that make transit and walking more practical options for people promote ecologically and fiscally sustainable options for economic development.
Our system today costs us much more than we think, with poor outcomes for all users, including public health and climate outcomes, which have a disproportionate impact on Black and low-income communities historically marginalized from transportation decision-making. We continue to invest in road capacity expansions as our go-to strategy to alleviate congestion or drive economic growth, despite proof that this strategy does not work. As a result, cities remain locked in a Sisyphean strategy that continues to leave us stuck in traffic, even after COVID-19, with more remote work options than ever.
Across recent major bills, federal investment in highway programs has vastly outpaced investments in transit.
Instead of continuing oversized investments in the bloated federal highway program that fail to deliver results, the next transportation reauthorization bill needs to invest in the rest to build a world-class, multimodal transportation system. Here are some steps Congress and USDOT can take to get started.
1. Fix the data
We need quality data to make quality decisions. Transportation generates plenty of opportunities to collect data, from vehicular speed and throughput to how many miles of bike lane are being built. However, ensuring data quality matters much more than raw quantity of measures alone. While we have plenty of data-oriented solutions and measures to advance and plan specific transportation projects, the data underlying our system is full of holes.
Right now, it’s difficult for policymakers and advocates to determine how we are spending our money and to identify the actual effects of spending trends. Critical performance measure data tracked by the Federal Highway Administration can take years to update or be presented incomplete, missing data entirely. But even quality data is insufficient when we interpret it through the same old flawed processes that take us to the same old conclusions that lead us to the same bad outcomes.
We need better information to make better decisions at the federal, state, and local levels. Practitioners should have access to tools that effectively model and account for induced demand, land use changes, greenhouse gasses, and access to jobs and services in ways that can inform investment decisions away from strategies that have not worked in the past. Current and planned transportation investments should be reported on a more standardized basis in order for state advocates to understand where their funds are actually going.
2. Better utilize federal programs
The transformative investment levels required to provide a world class transportation system won’t be met with small, individual discretionary grant programs alone. The real workhorses of the federal transportation program—the Surface Transportation Block Grant and National Highway Performance Program—often provide a significant portion of federal funds for states to invest how they see fit, which almost always means building more roads. Spending on new road capacity is delivering diminishing returns and should be rededicated to opportunities to take public transit or walk, bike, and roll.
Under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), there are many programs available to create more transportation options. However, finding and applying for these funds can be a strain on communities. Congress should consider consolidating the number of programs and expanding the size of smaller programs that provide funding access for local communities to address local safety, access, and resilience priorities. In implementing these federal programs, USDOT should streamline grant applications for smaller localities and jurisdictions while continuing to provide specialized assistance and relevant application information for lower resourced communities.
3. Fund transit operations, and use funding to boost frequency
When properly supported, transit provides immense value to communities and users from all walks of life. Unfortunately, transit has received significantly less support over the years compared to highway projects.
In order to unlock the transformative economic, climate, and equity benefits that transit can bring to a region, transit service needs to be frequent and provide access to jobs and services. We can do this by helping to fund transit operations and structuring federal grant programs to provide a pathway for transit agencies to reliably increase service and frequency to get people where they need to go.
Pairing the above with walkable, denser development around transit and a method to raise revenues that captures the value transit brings to a region could help advance investments in building out our transit systems, making them even more valuable resources.
4. Build out the passenger rail network
The IIJA is proving to be a launchpad for a passenger rail revival in the United States. There’s no doubt we’ve come a long way. However, as projects develop, there’s still much more work to be done and it takes a long time to bring a train up to top speed. If we want to build off our successes, reauthorization should ensure that we don’t stop building our rail network commitments now. Continuing our investments in national connectivity, and service is the best path forward to a strong national rail system. Learn more about how federal leaders can help advance passenger rail here.
The stakes
Congress and USDOT can play a major role in supporting a multimodal, world-class transportation system. Providing a floor for consistent investment in transit and active transportation infrastructure will be vital in ensuring that every American can reach their destinations safely, conveniently, and efficiently.
It’s Invest in the Rest Week
Click below to access more content related to our third principle for infrastructure investment, Invest in the Rest. Find all three of our principles here.
While we might have the most extensive highway infrastructure in the world, our system is delivering pitifully poor results compared to our peers when it comes to cost, efficiency, emissions, and safety. What can Congress and USDOT do to invest in the rest?
Last week, Transportation for America joined organizations and advocates nationwide in the Week Without Driving challenge. During this week, all Americans, including transportation practitioners and policymakers, are encouraged to travel without a car, allowing them to experience local barriers to walking, biking, and taking public transit firsthand.
For decades, federal highway funding and funding for all other types of transportation (public transit, opportunities to walk and bike) have been severely unbalanced. In order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, pedestrian deaths, and traffic, the Department of Transportation must invest in more transportation alternatives.
Last week, Transportation for America joined organizations and advocates nationwide in the Week Without Driving challenge. During this week, all Americans, including transportation practitioners and policymakers, are encouraged to travel without a car, allowing them to experience local barriers to walking, biking, and taking public transit firsthand.
For decades, our policies and investments have prioritized creating transportation infrastructure that is primarily oriented around the movement of people in cars. This focus has come at the expense of all other ways to travel, and everyday people pay the price.
This is why many advocates and organizations, including Transportation for America, chose to participate in the national Week Without Driving, which challenges people to spend a full week getting around to work, the grocery store, and all other activities, without using a car.
For individuals in transit-friendly and walkable neighborhoods, the Week Without Driving challenge was hardly a challenge at all. Many went about their daily routines or had fun exploring the other travel options in their area. But for the majority of Americans, who live in neighborhoods designed for cars at the expense of the safety and mobility options of everyone else, it’s not as easy as putting down the car keys and choosing another way to get around. Not being able to drive has consequences for travel time, as well as the comfort and safety of a trip. And this is not an accident—it’s a product of years of funding and policy decisions that focused on vehicle speed, rather than the far more important measure of how well our system is getting people where they need to go.
For a third of Americans, traveling without a car isn’t a choice, it’s an everyday reality. Yet many people who regularly drive are unaware of the need for more options. For some, it is an insurmountable challenge to get from Point A to Point B without a vehicle. Hostile walking and biking infrastructure, and unreliable transit frequency and coverage are only a few of the barriers cited by participants in going car free. Poorly maintained conditions of sidewalks and incomplete networks of paths also prevent pedestrians from safely crossing busy roadways and major arterial roads.
The impact isn’t felt equally
Every traveler has had the experience of not being able to drive at some point, for a variety of reasons (including when your car has to be taken in for repairs). However, the burden is felt most by people who are unable to drive regularly, if at all, including young adults, elderly folks aging in place, people with disabilities, and those who cannot afford the exorbitant costs of having a car. Barriers to access for a car are also particularly exacerbated in rural areas and low-income communities.
Everyday travel would look vastly different if the amount of funding we dedicate to expanding roadways and highways was instead used to build out the other transportation options that have been neglected for far too long. Not only would this increase the mobility options available for communities, it would also generate environmental, health, and public safety benefits writ large. We hope this year’s Week Without Driving helped decision-makers envision the transportation network Americans need.
At T4A, we believe it’s time to invest in a complete and comprehensive transportation network that empowers people to get wherever they need to go conveniently and efficiently, regardless of the mode of transportation they choose. That’s why one of our three guiding principles for the next federal investment in transportation infrastructure is Invest in the Rest. Learn more about this principle and why it matters here.
It’s Invest in the Rest Week
Click below to access more content related to our third principle for infrastructure investment, Invest in the Rest. Find all three of our principles here.
While we might have the most extensive highway infrastructure in the world, our system is delivering pitifully poor results compared to our peers when it comes to cost, efficiency, emissions, and safety. What can Congress and USDOT do to invest in the rest?
Last week, Transportation for America joined organizations and advocates nationwide in the Week Without Driving challenge. During this week, all Americans, including transportation practitioners and policymakers, are encouraged to travel without a car, allowing them to experience local barriers to walking, biking, and taking public transit firsthand.
For decades, federal highway funding and funding for all other types of transportation (public transit, opportunities to walk and bike) have been severely unbalanced. In order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, pedestrian deaths, and traffic, the Department of Transportation must invest in more transportation alternatives.
New legislation introduced by Senator Markey, the GREEN Streets Act, seeks to establish goals for emissions reduction and resilience in our transportation system, marking a pivotal step in alleviating the climate crisis on our roadways.Tell your senator to cosponsor this legislation.
Yet, federal transportation policy and funding historically, at all levels, have encouraged projects that expand highway networks at the expense of public and active transportation. Our recent analysis demonstrated that even with landmark legislation like the IIJA, touted for its climate programs, states are continuing to designate billions of dollars towards expanding road capacity. Such a car-oriented design forces people to drive for longer and more frequent trips, creating more congestion—and generating more emissions.
On January 25, 2024, Senator Ed Markey introduced the Generating Resilient, Environmentally Exceptional National (GREEN) Streets Act, co-sponsored by Senator Merkley, with companion legislation introduced in the House of Representatives by Congressman Huffman. This bill aims to reduce GHG emissions on all public roads and create resilient transportation systems that can adapt to the adverse effects of climate change.
To achieve these goals, the GREEN Streets Act directs the Secretary of Transportation to create minimum standards for states to reduce GHG emissions, per capita VMT, and air pollutants on public roads. Furthermore, the bill requires states and metropolitan organizations (MPOs) to publish an analysis of the effects of projects that increase traffic capacity on environmental justice communities that are at higher risk of experiencing adverse health and climate impacts. These measures build on the GHG emissions measure released by USDOT, encouraging more transparency and accountability within our transportation system.
Investing in our transportation system means investing in social, economic, and environmental outcomes. It is crucial that federal investments help Americans safely, reliably, and affordably get to where they need to go. Federal legislation like the GREEN Streets Act will play a fundamental role in avoiding the worst effects of climate change and enhancing the resiliency and connectivity of our communities.
Streets have always been a community gathering place since the beginning of civilizations. But why do we continue to elevate the car over people? Bogotá’s weekly Ciclovía is a regular reminder of how people can take back their streets to improve safety and access.
Community members of all ages and abilities biking, walking, running at the weekly Ciclovía event in Bogotá, CO. T4A photo by Benito Pérez.
The common experience we have traveling in our communities here in the United States is to hop in the car and drive at high speeds to our destination, park, and walk in. However, for many in urban, suburban, and rural areas, hopping in a car can mean troublesome delays, let alone health and environmental impacts.
This doesn’t even begin to account for many people in communities big and small who rely on bikes, transit, and walking to get to and from their destinations (with urban and rural areas seeing up to a third not having access to a private vehicle). Pedestrians and cyclists are often subject to unsafe roadway conditions, because they are deemed an afterthought to the movement of the transportation system, further reinforced by auto dominance in roadway design, operations, and perception.
Having traveled recently to Bogotá, Colombia in mid February 2023, I was exposed to a different culture of transportation. Though not perfect, Bogotá hosts a weekly community event, Ciclovía, that serves as not only a community amenity, but a powerful reminder that the streets of the city were and still are for moving people safely and effectively to their destinations.
What is Ciclovía?
Turning back the clock, Ciclovía in Bogotá started as a protest. The brainchild of Jaime Ortiz Mariño, the event started in 1974 to recognize the role and importance of affordable, safe, equitable, and sustainable transportation in the midst of a city and society rapidly urbanizing. Mariño had just studied architecture in the US and was worried that rapid urbanization in his home country would entrench costly auto dominance, thus his revolutionary push for cycling and engaging the community to take to the streets on a regular basis on foot, pedals, or other non-auto means. The city’s administration formally sanctioned the event starting in 1976, providing support for the weekly event currently held every Sunday (and holidays) from 7 a.m. – 2 p.m.
Today, the weekly event has multiple routes, totaling up to 80 miles (128 km), that cross every corner of the city via neighborhood streets, major avenues, even expressways. City transportation department staff are deployed early on event mornings to set up temporary barricades (via cones and some water-filled barricades), support services and community programming, implement bicycle traffic calming at key locations where speed can be a factor, and (with police support) start detouring vehicular traffic away from Ciclovía routes. As the event kicks off, the community comes out in force, engaging in family walks, an easier and safer bike commute, community commerce (street fairs and food carts), and entertainment like concerts and group fitness classes.
Ciclovía staff setting up and supporting the event in Bogotá, CO. T4A photo by Benito Pérez.
The success of Ciclovía in its nearly half century existence has elicited the event being replicated not only in other cities throughout Colombia (like Medellín and Calí), but the world. Looking at home here in the US, similar events inspired by Ciclovía have popped up in the last two decades, initially on an annual basis and at a much smaller scale (only a few miles or within a large community park). However, more events are becoming frequent and expansive, only drawing more attention to the need for safe, reliable, and accessible transportation alternatives and open streets for people as a result of the COVID pandemic.
Ciclovía in action. Video by Benito Pérez.
Community event or regular practice?
Having experienced my first Ciclovía in Bogotá, there was a lot to take in. But beyond the novelty to me of this community event are key takeaways we should look to replicate as regular practice. Designing and opening streets for people opened up a wealth of opportunities.
Children were able to learn to use bikes, scooters, and walk the real world streetscape, which lended opportunities on navigating their community safely and expanded awareness of mobility choice and community amenities. People of all ages, including seniors, were engaging with each other throughout the event, lending itself to awareness of and yielding to each other through the rest of the week, if they happen to get behind the wheel of a car. There was also increased economic vibrancy along the routes, with people engaging commerce on bikes and on foot (people want to see more walkable communities, as our Foot Traffic Ahead report states).
Smart Growth America’s Foot Traffic Ahead report shows that there is a growing demand for walkable communities. Read more here.
Where do we walk or bike next?
Policy Director Benito Pérez enjoying Ciclovía.
Ciclovía was a wonderful event to have participated in while in Bogotá. It reminded me of the lengths we still have to navigate here in the US to make such a community event, already happening in dozens of US cities, transition from novelty to regular practice.
For starters, I would point to bureaucracy and the car-centric status quo, a major roadblock that needs to be overcome to retake our streets for people. That means things like federal transportation design standards like the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices or AASHTO’s Highway and Street Design Manual need fundamental rewrites, not conservative and inconsequential changes, to reprioritize our street design to emphasize safe and accessible movement of people.
Additionally on the bureaucracy front, there needs to be a revolution of transportation culture. This revolution needs to shake up our decision makers and our transportation professionals operating state and local transportation departments to fundamentally orient and humanize their mission towards moving people safely and efficiently with mobility choices to jobs and services, not jargon priorities like level of service (LOS), speed, traffic volume, or crash density. Only then can our own communities, here in the US, come out to the street, and recognize the vitality and importance of streets as a tool and asset for all people.
Screen grab from our recent video “Not just a way to get from A to B”, a look at Tucson, AZ’s attempts to expand Complete Streets while centering equity.
When done right, active transportation infrastructure can cut greenhouse gas emissions, improve public health, keep people safer, and promote equity. But how will the new infrastructure law’s $650 billion in formula and competitive grant programs help to build safer, Complete Streets? What policies changed to prioritize active transportation investments? Here’s what you need to know, and how you can make these programs and policies work for you.
This post is part of T4America’s suite of materials explaining the 2021 $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), which governs all federal transportation policy and funding through 2026. What do you need to know about the new infrastructure law? We know that federal transportation policy can be intimidating and confusing. Our hub for the new law will walk you through it, from the basics all the way to more complex details.
For the purposes of this piece, active transportation refers to bicycling, walking, and rolling, like on scooters, wheelchairs, segways, and other personal mobility devices—as well as the infrastructure that supports those activities, like bike lanes, trails, and safe sidewalks. These types of bike- and walk-friendly infrastructure are usually present in Complete Streets, which we define as streets for everyone—designed and managed to prioritize safety, comfort, and access to destinations for all people who need to use a street.
Getting more people out walking, biking, and rolling can have enormous benefits to public health, climate, economic growth, and equity. But encouraging more routine trips on these modes requires providing safe and convenient facilities in which more people feel comfortable and safe walking, biking, scooting, or rolling. While the infrastructure law preserves the state’s wide flexibility that most use to prioritize moving vehicles quickly over other forms of transportation, it does create new opportunities to expand and improve active transportation through Complete Streets and other projects.
What’s in the law?
Special programs or funds are NOT required for states to make sizable investments in active transportation. If improving safety and providing other travel options are important to your state or agency, the broad flexibility of the biggest federal programs allows them to shift their funding accordingly.
Active transportation and Complete Streets advocates did manage to get some key provisions into the infrastructure law in the form of both policy changes and new or improved funding opportunities. One new funding opportunity is the new $7.3 billion formula and $1.4 billion competitive PROTECT program for at-risk coastal infrastructure grants, where bike/pedestrian facilities were included as eligible projects.
Within the largest pot of funding that states and metro areas control (the Surface Transportation Block Grant program), the amount set aside for smaller but vital transportation projects like bikeways, new sidewalks, safe routes to school, and micromobility was increased from 1.5 percent up to 10 percent. The law also lets local municipalities control more of that funding directly by increasing the share of that 10 percent that they directly control from 50 up to 59 percent. Note: the other largest formula programs with which you may be familiar (the alphabet soup of NHPP, STBG, CMAQ, HSIP) have flexibility for active transportation and Complete Streets projects, but states are responsible for flexing those formula dollars for those purposes versus the status quo of valuing vehicles and their speed.
As is reflected in the table below, states and regional metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) now have to spend at minimum 2.5 percent of their federal planning funds to adopt Complete Streets standards, policies, and prioritization plans as well as to plan for active transportation, among other goals like transit-oriented development that make active transportation easier.
The new Bridge Formula Program, meant to fix many of the nation’s worst bridges, will be evaluated based on “benefits to non vehicular and public transportation users.” Some groups are optimistic about the active transportation infrastructure that could emerge from these bridge repair projects, but there are numerous loopholes that will allow states to continue leaving these accommodations off as they repair or replace bridges. We want to see USDOT release clear guidance that these bridge projects shall provide benefits to those who bike, walk, and roll.
Most of the new opportunities in the infrastructure law come through discretionary or competitive funding programs. Here’s a brief guide to the funding programs that can be most easily used for active transportation and Complete Streets projects:
Competitive programs applicable to active transportation
Program name
Authorized funding (over five years)
Can be used for:
Should be used to:
Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP)
$7.2 billion over five years. (10% of each state’s Surface Transportation Block Grant program funds)
Projects that promote modes of transportation other than driving, with notable inclusions being anything eligible under the SRTS program and newly defined “vulnerable road user safety assessments”
Build well-planned active transportation networks that provide enough connectivity and access to induce drivers to switch their mode of travel to walking, biking, and/or rolling.
Active Transportation Infrastructure Investment Program
$1 billion, subject to annual appropriations of $200 million each year.
“Active transportation” networks (within communities) and spine (between communities) projects.
Build well-planned active transportation networks that provide enough connectivity and access to induce drivers to switch their mode of travel to walking and biking
Protect pedestrians and bicyclists not by moving them away from roads, but by making roads safer.
Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and Cost-saving Transportation (PROTECT)
$1.4 billion (competitive grant portion)
Extreme weather resilience and emergency response infrastructure.
Provide evacuation and recovery mobility to all road users. Build biking, walking, and rolling infrastructure into all resiliency plans and evacuation routes.
Local and Regional Infrastructure Project Assistance (a.k.a RAISE competitive grants)
$15 billion, up from only $4 billion spent from 2009-2020
Local or regional projects that improve safety, environmental sustainability, quality of life, economic competitiveness, state of good repair, and connectivity.
Build projects that promote active transportation. Capital projects like in Rockford, IL and northwest Indiana as well as planning projects like in Charleston, WV serve as models for successful complete streets RAISE projects.
State and regional formula programs applicable to active transportation
Program name
Authorized funding (over five years)
Can be used for:
Should be used to:
Complete Streets set-aside
2.5 percent of each MPO’s federal planning funds
Producing Complete Streets standards, facilitating planning for Complete Streets project prioritization plans, and developing active transportation plans.
$1 million minimum to states, formula based on primary and secondary school enrollment numbers. States can leverage core highway formula funds to fund the program.
Active transportation and complete streets projects, plus education or enforcement activities that allow students to walk, bike, and roll to school safely.
Build complete streets and active transportation facilities that access as many residential and commercial zones as possible.
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program
$13.2 billion
Any transportation project that reduces emissions from vehicles, from traffic alleviation to micromobility (bike or scooter share) and electric vehicles.
Focus emissions mitigation efforts on mode-shift away from driving, specifically toward enabling active transportation.
Carbon Reduction Program
About 2.56% of each state’s total apportionment from the federal transportation program
Projects that support the reduction of transportation greenhouse gas emissions.
Give people safe and convenient options to bike, walk, or roll instead of driving by planning, designing, and building active transportation facilities.
Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and Cost-saving Transportation (PROTECT)
$7.3 billion (formula grant portion)
Extreme weather resilience and emergency response infrastructure.
Provide evacuation and recovery mobility to all road users. Build biking, walking, and rolling infrastructure into all resiliency plans and evacuation routes.
Bridge Formula Program
$26.5 billion
Replacing, rehabilitating, preserving, protecting, and construction highway and off-network bridges.
Make sure that every bridge repaired under this program includes active transportation infrastructure, not just to check a box, but to connect to adjacent active transportation networks.
How else could the administration promote active transportation?
America’s roads are increasingly dangerous for pedestrians and other vulnerable users. Without addressing that reality, biking, walking, and rolling will remain dangerous and therefore unattractive options.
Though the infrastructure law overall provides a pittance to active transportation while dumping money into the status quo, there are things USDOT can do to improve access to active transportation. For one, they can give teeth to their Safe System approach, encouraging and guiding State DOTs to develop projects that promote safe roads at low speeds. USDOT already has a statutory obligation on the books to prevent projects that “have significant adverse impact on the safety for nonmotorized transportation traffic” (23 U.S. Code 109(m)). USDOT has never enforced or codified internal procedures for that provision, so the department is actually out of compliance with the law and should rectify that with urgency.
In addition, USDOT should update the MUTCD (the street design manual that all traffic engineers use) to build active transportation priorities into road design from the start.1 USDOT should also release clear guidance on how to best utilize the 2.5 percent Complete Streets planning funds set-aside mentioned above. States and MPOs should look to enhance and improve Complete Streets networks with this funding, not just use this new funding stream for work already underway.
On a positive note, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) released a memo that, among other things, urged states to simplify the review process for carbon-cutting safety and multimodal projects like bike lanes and sidewalks. This swift language from the administration is encouraging but not binding, and states can still spend the money however they’d like.
USDOT should immediately pursue all avenues for institutionalizing their new road safety strategy which included a full section on the importance of street design and the role it plays in unsafe speeds and safety. Their guidance on revising our broken process for setting speed limits, including moving away from the 85th percentile rule, is powerful, but will fail to have an impact if states ignore it. FHWA should be trying to enshrine this practice with their division administrators and engage state and local traffic engineers in better training.
How can the new money advance our goals?
It can be hard to measure and assess the benefits of increasing active transportation and building safer, Complete Streets. That’s one reason why we at Smart Growth America produced a Benefits of Complete Streets tool to help local communities better measure the potential benefits to health, safety, environment, and economy (using an equity approach) of Complete Streets in your community. Let’s zoom in on how we can maximize climate and equity benefits from the new infrastructure money.
Climate
Vehicle travel is a key contributor to U.S. emissions, so providing people and goods with mobility alternatives is a clear win for climate. But this is a challenge for such a vehicle-dependent country. A 2018 survey found that travel distance and fatigue were the two main reasons why many vehicle trips were not replaced with bike trips. As such, new federally-funded projects should make walking, biking, and rolling as easy, safe, and fast as possible. Walkability audits and assessments, like this survey conducted by the City of Milwaukee in 2021, can help cities plan for Complete Streets and active transportation facilities in the places where they will have the most impact and shift as many trips as possible away from vehicles.
Equity
Biking, walking, and rolling in low-income communities are often hazardous, unpleasant, and inconvenient modes of travel. Good multi-use paths are often located in the wealthy enclaves of many American cities rather than more marginalized communities. This is a major factor contributing to the higher incidence of pedestrian deaths among BIPOC and low-income people. Cities with equitable active transportation plans use two key strategies: data collection and community engagement. Two good examples: Baltimore, MD models equitable data collection in their Complete Streets performance measures and Huntsville, AL has done great community engagement for their demonstration projects. With these strategies in place, every active transportation project has a stronger chance of creating positive equity outcomes and being strong contenders for competitive grant funding from the infrastructure law.
So what?
A new bike lane won’t have much impact if it just connects to dangerous roads on each end. As former Pittsburgh DOT head Karina Ricks said in this terrific video about their city’s Complete Streets policy, it really requires a complete network approach to build Complete Streets and create safe connections that connect many people to many destinations. Despite all the new funding programs, eligibility, and carve-outs, federal funding for active transportation and Complete Streets is still dwarfed by the hundreds of billions of dollars in funding for roads and bridges. Many of those projects will expand roads and increase vehicle speed, making walking, biking, and rolling more dangerous and inconvenient.
States and localities should be ready to combat this by utilizing their limited active transportation funding in the most effective way possible. And states should use their considerable formula money flexibility to advance active transportation and Complete Streets (they have the authority to do so.) This will include utilizing the above strategies to maximize benefits, but it will also mean positioning for competitive grant application success. Local leaders will benefit from understanding the flexibilities within each funding program so they can make sure they get their share from their state and MPO, whether those entities are friendly to active transportation or not.
The deep irony here is that for all the promises made by Congress about improving safety and providing more options for people to get around, it will be up to state and local leaders to do the heavy lifting to deliver on those promises and get the most out of this law’s modest provisions for active transportation and Complete Streets.
(For more information on active transportation and Complete Streets funding in the infrastructure law, check out our funding brief on the topic.)
The expansion of grant and formula eligibility in the infrastructure law to include micromobility will give communities and states additional options for providing more transportation options, but those that are doing the most to make their streets safe and convenient stand to gain the most as well.
Photo courtesy of Lyft
This post is part of T4America’s suite of materials explaining the 2021 $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), which governs all federal transportation policy and funding through 2026. What do you need to know about the new infrastructure law? We know that federal transportation policy can be intimidating and confusing. Our hub for the new law will walk you through it, from the basics all the way to more complex details.
Micromobility—local travel on smaller vehicles like bikes, scooters, or other personal mobility devices—has become a vital part of our mobility landscape in just a few short years. The recent growth of shared micromobility networks owned and maintained by either cities or private companies has made such vehicles accessible and popular in urbanized areas. For example, Citi Bike in New York City grew 38 percent year-over-year, with a total of 28 million rides taken in 2021; based on ride volume, Citi Bike would be ranked as the 25th largest transit system in the US.
When these networks are integrated into public transit systems, like in Los Angeles, they act as extensions to trains and buses that allow passengers to make valuable first- and last-mile connections. During major disruptions in transit service, such as in New York or Washington D.C., they can act as vital reinforcements.
The most notable change in the infrastructure law on this count was to expand the eligibility of numerous programs to include micromobility. Below, T4America breaks down those policy changes, funding opportunities, and how best to advance micromobility in your community.
What’s in the law?
The 2021 infrastructure law is the first to authorize shared micromobility infrastructure—which can include vehicles, docking stations, protected lanes for bikes and scooters, or apps and websites for public access to shared networks—and operations funding. The most notable change comes from expanding the eligibility within the existing Transportation Alternatives Program, which “sets aside” 10 percent of each state’s Surface Transportation Block Grant Program—a state’s second biggest pot of federal funds—for transportation alternatives.2 Since 2015 this program has included projects to make walking or biking safer and more convenient; now, shared micromobility is an eligible project type.
This is a small but notable step to recognize the dramatic changes in our mobility landscape over the last decade, but whether or not any of this funding encourages greater shared micromobility will be left up to the states and metro areas who decide how to spend these funds.
Micromobility projects can also be advanced by new and revised infrastructure programs dedicated to climate change mitigation, transit improvements, safety, and disaster resilience. Other highlights include the new Carbon Reduction Program and the Active Transportation Infrastructure Investment Program, which funds projects under $15 million that focus on safety, are designed to increase pedestrian and cyclist activity, and build active transportation networks. Also notable is the new Safe Streets and Roads for All program, which is intended for initiatives that reduce traffic fatalities, including “complete streets” projects that foster active transportation use.
The formula-based programs below are perhaps the best opportunities for states, MPOs and local governments to leverage funding for micromobility. These programs are not competitive, so it is up to these governments to use this money effectively as outlined.
Formula
Program Name
Authorized funding
Can be used for:
Should be used to:
Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP)
$7.2 billion over five years. (10% of each state’s Surface Transportation Block Grant program funds)
Recreational trails, bike/ped projects, micromobility, and other types of transportation alternatives.
Expand useful micromobility options and build connective networks in communities that address demand.
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program
$2.745 billion
Transportation projects or programs that reduce congestion and improve air quality. CMAQ funding can be used for both capital and operating expenses.
Maximize MPO provisions for bike- and scooter-share capital projects and operations. Use funding to support operations that increase equity and program reach.
Carbon Reduction Program
$6.4 billion
Planning, designing, and building on- and off-road active transportation facilities; roadway right-of-way improvements.
Fund complete street designs that integrate micromobility infrastructure such as protected lanes and docking stations.
National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program
$5 billion
Implement electric vehicle charging on designated Alternative Fuel Corridors, with remaining funds being spent at discretion of state governments.
Implement electric bike/scooter charging facilities as part of integrated micromobility networks.
Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and Cost-saving Transportation (PROTECT)
Extreme weather resilience and emergency response infrastructure.
Implement micromobility vehicles and stations as a redundancy measure for evacuation or recovery mobility processes.
Urbanized Area Formula Grant Program
$33.5 billion
Planning, operation, and capital improvement for public transportation systems.
Build micromobility infrastructure at and nearby public transportation facilities and promote integration of bike- and scooter-share systems with local transit fares and services.
The following programs are competitively funded (discretionary), and winning these grants is tied to strong local matching (at 20–50% of the project cost).
Competitive program name
Authorized funding
Can be used for:
Should be used to:
Active Transportation Infrastructure Investment Program
$200 million, subject to annual appropriations and the whims of Congress
“Active transportation” projects.
Finance micromobility stations and vehicles as part of useful active transportation networks.
Safe Streets and Roads for All
$6 billion
“Vision Zero” plans and implementation projects.
Incorporate micromobility stations and protected lanes into complete streets projects.
Rural Surface Transportation Program
At least $25 million to each eligible project
Most projects on rural roads, including projects that protect all road users but also highway projects with adverse effects.
Introduce micromobility infrastructure to streets in rural areas; prioritize electric micromobility funding to achieve longer-distance trips. This should be framed so rural areas do not only have one choice in spending these funds.
Local and Regional Infrastructure Project Assistance (a.k.a RAISE)
$15 billion (not a new program, but this funding is substantially more than in the past)
Local or regional projects that improve safety, environmental sustainability, quality of life, economic competitiveness, state of good repair, and community connectivity.
Prioritize shared micromobility infrastructure that benefits surrounding communities, improves bike/pedestrian safety, and serves communities equitably.
How else could the administration improve micromobility?
To further aid the development and expansion of shared micromobility infrastructure, there are several steps the administration could take.
Further study and guidance is needed on how micromobility can be integrated with transit to better support ridership and access. Micromobility options work best when they circulate short distance trips within communities and connect them to transit facilities for longer-distance travel. In Washington, D.C., for example, 82 percent of Capital Bikeshare riders have used shared micromobility services to get to or from public transit. Best practices in design, both national and international, should inform more pointed recommendations and project eligibility standards for shared vehicle infrastructure.
The administration needs to provide guidance and technical support so everyone can fully understand how their projects can be made eligible for each grant. Many agencies won’t know much about micromobility eligibility, and USDOT can and should help fill those knowledge gaps.
In light of these suggestions, it is important for local and state governments to also consider every point of flexibility within the infrastructure law to fund micromobility infrastructure. For example, funding for electric vehicle infrastructure can be used to support electric scooter and bicycle charging facilities. The administration should also evaluate grantees based on how they will protect and connect disadvantaged users and communities. Colorado is establishing an emissions budget for new highway projects that requires corresponding investment in greener modes, which could be a good model for a cross-program policy.
How can the new money advance our goals?
Safety
The most significant constraint on the expansion of shared micromobility is the supportive infrastructure that makes riding on a bike or scooter feel safe, in both perception and reality. This can include fully protected bike lanes, visible and enforced curbside pickup/dropoff zones, complete signage and wayfinding standards for bicycles and other shared mobility options, and traffic control improvements such as signal retimings that allow micromobility users to safely traverse streets. Places that will realize the greatest benefits of expanded shared mobility options are those that also make safety the fundamental consideration of every other dollar spent.
Climate
Micromobility is a valuable tool in helping to decrease driving (and emissions) for short-distance trips, which are the bulk of all trips taken each day. Good micromobility service can also increase transit ridership by improving access and expanding the catchment area around stations, helping to lower emissions with greater transit use at the same time. Moreover, a 2021 report by Lyft states that 41 percent of its micromobility customers are weekly users of public transit and 54 percent do not own or lease a personal vehicle. The design of micromobility access points and networks is also important. Incorporating shade into station and protected lane designs can go a long way toward reducing the disastrous urban heat island effect, which can come from trees or in the form of solar panels.
Equity
When administered and implemented thoughtfully, micromobility makes car-free transportation accessible in areas that are underserved by our current road network. Localities will need to plan the location, price, and other features of bike- and scooter-share in a way that is viable across all communities. In particular, micromobility must address the fact that Black, Hispanic, and Native American pedestrians are disproportionately killed on America’s roads, and safety improvements should be prioritized where they are most needed. Furthermore, low-income communities experience the brunt of the urban heat island effect. When planned equitably, incorporating shade and landscaping into micromobility stations can be a step toward making such communities more resilient to high temperatures.
So what?
States, regions, and communities now have several avenues through which federal funding for micromobility is available. But micromobility is one of many applications from an already small funding pool, and without a thoughtful overarching plan for implementation, new initiatives will have limited and inequitable benefits. As such, advocates must work with their governments to pursue a detailed, equitable vision for micromobility so they can build a strong case for federal funding and the local matches needed to secure it.
Note: There are ample opportunities for the infrastructure law to support good projects and better outcomes. We have also produced short memos explaining the available federal programs for funding various types of projects. Read our memo about available funding opportunities for micromobility projects.
There are ample opportunities for the infrastructure law to support good projects and better outcomes. These five in-depth, detailed guides explain the available federal programs for funding public transportation, passenger rail, Complete Streets and active transportation, and EV infrastructure.
We boiled down the funding opportunities within the federal transportation program, with a focus on how much flexibility there is for transit, intercity rail, Complete Streets and EV infrastructure. These more sophisticated guides are especially helpful for very engaged advocates or agencies who are looking for in-depth specifics about funding and program eligibilities.
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (the IIJA, or 2021 infrastructure bill) is the law of the land, guiding all federal transportation policy and funding decisions through at least late 2026. On top of the infrastructure law’s $102 billion in competitive or discretionary grant programs, the established formula funding programs also have considerable but typically untapped flexibility for funding projects across the transportation infrastructure spectrum, such as the main source of highway funding going instead to certain transit projects.
In addition to the approved IIJA, the (stalled) 2021 budget reconciliation bill, the Build Back Better Act (BBBA), would bring additional major investment in sustainable and equitable transportation. While that bill is on hold for now, record investment is still on the way through the IIJA. 3
While the bulk of the new IIJA funding will just advance the status quo, these bills, taken together, do better acknowledge the importance of climate change, equity, safety, and connecting communities.
While fighting to stay ahead of a transportation and mobility landscape that changes by the day, 70+ people representing 23 cities gathered in Pittsburgh last week for the third meeting of our Smart Cities Collaborative to band together to solve problems and learn from each other.
While we were in Pittsburgh, Seattle Department of Transportation’s Benjamin de la Peña gave an interview to Seattle Business Magazine about automated vehicles that nails what the Collaborative is all about: “We do not want the technology to decide what kind of city we want to have. We need to decide what kind of city we want and have the technology adapt to that city,” he said.
Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto
This is the core mission of the Smart Cities Collaborative, and why we gathered again for three days in Pittsburgh last week. We were incredibly fortunate to have Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto kick things off for us with a stirring reminder of the aim for all of this work, which was embedded in the motto for their application to USDOT’s Smart Cities Challenge from 2016: “If it’s not for all, it’s not for us.”
Thanks to support from AARP’s Public Policy Institute and Jana Lynott, we started trying to put that maxim into practice right out of the gate with a tour of two particular intersections in Pittsburgh that could stand to have some major improvements made to better serve everyone who needs to use them.
As biking rates continue to go up and eventually shared bikes or scooters from companies like JUMP or Lime roll out, the city will continue having to carefully navigate the tension between allowing a market to develop and thrive, while also ensuring that new options also help the city accomplish their very ambitious goals. Goals like eliminating all traffic fatalities (Vision Zero), giving everyone access to fresh food within 20 minutes without having to use a car, and making every trip under a mile most enjoyably achieved by walking or biking, to name just three.
As the rain poured down, Karina Ricks, the director of Pittsburgh’s Department of Mobility and Infrastructure, described some of the challenges with a particular intersection in Pittsburgh to the Collaborative members.
So we toured these two intersections above (during a crazy week of floods in metro Pittsburgh) and then spent some time in a charrette discussing practical design changes for them, the endless tradeoffs that have to be made, and how to prioritize the city’s stated goals and values. How can cities make value-based decisions about what to prioritize? And how do you engage the public when making those difficult decisions?
All too often these days, city transportation departments are just like the surfer desperately fighting just to stay ahead of the break of a mammoth wave. As we heard during one session about e-scooters, they’re here, the cities didn’t ask for them, and it often feels like the challenge is best stated as “they’re here and we have to find a way to deal with them.”
But instead of merely “dealing” with these new services, how can cities work to harness their potential—whether ridesourcing, automated vehicles, bikes and scooters—to accomplish something good and advance their city’s overall values, rather than just avoiding the bad outcomes? And how can cities create flexible regulatory frameworks that can be applied broadly across new mobility models as they develop?
The pace of change is perhaps the biggest part of the challenge. The best way to describe the process when cities roll out a new transit service, for better or for worse, is pretty slow and methodical. Years can pass between the day when someone first drew a new line on a map and the day that a new bus or train starts picking up passengers. But with new mobility options, it feels like the time between ideation and rollout is measured in days, not years.
To better prepare for these new services and this pace of change, we spent the better part of half a day working in groups trying to craft an ideal, holistic policy for shared active transportation—the docked or dockless bikes and scooters that are popping up rapidly in cities from coast to coast.
We were glad to be supported by Emily Warren and the team from Lime, one of the biggest companies in the U.S. providing shared bikes and scooters, to kick things off with a look at some of the hot button issues like fleet size, requirements for locking technology, and how to proactively ensure that their services are available to everyone in a community.
Broken up into small groups, Collaborative members chose two policy topics they wanted to develop, like equipment and safety, operations, data standards, and equity, to name just a few. Over the space of half a day, Collaborative members explored the core components of a comprehensive policy and identified key policy areas to consider, set a recommended policy floor (a fundamental basic level of policy that all cities can and should adopt), and highlighted a few options for differing levels of action in each policy area.
The exercise illustrated the power of cities coming together to solve problems, learn what’s working (or not working), and learn from each other. This is the true strength of the Collaborative and the reason we’ve continued this work for nearly two years now.
With the help of our colleagues at Smart Growth America and the National Complete Streets Coalition, we closed out the three-day meeting with a look at each city’s equity guiding policy and examined how they translate those policies into action in their projects.
Each participant shared their department’s or agency’s equity policy—or their lack of one—what that policy meant to them and how they’ve tangibly incorporated it into their projects. Participants worked to identify gaps and areas for improvement as they move forward with their projects to ensure equity and access for everyone. It was a refreshing discussion that illuminated the ongoing difficulty in applying ambitious principles to policies and then to actual projects on the ground.
Participants getting a tour of some of the experiments going on in downtown Pittsburgh, including a painted bus lane through the incredibly busy corridor, parklets along the curb lane, artistic interventions, and a raised bus bump-out to make bus boarding easier.
The Collaborative reconvenes this December in Atlanta, just before Transportation for America’s Capital Ideas conference, which will also tackle this issue of new mobility. At Capital Ideas (open for registration now!), we will be focusing on the states’ role and how they can lead the way while also working in partnership with the providers and cities to create a transportation system that works for everyone.
Join us in Atlanta for Capital Ideas this December! Psst, find out what’s on the agenda here.
